#Oliver Johnston

[chaplinlegend]

Charles Chaplin and Harry Green on the set of the film "A King in New York" (1957)

Below are photos with the actors: Dawn Addams and Oliver Johnston.

Charlie Chaplin is interviewed on the way to the premiere of his latest film "A King in New York" 1957 :

[nicklloydnow]

“With Trump’s victory, the left reached its zero point.

Before we plunge into platitudes about “Trump’s triumph,” we should note some important details. First, that Trump didn’t get more votes than he did in the 2020 election—it was Kamala Harris who lost some 10 million votes compared to Joe Biden last time around. So it isn’t so much that “Trump won big” as it is Harris who lost big. It follows that all leftist critics of Trump should begin with radical self-criticism.

We must dispense with the racial-essentialist cant that came to dominate progressivism in recent decades. Trump’s victory should leave little room for the tendency to valorize certain groups based on their skin color. Among the points to be noted here, there is the unpleasant fact that immigrants, especially from Latin countries, are almost inherently conservative: They come to the United States not to change it, but to succeed in the system. Or as Todd McGowan has put it: “They want to create a better life for themselves and their family, not to better their social order.”

By the same token, we must reject the notion that Harris lost because she is a nonwhite woman. No, Harris lost because Trump stood for politics and political contestation, while she stood for nonpolitics or antipolitics. She took many progressive stances, on health care, abortion, and more. However, Trump and his partisans repeatedly made clear, “extreme” statements, while Harris exceeded in avoiding difficult choices, offering empty rhetoric. In this respect, Harris is similar to Britain’s Keir Starmer, who just happened to have the great good fortune of going up against an unpopular incumbent party that had been in power for a decade and a half. Like Starmer, Harris avoided taking a clear stance on the Gaza war, thus losing support not only from hard-line Zionists, but also Muslim imams and community leaders.

What Democrats failed to learn from Trump is that, in a political battle, “extremism” works. In her concession speech, Harris said: “To the young people who are watching, it is OK to feel sad and disappointed, but please know it’s going to be OK.” No, everything is not going to be OK. We should not trust that future history will somehow restore balance or harmony. With Trump’s victory, the trend that elevated the new populist right in many European countries reaches its climax.

(…)

Here again, we should begin with a critique of Trump’s opponents. The philosopher Boris Buden rejects the predominant interpretation that sees the rise of the new right-populism as a regression to quasi-religious fanaticism caused by the failure of modernization. For Buden, religion as a political force is instead an effect of the post-political disintegration of society, of the dissolution of traditional mechanisms that guaranteed stable communal links: Fundamentalist religion—of the kind that fuels part of Trump’s base (even as he abandons its social-conservative commitments)—is not only political, it is politics itself, i.e., it sustains the space for politics.

Even more poignantly, it is no longer just a social phenomenon, but the very texture of society, so that in a way society itself becomes a religious phenomenon. It is thus no longer possible to distinguish the purely spiritual aspect of religion from its politicization: In a post-political universe, religion is the predominant space in which antagonistic passions return. What happened recently in the guise of religious fundamentalism is thus not the return of religion in politics, but simply the return of the political as such. So the true question is: Why did the political—in the radical secular sense, the great achievement of European modernity—lose its formative power?

(…)

Here, ideology enters the scene—not just ideology in the sense of ideas and guiding principles, but ideology in a more basic sense of how political discourse functions as a social link. Aaron Schuster has observed that Trump is “an overpresent leader whose authority is based on his own will and who openly disdains knowledge—it is this rebellious, anti-systemic theater that serves as the point of identification for the people.” This is why Trump’s serial insults and outright lies—not to mention the fact that he is a convicted criminal—work for him: His ideological triumph resides in the fact that his followers experience their obedience to him as a form of subversive resistance.

Here we should mobilize the Freudian notion of the “theft of enjoyment”: an Other’s enjoyment inaccessible to us (as woman’s enjoyment is for men, or another ethnic group’s enjoyment is for our group), or our rightful enjoyment stolen from us by an Other or threatened by an Other. Russel Sbriglia noticed that the “theft of enjoyment” played a crucial role when Trump’s supporters stormed the Capitol on Jan. 6, 2021: What happened on Jan. 6 wasn’t a coup attempt, but a carnival, previously the model for progressive protest movements, suddenly appropriated by the right. The idea that carnivals represent a subversion of the status quo not only in their form and atmosphere (theatrical performances, humorous chants), but also in their non-centralized organization, is deeply problematic: Is capitalist social reality itself not already carnivalesque? Was the Kristallnacht of 1938 not a carnival if there ever was one? Furthermore, is “carnival” not also the name for the obscene underside of power, from gang rapes to mass lynchings? Let us not forget that Michail Bakhtin developed the notion of carnival in his book on Rabelais written in the 1930s, as a direct reply to the carnival of the Stalinist purges.

The contrast between Trump’s official ideological message (conservative values, of a kind) and the style of his public performance (saying more or less whatever pops up in his head, insulting others and violating all rules of good manners) says a great deal about our predicament. What kind of world do we live in in which bombarding the public with indecent vulgarities presents itself as the last barrier to protect traditional values from the triumph of total permissiveness? Or as Alenka Zupančič put it, Trump isn’t a relic of the old moral-majority conservativism—rather, he is the caricatural inverted image of postmodern “permissive society” itself, a product of this society’s own antagonisms, contradictions, and inner limitations.

Adrian Johnston has proposed “a complementary twist on Jacques Lacan’s dictum according to which ‘repression is always the return of the repressed’: The return of the repressed sometimes is the most effective repression.” Is this not also a concise definition of the figure of Trump? As Freud said about perversion, in it, everything that was repressed, all repressed content, comes out in all its obscenity. But this return of the repressed only strengthens the repression. And this is also why there is nothing liberating in Trump’s obscenities: They merely strengthen social oppression and mystification. Trump’s obscene performances thus express the falsity of his populism: To put it with brutal simplicity, while acting as if he cares for the ordinary people, he promotes big capital.

How to account for the strange fact that Trump, lewd and the very opposite of Christian decency, can function as the chosen hero of the Christian conservatives? The explanation one usually hears is that, while Christian conservatives are well aware of the problematic character of Trump’s personality, they have resolved to ignore his seedy dimension, since what really matters to them is Trump’s agenda, especially his anti-abortion stance (though he played it down this time around). But are things as simple as that? What if the very duality of Trump’s personality—his ostensible support for traditional morality accompanied by personal lewdness and vulgarities—is precisely what makes him attractive to Christian conservatives? What if they secretly identify with this very duality? This, however, doesn’t mean that we should take too seriously the images that abound in our media of a typical Trumpian as an obscene fanatic. No, the vast majority of Trump voters are ordinary people who appear decent and talk in a normal, rational way. It is as if they externalize their madness and obscenity in Trump.

(…)

This coming-open of the obscene background of our ideological space in no way means that the time of mystification is over, that now ideology openly displays its cards. On the contrary, when obscenity penetrates the public scene, ideological mystification is at its strongest: The true political, economic, and ideological stakes are more invisible than ever. Public obscenity is always sustained by a concealed moralism. Its practitioners secretly believe they are fighting for a cause, and it is at this level that they should be attacked.

Recall the sheer number of times that liberal media outlets crowed that Trump was finally caught with pants down, that he had finally committed a public suicide (mocking POWs, boasting about pussy-grabbing, etc.). Arrogant liberal commentators were shocked at how their continuous attacks on Trump’s vulgar outbursts didn’t hurt him at all, but maybe even enhanced his popular appeal. They missed how identification works: We as a rule identify with the other’s weaknesses, not only or even not principally with his strengths. So the more Trump’s limitations were mocked, the more ordinary people identified with him and perceived attacks on him as condescending attacks on themselves.

The subliminal message to ordinary people of Trump’s vulgarities was: I am one of you! This, while ordinary Trump supporters felt constantly humiliated by the liberal elite’s patronizing attitude towards them. Or as Alenka Zupančič put it succinctly: “The extremely poor do the fighting for the extremely rich, as it was clear in the election of Trump. And the left does little else than scold and insult them.” Indeed, the left does what is even worse: It patronizingly “understands” the confusion and blindness of the poor. This left-liberal arrogance explodes at its purest in the political-comedy shows anchored by the likes of Jon Stewart and John Oliver.

(…)

The problem isn’t that Trump is a clown. The problem is that there is a program behind his provocations, a method in his madness. Trump’s (and others’) vulgar obscenities are part of their populist strategy to sell this program to ordinary people, a program that—in the long term, at least—works against ordinary people: lower taxes for the rich, shoddier health care and diminished bargaining power for workers. Unfortunately, people are ready to swallow many things if these are presented to them through obscene laughter and false solidarity.

The ultimate irony of Trump’s project is that MAGA effectively amounts to its opposite: Make the United States another local superpower interacting on equal footing with other new local superpowers (Russia, India, China). An EU diplomat was right to point out that, with Trump’s victory, Europe should no longer act as Washington’s “fragile little sister.” Will Europe find the strength to oppose MAGA with something that could be called MEGA—make Europe great again—by resuscitating its radical emancipatory legacy?

The lesson of Trump’s victory is the opposite of what many liberal leftists advocated: Whatever remains of the left should get rid of its fear that it will lose centrist voters if they are perceived as too “extreme.” The left should clearly distinguish itself from the “progressive” liberal center and its corporate-friendly woke-ism. To do this brings its own risks, of course: The state itself might be divided between three or more factions, with no big governing coalition capable of taking form. However, taking this risk is the only way forward.

Hegel wrote that through its repetition, a historical event asserts its necessity. When Napoleon lost in 1813 and was exiled to Elba, this defeat may have appeared as something contingent: With better military strategy, he might have won. But when he returned to power again and lost at Waterloo, it became clear that his time was over, that his defeat was grounded in a deeper historical necessity. The same goes for Trump: His first victory could still be attributed to tactical mistakes, but now that he has won again, it should become clear that Trumpian populism expresses a historical necessity.

A sad conclusion thus imposes itself. Many commentators expect that Trump’s reign will be marked by catastrophic events, but the worst option is that there will be no great shocks: Trump will try to finish the ongoing wars (not least by imposing a peace on Ukraine); the economy will remain stable and perhaps even thrive; tensions will be attenuated; life will go on…. However, a whole series of federal and local measures will continuously undermine the existing liberal-democratic social pact and change the basic texture that holds together the United States—unraveling what Hegel called Sittlichkeit, the set of unwritten customs and rules that underpin politeness, truthfulness, social solidarity, political rights, and so on. This new world will appear as a new normality, and in this sense, Trump’s second reign may well bring about the end of what was most precious in our civilization.”

“On Tuesday, American men showed that they weren’t buying what the Harris-Walz campaign was selling. Donald Trump, liberal America’s avatar of toxic masculinity, won male voters by a margin of 10 percentage points to 13 points, depending on the survey. Harris won women, but by a much smaller seven or eight points. Men without a college degree supported Trump by 22 points. White men supported him by 20 points to 23 points, again depending on the survey. And white men without a college degree, those the Harris campaign hoped would see themselves in “America’s coach,” favored Trump by an overwhelming 38 points to 40 points.

The most impressive gendered result of the election has to be the response of young men. According to The Wall Street Journal, men aged 18 to 29 supported Joe Biden in 2020 by 15 points. In 2024, they favored Donald Trump by 14 points, an astounding 29-point swing in a single election. CNN found a much smaller Trump lead among young men of two points, but even this is a significant transformation. Democrats long believed that young people were their electoral Superman, weakened only by the kryptonite of indifference. If they could get these young voters to the polls, victory would be assured. This election just cast those illusions onto the ash heap of history.

(…)

In the end, liberal women in the media had the better measure of Minnesota’s governor. Rebecca Traister lauded Walz as an example of the emergent “Democratic man newly confident in his equal-to-subsidiary status.” Karrin Vasby Andersen praised Walz for “stepping back” and playing “contented second fiddle.” Alyce Collins acclaimed his “positive masculinity” for “showing more traditionally feminine traits” and “letting women take center stage.” Judy Berman echoed this in complimenting Walz’s “gentle form of masculinity.” Joy Reid dubbed it downright “21st century.” American women seemed to admire Walz’s masculinity far more so than did American men. Like those in 2016 who described Donald Trump as a poor man’s idea of a rich man, Walz proved to be a professional-managerial-class woman’s idea of a working-class man.

Already by mid-October, Team Harris was running low on joy. Democrats started playing hardball to close the gender gap with men. Barack Obama scolded black men in Pennsylvania for their lack of enthusiasm for the Harris-Walz campaign, explicitly accusing “the brothers” of misogyny. In Michigan, Michelle Obama tried to shame men with abortion rights, rebuking those considering a vote for Trump for treating women as “just baby-making vessels” and turning them into “collateral damage to your rage.” In the waning days of the campaign, the Democratic super PAC Progress Action Fund targeted young men with ad buys on social media warning them—in graphic terms—that their consumption of pornography and emergency contraception was at stake. Democrats were right to be worried. White men increased their vote for Trump at most by one percentage point. Black men added around 12 points, doubling their support from 2020. Hispanic men shifted to the right by anywhere from nine points to a shocking 17 points.

(…)

Americans might be consoled by the fact that, on the female side, the gender gap has actually shrunk over the Trump era. According to Pew Research analysis of validated voters, Hillary Clinton enjoyed a 15-point advantage among women in 2016, compared to 11 points for Biden in 2020. As noted earlier, current surveys for the 2024 race show Harris’s advantage among women down to seven or eight points. Men were also becoming less polarized over time. In 2016, Trump enjoyed an 11-point advantage among them, compared to two points in 2020. Some Democrats interpret the 2024 election’s return to 2016 levels among men as an undoubtable sign of misogyny. They would do better to instead see it as a reaction against those same Democrats’ attempts to scold, shame, denigrate, and manipulate men on the grounds of being men. Democrats don’t get to decide who is allowed to play gender politics; sauce for the goose is sauce for the gander. Turning the temperature down—way down—on gender politics will not only help Democrats in the future. It will help America as a whole.”

[ishallbelife]

Scarcity: What Tipped Me Off {We Shall Remain + Oliver Enjady}

In roughly 2013, I watched something I’ll never forget. It was somewhere in the We Shall Remain documentary, part of PBS’s American Experience series.

But I’m 95% sure that the speaker was Oliver Enjady. In the film, he was listed as a Chiricahua Apache, but I’ve also seen him identified as Mescalero.

(Mr. Enjady, if this was not you, I sincerely apologize. You were quite memorable in We Shall Remain, and I also sincerely enjoy your paintings—and the song Lyla June Johnston wrote based on your words.)

Anyway, moving on, here’s a paraphrased version of what was said:

In a healthy village, before the Europeans came to colonize this continent, barring famine or disaster, all needs were met in indigenous villages, because everyone had different talents. If an individual had more skill in gathering food from the plants around them, they take what they needed and harvest what was appropriate; then they would share the bounty with others in the village. A talented hunter may kill more animals than he could personally consume, but he would share with those in the village who didn’t have enough, like a widow and her children.

Now, if a hunter were to come in and hold on to more than he needed, that didn’t make any sense. That food would go to waste. Therefore, it was considered a sickness among his people, and the rest of the village would look after him and try to treat his illness.

{In my memory, the video’s graphic was quite powerful, because the graphic showed the hunter literally on top of a hill made of all his food, which looked a bit like a painted hambone. I think the food even started to rot.}

Now, when the Europeans first came to this land, it was well known and understood among the people already living on this continent: not only did the white men HAVE this sickness, they were rife with it.

Here is the reason why this isn’t a direct quote: My Memory Doesn’t Match.

[gingermintpepper]

As usual I read your tags always and so you said Apollo did not ask for resurrection of Asclepius and Hyacinthus so i just wanted to share this. About Asclepius death I read it on theoi.com, that earlier authors don't make him resurrect as a god but that's a later development mentioned only by Roman authors like Cicero, Hyginus and Ovid. But still Apollo has a role in Ovid's version

Ovid, Fasti 6. 735 ff (trans.Boyle) (Roman poetry C1st B.C. to C1st A.D.) : Clymenus [Haides] and Clotho resent the threads of life respun and death's royal rights diminished. Jove [Zeus] feared the precedent and aimed his thunderbolt at the man who employed excessive art. Phoebus [Apollon], you whined. He is a god; smile at your father, who, for your sake, undoes his prohibitions [i.e. when he obtains immortality for Asklepios].

So here it is actually because of Apollo the decision was taken to resurrect him as god. And with Hyacinthus, I don't think I've read about Artemis playing the primary role. I know in Sparta there was a picture of Artemis, Athena and Aphrodite carrying Hyacinthus and his sister to heaven.

This is not on theoi.com but I saw on Tumblr it's from Dionysiaca by Nonnus

Second, my lord Oiagros wove a winding lay, as the father of Orpheus who has the Muse his boon companion. Only a couple of verses he sang, a ditty of Phoibos, clearspoken in few words after some Amyclaian style: Apollo brought to life again his longhaired Hyacinthos: Staphylos will be made to live for aye by Dionysos.

So since he is singing inspired by amyclean stories it probably means in that place it was believed Apollo was the one to bring back his lover to life.

Apollo as god of order was very important so i think it shows how special these people (and admetus too) were to him that he decided to go against the order for them 🥺

ANON!! Shakes you like a bottle of ramune!! BELOVED ANON!!!!! I'm littering your face with kisses, I'm anointing you with olive oil and honey - you absolutely made my night with this because, not only did I get the pure serotonin shot of having someone interact with my tags (yippee, wahoo!!) I also got to have that wonderful feeling of "oh wow, have I misunderstood something that was integral to my understanding of this myth/figure this whole time or is this a case of interpretational differences?" which is imo vital for my aims and interests as someone who enjoys mythological content and literature.

I'll preface my response with this: Hyacinthus is by far the hardest of these to get accounts for because his revival itself, as you very astutely point out, is generally accounted for in painting/ritual format which muddies the waters on who interceded for what. I wasn't actually familiar with that passage from the Argonautica - and certainly didn't remember it so thank you very much for bringing it to my attention!

That said, what I've come to understand, both about Hyacinthus and about Asclepius is that in the accounts of their deaths, Apollo's position is startlingly clear.

For Hyacinthus, it is established time and again that Apollo would have sacrificed everything for him - his status, his power, his very own immortality and divinity. Ovid writes that Apollo would have installed him as a god if only he had the time:

(Ovid. Metamorphoses. Book X. trans. Johnston)

Many other writers too speak of how Apollo abandoned his lyre and his seat at Delphi to spend his days with Hyacinthus, but they also all agree that when it came to his death - he was powerless. Ovid gives that graphic account of Apollo's desperation as he tries all his healing arts to save him to no avail:

(Ovid, Metamorphoses Book X. Apollo me boy, methinks him dead. trans Johnston)

Bion, in one of his fragments, writes that Apollo was "dumb" upon seeing Hyacinthus' agony:

(Bion, The Bucolic Poets. Fragment XI. trans Edmonds)

Even Nonnus in the Dionysiaca speaks constantly of Apollo's helplessness in the face of Hyacinthus' fate where he writes that the god still shivers if a westward wind blows upon an iris:

and when Zephyros breathed through the flowery garden, Apollo turned a quick eye upon his young darling, his yearning never satisfied; if he saw the plant beaten by the breezes, he remembered the quoit, and trembled for fear the wind, so jealous once about the boy, might hate him even in a leaf...

(Nonnus, Dionysiaca, Book 3. trans Rouse)

And the point here is just that - Apollo, at least as far as I've read, cannot avert someone's death. He simply can't. Once they're already dead - once Fate has cut their string - all Apollo's power is gone and he can do nothing no matter how much he wants to. And this is, as far as I know, supported with the accounts of Asclepius as well!

Since you specifically brought up Ovid's account, I'll also stick only to Ovid's account but in Metamorphoses when we get Ovid's version of Coronis' demise, he writes that Apollo intensely and immediately regrets slaughtering Coronis. He regrets it so intensely that he, like he does with Hyacinthus, does his best to resuscitate her:

(Ovid, Metamorphoses Book Two. Apollo's regret)

And like Hyacinthus, when it becomes clear that what has happened cannot be undone, Apollo wails:

(Ovid, Metamorphoses Book Two. Apollo wept.)

Unlike his mother, Asclepius in her womb had not yet died and so, with the last of Apollo's strength, he does manage, at least, to save him.

(Ovid, Metamorphoses Book Two. Apollo puts the 'tearing out' in Asclepius.)

But it goes further than even that because Ocyrhoe, Chiron's daughter, a prophetess who unduly gained the ability to directly proclaim the secrets of the Fates, upon seeing the baby Asclepius, immediately prophesies his glory, his inevitable death and then his fated ascension:

(Ovid. Metamorphoses, Book Two. Ocyrhoe's prophecy. trans Johnston)

Before she too succumbs to her hubris and is transformed by the Fates into a horse so she can no longer speak secrets that aren't hers to share.

These things ultimately are important because it establishes two very important things: 1) Apollo can't do anything in the face of the ultimate Fate of mortals, which is, of course, death and 2) even when Apollo is Actively Devastated, regretful, yearning, mournful, guilty or some unholy combination of all of the above, when someone is dead, he accepts that they are gone. Even if he is devastated by it, even if he'll cry all the rest of his days about it - if they're dead? Apollo lets them go. In Fasti, when Zeus brings Asclepius back, he does not say Apollo asked him to - Zeus, or well, in this case Jove, brings Asclepius back because he wants Apollo to stop being mad at him.

(Ovid, Fasti VI. Apollo please come home your father misses you. trans. A.S Kline)

Even Boyle's translation which you used above in your findings hints that Zeus made Asclepius a god because he wanted Apollo to stop grieving. (i.e 'smile at your father', 'for your sake [he] undoes his prohibitions')

And like, Apollo was deeply upset by Asclepius' death - apart from killing the Cyclops in anger, in book 4 of the Argonautica, Apollonius writes that the Celts believe the stream of Eridanus to be the tears Apollo shed over the death of Asclepius when he left for Hyperborea after being chastised by Zeus for killing his Cyclops:

But the Celts have attached this story to them, that these are the tears of Leto's son, Apollo, that are borne along by the eddies, the countless tears that he shed aforetime when he came to the sacred race of the Hyperboreans and left shining heaven at the chiding of his father, being in wrath concerning his son whom divine Coronis bare in bright Lacereia at the mouth of Amyrus.

It all paints a very clear picture to me. Apollo did not ask for either of them to be brought back. Though bringing them back certainly pleased and delighted him, they are actions of other gods who are moved by Apollo's grief and mourning and seek to mollify him. Him not asking doesn't mean he didn't want them back which I think is a very important distinction by the by, but it simply means that Apollo knows the natural order of things and, even if it hurts, he isn't going to press his luck about it.

Which, of course, brings us to Admetus. And I'm really not going to overcomplicate this, Admetus is different because, very vitally, Admetus is not dead. Apollo can't do a thing once Fate has been carried out and Death has claimed a mortal but you know what he absolutely can do? Bargain like hell with the Fates before that point of inevitability. And that's what he does, ultimately for Admetus and Alcestis. He sought to prolong Admetus' life, not revive him from death or absolve him from death altogether and even after getting the Fates drunk, he's still only able to organise a sacrifice - a life for a life - something completely contingent on whether some other mortal would be willing to die in Admetus' place and not at all controllable by Apollo's own power.

All of these things, I think come back to that point you made - that Apollo's place as a god of order is very important and therefore these people are very special to him if it means he's willing to go against that order but, I also wish to challenge that opinion if you'd let me. Apollo's place as a god of order is very important and therefore, I would argue, that it is even more important that it is shown that he does not break the divine order, especially for the people that mean the most to him. The original context of my comments which started this conversation were on this lovely, lovely post by @hyacinthusmemorial which contemplated upon Asclepius from the perspective of an Emergency Medical personnel and included, in their tags, the very poignant lines "there's something about Apollo letting go when Asclepius couldn't that eats my heart away" and "you do what you can, you do your best, but you don't ever reach too far" and I think that's perfectly embodied with the Apollo-Asclepius dichotomy. Apollo grieves. He wails, he cries, he does his best each and every time to save that which is precious to him but he does not curse their nature, he does not resent that they are human and ultimately, he accepts that that which is mortal must inevitably die. There is nothing that so saliently proves that those who uphold rules are also their most staunch followers - if Apollo wants to delight in his place as Fate's mouthpiece, he cannot undo Fate. And, if even the god of healing and order himself cannot undo death, what right does Asclepius, mortal as he is, talented as he is, have to disrespect it?

The beauty of these stories isn't that Apollo loved them enough to bring them back. The beauty is that Apollo loved them enough to let them go.

[zepuckinghockey]

NHL Wedding Season 2024

We're back again for another summer of NHL weddings! If you'd like to see last year's, check out this post.

If you see something wrong or someone missing, let me know! I'll continue to update this list until September when the weddings fizzle out. I appreciate the replies, reblogs, and asks with corrections and additions ❤️

6/7/24: Adam Larsson: (private wedding, no idea)

6/19/24: Jake Evans: Brendan Gallagher, Joel Edmundson, Tyler Toffoli, Nick Suzuki, Joel Armia

6/22/24: Max Jones: Trevor Zegras, Jacob Bryson

6/26/24: Adam Fox: (looked to be just family)

Josh Anderson: Nick Suzuki, Max Domi, Nick Foligno, Seth Jones, Cam Atkinson, Scott Hartnell

6/29/24: Ryan Pulock: Matt Martin, Noah Dobson, Casey Cizikas, Oliver Wahlstrom, Adam Pelech, JG Pageau, Josh Bailey, Mat Barzal, Anthony Beauvillier, Cal Clutterbuck, Bo Horvat, Simon Holmstrom, Pierre Engvall, Mikey Reilly

Jake Oettinger: Mason Marchment, Tyler Seguin, Ty Dellandrea, Wyatt Johnston

7/3/24: Mason Marchment: Jake Oettinger, Tyler Seguin, Ty Dellandrea, Brandon Montour, Mike Carcone, Owen Tippett, Sam Reinhart

7/6/24: Nic Hague: Cody Glass, Owen Tippett, Zach Whitecloud, Alec Martinez, Shea Theodore, William Karlsson, Keegan Kolesar, Nic Roy

Brendan Gallagher: Cole Caufield, Nick Suzuki, Carey Price, Jeff Petry, Chris Wideman, Tanner Pearson, Nate Thompson, Philip Danault, Christian Dvorak, Jake Evans, Sam Montembeault

7/7/24: Adam Fox 2.0: Ryan Reaves, Kevin Rooney, Will Cuylle, Vincent Trocheck, Jacob Trouba, Barclay Goodrow, Alexis Lafreniere, Blake Wheeler, Jimmy Vesey, Jonathan Quick, Ryan Lindgren, Braden Schneider, Sammy Blais, Ryan Donato, John Marino

7/10/24: Elias Lindstrom: (haven't seen any NHL guests)

7/11/24: Jared McCann: Jordan Eberle, Yanni Gourde, Vince Dunn, Jamie Oleksiak, Jaden Schwartz, Matty Beniers, Will Borgen, Kailer Yamamoto, Justin Schultz, Andre Burakovsky, Ryan Donato, Darnell Nurse, Brandon Tanev

7/13/24: Jack Campbell: Tyler Toffoli, Jake Muzzin, Kyle Clifford, Evander Kane

Alex Carrier: Frederick Gaudreau, Mathieu Joseph, Jimmy Oligny

Pierre Engvall: Simon Holmstrom, Owen Wahlstrom

Andrew Mangiapane: Johnny Gaudreau, Rasmus Andersson, Mikael Backlund, Noah Hanifin, Erik Gudbranson, Mack Weegar, Troy Stecher, Jonathan Huberdeau

Kyle Connor: Zach Werenski, Evgeny Svechnikov, Connor Hellebuyck, Tony Calderone

Eetu Luostarinen: Niko Mikkola, Lundell Anton, Aleksander Barkov

Tyler Madden: Alec Turcotte, Akil Thomas

Zack MacEwen: (haven't seen any NHL guests)

7/18/24: William Carrier: Mathieu Joseph

7/19/24: Kaapo Kahkonen: (haven't seen any NHL guests)

7/20/24: Jamie Benn: Tyler Seguin, Joe Pavelski, Jordie Benn, Jason Robertson, Roope Hintz, Joel Kiviranta, Miro Heiskanen, Esa Lundell, Ben Bishop, Luke Glendenning, Ty Dellandrea, John Klingberg

Alex Killorn: Yanni Gourde, Pat Maroon, Brandon Hagel, Nikita Kucherov, Victor Hedman, Zach Bogosian, Anthony Cirelli, Luke Schenn, Ryan McDonagh, Tyler Johnson, Blaine Gabbert, Cam Brate, Andrei Vasilevskiy

Thomas Chabot: Josh Norris, Brady Tkachuk, Tim Stutzle, Mathieu Joseph

Sebastian Aho: Teuvo Teräväinen, Jesperi Kotkaniemi, Seth Jarvis, Antti Raanta, Nino Niederreiter, Jesper Fast, Jani Hakanpaa

7/22/24: Michael Bunting: Mitch Marner, Auston Matthews, John Tavares, Jake Muzzin, Morgan Reilly, Fred Anderson, Wayne Simmons, Alex Kerfoot, TJ Brodie, Kyle Clifford

7/26/24: Jake Lucchini: (haven't seen any NHL guests)

7/27/24: Connor McDavid: Leon Draisaitl, Darnell Nurse, Zach Hyman, Evander Kane, Cody Ceci, Evan Bouchard, Vinny Desharnais, Brett KUlak, Connor Brown, Ryan Mcleod, Derek Ryan, Stuart Skinner, Philip Broberg, Warren Foegele, Devin Shore, Kyle Turris, Luke Gazdic, Zack Kassian, Patrick Maroon, Sam Gagner

Carter Verhaeghe: Matthew Tkachuk, Aaron Ekblad, Evan Rodrigues, Stolarz, Ryan Lomberg, Nick Cousins

8/3/24: Travis Sanheim: Travis Konecny, Scott Laughton, Shayne Gostisbehere, Joel Farabee, Morgan Frost, Tyson Foerster, James Van Riemsdyk

Connor Ingram: (haven't seen any NHL guests)

Cody Glass: (haven't seen any NHL guests)

8/4/24: David Pastrnak: Taylor Hall, Tukka Rask, Patrice Bergeron, Brad Marchand, Zdeno Chara, Charlie Coyle, Hampus Lindholm, Jeremy Swayman, Linus Ullmark, Torey Krug, David Krecji

8/9/24: Alex Tuch: Shea Theodore, Zemgus Girgensons, Tage Thompson

8/10/24: Tyler Johnson: Yanni Gourde, Ondrej Palat, Mathieu Joseph, Ryan McDonagh, Alex Killorn, Pat Maroon, Reese Johnson, Adam Gaudette

8/17/24: Cale Makar: Gabe Landeskog, Nathan MacKinnon, Erik Johnson, Bo Byram, Darren Helm, Andrew Cogliano, Josh Manson, Kurtis Macdermid

Zachary Sanford: (haven't seen any NHL guests)

Mike Amadio: Zach Whitecloud, Ben Hutton, Brett Howden, Nic Hague, Nic Roy

Andrew Copp: JT Compher, Tyson Jost

Ryan Johansen: Colton Sissons, Luke Kunin, Roman Josi, Matt Duchene, Dante Fabbro, Cam Atkinson, Ross Colton, Miles Wood

8/23/24:

Roope Hintz: Tyler Seguin, Esa Lundell, Patrik Laine,

[chongoblog]

Mr. Chongo, why did you tag that boar post as Cody Johnston?

It's a reference to his show "Some More News", a weekly comedic political show in the same vein as John Oliver, where they spend about an hour covering a specific news subject (I highly recommend it)

One of his older bits that hasn't come back for a while is some episodes he likes to lampoon conspiracy theorists by theorizing that boars are the greatest evil in the world ever.

[kristallbluemchen]

Okay! Ich hab Bock auf nen Thread für Nolin Songs (Happy, sad, destructive, hopeful, mir schnurz, alles was ihr mögt und für passend haltet!)

Haut eure favorites raus und lasst sie uns sammeln!

Love Situation (911) - Blanks

Ich würd‘ lügen - Kayef (irgendwie mehr Noah pov but still about them)

What you do to me - Blanks

love should be easy - Zoe Wees 

Hold on me - Ella Henderson

Back to December - Taylor Swift

Midnight Rain - Taylor Swift

You‘re losing me - Taylor Swift

Love lies - Khalid & Normani

Let somebody go - Coldplay & Selena Gomez

Letzter Song - Cro

Falling - Cro

Dich - Cro (OMG Leute! Hört den euch an und schaut dann noch mal Folge 1047!)

C'est La Vie (Graham Lake Edit) - Graham Lake

Scream - WTRGRL & Zhone

Just friends - Nuno Freitas

Gravity - Michael Johnston 

Just You and I - Tom Walker

Flash mich - Mark Forster (Ja, der obligatorische Mark Forster Song hat es auch in meine Playlist geschafft)

The heart wants what it wants - Selena Gomez

Sorry - Justin Bieber (fragt nicht)

Wish I could forget - SLANDER, Blackbear & bring me the Horizon

Dream Boy - Waterparks

Closer - Waterparks

Kiss me - Sixpence None the Richer

Smile again - Blackbear

You be love - Avicii ft. Billy Raffoul

Miss you - Oliver Tree & Robin Schulz

Lost without you - Kygo & Dean Lewis

Unendlichkeit - MilleniumKid & JBS

Mit dir - MilleniumKid

Dir ist es egal - MilleniumKid (AUA)

Until I found you - Steven Sanchez & Em Beihold (unser inoffizieller Endgame Song 💔)

Heaven - Bryan Adams

When you‘re gone - Bryan Adams ft. Melanie C.

Please forgive me - Bryan Adams

It must have been love - Roxette

Listen to your heart - Roxette

Liar - LOWLIVES

Let Em Go - Matt Hansen

Break my heart - Matt Hansen

Without you with me - Matt Hansen

Dead the day you‘re gone - Matt Hansen

Where you belong - Matt Hansen

Can‘t stop loving you - Phil Collins

True Colors - Phil Collins

Weißt du - Rowli

Durch die Nacht - Francis

Close to you - Dayglow

Had me @ Hello - Luke Benward (don‘t ask aber der Song ist gut)

Mine - Michael Gerow

Broken - Isak Danielson

Don‘t think twice - Hikaru Utada (any Kingdom hearts Fans here? 👀)

Alone Pt. II - Alan walker & Ava Max

Falling stars - Fabian Schuster

Missed chance - Fabian Schuster

Strangers - Jake Cornell

Count me out - HART (not really sure about that one but it kind of fits?)

Clarity - Zedd ft. Foxxes

I‘d rather die - Lost stars (das ist so Noah!)

Vertigo - Lost Stars

Something just like this - The Chainsmokers & Coldplay

no more days alone - Isaac Anderson

[aliteraryprincess]

September 2024 Wrap Up

Thank god it's finally fall! I'm so excited for cooler weather. I finished drafting another dissertation chapter, which means I'm halfway through. Unfortunately, now I have to deal with job applications...

Books Read: 16

Check me out! To be fair, a lot of these are short since I was participating in Shorty September over on YouTube. But 16 is still pretty impressive! My favorite is Wylding Hall, closely followed by Fairy Tale. My least favorite was Life Studies, which I found quite disappointing. Titles marked with ® are rereads.

New Grub Street by George Gissing - 4.5 stars

Snow Drifts by Deven Philbrick - 4 stars

To Bedlam and Part Way Back by Anne Sexton - 4 stars

Fairy Tale by Stephen King - 5 stars

White as Snow by Tanith Lee - 4 stars

Rules for the Dance: A Handbook for Writing and Reading Metrical Verse by Mary Oliver - 4 stars

Time is a Mother by Ocean Vuong - 4 stars

They Never Learn by Layne Fargo - 3.5 stars

The Winter's Tale by William Shakespeare - 4 stars

Passing by Nella Larsen - 4.5 stars

Exit, Pursued by a Bear by E. K. Johnston - 5 stars ®

The Lady's Mile by Mary Elizabeth Braddon - 3 stars

Antigone by Sophocles - 3.5 stars

The Uninhabited House by Charlotte Riddell - 5 stars

Wylding Hall by Elizabeth Hand - 5 stars

Life Studies by Robert Lowell - 2 stars

On Tumblr:

And look at all these photos! I'm having a great time getting back into book photography, especially now that I have a nice camera. I also participated in a readathon hosted by @thereadingchallengechallenge, which was tons of fun!

August 2024 Wrap Up

Book Photography: Red Comet by Heather Clark

Book Photography: White as Snow by Tanith Lee

Book Photography: Fairy Tale by Stephen King

Book Photography: The Norton Shakespeare

Book Photography: Passing by Nella Larsen

Book Photography: Wylding Hall by Elizabeth Hand

Book Photography: The Uninhabited House by Charlotte Riddell

Book Photography: Mini Book Haul

Book Photography: Life Studies by Robert Lowell

Tagged: People I want to get to know better!

TRCC Readathon

On YouTube:

This is the first time in a long time there are less things in this section than in the On tumblr section. I guess I just need a little break from filming.

August Wrap Up | 9 books!

Currently Reading 9/4/24

My Favorite Books Under 250 Pages | Shorty September

Ranking All the Shakespeare Plays I've Read | #shaketember

My Annual Overly Ambitious Victober TBR!

[bookaddict24-7]

NEW YOUNG ADULT RELEASES! (APRIL 16TH, 2024)

___

HAVE I MISSED ANY NEW YOUNG ADULT RELEASES? HAVE YOU ADDED ANY OF THESE BOOKS TO YOUR TBR? LET ME KNOW!

___

NEW STANDALONES/FIRST IN A SERIES:

Dear Wendy by Ann Zhao

We're Never Getting Home by Tracy Badua

This is Me Trying by Racquel Marie

This Night is Ours by Ronni Davis

The One That Got Away With Murder by Trish Lundy

Deep is the Fen by Lili Wilkinson

Pretty Furious by E.K. Johnston

The Harrowing by Kristen Kiesling , Rye Hickman (Illustrator)

King of Dead Things by Nevin Holness

To Gaze Upon Wicked Gods by Molly X. Chang

The Kill Factor by Ben Oliver

The End of Always by Rebecca Phillips

NEW SEQUELS:

Calling of Light (Shamanborn #3) by Lori M. Lee

The Lady of Rapture (The Bones of Ruin #3) by Sarah Raughley

Merciless Saviours (The Ouroboros #2) by H.E. Edgmon

Sheine Lende (Elatsoe #2) by Darcie Little Badger , Rovina Cai (Illustrator)

___

Happy reading!

[charlotte-of-wales]

just out of curiosity, here is some info on the Pages of Honour: 

The King’s: 

HRH Prince George of Wales (some rando he found on the street ig) 

Lord Oliver Cholmondeley: 13, son of David Cholmondeley, 7th Marquess of Cholmondeley, and Rose Hanbury. David is Charles’ Lord-in-Waiting. 

Master Nicholas Barclay: 13, is the son of Rose Trouton and solicitor Piers Barclay. Rose is one of the King's goddaughters and is the daughter of Sarah Troughton, who is the King's second cousin and served as lady-in-waiting to Katharine, Duchess of Kent for ten years. In 2022, she became one of the six women appointed as Queen's Companions to Queen Consort Camilla.

Master Ralph Tollemache: 12, son of Edward Tollemache and Sophie Johnstone. Edward is Charles’ godson and Ralph’s grandparents Lord Timothy Tollemache, 5th Baron Tollemache, and Lady Xa Tollemache are close friends of Charles and Camilla. 

The Queen’s: 

Master Gus Lopes: 13, the son of Camilla’s daughter Laura Lopes and her husband, Harry. 

Master Louis Lopes:13, the son of Camilla’s daughter Laura Lopes and her husband, Harry.

Master Freddy Parker Bowles: 12, the son of Camilla’s son Tom Parker Bowles and his former wife, Sara Buys. 

Master Arthur Elliot: 11, the son of Camilla's nephew, Ben Elliot and his wife, Mary-Clare Winwood. 

[chaplinlegend]

Charlie Chaplin, Dawn Addams and Oliver Johnston in the film "A King in New York", directed and performed by Charles Chaplin.

Below is the movie poster.

[battyaboutbooksreviews]

April 2024 Young Adult Book Releases

🦇 Good morning, my bookish bats. I hope you have a good book, delicious latte, and sweet snack within reach! No TBR is complete without a few young adult novels, and plenty were released in April! Here are a few YA releases to consider adding to your shelves.

[ List Under the Cut ]

🩷 April 2 🩷 ✨ Your Blood, My Bones - Kelly Andrew ✨ What If... Loki Was Worthy? - Madeleine Roux ✨ Fate Be Changed - Farrah Rochon ✨ No Going Back - Patrick Flores-Scott ✨ The Reappearance of Rachel Price - Holly Jackson ✨ Darker by Four - June C.L. Tan ✨ Draw Down the Moon - P.C. Cast & Kristin Cast ✨ The Black Girl Survives in This One ✨ Wrath of the Talon - Sophie Kim ✨ Every Time You Hear That Song - Jenna Voris ✨ Otherworldly - F.T. Lukens ✨ Misdirection of Fault Lines - Anna Gracia ✨ Something Kindred - Ciera Burch ✨ Hearts Still Beating - Brooke Archer ✨ Call Forth a Fox - Markelle Grabo

🩷 April 9 🩷 ✨ Teenage Dirtbags - James Acker ✨ Canto Contigo - Jonny Garza Villa ✨ Dragonfruit - Makiia Lucier ✨ The Final Curse of Ophelia Cray - Christine Calella ✨ Fog & Fireflies - T.H. Lehnen ✨ Against the Darkness - Kendare Blake ✨ The Darkness Rises - Stacy Stokes ✨ Right Here, Right Now - Shannon Dunlap ✨ The Last Love Song - Kalie Holford

🩷 April 16 🩷 ✨ To Gaze Upon Wicked Gods - Molly X. Chang ✨ Merciless Saviors - H.E. Edgmon ✨ Deep Is the Fen - Lili Wilkinson ✨ This Is Me Trying - Racquel Marie ✨ Calling of Light - Lori M. Lee ✨ Pretty Furious - E.K. Johnston ✨ Dear Wendy - Ann Zhao ✨ The Lady of Rapture - Sarah Raughley ✨ The End of Always - Rebecca Phillips ✨ The Kill Factor - Ben Oliver ✨ The Breakup Lists - Adib Khorram ✨ We're Never Getting Home - Tracy Badua ✨ The Harrowing - Kristen Kiesling & Rye Hickman ✨ King of Dead Things - Nevin Holness ✨ Sheine Lende - Darcie Little Badger & Rovina Cai ✨ The One That Got Away with Murder - Trish Lundy

🩷 April 23 🩷 ✨ Song of the Six Realms - Judy I. Lin ✨ Off With Their Heads - Zoe Hana Mikuta ✨ Blood Justice - Terry J. Benton-Walker ✨ Kill Her Twice - Stacey Lee ✨ Dark Parts of the Universe - Samuel Mille ✨ Finally Fitz - Marisa Kanter ✨ The Merciless King of Moore High - Lily Sparks ✨ Out of Blue Comes Green - M.E. Corey ✨ A Whisper in the Walls - Scott Reintgen ✨ Homebody - Theo Parish ✨ Punk Rock Karaoke - Bianca Xunise

🩷 April 30 🩷 ✨ To a Darker Shore - Leanne Schwartz ✨ The Vanishing Station - Ana Ellickson ✨ The Last Boyfriends Rules for Revenge - Matthew Hubbar ✨ What's Eating Jackie Oh? - Patricia Park ✨ Sound the Gong - Joan He ✨ Playing for Keeps - Jennifer Dugan ✨ Not Like Other Girls - Meredith Adamo ✨ The Notes - Catherine Con Morse ✨ I'll Be Waiting for You - Mariko Turk ✨ Pillow Talk - Stephanie Cooke & Mel Valentine ✨ Saint-Seducing Gold - Brittany N. Williams ✨ Where Was Goodbye? - Janice Lynn Mather ✨ The Lilies - Quinn Diacon-Furtado

[vaspider]

Not only John Oliver, but Seth Meyers! I relied on A Closer Look to give me the news in a "we're making jokes but also on the brink of screaming because this isn't normal" way. I miss Seth.

I know you're not looking for recommendations, but Some More News with Cody Johnston on YouTube helps to fill the gap for me.

:)

[maximumwobblerbanditdonut]

Cillian Murphy Named Best Actor at Irish Academy Awards pictured at the IFTA Awards 2024 at the Dublin Royal Convention Centre. Picture: Brian McEvoy

Agnes O'Casey won Lead Actress for Lies We Tell

Cillian Murphy wins Lead Actor, Agnes O'Casey wins Lead Actress while KIN picks up five awards including Best Drama at Irish Film and Television Awards 2024.

Clare Dunne won the IFTA for Lead Actress for KIN

KIN star Clare Dunne took her third IFTA when she won the award for Lead Actress in a Drama in a category which also included Sharon Horgan for Best Interests, Niamh Algar for Malpractice and Caitriona Balfe for Outlander.

Full list of IFTA 2024 winners:

Film Categories

BEST FILM

That They May Face the Rising Sun

DIRECTOR - FILM

Lies We Tell - Lisa Mulcahy

SCRIPT - FILM

Lies We Tell - Elisabeth Gooch

LEAD ACTOR - FILM

Cillian Murphy - Oppenheimer

LEAD ACTRESS - FILM

Agnes O'Casey - Lies We Tell

SUPPORTING ACTOR - FILM

Paul Mescal - All of Us Strangers

SUPPORTING ACTRESS - FILM

Alison Oliver - Saltburn

DRAMA CATEGORIES

BEST DRAMA

KIN

DIRECTOR - DRAMA

KIN - Kate Dolan

SCRIPT - DRAMA

KIN - Peter McKenna

LEAD ACTOR - DRAMA

Éanna Hardwicke - The Sixth Commandment

LEAD ACTRESS - DRAMA

Clare Dunne - KIN

SUPPORTING ACTOR - DRAMA

Richard Dormer - Blue Lights

SUPPORTING ACTRESS - DRAMA

Maria Doyle Kennedy - KIN

BEST INTERNATIONAL FILM

Oppenheimer

BEST INTERNATIONAL ACTOR

Paul Giamatti - The Holdovers

BEST INTERNATIONAL ACTRESS

Emma Stone - Poor Things

GEORGE MORRISON FEATURE DOCUMENTARY

The Days of Trees

LIVE-ACTION SHORT FILM

Calf

ANIMATED SHORT FILM

Wind & The Shadow

CRAFT CATEGORIES

CINEMATOGRAPHY

Poor Things - Robbie Ryan

COSTUME DESIGN

LOLA - Lara Campbell

PRODUCTION DESIGN

A Haunting in Venice - John Paul Kelly

HAIR & MAKE-UP

The Pope's Exorcist - Orla Carroll, Lynn Johnston

SOUND

Barbie - Nina Rice

ORIGINAL MUSIC

LOLA - Neil Hannon

EDITING

Still: A Michael J Fox Movie - Michael Harte

VFX

Dungeons & Dragons: Honor Among Thieves - Kev Cahill, Diana Giogiutti

#IFTA Awards

Posted 20th April 2024

[scotianostra]

18th August 1773 saw Samuel Johnson and James Boswell set out on their three month tour of the Highlands and the Inner Hebrides.

Boswell enticed his famous English friend Samuel Johnson to accompany him on a tour through the highlands and western islands of Scotland.

James Boswell, 9th Laird of Auchinleck was a Scottish biographer, diarist, and lawyer, born in Edinburgh, like many young men he longed to visit the bright lights of London and in 1760 he deserted the family home to live in the English capital for a few months. It was during his second stay in 1762-63 that he met his literary hero and model, the poet, essayist and dictionary maker Dr. Samuel Johnson. In August 1763 Boswell embarked upon a 2½ year Grand Tour of Europe, during which he met many notable men and women, including Voltaire and Rousseau. On returning to Scotland he practised law as an advocate. During this time he made occasional visits London to spend time with Dr Johnson and others of his circle, including Oliver Goldsmith, Sir Joshua Reynolds and Edmund Burke. He was also on familiar terms with David Hume, Adam Smith and other leading figures of the Scottish Enlightenment.

Johnston and Boswell set off less than 30 years after the '45 Uprising, when whisky was still distilled illegally, roads were scarce and travel was by foot, bone-jangling carriage, horseback or over very turbulent seas in a rickety boat.

Their extraordinary journey to the Highlands and the Hebrides during an autumnal season of relentless rain and storms, took Johnson - plump, partially deaf and blind and who had rarely travelled outside of London - on a grand Scottish tour which led to two of the earliest travel books and paved the way for centuries of tourists who would also explore the nation’s wild islands and highland

While for the then 32-year-old Boswell there was a chance to witness Johnson up close for nearly three months, providing a wealth of material for his admired biography, Life of Samuel Johnson. The travel journal was a massive hit and a humorous account of their journey.

Boswell was Scots to his roots and is very defensive about the Scots and Scottishness, while Johnson has this very English take on it all. These two things fuel the humour, Johnson is like this English bulldog and Boswell is like a Scottish terrier. Together they are a hoot! Add to that the facts that as you would expect from a Scotsman, Boswell was a heavy drinker and Johnson was teetotal, which leads to all kinds of escapades. It’s like 18th century Laurel and Hardy.

Boswell, quoted their first conversation in the biography, Life of Samuel Johnson, saying: “Mr Johnson, I do indeed come from Scotland, but I cannot help it”. To which Johnson replied: “That, Sir, I find, is what a great many of your countrymen cannot help.”

It set the scene for a friendship driven by verbal sparring, with Johnson’s deprecating remarks about Scots robustly foiled by Boswell’s defence of homeland.

Their travels began in mid-August at Boyd’s Inn in Edinburgh, where the cleanliness dismayed Johnson. Boswell wrote: “He asked to have his lemonade made sweeter; upon which the waiter, with his greasy fingers, lifted a lump of sugar, and put it into it. The Doctor, in indignation, threw it out of the window”.

The pair then travelled up the east coast, stopping at St Andrews to indulge their interest in John Knox and Mary, Queen of Scots, Following the coast towards Aberdeenshire, a bit like today’s NC500 tourists plotting their route, they took an anti-clockwise course along the Moray Coast to Inverness and then to the Western Isles.

At times their journey resembled a lengthy pub crawl as they noted the quality of the inns and the food.

In Montrose, Johnson noted: “At our inn we did not find a reception such as we thought proportionate to the commercial importance of the place; but Mr Boswell desired me to observe the innkeeper was an Englishman, and I then defended him as well as I could.” Dundee, it was noted, was “dirty, despicable”. They even recorded their first taste of Arbroath smokies.

Having travelled through Glen Shiel, the pair arrived at the inn at Glenelg. Often praised today, Boswell and Johnson gave it the equivalent of a one-star TripAdvisor review. Having arrived “wearing and peevish”, they discovered “no meat, no milk, no bread, no eggs, no wine. We did not express much satisfaction.”

The Highland terrain posed even greater stress. Dangerous and often impassable except on foot, they were often in remote spots, miles from inns or shelter or ankle deep in a peat bog. Nevertheless, they trudged on through stormy weather and with Johnson often suffering from colds, increasing deafness and seasickness on the journeys between the islands.

The trip from Coll to Skye was undertaken during a vicious storm, with Boswell fretting over whether the boat might sink or explode, and troubled that he couldn’t understand the sailors’ Gaelic! Johnson was no great fan of the language, describing it as “the rude speech of a barbarous people, who had few thoughts to express, and were content, as they conceived grossly, to be grossly understood”.

But in Skye, they were delighted to meet Flora MacDonald, and slept in the same room that Bonnie Prince Charlie had slept in. “Both were over the moon because they were besotted with the story,” he wrote.

Don’t judge Johnson on his dislike of the Gaelic language though, the pair told of finding the Highlands still occupied by military garrisons, cleared by immigration and spoke of the suppression of Highland culture and oppression of the clans.

The isle of Raasay turned out to be a favourite spot, where the pair enjoyed the clan chief’s hospitality and a raucous ceilidh, with Boswell dancing a jig on the flat summit of Dun Caan. Both felt that in Raasay they had come close to authentic old Gaelic culture and way of life.

By October 1773 they were in the Saracen Head Inn in Glasgow’s Gallowgate, revelling in a roaring coal fire and conversation with professors from Glasgow University.

The trip would come to a sorry end, however, at Boswell’s family’s Ayrshire home at Johnson and Boswell’s father had an enormous row; they were total opposites in religious and political beliefs,

Johnson was a kind of father figure to Boswell. He knew Boswell could be a bit out of hand, but he also knew he was a real literary talent.”

Johnson’s A Journey to the Western Islands of Scotland, was published in 1775, followed a exactly decade later by Boswell’s The Journal of a Tour to the Hebrides with Samuel Johnson. Both wrote their own versions of their tour differently. They go to the same places but see things differently.

[stlangels]

Analysis of Voter Turnout

In 2016: Trump had 62,984,828 votes. Hillary had 65,853,514. Gary Johnston (libertarian) had 4,489,341. Jill Stein had 1,457,218. Total: 134,784,901

In 2020, Trump had 74,213,893 votes and Biden had 81,268,720. Third party candidates together had 2,922,155. Total: 158,404,768

In this election so far (Nov 6 2:15pm pst), Trump has 71,083,860. Harris has 67,274,908. Jill Stein has 629,996. RFK Jr has 602,173. Chase Oliver (libertarian) has 568,034. Other candidates have 319,399. Together 3rd parties have 2,119,602. Total (so far): 140,478,370. The only states still counting are Nevada and Arizona. Nevada has a population of 3.194 million and Arizona has a population of 7.431 mil. Even if every person in both those states voted and none of their votes had been counted yet, voter turnout will be less than in 2020.

So, some results. In this election, voter turnout overall is significantly lower than in 2020. Both Trump and all 3rd party candidates got less votes in this election than in 2020. While lower voter turnout overall could account for some of this loss, it cannot account for all of it.

Kamala's lack of votes (not electoral, but actual cast ballots) most likely comes from people choosing not to vote, rather than voting 3rd party or for Trump.

The reason she lost the popular vote is because her campaign could not convince democrats and left-leaning americans to vote for her. And, yes, yes, it was wrong and dumb for them to abstain from voting because of moral hang ups or apathy or indecisiveness or whatever reason. But the democratic party and the Harris campaign consistently focused on appealing to centrist and center-right voters and swinging them rather than ensuring that the turnout in 2020 repeated itself. Rather than focus on galvanizing her base, the campaign focused on gaining new voters and as a result did very little to appeal to the Biden 2020 voters.

Racism and sexism and associations with the Biden presidency most certainly negatively affected Kamala's campaign, but that would have been unavoidable in any campaign she ran. The campaign they did actually run failed to address any issues brought up from the left (not even leftists, those left of center). Like what genius decided to send a Clinton and a Cheney to a place where the campaign wanted to secure Arab voters?

I do not think it was a good thing that people did not vote. However, it is plain stupid of democrats to expect that people will continue to fervently support any candidate they nominate when they demonstrate almost no effort to appeal to minority groups and the left and then blame the foolishness or rightward shift of those groups on their losses. The dems should not have expected that all they needed to be was less bad than Trump to get the kind of turnout Biden got in 2020. The Trump campaign actually focused on keeping the voters from 2020 and strengthening that pre-existing support. Thats why his total vote count changed so little from 2020.

Democrats cannot expect the habit of appealing to nonexistent voters and neglecting their base and then blaming the state of the country on like 15,000 people who were apparently too foolish or morally wrong to "do the right thing" to work. Its stupid.