#Jewish art about the Holocaust is so so so important to my understanding of it

[jesncin]

Where the Wild Things Are, morals for kids, and queer art

One of my favorite things about this children's book is that the way adults respond to it is a great litmus test for how much they get kids.

At it's core, Where the Wild Things Are is a book about a tantrum. Max misbehaves, is sent to his room without supper, imagines a world where he gets to be in charge and let all his monstrous rage out, but when he's had his fun? "Max the king of all wild things was lonely and wanted to be where someone loved him best of all" he says goodbye to the beasts and makes his way back home where "he found his supper waiting for him. And it was still hot." It's still hot. The book describes his journey into and out of Where The Wild Things Are as taking "years, weeks, days" that he can smell his supper "far away across the world" but that's because everything feels so big when you're a kid. Your tantrums feel like they last an eternity but by the time you're back from it, your supper is still hot.

Deep down, Max understands that his mom sent him to bed without supper because she cares about him. Because when he's out having a wild rumpus with the beasts that follow his every command, he still sends them to bed without supper. Max might not understand why, but he sure does repeat that action to the beasts he watches over as king. Supper is still waiting for Max when he returns because his mom understands that even though Max misbehaves, it's not coming from a place of malice. It's a tantrum, and kids come back from that. They don't mean the cruel things they say or do.

So when I see grown ups read this book and go "what the heck?' This book is about a spoiled jerk who gets to boss monsters around and come back home to a nice meal? Where's his punishment??? He didn't learn a thing! What's the lesson?" I'm just amused. "he threatens his mom and she lets that slide??" Dude, the mom calls him a "WILD THING!" and he responds "I'LL EAT YOU UP" a child can't threaten you. "what if this book influences my child to act out, thinking they'll be rewarded??" Kids are going to act out no matter how you raise them.

This book has stayed with me because it's pretty to look at, it scared me, understood me and as I grew older I learned that the author, Maurice Sendak was queer. Sendak was also the son of Polish-Jewish immigrants escaping the Holocaust. He never told his parents he wasn't straight. "All I wanted was to be straight so my parents could be happy. They never, never, never knew." Adults constantly demand moral closure from kids' media. To them, kids have to be taught and disciplined and influenced into the right behaviors. But Where the Wild Things Are isn't that kind of book. This book gave me a space to let out my messy, ugly, tantrum feelings without being judged or punished for it. I didn't have to learn a lesson. I got to go to Where the Wild Things Are and come back when I'm ready.

I'm a children's book author now, and there's something so special about being able to connect to another queer creator through their work like this. My book also talks about how important it is to have the space to just feel and make sense of change. A lot of queer art is inherently challenging. To know that even the stuff we craft to nurture kids can still confound and challenge their parents? "What if this book influences our kids??" some things about queer art never change.

[jewishbarbies]

now that I know that Barbie was Jewish, I wish they included some elements of that in the movie and used that to bring about the point of feminism. Like I’m not asking for the Barbie movie to be a fucking history documentary, but yeah I wish they involved something about it in it.

And I didn’t know all that Oppenheimer, now it finally makes sense to me why he made the decisions he made in life and created the bomb coz they didn’t tell us none of that in history class or in the movie.

They do that with a lot of Jewish figures from my understanding. Except maybe Anne Frank. Like until 3-4 years ago I didn’t know Einstein was a Jewish man and that nazi scientists rejected his theory of relativity by calling it a “Jewish science” and he once said “if my theories are proven correct, Germany will claim me as a German and France will declare me a 'Citizen of the World.' If they are proven incorrect, France will label me as a German, and Germany will call me a Jew."

I’ve seen many pro Palestinian people quote Einstein being saddened by the Israeli government as him being anti Zionist however after researching… turns out he was a very prominent Zionist. It seems likely that he changed his mind after the creation of Israel as when he died he was working on a speech to celebrate the 9th anniversary of Israel. In his will, he also give almost all his materials of substance to the State of Israel, especially the Hebrew University.

people only care when someone is jewish if they’ve died, moreso if they died because they were jewish. everyone loves to talk about the holocaust as if that’s the only jewish thing to happen in history of that kind of relevance. meanwhile, jews have been the cornerstones of science, medicine, and invention for hundreds of years. Einstein is so unbelievably jewish that, despite everything, it does genuinely shock me when people don’t know or don’t care that he was jewish. like, look at him! in every picture he looks like a nice old jewish man you’d run into at the deli. but a lot of people can’t acknowledge his jewishness bc then they’d have to confront their own antisemitism, so instead he’s just That One Smart Guy whose work even people with Einstein art/posters on their walls don’t actually understand.

leftists have quoted several jewish figures since oct 7th that have nice quotes for dunk tweets, but were saying them bc they were wholeheartedly zionists. they quote prominent holocaust survivors in their “antizionism” tweets. meanwhile there’s a 2hr ted talk of that same person talking about zionism and why they believe it’s important for jews. these people only exist within twitter. if it’s said somewhere else, they don’t believe and/or they don’t know it.

[iwanttobepersephone]

Rant about Harry Potter and JK Rowling, stick with me here

Ok, so, I hate JK Rowling. I feel like that's a given, right? Like, she's a transphobic homophobic bigot who hides behind feminism and routinely denies massive parts of the holocaust, and I despise her in ways that I don't think words can even express. I can't stand her, but y'know what I also can't stand?

When someone implies that my mother, who is one of the most supportive people I know, and a massive part of the founding, organization, and actions of a local group made specifically to fight Moms for Liberty and school boards in our area trying to harm trans and queer people, is transphobic because she likes Harry Potter

Wanna know why my mom likes Harry Potter? Because when she discovered the series at 12 years old, she quite literally lived in a cupboard under the stairs and was in an abusive household. The magic of the wizarding world or whatever was her escape, it's the reason she's still alive, and by extension, the reason I was ever alive.

But, sometimes, not even often, when I try to express even the most minimal amount of appreciation of that, someone says to me "but isn't JK Rowling transphobic? Why would you support someone like that? Are you transphobic?"

Which pisses me off beyond belief, as one might imagine

In this situation, "separate the art from the artist" isn't exactly a good phrase to use, given the fact that the goblins or whatever run the bank are Jewish stereotypes and the house elves generally being happy to work under their masters being a straight rip from the whole happy slave myth, and those are very very important things to recognize and understand, among others

I feel like it's a lot closer to "separate the hundreds if not thousands of lives she's helped from the hundreds if not thousands of lives she's ruined", or even better, understand that the good she's indirectly done for people makes all the bad that much more horrid

My mother is the closest thing to a hero in this entire world and I will not stand to hear one more person accuse her of being transphobic purely because she thinks fondly of a book series that saved her life. I will not stand for people saying she's just as bad as a holocaust denier because she owns every book in the series. I will not stand for anyone going entirely against their point of not judging a group as if it's monolithic by saying all Harry Potter fans are bad people, including my mother. And, once again, it's not often at all that this happens, but it happens and I'm pissed about it and needed to rant

Anyways rant over JK Rowling sucks don't believe a single thing she says and don't support her unless you wanna support someone actively trying to make the existence of queer people illegal

[zevranunderstander]

the current genocide happening in palestine so brutally opened my eyes about german politics in terms of antisemitism awareness it kind of makes me sick

the german school curriculum does a lot for antisemitism awareness and for analysis and discussion of WWII and holocaust. i am not jewish so i can't say how much a jewish person would judge the methodology to be effective, but in school we extensively talked about how the fascist regime came to power in germany, why the movement was rooted in antisemitism, and while i think you could have gone into more detail about some aspects of it, i felt like my school at least laid a very solid basis for having an anti-fascist understanding. germany is very much funding a lot of jewish art and projects that are dealing with the holocaust, there are some quite well-known holocaust memorials and visiting a concentration camp is something most school classes do at some point.

and i genuinely think this is a good thing, there is a platform given to jewish people who want to express their indescribable trauma and anger and grief at the holocaust through art and museums and exhibitions and talks and monuments and in my personal opinion it did a lot in terms of creating awareness for antisemitism and the dangers of fascism, and please do not think that i view these things to be bad in any way

but one thing that has always bothered me that this applies to the holocaust ONLY, it is of course one of the worst against humanity commited, but germany never took responsibility in ANY way for the Herero and Namaqua genocide or any other atrocities commited. the most Namibia ever got was a weak apology that amounted to 'we aknowledge it :( sorry :('.

and at the same time germany hails itself as modern and progressive and past all barbarism and is publically atoning for the holocaust in every form they can. so the funding of these projects to me always had that sense of creating an image of atonement, more than actually atoning for a past. funding something good for the wrong reason still creates something good, but if you analyse it a bit, you can clearly see that this atonement is not for actual atonement's sake, but is instead done so that germany can be internationally respected again and is allowed to be in the Important Councils™ again, that france, the uk and the us are in, and so that they can officially be internationally "forgiven" by the other countries

i don't think this is an 'agenda' so to say, i think it's a lot more complex than that, and that politicians often probably actually want to combat antisemitism, but i don't want this post to go on forever, so just right now understand that in germany antisemitism awareness as a talking point has kind of become something that is universally aknowledged as "good", even the really fascist parties aren't stupid enough to have openly antisemitic talking points (they still are mad about every other minority, so idk if you're really supposed to believe that). and i again want to state that that is genuinely very good, that open antisemitism is seen as such a huge political no-go. openly denying the holocaust is a pretty severe crime in germany and you can get in REAL trouble for it and that is also a very very good thing!

however, all of this public atonement is fine and good, but what has germany done for the actual families of the victims of the holocaust? well. they paid 3 billion marks in reparations to a state that didn't exist 4 years prior to the agreement, which is, of course, israel. since its founding, germany has at every turn helped legitimize israel's existence and it's representation as the jewish homeland, while barely otherwise aknowledging victims of the holocaust when it comes to reparations

and in the modern day they have absolute gall to use this framing - that germany themselves created that israel is the state that we need to pay our atonements to - against everyone daring to speak up against the genocide in gaza. i know that a lot of western states try to frame support of palestine as antisemitic, but nowhere is it as insidious as in germany. the state that seemingly atones for genocide is calling speaking up against a genocide a hatecrime.

like i said, germany does a lot of things correctly but for the wrong reasons and now those wrong reasons stand in the way of the image they have previously set up as a peace-loving modern nation, and so they just hold up jewish people as a shield against any criticism of their defense politics, claiming that people opposing them are antisemitic, (which, like said before, is pretty much an universally aknowledged "bad thing") running news stories and quotes of zionist jews on the political situation and framing this occupation as "the jewish people of all the world vs. the evil terrorist palestinians", not caring how much actual antisemitism they create in the population, and how much they harm actual jewish communities, when they directly frame them as the enemy of the besieged palestinian population

[unabbozzo]

This is Why I Think "Free Palestine" is Not Only An Incomplete Call for Liberation, But A Dangerous Slogan that Enables Jihadism All Over the World.

Over the last twelve months, I've become concerned by what I see on my dashboard. I've had my Tumblr since I was a teenager, and it was often a space to console in, where I can remain semi anonymous and confide my personal process, share art, thoughts, ideas. It feels like it is being infiltrated with misinformation now more than ever. When I left my Catholic family background to earn an education, I entered a more progressive, liberal space which was so important for my development. However, I've watched so many of my colleagues and personally trusted sources turn to symbology and slogan use, most of whom I presume do not know what they are actually communicating. This began for me when last year I said to a leftist friend, who happens to be Jewish, "Of course we want Palestine to be free." He met this with a gently skeptical, and awakening remark for me: "I just don't know what that means."

His ability to hold space for me in my complete naivety is what embarked me on this very personal journey, while across from the world of war. I became more willing to be wrong, and to recognize where I was faulty in my attempts for "activism." If equality is the fundamental idea of the progressive left, then why does it time and time again, leave Jews out of the conversation? Why have they been the scapegoat for millennia? Why is it so insidious that as a self proclaimed progressive person, growing up with progressive Jewish families,--so much to the point where I sat in their homes and ate matzo ball soup in their kitchens on Hanukkah,--did I compartmentalize our collective antisemitism? Because it was convenient for just about every other group on Earth. Well, why is it so convenient to scapegoat Jews? This answer goes far beyond me, and there are plenty of Jewish voices who cover it better. But now, I feel urged to speak to what I am witnessing as an ally.

A beloved Jewish friend of mine who I've known for ~25 years (we met when her parents moved in across the street from mine when we were both 4 years old) said it best about the current conflict in the Middle East: "If the 'solution' does not include every civilian, then it's not a solution." This makes thousands of years of agony and conflict feel so simply put, which is what makes it so heartbreaking. That's just it - I've been numb for the last year seeing death and destruction so casually breeze through my daily scrolling rituals. What have I been desensitized to? I completely understand why we might have shut down our hearts. For a moment, I did.

But I began to come out of a state of numbness. It happened slowly, mostly by listening to my loved one's pain, and learning about the layers of history that go into these compounded moments of deception, divisiveness and conflict. I learned that Christianity is an appropriation of Judaism (um, why didn't I realize that? Didn't we all know Jesus was Jewish?). I learned there were Jews even persecuted in China, I learned that Soviet Russia was worse than the Holocaust but we hardly have the records for it because the regime so cleanly destroyed everything in its path; I learned a lot of things that helped me see what is going on. Most of all, I learned that distinguishing oneself as anti-Hamas, the terror group that runs Palestine, is essential in liberating Palestinians, who are trapped in hell. If Hamas is not held accountable, the Islamic Regime will work to continue making all sovereign nations go dark. That is what a regime does.

I'm still processing this and learning more. Obviously, the whole world is too, as this unfolds. I truly believe we cannot move forward without looking at ourselves, and specifically assessing our inner antisemitism. It is a collective issue and you do not have to be ashamed about it. Shame will keep us here in hell. I highly suggest these resources:

People Love Dead Jews by Dara Horn

Ahmed Fouad Alkhatib on social media, a Palestinian American writer who is Anti-Hamas and Pro-Peace.

Elica Le Bon on social media, an Iranian attorney and activist who is anti-regime.

This is all I have time to share, but I hope it is enough to have you thinking more critically about what you mean when you say "Free Palestine."

[bixiebeet]

Omg I hoped you meant this! I love Walk Hard, it’s such a strangely accurate parody/homage to music biopics. It wasn’t a box office success, but it’s apparently become a cult classic. And now I will wax poetic about it!

For the wider tumblr audience who has no idea what’s going on…Walk Hard is a 2007 comedy in which John C Reilly plays Dewey Cox, a fictional 1950s+ rock star a la Johnny Cash. It came out in an era when these semi-formulaic rock star biopics were big—the rise from humble beginnings, the wild fame, the eventual crash and burn, and finally the rock star finding peace in his senior years. (Imho knowing the source material helps you understand why Walk Hard is funny.)

Harold Ramis plays a Hasidic Jewish record executive named L’Chaim, which means ‘to life’ in Hebrew. (This would be like a character named ‘cheers!’ in American English. It’s absurd purely by the nature of it.) The clip of Ramis in the club and then the studio had me in stitches. Imho it’s not antisemitic—instead, it’s mocking the actual antisemitic claim that Jewish people control the media.

The record producer says that he’s lost his faith in the Jewish people because Reilly’s first song isn’t good; I cracked up so hard when Reilly vows to sing better to restore the image of Judaism. If only it was that simple in real life to combat anti-Jewish hate!

Ramis and Reilly have an exchange later in the film that is all in Yiddish. They had an actual Yiddish language coach come in for it. Again for wider tumblr…Yiddish is a language used by Jewish people in central and eastern Europe before the Holocaust. It draws from German, Hebrew, Polish, and other influences. It was estimated to have around 11 million speakers at one time. However, that number was decimated after World War 2. There are now fewer than one million native speakers.

Yiddish remains a core language in Hasidic Jewish communities in America. Other Jewish immigrants spoke Yiddish when they were exiled from Europe to places like America in the mid 1880s and beyond; in the early 20th century, there was a thriving Yiddish theater scene. Ramis grew up hearing Yiddish spoken, but didn’t speak it himself. Many people gave up Yiddish when they assimilated in America and began speaking English. But words still remain, like klutz, schlep, and schmuck.

Hebrew is a separate language that is spoken by approximately nine million people worldwide. Yiddish has European roots, whereas Hebrew is spoken more natively by Jewish people who are from North Africa and the Middle East. Hebrew is also used in Jewish religious contexts.

Ramis really nails the American Yiddish accent and the whole look in Walk Hard. It’s a great depiction imho. If he wasn’t saying jokes in the movie context, you’d think he’s just a Hasidic character. (Hasidism is a whole other thing—insular ultra orthodox communities that continue to have their own customs, attire, etc.)

I’ve blabbed enough! Go read this article to hear from the Yiddish coach! And thanks @jathis for giving me a new headcanon.

Owl Fun Fact: in some of my stories when Egon mentions his grand uncle Tobias; he’s talking about the dude from Walking Hard!

This was my first ask (maybe?) and I never saw it until now! From @jathis who has such a fun tumblr feed. Who is the dude from Walking Hard?? Curious minds want to know!

[soxendanso]

‘Lessons from Auschwitz’ is a project I took part in near the end of March, and it was a journey where an organisation took a group of students to Auschwitz-Birkenau to bear witness to the horrors that happened during the years when the Holocaust took place. Throughout the project, we were urged to understand it as something that occurred to individuals, rather than statistics, that dehumanise the people who went through these concentration and death camps.

For my response to this project, I created a piece of art to show my understanding of what I learnt, as well as a way to share this with as many people as I can.

In this image, I have painted four victims of the Holocaust above a landscape depicting the polish town Oswiecim before the Holocaust. The town is found near the Auschwitz-Birkenau concentration camps, and before the Holocaust, it housed a population that was 60% Jewish. Now, there are no Jewish families living there.

The red colour of the painting represents the urgency in which the information about the Holocaust should be shared. As survivors decrease in number, we need to continue to remember this terrible event that happened in History, so that it never happens again.

The second portrait is of a 14-year-old girl named Czeslawa Kwoka, one of many children murdered by the Nazi regime. When the picture I used for reference was taken, she was beaten up by the guard instructing her on what to do because she did not understand the language that they were speaking. Czeslawa died one year after the picture was taken, in 1943, soon after her mother. They were a Polish family deported from their village to create living-space for Germans.

With the increase in extremism in today’s world, it is very important to remember events such as the murder of people like Czeslawa, understand that every person was an individual, and make sure we prevent future genocides.

‘When you listen to a witness, you become a witness’ -Elie Wiesel

[copper-dust]

Re: Your "RAB" post. You do realize the authors have compared events and situations in their own book to real world events? Because that's where they drew their inspiration from? GRRM and JKR come to mind. The former compared Daenerys's dragons to nukes, her takeover of Mereen akin to the Iraq war, and JKR has said Voldemort and his Death Eaters echo the Nazis.

Part 2 of the ask: That being said, I do feel it is important to only use what the author mentions, and not go beyond that. GRRM has said ASOIAF is heavily inspired from largely aspects of the RL middle ages, with the exception of Daenerys, her dragons, her campaign (and the Targs), so with him, it's difficult. But JKR has never gone beyond the Voldemort/Nazis and the Lyncanthropy Stigma with the AIDS stigma (the latter of which I think is a mistake and has made the fandom toxic, that's another story).

Yes, I do realize that JKR has said that the Death Eater situation is inspired by WWII. That being said, keep in mind that the Holocaust is one of many, many historical events in which a majority population targeted and murdered a minority population. This is something that has happened many times, unfortunately, and it didn't begin or end with the Holocaust. (And before someone comes at me with the accusations of anti-Semitism, please check yourself and have some respect because I am Jewish and my grandparents are survivors.) JKR grew up in post-war Britain, which took years and years to recover from WWII. It makes that the WWII/the Holocaust would be the historical event that influenced her the most, because every school child growing up in 60s/70s England would have been completely steeped in World War II history and stories of heroism and evil from the war.

Part of the Read Another Book phenomenon is recognizing that artists can and do re-contextualize and reinterpret popular works of art. They place characters into contexts that would be physically impossible for the original artist to imagine. They reverse and subvert the author's original intentions, or they play with "what-if" scenarios. They find cracks and seams in the narrative and think about what world-expanding or world reversal or alternate universes would look like. What artists don't do is issue a narrow set of moral prescriptions to a captive audience; that's the work of propagandists, and it's not something I'm interested in reading.

But as to the concern about, "What if people empathize with James and his character is in a fictional organization that is loosely inspired by the Nazis?" Yes, and...? Did you think that storytelling doesn't involve building empathy for characters who commit evil, characters who lie, characters who are repulsive? Are you unaware of the Byronic hero, or of the anti-hero, of the charismatic villain, of the unreliable narrator? These aren't exactly new tropes. Are you aware that the recent Pulitzer Prize-winning novel All the Light We Cannot See features a sympathetic protagonist who joins Hitler Youth and later, the Wehrmacht?

Read another book! Read Lolita or Wuthering Heights or Interview With the Vampire or American Psycho. Read a novel that helps you understand why people very different from you commit atrocities, and what leads people down dark pathways toward violent ends. Read horrible, selfish, repulsive, villainous, pedophilic, sadistic, thieving, murderous protagonists and you will find that literature is full of them! Read The Things They Carry and find out how it feels to knowingly fight for the wrong side in an unjust war; read All Quiet on the Western Front and realize that soldiers are human beings just like you; read We Need to Talk About Kevin and learn how the mother of a school shooter might feel. You like To Kill A Mockingbird? Go read Go Set A Watchman and discover that even your heroes are flawed and complicated.

Go read another book!

[leonemian]

Werewolf: 21st Century Edition

Okay, been working on this for a while, and I figure here's a good a place to post, and a good a time as any to start.

I love Werewolf: The Apocalypse in spite of itself.

A lot of really great writing, worldbuilding, character work, and RPG design went into the system, but while the 20th Anniversary Edition took the most steps forwards, every edition has seen at least one step backwards. Changing Breeds put the nail in the coffin for me, when it comes to official content, and I just sadly put it on my shelf as a work of art I was once entranced by.

Then my fiance says I talk about it so much, I might as well write my thoughts down. I can't be the only person who feels this way about it.

Plus I've worked out some deep-seated emotional issues through the game, and that aint nothing.

TW: violence, by the way.

Here goes nothing, I guess.

RAGE

A lot of people on this website talk about anger, and how emotions stereotyped as 'negative' are not antithetical to love. How you deal with anger, rather than just labeling it as broadly negative and shoving it down within you or 'rising above', is an important lesson to learn.

The world is filled with terrible things, terrible actions, and terrible people. Being filled with rage is a completely reasonable and understandable reaction.

Werewolf: The Apocalypse makes, as its first theme, Rage. It's right in the tagline, "When Will You Rage?", essentially the entire game is asking this question. I love that the game has a question as its tagline, which is as good a time as any to talk about Judaism.

I'm not that close with my Jewish ancestry, on account of how my entire observant family were killed during the Shoah. Even in early 20th century, the American side of my family, lead by my grandfather, were pulling away from the faith. My grandfather was a strict rationalist, a man of science for whom faith held little interest.

That said, we still celebrated the holidays and didn't exactly Christianize, so I've always felt aloof from both worlds. I distinctly remember having to ask my father about our family history with the Holocaust, and, after a quintessentially Jewish moment wherein my father repeatedly asked me if I was certain I wanted to know, I received some photocopied documents. A list of names and numbers, and my family name written down among them.

I've dealt with a lot of rage in my life, as a Jew, as a queer man, as a progressive, as a leftist, it all boils up at times. Beyond that, I also am an angry person on a fundamental level, and that anger feels complicated. I'm soft-spoken normally, but I've been told when I'm angry, I bellow with a voice that legitimately frightens people. I don't mean this as a boast, it *terrifies* me.

To get back to Werewolf, part of what resonated so strongly with me was the idea of everyone having Rage. Some have it stronger, like the Ahroun, some have it weaker, like the Ragabash, but everyone has it. When you play Werewolf, you are playing a fighter, a barbarian, a druid, a sorcerer, a rogue, and a bard all at once.

To isolate the barbarian side of things, you ever wonder what it'd be like to live with a Barbarian, like a classic D&D Barbarian? Because, sure you as a player can turn Rage on and off at-will, and the lack of spellcasting or 'concentration' is a common limiter meant to signify their lack of restraint.

But, what if it wasn't something you could fully control?

I should clarify for those who don't play Werewolf that Rage is fucking AWESOME. Spending Rage points lets you take multiple actions per round, instantly shapeshift between forms, and ignore wound penalties. It's an invaluable resource in combat that means the difference between life and death, and makes a Werewolf pack unstoppable whirlwinds of violence, capable of punching way above their metaphysical weight class in-universe.

The problem is, you don't just get to have it when you want, and ignore it when you don't.

In Werewolf, anything can provoke Rage in you. Sufficiently agitating or infuriating situations can have the Storyteller call for a Rage roll, making this precious resource debilitating at a time when you want to be calm. Roll too many successes and the game mechanics make you Frenzy, attacking anything in sight. Frenzy can be useful in combat, you instantly shift into the war-form, Crinos, and ignore wound penalties for the duration, but outside of combat? Things get *dire*.

You can spend a second in-game resource, Willpower, to resist a Frenzy, but Willpower is a resource that takes much longer to regenerate, a 'good night's rest' usually only restoring 1, for comparison.

Are you a bad person if you flip out and destroy something? I've argued with my storyteller, asking for higher difficulty to the Rage roll (higher numbers required to gain a 'success' which in this instance is NOT something you want), if my character just directed their anger at an inanimate object. It worked in-game, but it also scared my character's brother and sister, and broke the sink in their kitchen.

I have a brother who I love so deeply and dearly, but who terrorized me as a child. Physically, mentally, and emotionally. I still fear the sound of floorboards creaking outside of my room, I still shrink from people who touch me from behind, even gently, when I don't expect it. It left a sense of impotent rage at my inability to protect myself, an anger towards my family for not protecting me, and a deep-seated desire for payback at him.

Thing is, he's apologized to me so many times. He loves me, I love him, and he was a kid with severe addiction problems whose brain was on fire 24/7. My parents were making the best of a terrible situation, and simply couldn't be in two places at once.

He's talked about feeling like a monster. Feeling like he couldn't control the waves of emotions, at that and many other moments. He took responsibility, but in the decades since, I've been on that side of the fence myself a few times.

I love him. Justice is in our reconciliation, for me at least. His acknowledgement of my pain, and my sense of him as a full person rather than as a demon who hounded my childhood has given me my brother back.

I've yelled at him a bunch, I've gotten my chance to voice my pain, but I realized at a certain point that it wasn't making me feel better. The problem was, I love him, and thus, even if he was the one who hurt me, it didn't help to see him in pain, whether through my 'punishment' or his own guilt and self-torment.

That said, I did a lot of the smiling mask, burying my emotions down, for a long time, and that wasn't useful either. The rage needed to be let out, and you know what? It was well deserved.

To get back on topic, that is a complicated web of pain, but it arises really easily in Werewolf: The Apocalypse. We often think we're rational, logical beings, in full control of ourselves, but by periodically taking the choice out of our hands via the dice, Werewolf lets us deal with that complicated, painful moment where we are responsible for injury, but may not have been entirely conscious at the time.

Treating it like a disease is also bad, though, because...

The world SUCKS. Things are TERRIBLE. Violence, murder, bigotry, corruption, capitalism, ecological devastation, man's inhumanity to man just keeps rolling onwards, and it makes us ANGRY. That anger is earned, that anger is justified, and we don't always need to sublimate or deny it, because if anger is the only thing getting you up in the morning, then anger, in that instance, is a good and holy thing.

I'll end each of these sections with a bit from my personal favorite Werewolf character of mine, Maeve Ceallach, Homid Fianna Ahroun.

Oh, spoiler warning, I'm going to try and do more posts, more sections on Werewolf concepts, how the game handles them, and how I would change them. Rage was the one I started with because it's both the primary theme of Werewolf, and also the one that needs the least change in my opinion.

Maeve Ceallach

"I don't remember at what point I realized my father was missing his right arm. It must have happened when I was really young, I remember him having his arm, there's pictures of him holding me, but grade school onwards, it was just a fact of our home life. Daddy did things differently, that's just how it was.

My mother didn't speak to me about it. Well, shit, she didn't talk to me about much of anything, until my first change. Then I got a lot of attention, I was the golden child from then on. Tried to live up to her expectations, and that didn't include dredging up painful family memories, so I stayed off it.

By the time I finally got her to talk to me about it, I was in college. I had a lot of... interest, let's call it, from a lot of people. It was fun at first, then it was irritating because I had to keep up my studies and my duties to the Nation. Then it got weird, and finally, scary.

Look, I get it, redhead, big muscles, funky scars, the piercings, the tattoos, the boots, I'm aware of my presentation. Lotta people want me to step on them, and that's fun from time to time, but it gets old. Remind me to tell you the story about the ink at the base of my neck, that'll clue you in.

It's fun... until it isn't. I had this one girlfriend in Junior year, and she just kept... pushing. She wanted the 'lioness', she wanted the 'wolfmother', she wanted, you know, the beast in me. I didn't want that, I get enough of that in my job, but she just kept pushing.

It was a bad night, and I should've just walked away, taken a breath, counted to 100, all the stuff I've learned. I didn't, and she wasn't taking the hint that I needed to be alone... Honestly, maybe I should've been firmer about it? I've always had trouble with that, I like to please.

She grabs me from behind, and I just snapped. I left claw marks in the washing machine, and grabbed her. I wasn't going full Crinos, but I definitely drew blood. The look on her face... I still see it in my nightmares. Not just her, but the reflection in her eyes.

My ma came and picked me up. Guess she had to, Sept leader and all that, clean up the mess, keep everything hush-hush, but she stayed behind with me.

'Never bring the fight in here.' She said. 'We fight, we bleed, we kill, but you don't bring it in the house. You wash up at the gym, you sleep in the car or on the rocks if you've got to. You don't bring the fight in here.'

My dad pulled up, and as I watched him fiddle with his keys to get into my apartment, I asked the question I'd been waiting 24 years to ask.

'Did you ever let the fight come home?'

She looked out the window to him, and he waved at her, smiling.

'Once.' She said. 'Only once.'"

[barnesbabee]

more shit to add to the storm, apparently GFRIEND was shooting for a comeback show 

so are they all daft????? 

out of ALL the places, out of ALL the museums, they decided that a museum with Nazi attires was the best one to shoot the show at

nevermindd shooting in an art museum, that would be too simple

also how did she not know about the holocaust when one of her bandmates got backlash for using the word ‘holocaust’ in a solo rap song? 

literally the ONE thing that will get Europeans mad. 

Yall will do the hand gesture while speaking in a mock Italian accent, yall will plaster on fake moustaches and say oui oui bagette, yall will dress up as vikings for tiktok and halloween and yall will grab a bottle of vodka and speak in funny accent to pretend your russian and no one gives a fuck. No one cares. No one gets mad because no one sees that as offensive unlike certain countries.

But people just HAD to go in for the holocaust didn’t they. But I don’t see the stupid spam of posts about this now. 

Yuju said ‘my minds so blown its a holocaust’ in a rap song. This one took a pic with a Nazi soldier. What next? Doing the Nazi salute? Tattooing a swastika because it’s ✨a pretty star✨?

the Holocaust is THE ONE THING that makes us mad. But no, I guess it’s to hard to respect and too hard to understand how terrible it was

And I better not hear ONE FUCKING SOUL say I’m making a big deal out of this. 

It wasn’t just jews, and they weren’t just killed. It was anyone who was a jew, physically disabled, or deemed not ary an enough. I bet some of them wished they were killed. Instead they were thrown into concentration camps, forced to live in no conditions, treated like animals, burned and gassed, mistreated, beat up by the nazi soldiers, experimented on, every single cruelty you can think of, that’s what went on inside those camps. 

So that pretty girl can take picture with pretty mannequin <3 

So yes, I’m making a big fucking deal out of this, because it’s a big deal. Some of you know NOTHING about europe, and it’s fucking embarrassing. Some of you know NOTHING about our history and your just turn a blind eye when shit like this happens because ‘calm down it was just a picture’. Stop being fucking ignorant. Europeans have to educate themselves about every single culture in fear we get called racist for wearing a certain thing, or for saying a certain things, or god forbid, for making a tiktok with that one song, when we don’t mean to. People don’t take the time to educate us, people don’t take the time to consider ‘maybe they were never taught about this’. No, they instantly turn to calling us racist and colonizers. We have to constantly tiptoe around culture and history when it’s about EVERYBODY ELSE, but you’re not fucking botheres no learn about the single most important detail about our history? Something that affected not only germany, but europe and the world as a whole? Europe is important. Learn about our history. Or at least learn about the Holocaust, have a little notion about the one thing you shouldn’t joke about if youre not european or jewish.

[bopinion]

Book of the month / 2021 / 08 August

I love books. Even though I hardly read any. Because my library is more like a collection of tomes, coffee-table books, limited editions... in short: books in which not "only" the content counts, but also the editorial performance, the presentation, the curating of the topic - the book as a total work of art itself.

Through a different Lens

Stanley Kubrick (& Sean Corcoran, Donald Albrecht, Luc Sante)

Photography / 1997 / Taschen Publishing House

Every now and then, I sentence the kids to watch movies that I think are relevant - whether from a personal or a cinematic point of view. While my little son tends to be served light fare like "Blues Brothers," my big daughter sometimes has to chew a little harder, as happened the other day with "2001: A Space Odyssey." Her enthusiasm was a bit restrained, even if I exclaimed about 23 times, "That movie is from 1968. There were no special effects then, it's all actually built!".

Even regardless of that aspect, this epic can be considered groundbreaking. From the genre reference of the classical music background and the excellent script, to the technological authenticity and the almost psychedelic color scheme, to the revolutionary camera work. Above all, the visual composition of this film is the true mastery of director Stanley Kubrick, who is not considered one of the most important filmmakers of all time for nothing. Of course, I also have the matching book in my library ("The Making of Stanley Kubrick's '2001: A Space Odyssey'", also from Taschen, of course), but this time it's about another work of this visually powerful creator: his early work, photography.

"In the Streets of New York" is the title of the publisher's documentary "Through a different Lens" on the occasion of an exhibition of the same name at the Museum of the City of New York. For it was there that Kubrick, just 17 years old, went on his first stalk of optical impressions. In 1945, he signed on as a photographer for the magazine "Look," for which he photographed stories with a human touch in the streets, clubs and sports arenas of New York City for five years. In the process, he captured with his camera just about everything that made up life in the Big Apple in that era: People in the laundromat, the hustle and bustle at Columbia University, sports stars, showgirls in their dressing rooms, performers in the circus, Broadway actresses rehearsing their lines, cab drivers changing a tire, couples kissing on the train platform, shoe shine boys, boxers reconsidering their career choice in the ring corner, patients in their dentist's waiting room, prominent businessmen, politicians, children in the amusement park, and commuters on the Subway.

Even these photographs from Kubrick's younger years reveal a startling sense of composition, tension, and atmosphere, and seem like film stills to never-shot dramas from the jungles of the big city. "This exhibition reveals how (Kubricks) formative years laid the groundwork for his compelling storytelling and dark visual style. They also show a noir side of New York that's no longer around." (Vanity Fair) "Photography, and particularly his years with Look magazine, laid the technical and aesthetic foundations for a way of seeing the world and honed his ability to get it down on film. There, he mastered the skill of framing, composition and lighting to create compelling images," explains Sean Corcoran, curator of the exhibition "Through a different Lens" and co-author of the book. Apparently, it was clear to the young man from the very beginning where his talent lay and how he was able to hone and master it.

Stanley Kubrick was born in New York City on July 26, 1928, as the first of two children. His parents came from Jewish families, and all of his grandparents had immigrated from Austro-Hungarian Galicia. His early passions were excessive reading, cinema and chess. He was first gifted a camera, a Graflex, from his father when he was 13 years old. And he immediately took off as a photographer for the William Howard Taft High School student newspaper. After graduation, he turned his hobby into a career and at the age of 18 became a full-time photographer for Look, to which he had previously sold amateur photos. As early as 1950, Kubrick directed his first documentary, "Day of the Fight", about life in and around the boxing ring, which he had already explored photographically. Although only 16 minutes long, the film was already considered a sensational study at the time. His future career path was set, the rest is history.

"Through a Different Lens" was an extremely successful exhibition, which subsequently also went on tour. Not only Kubrick fans were impressed by the mastery of optical staging that was already visible at an early stage. Corcoran: "Kubrick learned through the camera's lens to be an acute observer of human interactions and to tell stories through images in dynamic narrative sequences. (His) ability to see and translate an individual's complex psychological life into visual form was apparent in his many personality profiles for the publication. His experiences at the magazine (Look) also offered him opportunities to explore a range of artistic expressions. Overall, Kubrick's still photography demonstrates his versatility as an image maker. Look's editors often promoted the straightforward approach of contemporary photojournalism at which Kubrick excelled. It's clear he always got the photographs that were needed for the assignment, but that he was also unafraid to make pictures that excited his own aesthetic sensibility."

Beyond the 100 photographs in the exhibition, the book presents 300 of Kubrick's images, including unpublished shots and outtakes. Annotated by Corcoran, his colleague Donald Albrecht, and renowned writer and critic Luc Sante, who has published most notably in Interview and Harper's. They place the motifs in their context, refer to stylistic aspects, and thus point to Kubrick's (imminent) artistic career. Above all, in contrast to the exhibition, the book offers all friends of photography - whether fans of Kubrick or not - a rare insight into the proverbial pioneering early work of a brilliant artist. And into one of the most interesting eras of the "city that never sleeps" - yes, even Frank Sinatra was photographed by young Kubrick.

From the extensive, mostly euphoric reviews of the book "Through a different Lens" or the oeuvre documented in it, let's take one example each from a professional and an amateur:

"The man who later led a genre to its lonely high point and at the same time to its final point with each of his films knew already at the age of barely 17, that's how old he was at the time, that expression and form shape every impression." (Die Welt)

"I can't praise this book enough. Wonderful collection and very informative. An absolute must for those wishing to understand more of how Kubrick valued the frame." (Yvi on amazon.com)

P.S.: Just for the sake of completeness, let's mention Kubrick's cinematic output after his breakthrough: 1960: Spartacus / 1962: Lolita / 1964: Dr. Strangelove or: How I Learned to Stop Worrying and Love the Bomb / 1968: 2001: A Space Odyssey / 1971: A Clockwork Orange / 1975: Barry Lyndon / 1980: The Shining / 1987: Full Metal Jacket / 1999: Eyes Wide Shut. No, this is not a selection of greatest hits, this is a complete listing. And thus the proof that he has indeed realized a significant peak in the respective genre. His great influence on the history of cinema is also shown by the fact that he is the only director to appear a total of five times in the list of the 100 films with the best critics' ratings.

In addition, two side notes: Kubrick spent several years preparing a film biopic about Napoleon Bonaparte. The preparations were so far along that he could have started production at any time. However, the release of "Waterloo" (1970) and its poor financial results dissuaded him and the film studio from the project. The project has since been known as "The greatest Movie never made". He also dealt intensively with the subject of the Holocaust. After the release of "Schindler's List" (1993), however, he discarded these plans explaining that Steven Spielberg had already told all the essential.

Stanley Kubrick died of a heart attack on March 7, 1999, in his home at Childwickbury Manor near London, where he had lived in seclusion since the 1960s and had set up studio and editing rooms in the former stables.

Here's a short trailer for the exhibition "Trough a different Lens":

https://youtu.be/EgPlnjeBs7E

[jentlemahae]

Oh, yeah, sometimes the artists’ ideology does affect their craft, but that’s where critical thinking and death of the author come into play. Critical thinking because even if the artist wholeheartedly meant every single shitty thing they included in the art, the consumer can still consume being fully aware that that content is evil, or realize it’s evil as they consume it.

Like, I’ve read Mein Kampf, and I’m definitely not a fucking nazi. I didn’t read it because I was one nor did I become one after reading it, I was, frankly, curious. And when I finished the book I was like “Jesus fucking christ how did most people read this shit and not see the holocaust coming from a mile away”, and the key point here is that some people, even at the time, read the book, saw what Hitler was doing, and put it all together and tried to warn others. And others didn’t. Some exercised critical thinking.

And then death of the author operates by interpreting the contents of a text without caring about the author’s circumstances or explicit intentions, which doesn’t mean “separate art from author” as most people seem to think, but rather that the only true ideas in a text are those which are contained within it, not the ones one might adscribe to it due to their knowledge of the artist’s life circumstances or attitudes. For example, art be racist without intending to be (Dune, the novel, does not set out to be racist, but it still reads as deeply offensive towards brown poc, because at the time… it was part of the intrinsic white mindset. The author did not set out to actively talk shit about dark people, but he ended up doing it by accident). Anyways, even if a piece of art is created with evil intentions to be evil, it is still possible to consume it without endorsing its contents. (Sorry for the long ass ask, this is ps anon btw, I’m just always fascinated by this kind of discussion 😂)

i personally wouldnt feel comfortable reading mein kampf but i do understand your point, bcs it’s actually a discussion we had back in high school with my lit/history teacher! i personally wouldnt feel comfortable reading it as im not jewish, but i get the point you’re bringing up (also idk whether youre jewish or not, so idk via which perspective ur approaching the text)

but yeah i also understand your other point! tho i think it depends on how u consume it (eg are u just doing it in private or are u like praising it to others are recommending it + are u financially supporting the artist by purchasing the art), but yeah i agree that sometimes the art doesn’t directly endorse the artist’s ideology. it’s a grey area tho bcs i think it depends on how u approach the art, bccs some ppl think that taking into account the historical/cultural background is important, while others solely consume the text directly (like u said)

[mrmrswales]

The story behind Kate’s survivor portraits – and what they mean for remembrance

The Duchess of Cambridge’s poignant photographs of Holocaust survivors and their families will help bring this crucial initiative to the attention of millions worldwide – puncturing holes in the narrative of denial that still finds a place in dark corners of the internet.

But it requires further context to fully understand the significance of the future Queen’s involvement, alongside more than 10 professional photographers.

Of course Kensington Palace don’t routinely provide behind-the scenes detail on the machinations that go into such projects but to me, as the grandson of a refugee from the Nazis, it’s important people know this was far from a ‘point and click’ job. I hope that I won’t be sent to the Tower but this time I’ll take the risk.

Having approached the Palace six months ago with the seeds of an idea for a photography project involving the Duchess to mark 75 years since the liberation of Auschwitz, I was delighted (not to mention surprised given the weight of requests the Royals receive) to receive a call asking for more details. Further calls followed and it wasn’t long before Palace aides suggested bringing in the Royal Photographic Society, where she is a patron, to help make my vision of 75 images a reality, and involving the families of survivors to highlight their fortitude in building full lives after the horrors.

But I didn’t dare believe this project would happen until I learnt how much time and thought the Duchess was personally putting into it. The fine art graduate spent several days researching what she could bring to the table in order to best capture these individuals for the future. She was at pains to ensure the survivors were comfortable with the vision and that the spotlight was on the heroes to be pictured and not the Duchess herself. The idea of an exhibition bringing together all 75 images – most of which will be taken over the coming months by fellows of the RPS – followed .

Last month, the Holocaust Memorial Day Trust came on board to support the initiative and spoke in strict confidence to survivors to be photographed both by The Duchess and by RPS. We are also honoured to reveal the first cohort of these images today. Before meeting Steven Frank and Yvonne Bernstein, The Duchess spent significant time preparing for the photography session, and once they had arrived she spent nearly two and a half hours with them, getting to know them and their stories, and taking their photographs.  Why give you all this background? It’s crucial because it shows that our Royal Family are determined to follow up oft-repeated words of remembrance with practical steps as, day by day, we bid farewell to more survivors. It shows they are personally ready to take on the message of the survivor generation to challenge all forms of hatred wherever it rears its ugly head. As the Duchess and Prince William wrote in the visitors book at Stutthof concentration camp two years ago: “All of us have an overwhelming responsibility to make sure that we learn the lessons and that the horror of what happened is never forgotten and never repeated.” In other words, the message is about the here and now at least as much as about the past.

It’s a lead the young Royals have no doubt taken from Prince Charles who has gone above and beyond to honour survivors and remember victims; he’s long been a regular at milestone events, has attended several fundraising dinners and, perhaps most notably, came up with the idea for a community centre in Krakow after witnessing first hand the need of survivors for a meeting place. Eleven years on, he still asks for progress reports on the centre’s growth.

I remember several years ago discussing with my grandma, who came to Britain on the Kindertransport in 1939, an upcoming gathering of her fellow former refugees and being struck by her almost casual approach on the question of whether she would receive that golden ticket to meet Charles.

It was a reaction that I assure you had nothing to do with the heir to the throne’s small talk and everything to do with his stand-out commitment on this issue. This had afforded her the honour of previously attending at least two events with HRH – and she understood that it might be someone else’s turn.

This week, it was wholly fitting that Yad Vashem was the centrepiece of HRH’s first official visit to Israel this week. You didn’t need to be a world leader in Jerusalem to see this visit was deeply personal for him and not just because his great-grandmother is honoured at the museum for saving Jews during the Holocaust.

Just as he’s always worn his appreciation for the survivors and their contribution on his sleeve, so too I was always aware how much his support was appreciated by my grandma and her fellow survivors. She often spoke about how important it was to her that her grandchildren knew what happened in order to relay the memory – and the media spotlight that follows the Royals means they can amplify the survivors’ stories to the world like few others.

When she passed away four years ago, we discovered a copy of a special issue of the Jewish News marking the 70th anniversary among the few papers she had kept. It was guest edited by four survivors – only two of whom are still with us. As we bid farewell to the last survivors at a time of rising antisemitism, Islamophobia and other hate crime, the importance of four of the most senior Royals all using their platforms this week to shine a light on what man is capable of can’t be overestimated.

[swifty-fox]

dude! more history rants, that was great!! I honestly probably learned more in that than I ever have in a history class

dude! Learning about history is SO much better when the person you’re listening to has a genuine passion for it! My Russian prof used to take his shoes off and bang on the table to prove his point, he would imitate historical figures down to the Russian accent (with great skill he lived in the USSR through the entire nineties which if you know anything about nineties Russia that is a FEAT. His wife to be at the time ((now a german history prof at my college)) was offered a ride in a helicopter by the Russian mob. She declined) 

Russian history is also just such a rich and dramatic and WILD history. Theres so many things to focus on like an entire semester was spent JUST studying the revolution and that was only an introductory course

Anyways since I’m here and can rant lets talk about two fun things! Lenins  name and his family as well as Vasily Grossmans greatest and most controversial works!

So Vladimir Lenin is a pretty iconic name. A pretty cool name in fact! Really rolls off the tongue and strikes FEAR into enemies hearts.

Did ya know it’s not his fuckin name? Nope! the guy straight up chose a new last name for himself! This former law student (oh yeah he wasn't even a politician no wonder the fucko didn't know how to run a country) was actually born Vladimir Ulyanov! 

but why the name change? Ulyanov is still pretty easy to say, still pretty memorable. Rolls of the tongue so on and so forth.

this, ladies, gentlemen, and everything in between and beyond, is because of Lenins older brother Aleksandr Ulyanov! 

(this guy has better hair than i could ever hope to, thanks diluted slav genes) 

now sweet Aleks here was also four years Vladimirs Senior and was also a revolutionary! (seems like it ran in the family) 

Not only was he a revolutionary but he was a MASSIVELY FAMOUS ONE and kinda helped set the ENTIRE downfall of the soviet union in motion long before the revolution was even a whisper of a thought. 

How you ask? well uh.

he tried to kill Tsar Nikolas II’s dad. 

yes, that Tsar Nikolas who later was overthrown and was executed by firing squad. Sorry the Romanovs are all very very dead we found all their bodies the animated movie was very wrong. 

Anyways, sweet kolya’s father was Tsar Alexander III and he was known throughout the land as the Peacemaker! 

(also yes they're both called Aleksandr. Russians only have like. Ten names to choose from)

wow sounds like he must be a great guy with a nickname like that huh? Why would anyone wanna kill him! Sadly, the nickname is only because Russia entered no wars under his rule. He was in fact, a huge bastard. Outside of being physically and emotionally abusive to his family (he would often berate Nikolai for being weak which definitely led to some of his issues with his authority and pride being questioned later on...) he was incredibly reactionary and heavy handed when it came to ruling. he opposed ANY movement that might minimize his authority as emperor. He was famous for executing a LOT of anti-imperialist terrorists.

he also looked like this

not to insult bulldogs but this guy sure looks like one. 

Anyways, Aleksandr Ulyanov helps devise a plot wherein he and a bunch of other revolutionaries will ride by Tsar Alek’s carriage and chuck a bomb through his window and then boom no more emperor. basically, it was the 1887 version of a drive by shooting. 

Naturally, it failed, otherwise we wouldn’t be talking about this! Anyways, All the conspirators were captured and sentenced to death. (5 were later pardoned none of which were Lenins brother.) They were all hanged.

Although Lenin was involved in politics before this to some degree, this action really radicalized him and really got the ball rolling for the eventual Soviet Union. Talk about butterfly effect. 

Alright time for history lesson part TWO!! Lets talk about Vasily Grossman and his work In The Town of Berdichev! Though more technically I will be talking more about the film adaptation titled Commissar(1967). 

quick background time! Vasily Grossman was born to a Jewish family and due to prosecution (of both Jewish people and Ukrainians) at the time was forced to conceal his heritage. He actually studied to be a chemist at first and was quite successful until he transitioned later in life to being a writer and reporter! His accounts of the Ukrainian famine are the some of the most detailed accounts as well as the most controversial (to the Russian state) he also was a war reporter for WWII and intensively documented the ethnic cleansing going on. Understandably.

he was strongly supported by Maksim Gorky! (yes that Maksim Gorky, famous writer, and the man who helped develop the entire soviet education system that kinda was just brainwashing and propaganda. Reportedly later in life he considered that to be one of his greatest regrets((he was also a massive homophobe too because same sex relationships were actually legal for a while there in russia!))

Long story short, Vasya believed strongly in several things. he believed in the human spirit, he believed in supporting his Jewish brethren, he believed strongly in mother Russia and the communist party. But more than that he believed that those who do not learn from our mistakes are doomed to repeat them. 

Thus came about his work. I’ll post a quick plot summary here from Wikipedia of the movie. it’s a really good film honestly I highly recommend it. 

“During the Russian Civil War (1918–1922), a female commissar of the Red Army cavalry Klavdia Vavilova (Nonna Mordyukova) finds herself pregnant. Until her child is born, she is forced to stay with the family of a poor Jewish blacksmith Yefim Magazannik (Rolan Bykov), his wife, mother-in-law, and six children. At first, both the Magazannik family and "Madame Vavilova", as they call her, are not enthusiastic about living under one roof, but soon they share their rationed food, make her civilian clothes, and help her with the delivery of her newborn son. Vavilova seemingly embraces motherhood, civilian life, and new friends.Meanwhile, the frontline advances closer to the town and the Jews expect a pogrom by the White Army as the Red Army retreats. Vavilova attempts to console them with a Communist dream: "One day people will work in peace and harmony", but the dream is interrupted with a vision of the fate of the Jews in the coming world war. She rushes to the front to rejoin her army regiment, leaving her newborn behind.“

- White army was the anti-soviet army during the revolution. Red Army was the soviets. Pogroms were targeted areas of ethnic cleansing against Jewish peoples, namely they were villages or towns that were wiped out. 

this film was banned for something like forty years for anti-soviet sentiment. But why? it seems pretty damn pro-soviet doesn't it? 

Well firstly lets talk about how oppressive the soviet regime was by this point! In 1967 Russia was in the dying throes of Stalins regime. Yes he had died a little over a decade earlier but the government was still very much being run by his ideals. All independent newspapers were banned. EVERYTHING every single piece of art, literature, news, commercial, WHATEVER, had to be state approved. And by god was it hard to get things approved. Grossman routinely wrote of his frustrations and struggles of getting anything published because if a Russain character was portrayed as anything but a happy go lucky communist then it would be censored. Grossman first ran into this issue when he was reporting on the iron and coal mines in siberia. the conditions were terrible but Grossman had to lie and say everything was fine. It let to a real crisis of ideals for him.

The first red mark against this movie is that well, it focuses on a woman. It’s an incredibly feminist movie, with the idea of motherhood and duty and the strength of a woman being just as much if not more than a man. (for reference a Commissar is like an army Officer) 

Secondly, she abandons her post! to have a child! In communist Russia NOTHING comes before your duty to the motherland. But again she eventually realizes that the call of her country is stronger than the call of this simple maternal life and she does go on to fight so why is this a problem?

Well ultimately, it boils down to the final scene. 

"One day people will work in peace and harmony" she says. An entirely pro-soviet message. But then it is instantly contradicted by footage of the holocaust. This is a visual representation fo Grossman saying that although the communist ideal is strong in the soviet union that they are being blinded by false enemies, prejudices and will find themselves committing such atrocities (of course they already are but again he DID still support the Soviet State) Basically it was a warning to the Soviet Party! Learn from the mistakes that were made and gentle themselves!

And this, this was a criticism of the Soviet party! And thus, it was shelved for nearly twenty years.

It finally was shown again in the late 80′s  

Grossman, after attempting to publish his magnum opus, Life and Fate, had his flat raided by the KGB and all his notes, manuscripts, letters, books, publications, and pretty much his life's work were confiscated. Grossman died in the mid 1960′s of stomach cancer not knowing if any of his writings or best works would ever be seen or published again. 

Thankfully they were found and published and his massively important legacy lives on in the people who know about him. But his story is a very bittersweet one indeed. 

you can watch the full movie here with English captions! 

(tw: imagery of holocaust, some anti-semitism (if i recall) some children without any clothes bathing if i recall (its not weird but I know it was shocking for me to see at first))

(maybe I’ll talk about the TRUE story of Rasputin another time...) 

[letterboxd]

Common Language.

With her third feature, Lingua Franca, now on Netflix, Filipina filmmaker Isabel Sandoval talks to Valerie Complex about undocumented immigrant workers, sensual cinematography, taking narrative risks and Steven Soderbergh’s sexiest film.

“I’m not the type of filmmaker that is into crowd-pleasing and I think that resonates with audiences.” —Isabel Sandoval

Isabel Sandoval’s films have an auteur, European appeal; they take their time. Inspired by cinematic film legends including Chantal Akerman, Wong Kar-wai and James Gray, Sandoval is pushing forward in an industry reluctant to change, creating narratives that speak to her existence, and her experience.

After making two feature films set in her native Philippines (Apparition, Señorita), Sandoval relocates to her adopted hometown, New York City—or at least a small seaside corner of it—for her third film. Lingua Franca follows Olivia (played by Sandoval), an undocumented Filipina trans woman who is looking to secure a green card so she can continue to stay and work in the US. Olivia knows the only way to legal status in present-day America is through marriage, but struggles to find the right person to accept her offer.

Green-card marriages also cost money. Olivia takes a job as a live-in caregiver for Olga (Lynn Cohen), an elderly Russian woman living in Brooklyn’s Brighton Beach neighborhood. She soon finds a love interest in her client’s grandson Alex (Australian actor Eamon Farren), and her future seems solidified. Or is it? As anxiety about deportation mounts, Olivia strives to maintain autonomy in a world that continually rejects her.

The slow, meditative nature of Lingua Franca has already found fans on Letterboxd. “Trans narratives are so often couched in dramatic twists and turns, but here we get something so much more gentle,” writes Connor. Sandoval’s turn as a woman searching for her truth while existing at the intersections of marginalization is also hitting home. “This is the hardest I've been struck by a performance since Jeon Do-yeon's masterful display in Lee Chang-dong's Secret Sunshine back in 2007,” writes Joshua. “I really cannot believe this is Isabel's first performance and I certainly believe that it won't be her last.”

Sandoval instinctively injects concepts of immigration, loneliness, and displacement throughout Lingua Franca in a way that doesn’t overwhelm, but does force deep empathy. “Artfully plays with a lot of themes at once,” agrees Letterboxd member Oluwatayo.

Merriam-Webster’s definition of ‘lingua franca’—“something resembling a common language”—can be interpreted in various ways. For Sandoval, she aims to create her own common language of passion, pain and new beginnings. With migrant workers sharing a common language of homesickness in every corner of the world, I had to ask why she chose New York to be the setting for this emotional drama.

Isabel Sandoval (as Olivia) and Eamon Farren (as Alex) on Brighton Beach, New York.

Letterboxd: What is it about New York that made the setting work for you and Lingua Franca? Is it the diversity of the environment or…? Isabel Sandoval: You know, growing up in the Philippines, New York was seen as romantic. I wanted to put my stamp and unique views of life in New York City. I wanted to do two things with Lingua Franca: I wanted to do my own New York movie from the perspective and the gaze of a foreigner and an immigrant, and I wanted to make a different kind of film that was quiet and patient. I wrote the script around the time when Trump got elected president, which painted a perfect storm for the premise, story and view of the film. I was also influenced by the James Gray film Two Lovers, which was filmed in Brighton Beach.

That’s not an easy thing to accomplish in a New York movie, yet you manage to do that with such patience and quiet and subtlety. I was shocked. But, you know, New York is not all crazy. There are places that are quiet. Exactly! Especially in Brooklyn. I wanted to capture the different worlds that exist block to block in the film.

Your movie deals with a lot of themes: family, immigration and romance… I’m always drawn to stories with a socio-political point of view about women who are marginalized and forced to make intensely personal decisions. French filmmaker Jean Cocteau once said: “Filmmakers make the same movie over and over”. As you progress and make more films, and you’re being involved as a storyteller, you’re beginning to polish; your style becomes more evident and sophisticated. That’s just the story I felt attached to because it was one I was passionate about and it was the right time to create it.

How do you feel about being embraced by the film community, both domestically and abroad? Tribeca, Locarno, SXSW and Venice are among the festivals that have premiered your films. It’s vindicating to me. My first feature film shot and produced in the US screened internationally, but, with Lingua Franca, it’s come full circle. I think critics now embrace and know that I have a voice and a sensibility that’s worth exploring more. They want to involve a filmmaker with different views, especially in an industry where you need to conform to certain formulas and certain group things in terms of how we approach certain issues or certain things or certain ideas. It truly makes me feel independent.

Art-house film and cinema has long been associated, or at least for the last fifteen years, with really gritty, social-realist drama. I’ve received reviews of my film that criticize it for not being romantic enough. My film captures emotions that are not easy, obvious and straightforward. I’m not the type of filmmaker that is into crowd-pleasing and I think that resonates with audiences.

You are the director, the star, the editor, and the producer of Lingua Franca. How did you stay organized enough to manage all of those tasks? I have one job and that is to make a film and tell a story. I had a clear vision of what I wanted to accomplish, and honestly, it’s me being a stubborn auteur.

The camera work is really sensual and intimate. What conversations took place between you and cinematographer, Isaac Banks, and what, if any other films, were the inspiration for that look? He and I discussed patience and sensuality often, so that’s why Wong Kar-wai had quite an influence on my work with In the Mood for Love and also Christian Petzold, the German director, who directed Transit and Phoenix.

Lingua Franca places a particular lens on the fragility of Filipino, migrant culture. In the film, Olivia exists at the intersections of race, gender, sexuality, ICE and Covid-19—and you lay that all on the table here. What do you hope the audience will see in Olivia’s story at this time? She’s a trans woman, she is a woman of color, she is an immigrant, but she’s also more than the sum of these individual parts. I know my film demands a lot of intellectual and emotional labor, but it’s important that viewers think deeply and critically about Olivia’s motivations, which may seem contradictory and complex. I want Lingua Franca to be an emotional experience, even if it’s not the most comfortable to watch. If I get one audience member to do the emotional legwork of trying to understand where the main character is coming from, I will feel complete as a filmmaker.

What do you think is the must-see Filipino film, classic or new? [Peque Gallaga’s] Oro, Plata, Mata, which came out in 1982. It is a multi-generational tale set in central Philippines. It’s just a sprawling, dramatic epic, and it’s one of the films that made me want to be a filmmaker. It’s not the most technically polished film, but it takes risks narratively. At the end of the day, it’s not about how big the production is. It’s your willingness to be expansive and explorative as a filmmaker that counts.

What do you consider the sexiest film you’ve ever seen? Out of Sight by Steven Soderbergh.

Out of Sight?! I did not see that coming. Yes! That film doesn’t have any sex scene, but it’s the level of seduction for me. I think sensuality is not necessarily a physical encounter between bodies, but the patience and longing of the moment.

What is your all-time favorite comfort film? A League of Their Own by Penny Marshall. That was the first movie that I saw where I bawled in the last ten minutes of the film.

If I were doing a triple feature with Lingua Franca, what two films would you recommend to watch before or after? I would recommend Ali: Fear Eats the Soul by Rainer Werner Fassbinder, which is another interracial love story between a German woman and a Moroccan immigrant. The other one would be Two Lovers by James Gray, which is set by the beach.

Isabel Sandoval (as Olivia) and Lynn Cohen (as Olga) in ‘Lingua Franca’.

[Spoiler warning: The final two questions concern aspects of the film’s ending.]

I thought the ending of your film was powerful, because we’re right back at the beginning of Olivia’s journey. Sometimes things don’t work out and you have to pick up the pieces and move forward. Exactly! I also wanted to make a point that even though we are focusing on Olivia, I pulled the camera back to highlight bigger sociological themes. She is one of many immigrants in the script and their fates are not resolved by the end of this movie. I wanted that to be a subtle reminder this type of thing becomes cyclical. Life goes on, it’s just another day. Olivia is a displaced immigrant woman in America where Trump is president. Whereas Olga, who’s Ukranian-Jewish, left her home country fifty or sixty years ago in the aftermath of the Holocaust. I wanted people to see this connection.

Based on the meaning of ‘lingua franca’, was that your original choice or for the title? The definition really fits the story. The film is an invitation to the audience to really pay closer attention to language—the language of things said and unsaid. That probably was also a big point of decision for me to open and close the film with words in Tagalog, which is my native language. A lot of people have asked “why didn’t Olivia accept the marriage proposal?” at the end of the film. Sure, that would’ve been practical, but I invite the audience to look at the language between Alex and Olivia. I challenge them to look beyond Olivia as just an immigrant without papers or as a trans woman looking for love, but this is a woman who is taking her agency back and her ability to determine her life moving forward.

Related content

Leonora Anne Mint’s list of Films by Transgender Writers and Directors.

The Top 100 Filipino Films on Letterboxd.

Jojo Kuneho’s lists of Tagalog movies.

Philippines: The Ultimate List.

Follow Valerie on Letterboxd.

‘Lingua Franca’ is distributed by ARRAY Releasing and is available on Netflix.

[clarasimone]

Q&A Windermere Children: BBC marks Holocaust Memorial Day and the 75th anniversary of the liberation of Auschwitz-Birkenau

Iain Glen alongside creative partners.... The made-for-tv feature will be broadcasted in the UK and Germany January 27 2020.... Frankly it moves me (and does not surprise me) to see IG being part of this large scale commemorative event.

https://www.pressparty.com/pg/newsdesk/BBC1/view/201152/

BBC marks Holocaust Memorial Day and the 75th anniversary of the liberation of Auschwitz-Birkenau

The BBC is marking Holocaust Memorial Day (27 January 2020) and the 75th anniversary of the liberation of Auschwitz-Birkenau with a special televised Holocaust Memorial Day event, as well as a range of content across TV and radio.

The BBC is producing the national Holocaust Memorial Day event on behalf of the Holocaust Memorial Day Trust with the theme of Stand Together.

Other programme highlights include a major new drama telling the story of the Windermere Children, child survivors of the Nazi Holocaust; Robert Rinder helping second and third generations of families who experienced the Holocaust retrace their relatives’ footstep; David Baddiel investigating the history and modern face of Holocaust denial; a moving documentary exploring the untold story of the infamous Bergen-Belsen concentration camp; a special edition of Words And Music on BBC Radio 3.

Tony Hall, Director-General of the BBC, says: "This is an important moment to stop and reflect on a period in our history which showed both the worst, and the best, of the human spirit. That's why we've invested in drama, documentary and events to mark the 75th anniversary. We'll be telling new stories, as well as sharing first-hand testimonies from those who lived through the horror of the concentration camps.

"It's our responsibility as the nation's public service broadcaster to bring these stories to new generations - and I'd like to thank the Holocaust Memorial Day Trust, and our European media partners, for their invaluable support. Together, we're offering everyone the chance to reflect on the consequences of prejudice and hatred, and in doing so we'll ensure that the millions of lives lost in the Holocaust are not forgotten."

Olivia Marks-Woldman, Chief Executive of the Holocaust Memorial Day Trust, says: "We are delighted to be working with the BBC to enable millions of people across the country to learn more about the Holocaust, Nazi Persecution and more recent genocides through the broadcast of the national ceremony for Holocaust Memorial Day (HMD), as well as additional factual programming.

"At a time when identity-based prejudice and hostility is worryingly prevalent in the UK and internationally, HMD is an opportunity to learn about the consequences of hatred when it is allowed to exist unchecked. At this important moment, 75 years after the liberation of Auschwitz, we are asking people to Stand Together against prejudice, and in memory of those who were murdered during the Holocaust, under Nazi Persecution and in genocides which have taken place since."

UK Ceremony for Holocaust Memorial Day The Holocaust Memorial Day Trust’s annual event honours survivors of the Holocaust, Nazi Persecution, and the genocides which followed in Cambodia, Rwanda, Bosnia and Darfur. The Ceremony will be broadcast on Holocaust Memorial Day itself, 27 January 2020, and will be a particularly significant event due to notable anniversaries - marking 75 years since the liberation of Auschwitz-Birkenau and the 25th anniversary of the genocide in Bosnia. The ceremony is the focal point of Holocaust Memorial Day in the UK. This year, it will focus on the theme Stand Together, with the Ceremony including readings, poetry, music and testimony from survivors of the Holocaust and genocide.

My Family, The Holocaust and Me (BBC One) In this moving new two-part series, Robert Rinder helps second and third generations of families who experienced the Holocaust to retrace their relatives’ footsteps and discover the full truth about what happened to them. Robert also explores further his own family’s Holocaust stories, on both his mum’s and his dad’s sides.

This series reveals what it means to be the children and grandchildren of Holocaust victims and survivors. Robert meets three different British Jewish families who have been affected by the Holocaust: a man who wants to know what happened to his German grandparents and uncle; two sisters who investigate their grandmother’s role in the Dutch resistance and the fate of her sister; and a daughter who knows her mother was arrested as a child by the Nazis as she tried to flee France.

Robert also embarks on his own journeys of discovery. To find out what happened to his paternal family, he travels to Lithuania and hears a harrowing eye-witness account. Robert also travels with his mother Angela to Treblinka, to meet the last remaining survivor of the former Nazi death camp and to commemorate his great-grandfather and his family.

The Windermere Children (BBC Two) August, 1945. A coachload of children arrive at the Calgarth Estate by Lake Windermere, England. They are child survivors of the Nazi Holocaust that has devastated Europe’s Jewish population. Carrying only the clothes they wear and a few meagre possessions, they bear the emotional and physical scars of all they have suffered.

From Bafta-nominated screenwriter Simon Block and Bafta and Emmy-winning director Michael Samuels, The Windermere Children is the first dramatisation of a remarkable true story about hope in the aftermath of the Holocaust, based on the powerful first-person testimony of survivors who began their new lives in the UK.

The drama is led by a stellar cast including Thomas Kretschmann (The Pianist), Romola Garai (The Miniaturist), Tim McInnerny (Strangers) and Iain Glen (Game Of Thrones).

Charged with looking after the children is child psychologist Oscar Friedmann (Kretschmann). Along with his team of counsellors, including art therapist Marie Paneth (Garai), philanthropist Leonard Montefiore (McInnerny) and sports coach Jock Lawrence (Glen), they have four months to help the children reclaim their lives.

By the lake, the children learn English, play football, ride bikes, express their trauma through painting – and begin to heal. some locals taunt them, but they are embraced by others. Haunted by nightmares, they yearn for news of their loved ones. When the red cross arrives with letters about the fates of their families, none of them receive good news. But in the absence of relatives, the children find family in each other.

The Windermere Children is the stark, moving and ultimately redemptive story of the bonds the children make with one another, and of how the friendships forged at Windermere sustain them as they rebuild their lives in the UK.

Confronting Holocaust Denial with David Baddiel (BBC Two) The Holocaust is one of the most documented, witnessed and written about events in history, so why is Holocaust denial back on the political agenda? What has happened in the 75 years since the liberation of the camps to have so skewed the picture? And, if it matters, why does it matter?

In this timely and important film, Holocaust Denial: A History With David Baddiel (w/t), for BBC Two, David (pictured, top of page) investigates the history and modern face of Holocaust denial. He talks to academics and historians to trace how denial has evolved since the end of the Second World War and try to discover how and why people are still denying the Holocaust today.

Over the course of the film David encounters people who cause him to question deep-rooted opinions, others who lend extra weight to beliefs he’s grown up with from childhood - and some he really would rather not meet at all. He broaches taboos and finds himself in often uncomfortable situations. At the heart of the film are his attempts to answer some fundamental questions: why does a desire to deny the events of the Holocaust even exist? Why is it growing? What does it tell us about anti-Semitism? Is there a version of Holocaust Denial that is becoming respectable? And how can we best counter these ideas?

Finally he emerges with a new perspective on an issue that goes beyond the events of the Holocaust, and sheds light on a very 21st century malaise - the denial of historical fact. For many, even to explore the phenomenon of Holocaust Denial is to unlock a box marked 'do not open'. But this film suggests that exploring this archetype of lies, conspiracy theory and fake news could deepen our understanding of our post-truth world.

Belsen: Our Story (BBC Two) Belsen: Our Story is a one-hour documentary film telling the untold story of the infamous Bergen-Belsen concentration camp where over 50,000 people, mostly Jews, died primarily from starvation and disease in the last phase of World War II.

As the Allied troops advanced into Germany through the winter of 1944, thousands of Jewish prisoners were evacuated from camps near the Eastern front, mostly through brutal forced marches. Bergen-Belsen’s population increased eight-fold to nearly 60,000. But unlike the infamous extermination or death camps such as Auschwitz or Treblinka, Belsen wasn’t designed as a place of killing. It had no gas chambers. Instead, the prisoners were slaughtered by systematic neglect - many starved to death, others succumbed to typhus, tuberculosis, typhoid fever or dysentery, diseases which ravaged the camp, fostered by the lack of clean drinking water and minimal sanitation.

All that remains of Belsen today is a peaceful, grassy meadow, but it’s legacy lives on through the recollections of those who survived it. Belsen: Our Story is their story. Featuring powerful new interviews with some of the last remaining survivors of the Holocaust and dramatic reconstructions, it also includes archive of the British liberation. Those liberators recount the moment they stumbled into the horror of Belsen, the piles of unburied bodies, the epidemics of disease, such the British army felt they had no choice but to burn Bergen Belsen to the ground - inadvertently reducing much of the evidence of the Nazis crimes to ashes. The oral histories of Belsen: Our Story ensures that story is not forgotten.

The Windermere Children: In Their Own Words (BBC Four) The Windermere Children: In Their Own Wordstells the story of the pioneering project to rehabilitate child survivors of the Holocaust on the shores of Lake Windermere.

In the year that marks the 75th anniversary of the end of World War II and the Holocaust, this powerful documentary reveals a little-known story of 300 young orphaned Jewish refugees who began new lives in England’s Lake District in the summer of 1945. The documentary accompanies the BBC Two drama, The Windermere Children.

With compelling first-hand testimony from some of the last living Holocaust survivors, this film explores an extraordinary success story that emerged from the darkest of times, all beginning with the arrival of ten Stirling bombers carrying the 300 children from Prague to Carlisle on 14 August 1945.

The survivor interviews include extraordinary first-hand accounts of both their wartime experiences, separation from families and the horrors they experienced, but also their wonder at arriving in Britain and their lives thereafter.

With powerful contemporary resonance, the film will reveal that many of the 300 who arrived as bewildered young refugees without a word of English or many possessions, and went on to forge successful lives in Britain, starting families of their own and giving back to the country that welcomed them in extraordinary ways.

Words and Music: Commemorating The Liberation Of Auschwitz Sunday 26 January, 5.30pm-6.45pm

BBC Radio 3

Radio 3’s weekly journey of discovery weaving together a range of music with poetry and prose read by leading actors.

In this special edition of Words And Music, marking the 75th anniversary of the liberation of Auschwitz, readers Henry Goodman and Maria Friedman read poetry and prose about life and death at the most notorious Nazi concentration camp and what the moment of liberation was like when the Russian soldiers arrived 75 years ago.

We'll hear from survivors like Primo Levi and Victor Frankl, who paint vivid pictures of life at Auschwitz and from Anita Lasker-Wallfisch, who played the cello in the Auschwitz Women's Orchestra. She once played Schumann's Träumerei for Dr Josef Mengele, who came to be known as 'the angel of death'.

Music was a major part of concentration-camp life, we'll hear about the fate of Auschwitz's Roma Orchestra and the unexpected presence of Tango at Auschwitz. You'll hear an early recording of the first song to be written in a concentration camp, the Peat Bog Soldiers, and some of the Yiddish tangos popular at the time. There will also be songs by Ilse Weber, who wrote music for the children of the Theresienstadt camp, and sang to those walking to their deaths in the gas chambers of Auschwitz.

Poetry by survivors András Mezei and Annette Blialik Harchik reminds us that liberation was the end of a hellish journey, but living with the aftermath of the holocaust was a burden which would be carried long after the camps were destroyed.

SOURCE

BBC ONE