#a modern person becoming a ghost than earlier centuries | Explore Tumblr posts and blogs

qqueenofhades · 3 years ago

Text

The Green Knight and Medieval Metatextuality: An Essay

Right, so. Finally watched it last night, and I’ve been thinking about it literally ever since, except for the part where I was asleep. As I said to fellow medievalist and admirer of Dev Patel @oldshrewsburyian, it’s possibly the most fascinating piece of medieval-inspired media that I’ve seen in ages, and how refreshing to have something in this genre that actually rewards critical thought and deep analysis, rather than me just fulminating fruitlessly about how popular media thinks that slapping blood, filth, and misogyny onto some swords and castles is “historically accurate.” I read a review of TGK somewhere that described it as the anti-Game of Thrones, and I’m inclined to think that’s accurate. I didn’t agree with all of the film’s tonal, thematic, or interpretative choices, but I found them consistently stylish, compelling, and subversive in ways both small and large, and I’m gonna have to write about it or I’ll go crazy. So. Brace yourselves.

(Note: My PhD is in medieval history, not medieval literature, and I haven’t worked on SGGK specifically, but I am familiar with it, its general cultural context, and the historical influences, images, and debates that both the poem and the film referenced and drew upon, so that’s where this meta is coming from.)

First, obviously, while the film is not a straight-up text-to-screen version of the poem (though it is by and large relatively faithful), it is a multi-layered meta-text that comments on the original Sir Gawain and the Green Knight, the archetypes of chivalric literature as a whole, modern expectations for medieval films, the hero’s journey, the requirements of being an “honorable knight,” and the nature of death, fate, magic, and religion, just to name a few. Given that the Arthurian legendarium, otherwise known as the Matter of Britain, was written and rewritten over several centuries by countless authors, drawing on and changing and hybridizing interpretations that sometimes challenged or outright contradicted earlier versions, it makes sense for the film to chart its own path and make its own adaptational decisions as part of this multivalent, multivocal literary canon. Sir Gawain himself is a canonically and textually inconsistent figure; in the movie, the characters merrily pronounce his name in several different ways, most notably as Sean Harris/King Arthur’s somewhat inexplicable “Garr-win.” He might be a man without a consistent identity, but that’s pointed out within the film itself. What has he done to define himself, aside from being the king’s nephew? Is his quixotic quest for the Green Knight actually going to resolve the question of his identity and his honor – and if so, is it even going to matter, given that successful completion of the “game” seemingly equates with death?

Likewise, as the anti-Game of Thrones, the film is deliberately and sometimes maddeningly non-commercial. For an adaptation coming from a studio known primarily for horror, it almost completely eschews the cliché that gory bloodshed equals authentic medievalism; the only graphic scene is the Green Knight’s original beheading. The violence is only hinted at, subtextual, suspenseful; it is kept out of sight, around the corner, never entirely played out or resolved. In other words, if anyone came in thinking that they were going to watch Dev Patel luridly swashbuckle his way through some CGI monsters like bad Beowulf adaptations of yore, they were swiftly disappointed. In fact, he seems to spend most of his time being wet, sad, and failing to meet the moment at hand (with a few important exceptions).

The film unhurriedly evokes a medieval setting that is both surreal and defiantly non-historical. We travel (in roughly chronological order) from Anglo-Saxon huts to Romanesque halls to high-Gothic cathedrals to Tudor villages and half-timbered houses, culminating in the eerie neo-Renaissance splendor of the Lord and Lady’s hall, before returning to the ancient trees of the Green Chapel and its immortal occupant: everything that has come before has now returned to dust. We have been removed even from imagined time and place and into a moment where it ceases to function altogether. We move forward, backward, and sideways, as Gawain experiences past, present, and future in unison. He is dislocated from his own sense of himself, just as we, the viewers, are dislocated from our sense of what is the “true” reality or filmic narrative; what we think is real turns out not to be the case at all. If, of course, such a thing even exists at all.

This visual evocation of the entire medieval era also creates a setting that, unlike GOT, takes pride in rejecting absolutely all political context or Machiavellian maneuvering. The film acknowledges its own cultural ubiquity and the question of whether we really need yet another King Arthur adaptation: none of the characters aside from Gawain himself are credited by name. We all know it’s Arthur, but he’s listed only as “king.” We know the spooky druid-like old man with the white beard is Merlin, but it’s never required to spell it out. The film gestures at our pre-existing understanding; it relies on us to fill in the gaps, cuing us to collaboratively produce the story with it, positioning us as listeners as if we were gathered to hear the original poem. Just like fanfiction, it knows that it doesn’t need to waste time introducing every single character or filling in ultimately unnecessary background knowledge, when the audience can be relied upon to bring their own.

As for that, the film explicitly frames itself as a “filmed adaptation of the chivalric romance” in its opening credits, and continues to play with textual referents and cues throughout: telling us where we are, what’s happening, or what’s coming next, rather like the rubrics or headings within a medieval manuscript. As noted, its historical/architectural references span the entire medieval European world, as does its costume design. I was particularly struck by the fact that Arthur and Guinevere’s crowns resemble those from illuminated monastic manuscripts or Eastern Orthodox iconography: they are both crown and halo, they confer an air of both secular kingship and religious sanctity. The question in the film’s imagined epilogue thus becomes one familiar to Shakespeare’s Henry V: heavy is the head that wears the crown. Does Gawain want to earn his uncle’s crown, take over his place as king, bear the fate of Camelot, become a great ruler, a husband and father in ways that even Arthur never did, only to see it all brought to dust by his cowardice, his reliance on unscrupulous sorcery, and his unfulfilled promise to the Green Knight? Is it better to have that entire life and then lose it, or to make the right choice now, even if it means death?

Likewise, Arthur’s kingly mantle is Byzantine in inspiration, as is the icon of the Virgin Mary-as-Theotokos painted on Gawain’s shield (which we see broken apart during the attack by the scavengers). The film only glances at its religious themes rather than harping on them explicitly; we do have the cliché scene of the male churchmen praying for Gawain’s safety, opposite Gawain’s mother and her female attendants working witchcraft to protect him. (When oh when will I get my film that treats medieval magic and medieval religion as the complementary and co-existing epistemological systems that they were, rather than portraying them as diametrically binary and disparagingly gendered opposites?) But despite the interim setbacks borne from the failure of Christian icons, the overall resolution of the film could serve as the culmination of a medieval Christian morality tale: Gawain can buy himself a great future in the short term if he relies on the protection of the enchanted green belt to avoid the Green Knight’s killing stroke, but then he will have to watch it all crumble until he is sitting alone in his own hall, his children dead and his kingdom destroyed, as a headless corpse who only now has been brave enough to accept his proper fate. By removing the belt from his person in the film’s Inception-like final scene, he relinquishes the taint of black magic and regains his religious honor, even at the likely cost of death. That, the medieval Christian morality tale would agree, is the correct course of action.

Gawain’s encounter with St. Winifred likewise presents a more subtle vision of medieval Christianity. Winifred was an eighth-century Welsh saint known for being beheaded, after which (by the power of another saint) her head was miraculously restored to her body and she went on to live a long and holy life. It doesn’t quite work that way in TGK. (St Winifred’s Well is mentioned in the original SGGK, but as far as I recall, Gawain doesn’t meet the saint in person.) In the film, Gawain encounters Winifred’s lifelike apparition, who begs him to dive into the mere and retrieve her head (despite appearances, she warns him, it is not attached to her body). This fits into the pattern of medieval ghost stories, where the dead often return to entreat the living to help them finish their business; they must be heeded, but when they are encountered in places they shouldn’t be, they must be put back into their proper physical space and reminded of their real fate. Gawain doesn’t follow William of Newburgh’s practical recommendation to just fetch some brawny young men with shovels to beat the wandering corpse back into its grave. Instead, in one of his few moments of unqualified heroism, he dives into the dark water and retrieves Winifred’s skull from the bottom of the lake. Then when he returns to the house, he finds the rest of her skeleton lying in the bed where he was earlier sleeping, and carefully reunites the skull with its body, finally allowing it to rest in peace.

However, Gawain’s involvement with Winifred doesn’t end there. The fox that he sees on the bank after emerging with her skull, who then accompanies him for the rest of the film, is strongly implied to be her spirit, or at least a companion that she has sent for him. Gawain has handled a saint’s holy bones; her relics, which were well known to grant protection in the medieval world. He has done the saint a service, and in return, she extends her favor to him. At the end of the film, the fox finally speaks in a human voice, warning him not to proceed to the fateful final encounter with the Green Knight; it will mean his death. The symbolism of having a beheaded saint serve as Gawain’s guide and protector is obvious, since it is the fate that may or may not lie in store for him. As I said, the ending is Inception-like in that it steadfastly refuses to tell you if the hero is alive (or will live) or dead (or will die). In the original SGGK, of course, the Green Knight and the Lord turn out to be the same person, Gawain survives, it was all just a test of chivalric will and honor, and a trap put together by Morgan Le Fay in an attempt to frighten Guinevere. It’s essentially able to be laughed off: a game, an adventure, not real. TGK takes this paradigm and flips it (to speak…) on its head.

Gawain’s rescue of Winifred’s head also rewards him in more immediate terms: his/the Green Knight’s axe, stolen by the scavengers, is miraculously restored to him in her cottage, immediately and concretely demonstrating the virtue of his actions. This is one of the points where the film most stubbornly resists modern storytelling conventions: it simply refuses to add in any kind of “rational” or “empirical” explanation of how else it got there, aside from the grace and intercession of the saint. This is indeed how it works in medieval hagiography: things simply reappear, are returned, reattached, repaired, made whole again, and Gawain’s lost weapon is thus restored, symbolizing that he has passed the test and is worthy to continue with the quest. The film’s narrative is not modernizing its underlying medieval logic here, and it doesn’t particularly care if a modern audience finds it “convincing” or not. As noted, the film never makes any attempt to temporalize or localize itself; it exists in a determinedly surrealist and ahistorical landscape, where naked female giants who look suspiciously like Tilda Swinton roam across the wild with no necessary explanation. While this might be frustrating for some people, I actually found it a huge relief that a clearly fantastic and fictional literary adaptation was not acting like it was qualified to teach “real history” to its audience. Nobody would come out of TGK thinking that they had seen the “actual” medieval world, and since we have enough of a problem with that sort of thing thanks to GOT, I for one welcome the creation of a medieval imaginative space that embraces its eccentric and unrealistic elements, rather than trying to fit them into the Real Life box.

This plays into the fact that the film, like a reused medieval manuscript containing more than one text, is a palimpsest: for one, it audaciously rewrites the entire Arthurian canon in the wordless vision of Gawain’s life after escaping the Green Knight (I could write another meta on that dream-epilogue alone). It moves fluidly through time and creates alternate universes in at least two major points: one, the scene where Gawain is tied up and abandoned by the scavengers and that long circling shot reveals his skeletal corpse rotting on the sward, only to return to our original universe as Gawain decides that he doesn’t want that fate, and two, Gawain as King. In this alternate ending, Arthur doesn’t die in battle with Mordred, but peaceably in bed, having anointed his worthy nephew as his heir. Gawain becomes king, has children, gets married, governs Camelot, becomes a ruler surpassing even Arthur, but then watches his son get killed in battle, his subjects turn on him, and his family vanish into the dust of his broken hall before he himself, in despair, pulls the enchanted scarf out of his clothing and succumbs to his fate.

In this version, Gawain takes on the responsibility for the fall of Camelot, not Arthur. This is the hero’s burden, but he’s obtained it dishonorably, by cheating. It is a vivid but mimetic future which Gawain (to all appearances) ultimately rejects, returning the film to the realm of traditional Arthurian canon – but not quite. After all, if Gawain does get beheaded after that final fade to black, it would represent a significant alteration from the poem and the character’s usual arc. Are we back in traditional canon or aren’t we? Did Gawain reject that future or didn’t he? Do all these alterities still exist within the visual medium of the meta-text, and have any of them been definitely foreclosed?

Furthermore, the film interrogates itself and its own tropes in explicit and overt ways. In Gawain’s conversation with the Lord, the Lord poses the question that many members of the audience might have: is Gawain going to carry out this potentially pointless and suicidal quest and then be an honorable hero, just like that? What is he actually getting by staggering through assorted Irish bogs and seeming to reject, rather than embrace, the paradigms of a proper quest and that of an honorable knight? He lies about being a knight to the scavengers, clearly out of fear, and ends up cravenly bound and robbed rather than fighting back. He denies knowing anything about love to the Lady (played by Alicia Vikander, who also plays his lover at the start of the film with a decidedly ropey Yorkshire accent, sorry to say). He seems to shrink from the responsibility thrust on him, rather than rise to meet it (his only honorable act, retrieving Winifred’s head, is discussed above) and yet here he still is, plugging away. Why is he doing this? What does he really stand to gain, other than accepting a choice and its consequences (somewhat?) The film raises these questions, but it has no plans to answer them. It’s going to leave you to think about them for yourself, and it isn’t going to spoon-feed you any ultimate moral or neat resolution. In this interchange, it’s easy to see both the echoes of a formal dialogue between two speakers (a favored medieval didactic tactic) and the broader purpose of chivalric literature: to interrogate what it actually means to be a knight, how personal honor is generated, acquired, and increased, and whether engaging in these pointless and bloody “war games” is actually any kind of real path to lasting glory.

The film’s treatment of race, gender, and queerness obviously also merits comment. By casting Dev Patel, an Indian-born actor, as an Arthurian hero, the film is… actually being quite accurate to the original legends, doubtless much to the disappointment of assorted internet racists. The thirteenth-century Arthurian romance Parzival (Percival) by the German poet Wolfram von Eschenbach notably features the character of Percival’s mixed-race half-brother, Feirefiz, son of their father by his first marriage to a Muslim princess. Feirefiz is just as heroic as Percival (Gawaine, for the record, also plays a major role in the story) and assists in the quest for the Holy Grail, though it takes his conversion to Christianity for him to properly behold it.

By introducing Patel (and Sarita Chowdhury as Morgause) to the visual representation of Arthuriana, the film quietly does away with the “white Middle Ages” cliché that I have complained about ad nauseam; we see background Asian and black members of Camelot, who just exist there without having to conjure up some complicated rationale to explain their presence. The Lady also uses a camera obscura to make Gawain’s portrait. Contrary to those who might howl about anachronism, this technique was known in China as early as the fourth century BCE and the tenth/eleventh century Islamic scholar Ibn al-Haytham was probably the best-known medieval authority to write on it extensively; Latin translations of his work inspired European scientists from Roger Bacon to Leonardo da Vinci. Aside from the symbolism of an upside-down Gawain (and when he sees the portrait again during the ‘fall of Camelot’, it is right-side-up, representing that Gawain himself is in an upside-down world), this presents a subtle challenge to the prevailing Eurocentric imagination of the medieval world, and draws on other global influences.

As for gender, we have briefly touched on it above; in the original SGGK, Gawain’s entire journey is revealed to be just a cruel trick of Morgan Le Fay, simply trying to destabilize Arthur’s court and upset his queen. (Morgan is the old blindfolded woman who appears in the Lord and Lady’s castle and briefly approaches Gawain, but her identity is never explicitly spelled out.) This is, obviously, an implicitly misogynistic setup: an evil woman plays a trick on honorable men for the purpose of upsetting another woman, the honorable men overcome it, the hero survives, and everyone presumably lives happily ever after (at least until Mordred arrives).

Instead, by plunging the outcome into doubt and the hero into a much darker and more fallible moral universe, TGK shifts the blame for Gawain’s adventure and ultimate fate from Morgan to Gawain himself. Likewise, Guinevere is not the passive recipient of an evil deception but in a way, the catalyst for the whole thing. She breaks the seal on the Green Knight’s message with a weighty snap; she becomes the oracle who reads it out, she is alarming rather than alarmed, she disrupts the complacency of the court and silently shows up all the other knights who refuse to step forward and answer the Green Knight’s challenge. Gawain is not given the ontological reassurance that it’s just a practical joke and he’s going to be fine (and thanks to the unresolved ending, neither are we). The film instead takes the concept at face value in order to push the envelope and ask the simple question: if a man was going to be actually-for-real beheaded in a year, why would he set out on a suicidal quest? Would you, in Gawain’s place, make the same decision to cast aside the enchanted belt and accept your fate? Has he made his name, will he be remembered well? What is his legacy?

Indeed, if there is any hint of feminine connivance and manipulation, it arrives in the form of the implication that Gawain’s mother has deliberately summoned the Green Knight to test her son, prove his worth, and position him as his childless uncle’s heir; she gives him the protective belt to make sure he won’t actually die, and her intention all along was for the future shown in the epilogue to truly play out (minus the collapse of Camelot). Only Gawain loses the belt thanks to his cowardice in the encounter with the scavengers, regains it in a somewhat underhanded and morally questionable way when the Lady is attempting to seduce him, and by ultimately rejecting it altogether and submitting to his uncertain fate, totally mucks up his mother’s painstaking dynastic plans for his future. In this reading, Gawain could be king, and his mother’s efforts are meant to achieve that goal, rather than thwart it. He is thus required to shoulder his own responsibility for this outcome, rather than conveniently pawning it off on an “evil woman,” and by extension, the film asks the question: What would the world be like if men, especially those who make war on others as a way of life, were actually forced to face the consequences of their reckless and violent actions? Is it actually a “game” in any sense of the word, especially when chivalric literature is constantly preoccupied with the question of how much glorious violence is too much glorious violence? If you structure social prestige for the king and the noble male elite entirely around winning battles and existing in a state of perpetual war, when does that begin to backfire and devour the knightly class – and the rest of society – instead?

This leads into the central theme of Gawain’s relationships with the Lord and Lady, and how they’re treated in the film. The poem has been repeatedly studied in terms of its latent (and sometimes… less than latent) queer subtext: when the Lord asks Gawain to pay back to him whatever he should receive from his wife, does he already know what this involves; i.e. a physical and romantic encounter? When the Lady gives kisses to Gawain, which he is then obliged to return to the Lord as a condition of the agreement, is this all part of a dastardly plot to seduce him into a kinky green-themed threesome with a probably-not-human married couple looking to spice up their sex life? Why do we read the Lady’s kisses to Gawain as romantic but Gawain’s kisses to the Lord as filial, fraternal, or the standard “kiss of peace” exchanged between a liege lord and his vassal? Is Gawain simply being a dutiful guest by honoring the bargain with his host, actually just kissing the Lady again via the proxy of her husband, or somewhat more into this whole thing with the Lord than he (or the poet) would like to admit? Is the homosocial turning homoerotic, and how is Gawain going to navigate this tension and temptation?

If the question is never resolved: well, welcome to one of the central medieval anxieties about chivalry, knighthood, and male bonds! As I have written about before, medieval society needed to simultaneously exalt this as the most honored and noble form of love, and make sure it didn’t accidentally turn sexual (once again: how much male love is too much male love?). Does the poem raise the possibility of serious disruption to the dominant heteronormative paradigm, only to solve the problem by interpreting the Gawain/Lady male/female kisses as romantic and sexual and the Gawain/Lord male/male kisses as chaste and formal? In other words, acknowledging the underlying anxiety of possible homoeroticism but ultimately reasserting the heterosexual norm? The answer: Probably?!?! Maybe?!?! Hell if we know??! To say the least, this has been argued over to no end, and if you locked a lot of medieval history/literature scholars into a room and told them that they couldn’t come out until they decided on one clear answer, they would be in there for a very long time. The poem seemingly invokes the possibility of a queer reading only to reject it – but once again, as in the question of which canon we end up in at the film’s end, does it?

In some lights, the film’s treatment of this potential queer reading comes off like a cop-out: there is only one kiss between Gawain and the Lord, and it is something that the Lord has to initiate after Gawain has already fled the hall. Gawain himself appears to reject it; he tells the Lord to let go of him and runs off into the wilderness, rather than deal with or accept whatever has been suggested to him. However, this fits with film!Gawain’s pattern of rejecting that which fundamentally makes him who he is; like Peter in the Bible, he has now denied the truth three times. With the scavengers he denies being a knight; with the Lady he denies knowing about courtly love; with the Lord he denies the central bond of brotherhood with his fellows, whether homosocial or homoerotic in nature. I would go so far as to argue that if Gawain does die at the end of the film, it is this rejected kiss which truly seals his fate. In the poem, the Lord and the Green Knight are revealed to be the same person; in the film, it’s not clear if that’s the case, or they are separate characters, even if thematically interrelated. If we assume, however, that the Lord is in fact still the human form of the Green Knight, then Gawain has rejected both his kiss of peace (the standard gesture of protection offered from lord to vassal) and any deeper emotional bond that it can be read to signify. The Green Knight could decide to spare Gawain in recognition of the courage he has shown in relinquishing the enchanted belt – or he could just as easily decide to kill him, which he is legally free to do since Gawain has symbolically rejected the offer of brotherhood, vassalage, or knight-bonding by his unwise denial of the Lord’s freely given kiss. Once again, the film raises the overall thematic and moral question and then doesn’t give one straight (ahem) answer. As with the medieval anxieties and chivalric texts that it is based on, it invokes the specter of queerness and then doesn’t neatly resolve it. As a modern audience, we find this unsatisfying, but once again, the film is refusing to conform to our expectations.

As has been said before, there is so much kissing between men in medieval contexts, both ceremonial and otherwise, that we’re left to wonder: “is it gay or is it feudalism?” Is there an overtly erotic element in Gawain and the Green Knight’s mutual “beheading” of each other (especially since in the original version, this frees the Lord from his curse, functioning like a true love’s kiss in a fairytale). While it is certainly possible to argue that the film has “straightwashed” its subject material by removing the entire sequence of kisses between Gawain and the Lord and the unresolved motives for their existence, it is a fairly accurate, if condensed, representation of the anxieties around medieval knightly bonds and whether, as Carolyn Dinshaw put it, a (male/male) “kiss is just a kiss.” After all, the kiss between Gawain and the Lady is uncomplicatedly read as sexual/romantic, and that context doesn’t go away when Gawain is kissing the Lord instead. Just as with its multiple futurities, the film leaves the question open-ended. Is it that third and final denial that seals Gawain’s fate, and if so, is it asking us to reflect on why, specifically, he does so?

The film could play with both this question and its overall tone quite a bit more: it sometimes comes off as a grim, wooden, over-directed Shakespearean tragedy, rather than incorporating the lively and irreverent tone that the poem often takes. It’s almost totally devoid of humor, which is unfortunate, and the Grim Middle Ages aesthetic is in definite evidence. Nonetheless, because of the comprehensive de-historicizing and the obvious lack of effort to claim the film as any sort of authentic representation of the medieval past, it works. We are not meant to understand this as a historical document, and so we have to treat it on its terms, by its own logic, and by its own frames of reference. In some ways, its consistent opacity and its refusal to abide by modern rules and common narrative conventions is deliberately meant to challenge us: as before, when we recognize Arthur, Merlin, the Round Table, and the other stock characters because we know them already and not because the film tells us so, we have to fill in the gaps ourselves. We are watching the film not because it tells us a simple adventure story – there is, as noted, shockingly little action overall – but because we have to piece together the metatext independently and ponder the philosophical questions that it leaves us with. What conclusion do we reach? What canon do we settle in? What future or resolution is ultimately made real? That, the film says, it can’t decide for us. As ever, it is up to future generations to carry on the story, and decide how, if at all, it is going to survive.

(And to close, I desperately want them to make my much-coveted Bisclavret adaptation now in more or less the same style, albeit with some tweaks. Please.)

Further Reading

Ailes, Marianne J. ‘The Medieval Male Couple and the Language of Homosociality’, in Masculinity in Medieval Europe, ed. by Dawn M. Hadley (Harlow: Longman, 1999), pp. 214–37.

Ashton, Gail. ‘The Perverse Dynamics of Sir Gawain and the Green Knight’, Arthuriana 15 (2005), 51–74.

Boyd, David L. ‘Sodomy, Misogyny, and Displacement: Occluding Queer Desire in Sir Gawain and the Green Knight’, Arthuriana 8 (1998), 77–113.

Busse, Peter. ‘The Poet as Spouse of his Patron: Homoerotic Love in Medieval Welsh and Irish Poetry?’, Studi Celtici 2 (2003), 175–92.

Dinshaw, Carolyn. ‘A Kiss Is Just a Kiss: Heterosexuality and Its Consolations in Sir Gawain and the Green Knight’, Diacritics 24 (1994), 205–226.

Kocher, Suzanne. ‘Gay Knights in Medieval French Fiction: Constructs of Queerness and Non-Transgression’, Mediaevalia 29 (2008), 51–66.

Karras, Ruth Mazo. ‘Knighthood, Compulsory Heterosexuality, and Sodomy’ in The Boswell Thesis: Essays on Christianity, Social Tolerance, and Homosexuality, ed. Matthew Kuefler (Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 2006), pp. 273–86.

Kuefler, Matthew. ‘Male Friendship and the Suspicion of Sodomy in Twelfth-Century France’, in The Boswell Thesis: Essays on Christianity, Social Tolerance, and Homosexuality, ed. Matthew Kuefler (Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 2006), pp. 179–214.

McVitty, E. Amanda, ‘False Knights and True Men: Contesting Chivalric Masculinity in English Treason Trials, 1388–1415,’ Journal of Medieval History 40 (2014), 458–77.

Mieszkowski, Gretchen. ‘The Prose Lancelot's Galehot, Malory's Lavain, and the Queering of Late Medieval Literature’, Arthuriana 5 (1995), 21–51.

Moss, Rachel E. ‘ “And much more I am soryat for my good knyghts’ ”: Fainting, Homosociality, and Elite Male Culture in Middle English Romance’, Historical Reflections / Réflexions historiques 42 (2016), 101–13.

Zeikowitz, Richard E. ‘Befriending the Medieval Queer: A Pedagogy for Literature Classes’, College English 65 (2002), 67–80.

#the green knight #the green knight meta #sir gawain and the green knight #medieval literature #medieval history #this meta is goddamn 5.2k words #and has its own reading list #i uh #said i had a lot of thoughts?

2K notes · View notes

backofthebookshelf · 4 years ago

Text

That post I reblogged earlier reminded me that I need to yell about how much I adore Jon Archivist Sims not just as an asexual character but as an asexual horror narrator, because asexuality in horror is usually something that makes me cringe.

Not that there's much asexuality, as a sexual orientation, in horror; like everywhere else it's pretty rare to see it depicted at all. But there are tropes, and just like good writers often write neurodivergent characters without realizing it, they sometimes write asexual characters without realizing it, it's just that people think of sex as foundational to the human experience and therefore something universally meaningful to discuss in horror, and therefore deviations get...weird.

There's the "too busy/too good for relationships" trope that @bananonbinary mentioned, which Vivian Sobchak calls the "virginal astronaut" trope -- which derives from the horrible combined mess of "logic is masculine, emotion is feminine," "sex must be heterosexual and therefore a story with no women can't be about sex," and "sex and emotions are inextricable." Literally every one of those concepts can and should and has been deconstructed by queer horror, but it hasn't made them go away (particularly if, like me, you like 19th century ghost stories a lot).

But so much of horror is about the body, and so much of thinking about bodies is about sex. There's a whole sub-genre of plant horror - from Invasion of the Body Snatchers to Annihilation, not to mention that totally unnecessary scene in the first Evil Dead movie - and so much of that particular kind of body horror is about asexual reproduction. It's not just "what if there was no reason to have sex" but that the lack of a need for sex is the way you can tell that someone is no longer human.

There's also a whole thread of Frankenstein criticism that treats asexual reproduction as the central problem of the novel (which I think is dramatically missing the point) that I found massively triggering to stumble across. The whole reason Victor Frankenstein fails is because he won't have sex with a woman? Great, love to know that sexual relationships are the be-all and end-all of human success. (Again, not the point of the novel, if you haven't read Frankenstein please don't let this ruin it for you.)

Honestly, weirdly enough, I think the only time I don't find a character who's passively depicted as asexual in horror fiction to be alienating is...in Lovecraft stories. Horrific, I know, Lovecraft had every bigotry known to humanity turned up to twelve, except I suspect he actually was sex-repulsed and asexual and so the lack of sex or sexual relationships in his stories seem more like a natural consequence of it just not being something he cared about than as a way to prove that his characters were above messy human emotions or that they were somehow broken or less than human. Trust me, I loathe the fact that Lovecraft is apparently decent ace rep, but...there we are.

But to bring this back to TMA -- especially to start with, Jon is a horror narrator very much modeled on the 19th and early 20th century "researcher accidentally eaten by the thing he's researching" story form. (Not just Lovecraft, but Arthur Machen, Algernon Blackwood, Arthur Conan Doyle, M.R. James - TMA is named after an M.R. James story, even.) (Actually look at the assistants' surnames and that's a pretty good catalog of the inspirations; even Dracula is an epistolary novel featuring a narrator who's accidentally consumed by something he thought he was apart from, although asexual it is not.) And most of those narrators are asexual, of the "virginal astronaut" type, because of the tropes of the day (and because of the stereotypes of academics).

Then through the course of the series Jon becomes a more modern type of horror protagonist, turning into a monster himself, and the series begins to question heavily what it means to be human and where the lines between human and monster are drawn. And the longer this goes on, the more monstrous Jon becomes in his physical dependence on statements and his uncanny healing abilities and his literal return from the dead -- the more human he becomes, too, making better connections with people, reaching out to offer help or even just sympathy, prioritizing his relationships with other people over his own research or his need to not become a mystery.

And I think that's why his asexuality hits so good: the story prioritizes the emotional parts of human connections even while it's diving into the monstrous transformation stuff that so often uses lack of sexual interest as a shorthand to demonstrate that the person isn't fully human anymore. (And not even just romantic connections, although Jon and Martin's relationship is a lynchpin of the series; you've also got Jon repairing his relationship with Melanie, his complex relationship with Daisy, his ongoing struggle to relate to Basira.) TMA isn't just deconstructing what it means to be human, it's also completely removed sexuality from that calculation. There are lots of things that make a person more or less human, by a wide variety of definitions of "human," but sexuality is not one of them.

I'm not sure how much of this was intentional; I definitely assumed that the reason Jon was asexual was because of that tradition of cosmic horror and ghost story narrators, updated for a modern queer audience, and the comments Jonny has made in q&as and elsewhere seem to support that. But this is a great example of what happens when something is written thoughtfully and with care taken to consider implications, rather than defaulting to easy cultural shorthands. And it's also an illustration of the usefulness of queer as an umbrella term -- queer fiction by definition has to sidestep a lot of those cultural shorthands, and the more of those you can deconstruct, the more you're able to create something that includes everyone.

#the magnus archives #asexuality #horror #ace things #cw aphobia #tma spoilers

698 notes · View notes

pointnumbersixteen · 4 years ago

Note

How do you see The Captain's coming out, and growth in confidence and self acceptance thereafter taking place?

I like this question! …and I’m probably going to elaborate on it a bit more than many people will want to read (I noticed back when I was regularly writing essay length posts that they did not get a lot of love) and it’s probably going to get even more ramble-y than usual (brain has not been braining as cooperatively as it should recently and the decision to drink half a bottle of wine right before answering this- sorry- probably does not help), but here we are.

About coming out scenarios, none of mine are particularly elaborate. While I do think he needs to come out for his story line to progress, I can’t imagine him making a big thing out of it (long or elaborate announcements, heart-to-hearts, emotional displays of bearing his authentic self or any of the like), either with the group, or person-by-person, for several reasons:

First off, that sort of a coming-out to-do is a more modern notion, and I doubt he was a particularly modern person even when he was alive, seventy-five years ago. His notions of privacy and propriety are probably much more conservative than ours, and I feel like that makes it unlikely that he’d go into any sort of detail, at least at early in this process, about his feelings/emotions or the specificities of his attractions. We’re talking about a man who doesn’t even use his own name. It’s difficult to picture him going into depth about his desires and love life.

Secondly, he’s a bit of a social coward. (He’s not a physical coward, of course, he jumped on that bomb in the garden without hesitation, and acknowledged after the fact that he gotten caught up in the moment, and therefore hadn’t really thought about how a bomb couldn’t hurt him.) And I get it, I’m a bit of a social coward, too, so no judgement. He probably faced a lot of ridicule in his life. Being a social coward is totally fair. But he doesn’t put himself into situations that might involve awkward interpersonal interactions if he can help it, and legs it whenever interactions he’s already in become to awkward for him. I feel like he’s probably quite desperate (although he’d never admit to it) to save face and protect what bits of his ego remain unscathed.

Think about it: he could have spoken to Fanny on his own about her nightly screaming disturbing him in s1e1, they have a clear association established at the outset of the show, they leave Heather’s room together at the end of the very first scene, but he doesn’t do so until he has the weight of the whole group to back him up about the screaming at their meeting. He had to buck up his courage and give himself his little ‘over the top we go’ pep talk before going to speak to Alison in Gorilla War. Also, if there was actually something wrong with his soldiers’ horseplay after hours in Reddy Weddy- if it was breaking regulations or even his own orders for quiet hours- and he heard it, he could have gone down directly when he heard it, confronted whoever was involved and order them to stop or put them on report. But no, instead he addressed the entire group of soldiers in a sixteen point morning brief. He even dispatched Pat to confront Alison about the party in s2e2, instead doing it himself… and spit out his apology/reconciliation with Pat at the end as fast as possible. And as for legging it when things get awkward, see his retreats following the group confronting him in Getting Out and after Alison telling him he wasn’t needed in the Grey Lady- and on a more figurative than literal level, but most relevantly, his quick turn from ‘I’ll miss you’ to ‘we’ll miss you’ with Havers in Reddy Weddy.

This is not a man who wants to be in awkward or embarrassing situations. And I think that coming out, at least at first, will probably be a bit embarrassing for him- it was scandalous in his time, and I think it will take him longer to get over that feeling and come to terms with himself than it will to finally acknowledge that he’s gay. So I doubt he’d make more of it than he utterly feels he has to, at least at first. And of course, he’d have to be a bit afraid that people would judge him or stop associating with him over it, as sadly, in his own time many people would have done, and most of the ghosts are from even earlier times than he was. So that might add more hesitation…

And thirdly, he doesn’t like and/or respect many of his house mates. The other twentieth century ghosts are the only ones he spends much time with. I doubt he’d go out of his way to communicate much of anything to the rest if it wasn’t “mission related” much less discuss his sexuality with them. He mostly disregards Humphrey. See his, “Oh, it’s you.” Mary obviously doesn’t like him and he only associates with her when it might be useful for his ‘missions.’ He clearly doesn’t think much of Thomas and doesn’t really even bother including him in his plans. These aren’t people he’s going to have heart-to-hearts with.

With those constraints in place, here’s a non-exhaustive list of possibilities by which I might see his coming out finally happening. They’re really just scenarios I made for myself on how I might see him coming out and I like to keep my options open (the first three are strategies he might go for, the last is an alternate scenario, presented in decreasing levels of directness on his part):

1) The ‘pull the bandage off quickly and hope it doesn’t sting too much’ strategy.

The Captain waits for the end of one of their various group activities or meetings, where all announcements seem to be made, gets up, clears his throat, stammers a bit, announces it tersely, using the most proper popular word for homosexuality that existed in his time (think: “Heh-hem. Er. Um. Well. It has recently come to my attention that I am- er- well- as it happens- gay. I, uh, thought it should be noted. That is all.”), and then beats a hasty retreat, so he doesn’t have to try to cope with the potentially negative aftermath. Of course, there isn’t a negative aftermath, because many of the ghosts already have guessed and the rest don’t really care. Someone, probably Pat, because he does the bulk of the emotional labor in the group, and more importantly, he’s Cap’s closest friend, would have to go after him. He would of course be initially defensive, and Pat would have to sooth his feathers a bit- or maybe just spit it out over his defensiveness- that he guessed a long time ago and so had plenty of other people, and they were just waiting for him to be ready, and really, it’s fine, and no one’s going to disown him for it.

2) The ‘well maybe I should tell my friends with the hope they support me’ strategy.

He gets together with a small group, the people whose company he actually values, definitely Fanny and Pat, maybe Julian, probably Alison either at the same time or after he finishes with his ghosts pals, and says it in much the same way as the previous scenario, but waiting for their reactions rather than retreating straight away. Pat and Alison, I expect, would answer with something like ‘yeah, we figured that one out a long time ago, actually, and it’s completely fine’ and Julian’s reaction would probably be something like, ‘well, obviously.’ Fanny’s had a lot of character growth since season one, when I expect her reaction would have been very shrill and judgmental, probably still would be a touch less warm and/or nonchalant, but I picture it as something like a sigh, followed by a pat on the arm and something like, ‘well, I still like you better than everyone else here, anyway.’ Word would eventually trickle to everyone else by way of social osmosis. Or not. No one seems to care if Humphrey or the plague ghosts are well informed.

3) The ‘I’m not brave enough to actually go through the process of actually telling anyone anything about me so let’s just drop hints and hope everyone figures it out without making a big deal about it’ strategy.

The indirect approach (I’m rather fond of this one, but mostly because it was my own primary coming out approach)… he first sends out feelers to certain people on the topic of homosexuality, probably Alison, since she’s modern, hosted a lesbian wedding, and very much implied that she’d be ready to keep scandalous secrets for him in Reddy Weddy, and possibly maybe also Julian, as he’s the most sexually experienced/knowledgeable, and after Alison spent a while inundating him with ‘it’s okay to be gay’ messages (along with a sudden and entirely unexplained influx of LGBT media) as she’s socially clever enough to see that’s what he’s looking for and after Julian spent a while telling him probably far more than he ever actually wanted to know about the potentialities of gay sex, that might boost the Captain’s confidence enough to let him start dropping hints to people, instead of telling them outright (consciously commenting on the attractiveness of men they see rather than occasionally accidentally blurting it out- see ‘the handsome one’- occasionally putting forth an opinion or stance on the LGBT world ‘it would have been nice if gay marriage was acceptable when I was alive,’ maybe occasionally mentioning how certain men would make cute couple), expecting them to meet him in the middle and figure out the point on their own… of course, many of them have already realized, so this isn’t a problem. It’s entirely possible, though, that Mary (world view not terribly grounded in reality) and Kitty (lack of life experience and/or instruction about life, see the how are babies made subplot) never pick up the hints on their own and someone else eventually has to tell them.

4) The ‘someone puts him out of his misery’ scenario.

Cap acknowledges to himself that he’s gay first and then, wishing to avoid embarrassment or lack of acceptance, obviously, awkwardly, painfully tries to disguise it and in doing so draws attention to it, until a third party decides to put him out of his misery and tell him that many of them figured it out ages ago and that everyone is fine with it. Maybe Pat. Maybe Alison. I kind of like the idea of it being Fanny (with her lovely character growth and her couple of suspicious glances his way in the Perfect Day), actually, by way of something like ‘You know, I was entirely prepared to continue on living with my husband, George, keeping his secrets, about the, uh, sort of person he was, and you’re at least one better than him, given that you at least never murdered me- or, for that matter, never married some poor woman you had no interest in to shield yourself from scrutiny… and so, what I’m saying is, I wouldn’t turn my back on you for being the, uh, sort of person you are, either, and maybe things have progressed enough that you don’t actually have to keep secrets at all.’ Cap would take all of this in with a mixture of mortification and relief. I’m rather fond of this scenario, too.

As for the second bit of the question, once his sexuality is out there, though, and no one judges him or hates him for it- and some are quite supportive- I do see him becoming more self-accepting. If no one’s judging him, does he need to judge himself so harshly? And also more confident. Because some of those things that he’s always felt different about and in the past has probably been ridiculed about in the past (even if he’s in denial about being gay, he and quite a few other people had to at the very least note that he’s not particularly interested in women), are, apparently just fine now. So he’s a bit more just fine now himself. And that weight of always trying to be someone else, someone who’s just right, can lift and he can relax a bit more. And that would probably help him a lot, too. I see it as a slow sort of thawing process. No matter what way he comes out, I still see Alison as very helpfully providing a variety of LGBT media to help this process along. And maybe he’d eventually get to the point where he processed enough and warmed up enough to be able to talk more in depth, at least with his friends, about what it was like being him in repressed pre-war Britain, and what sort of men he’s attracted to (I enjoy the idea of him and Fanny- gradually overcoming her own repression- scoping out hot men together). Maybe he’ll even luck out one of his male housemates will decide (or has already decided) that bisexuality is a valid option and he’ll get a date (insert whichever ghost y’all ship him with here). I bet Alison would totally help him set up a nice date, too, with her convenient still-functional-in-the-mortal-realm hands. And it would be nice to maybe see him get a taste of actual happiness.

#bbc ghosts #the captain #coming out #sorry for the giant block of text friends #i find it difficult to help myself

92 notes · View notes

freddiekluger · 4 years ago

Note

I am all ears for your season 3 cap's big gay awakening ideas 👀👀

alright, you asked so sit down and strap in

before we get started- a few details are recycled/repurposed from earlier headcanons/ask answers (characterisation is like that), and i came up with all this a couple weeks back, so any overlap with other peoples suggestions is totally unintentional! i’ve just been finding the energy to properly write them up as originally i riffed them with a friend late at night lmao

the captain: homo evolution

introduction (scroll down if you’re not bothered for the hardcore analysis/logic)

this isn’t necessarily what i think WILL happen as much as how i would do it. over the past two seasons of Ghosts, we’ve seen the captain’s main character arc being centred around him loosening up, from learning to value mike, alison, and the other ghosts more as equals than soldiers/means to an end to the season 2 finale, where cap is not only expressing an interest in flowers and fashion (distinctly un-soldierly pursuits) but joining the party and other men (the direct opposite of About Last Night, in which cap bah humbugs partying/’gay abandon’ and is left speechless by the mere presence of a mostly naked man). that being said, the captain is still the captain: his character is still centred around this need for rules and structure and he still finds his identity in the archetypal WW2 military man- all of his incremental moves towards a more ‘modern’ perspective have ultimately been made possible because, like Ben said on twitter, the captain isn’t CONSCIOUSLY aware that he’s gay. he has the underlying feeling that he’s different, he knows of his tendency to attach himself to specific men and form incredibly close bonds (and, as demonstrated by his attempts to hide them, is at least somewhat aware that that’s not the norm), but in his mind he’s written that off as merely “not being a ladies man”.

the captain is from the 1940s- it’s one thing for him to see and be supportive of a same-gender wedding in present day England where gay=legal unions, marketed doritos, and homophobia being still present but generally frowned upon, and another thing entirely for him to have to apply it to himself. we’ve already seen that the captain appears to be stuck in the past more than any of the other ghosts (”the war is over!” “is it, alison? is it?”- he also references the past more frequently than most of the others), and in his past sodomite gay=punishable by imprisonment and chemical castration, back alley hookups, and the constant threat of blackmail and violence. obviously, despite all this, there was a vibrant underground queer history taking place in England during this time & not all of the above is accurate, but it’s what cap would have seen, and the England of the early 20th century is denoted as being a particularly brutal period for lgbtq+ folks (the destruction of the first world war exacerbated rage and frustration, and lgbtq+ people weren’t the only gorup to end up on the receiving end of that, but i digress). this is basiclly just a really long way of me saying that the captain compartmentalising to that degree was, and to some extent is, a survival mechanism. confronting his homoseuxality means confronting what it means for a 1940s man to be a dreaded homosexual, and all of that directly conflicts with the image of ‘the Captain’ he’s built in his mind.

we’ve seen this in Redding Weddy, where the captain is aware that Havers means/meant more to him than was normal for a captain/2ic relationship (he does attempts to hide his affection- “i shall miss you, Havers. by which of course i mean we shall miss you “he left me, i mean he left for the front”), but is never able to fully verbalise WHY, and it only takes a series of increasingly dramatic prompts before he will even mention the idea of Havers, let alone begin to articulate their relationship.

all this just goes to prove that for the captain to properly ‘come out’, there needs to be an external inciting incident- he could easily have gone on shadowing attractive men whenever they visit and avoiding interrogating those feelings for another seventy years if Button house remained without alison and mike.

while at least julian, pat, and robin have noticed that the cap is not the most heteroseual of men (they’re the only ghosts who have visibly reacted when cap says gay shit), they all appear to have decided to just not mention it, which makes alison and mike our wildcards. not only has alison’s ability to see and communicate with the ghosts already connected them more to the modern world than they ever have been, alison, and mike by extension, has a personal stake in the wellbeing/general growth of the ghosts. happy ghosts=happy house, and like it or not some of them are even beginning to become friends. [i probably didn’t need to write all this like explaining my decisions, but i think figuring out the motivations behind everyon just develops the flavour and lets us have a sexy and accurate headcanon]

so,

the episode

while the captain might not consciously know he’s a fruit (derogatory), he is well and truly terrible at concealing the thirst (it’s not his fault things just keep slipping out!)- i love the idea of just having a supercut near the beginning of the episode that just shows that the captain has gotten even GAYER since last season, with slip ups becoming almost a daily occurence, but it’s getting to the point where it’s actually becoming a serious hazard. last week, he was supposed to be looking out for alison while attempted to put up blinds, but one of mike’s friends (who was over ‘helping out’, which mostly meant eating chips and covering himself in paint) walked through the room with his shirt off and paint handprints on the seat of his shorts, distracting the captain from realising that alison’s stepladder was about to give way.

with the increased presence of non elderly men in the house (the previous owner wasn’t exactly the life of the party) the captain is getting gayer and gayer, but he’s also becoming more and more defensive, while his brisk demeanour and need for control regresses to much more of a season 1 state (a subconscious attempt to regain control as things get close to spilling over). it’s not the first time his repression has almost slipped, he spent much of his life surrounded by soldiers after all, but with no war and no corporeal body he’s got almost nothing to distract himself from it. needless to say, between the safety hazards and the almost agressive defensiveness which derails any interaction, something needs to be done about the captain.

throughout the week, alison tries to find the opportune time to talk to the captain about what’s going on with him for everyone’s sake, but cap keeps masterfully evading any ‘deep’ talk with willful misunderstanding or just straight up dismissal (which at times gets a bit rude), and alison really doesn’t have the time- her and mike are caught up with managing the first official room redecoration and butting heads with a passive agressive delivery driver. insert general shenangigans, but at some point the captain’s whole “accidentally sabotage something by being distracted and then attack anyone who dares even look at him the wrong way afterwards” act causes alison to exasperatedly blurt out “we all know you’re gay! we get it! you like men! you can drop the act!”. there’s no malice or anything but, as we know, when alison gets run ragged things don’t tend to come out quite right.

everything falls silent (and mike is vaguely confused), and the captain just looks like a deer in headlights. as alison catches her breath, pat pipes up with a “it’s alright, cap, we don’t mind- now we can focus on the task at hand”. the captain sort of regains his composure and once again attempts to brush them all off with a scoff and a “i haven’t the faintest idea what you’re talking about. if any of us is distracted, i-it’s... kitty!” but it’s easy to tell he looks rattled. most of his words don’t come out right, and after trying to blame kitty for their failures (she just had the unfortunate luck of being in his line of sight), he ends up doing an awkward little walk away which quickly turns into a full on sprint. mike, having finished processing alison yelling about gay shit to the air and kind of pieced together what must have happened awkwardly chimes in with “it’s okay to be gay!”- alison just pats him on the back (”yeah no he’s gone, mike.” “gone?” “sprinted away.” “huh”)

the episode continues with the captain flat out avoiding alison and the other ghosts to an almost funny extent as the other plots continue. it takes a bit for alison to realise why the captain reacted so badly (in fact, it’s actually mike who remembers that he’s 1940s ghost- “he’s probably just scared and taking it out on everyone else”). while thomas and julian vote for leaving the captain be so they can have some peace and quiet, fanny/pat/alison/robin decide someone needs to talk to him (fanny surprised everyone but after all, she got murdered because her husband had to live in secrecy- if talking to the captain will avert any further crises, she’s happy to make sure someone else does it for her). kitty’s still upset about being singled out, but she knows better than anyone that sometimes all you need is a friend- cue realisation no. 2.

with the captain avoiding everyone, sending in a regular emissary isn’t going to work. they need to find the least threatening person possible, with no agenda or history other than being there to help (a friend, if you will)- cue everyone looking at mike.

a quick offscreen briefing later, we see mike wandering out to the field where the captain has exiled himself- remember that up until this point, the captain was still in conscious denial about his sexuality, so being forced to confront it head on (and finding out that apparently everyone ‘knew’, which for cap would feel like an intimate invasion of privacy/forced vulnerability) would rattle him to the point of self-exile- he might not be able to run from his sexuality, but he can run from people. the thing is, mike can’t see or hear the ghosts, which means the captain can’t be frightened off by any expectations (mike actually talks to/at cap while facing completely the wrong direction, but consdiering the above point, this works rather well).

the captain was alternating between pacing, fiddling with his swagger stick, and sitting, but he unconsciously stands to attention as mike wanders over. he’s used to mike not being able to see them, so mike asking to sit down takes him by surprise, disrupting his instinct to flee again.

mike begins a little awkwardly (”mind if i sit?” *silence* “...i’m just gonna assume that’s a no. or is it a yes? yeah anyways i’m just gonna sit. so... heard you’ve been going through a rough patch”), and the captain almost scoffs and wanders off, but something about the clumsy earnestness in mike’s voice, the captain’s vulnerable state, and the fact that it’s been so long since cap has had anyone actually check in on him, that he stays put. he keeps standing and staring away from button house, and mike keeps speaking to the empty air to his left, and alison and the ghosts stay hidden behind their bush a few metres away, but at least the captain is listening. for the first time in weeks, he’s not on the offensive.

“i can’t actually see or hear you, so i’m just gonna talk and assume you’re listening. alison mentioned you have a habit of running away but, um, maybe don’t do that please?”

“my mate daniel's gay. uh, homosexual, you’d probably say- did you have gay when you were alive? did it just mean happy? anyway, he didn’t come out- that means tell people- until he left high school. we all kind of guessed it, the other kids at school gave him a real tough time for it, but he just squashed it down. couldn’t imagine that all the things people were shouting at him were true, so he ignored it. he’s doing good now though. got married to his husband last year, currently runs a bookshop. so that’s nice.”

it goes quiet for a bit. the captain hasn’t moved, and we’re still only seeing shots of him from the back, but there’s a little less tension in his stance than there was before. mike clears his throat before continuing.

“i’m guessing you’re probably pretty scared right now. i would be- i mean not that you should be, you shouldn’t, but coming from your... situation, i’m guessing it’d be hard. no one’s saying you have to be anything you’re not ready to be, but lots of things that are scary are actually not bad. airplanes, skydiving, clowns- well, not the clown from that movie, but he gives clowns a bad rep- i’m sure there are plenty of lovely clowns out in the world. still give me the creeps though.” the captain makes a captain-y noise of assent about the clown comment- he never liked them either.

mike glances over to the bush where alison and the ghosts were attempting to listen in (they could only catch every few words- mary got particularly concerned about why mike had referenced clowns), and the captain still hasn’t run away, so alison motions for mike to keep going. he starts telling the captain a story from his uni days. it’s got nothing to do with the captain, or being gay, or self-acceptance, or anything like that- it’s just a standard tale of comedic but inventive problem solving. the captain sits himself down next to mike (to his right, avoiding mike’s gaze, and still staring away from button house), muttering that his legs are getting a bit tired. he sits there for a while, and mike just talks. sometimes he circles back to the gay thing, sometimes he just asks the captain questions, before remembering that he can’t actually hear any answer, but then he keeps asking anyway, thinking that cap might need to talk. he doesn’t at first, but slowly he offers up a word or two. and then a sentence, and then maybe more- mike will accidentally cut the captain off, or leave the silence to long, but the captain doesn’t mind (it’s a nice reminder that nothing he says will actually go on to have consequence). at one point, mike gets out his phone to show the captain photos of his mate daniel and daniel's husband, not just their wedding day but casual photos- couples drinks with him and alison, dinners at each other's places, the bookshop.

alison and the other ghosts have long gone, and the sun is just about to sink below the horizon by the time the captain stands himself back up with the traditional knee crack and grunt. he looks at mike and nods, giving him a simple thank you before turning to walk (not run) back to button house, head held slightly higher and looking more relaxed than he’s been all episode. the captain has still got a lot to figure out, but at least it’s a start.

[i love the dramatic ending but the implication is that alison has to go and fetch mike bc he has no ideas cap has left and is prepared to keep going lol- also by no means is cap suddenly going to ditch his characterisation and become a yas kween gay right away, i didn’t go into the aftermath bc this is alreayd fucking LONG but let me know if you want follow up????}

EDIT: i've rbed this with the follow up/part 2 attached!

EDIT 2, much later: switched out mike's reference to his 'younger brother' to a school friend, since the christmas special confirmed mike only has sisters and we're all about accuracy here

#bbc ghosts #ghosts bbc #the captain #ben willbond #bbc ghosts captain #bbc ghosts headcanon #ghosts headcanon #lgbt #lgbtq #gay #mlm

232 notes · View notes

carnegiemuseumnaturalhistory · 4 years ago

Text

The History of Holiday Ghost Stories

The song Jingle Bells, chestnuts roasting over an open fire, various types of poultry in assorted shrubbery, and horror stories. One of those things doesn’t quite seem to fit with the others, but “scary ghost stories and tales of the glories” have been an integral part of Christmas celebrations for certain cultures for centuries.

But how did something that is now much more associated with the fall and Halloween end up a quintessential (but quickly diminishing) Christmas tradition? Like so many of the things we now celebrate as part of the season, we must look past the symbols used in Christmas celebrations to earlier Pre-Christian times.

Oliver Cromwell may have been hinting about the less-than-Christian origins of some holiday traditions whenever he and the Puritans created an ordinance in 1644—following the outcome of the English Civil War—which abolished the Feast Day of Christmas (as well as Easter and Whitsun, another name for the festival of Pentecost). Shops were to remain open and soldiers would patrol the streets and seize food being prepared for a feast on those days. From 1659 to 1681, the Massachusetts Bay Colony in what would eventually become the United States banned the celebration of Christmas with the penalty being a five shilling fine—approximately three days wages for a skilled tradesman.

Many modern Christmas traditions are a conglomeration of many cultural and spiritual beliefs throughout time; the Yule Log as well as Yule season are often linked to Pre-Christian celebrations of the Solstice in pagan traditions.

The Winter Solstice (also known as hiemal solstice, hibernal solstice, or simply midwinter) is caused by the angle of the Earth’s axis reaching its maximum tilt away from the sun. This event causes the seasons on Earth, with the solstices falling on the points where the axis points directly towards and away from the Sun. In the Southern Hemisphere, this is reversed, with the Winter Solstice falling in June; making surfing at Christmas an appealing thought.

During the Winter Solstice, it was tradition to sit around the fires built to ward off the darkness with the Yule Log and celebrate the rebirth of the sun. Humans haven’t changed much biologically in several thousand years, and a person’s physical reaction to a harmless scare—elevated heart rate, endorphin rushes caused by adrenaline—is still essentially the same. The reaction to hearing a ghost story around the burning Yule fire became a tradition; a feeling of warmth and group bonding at what was the coldest and darkest time of year.

This tradition lasted for several hundred years until Christmas celebrations were halted by the Puritans. Despite many of the traditions making a resurgence during the Restoration (1660-circa 1688), the damage had essentially been done. Along with reducing of the importance of Feast Days during the Enlightenment and Industrial Revolution, many Christmas traditions were now seen as old-fashioned.

This abruptly changed in 1843 with the publication of Charles Dickens’ A Christmas Carol. While there was a small resurgence of Christmas Spirit taking place as a counter to the dehumanizing aspects of the Industrial Revolution, Charles Dickens was able to capture this burgeoning movement in the text. His story helped reinvigorate Christmas traditions, with a focus on the more humanistic aspects of the holiday—global peace and forgiveness, filial love, and goodwill towards humanity through good works. This caught the Victorian imagination and spawned an entire set of Christmas works by Dickens, including The Chimes, The Cricket on the Hearth, The Battle of Life, and The Haunted Man and the Ghost’s Bargain. Most of these works revisit themes about the crushing effects of capitalism and redemption that are first found in A Christmas Carol (though interestingly enough, never quite approached the commercial success of his first work in the genre).

From there, A Christmas Carol (or, as it may be thought of, a holiday ghost story) has become a cultural phenomenon. “Bah Humbug,” the phrase most often representing Ebenezer Scrooge, has entered the popular lexicon; the figure of Father Christmas helped inspire Thomas Nast during his creation of the modern portrayal of Santa Claus; and the story has been retold in film no less than 27 times since 1901—most importantly immortalized as a cultural touchstone in 1992 by the Muppets.

So this Yule season, relax in the glow of the Yule log, friends, and family and perhaps consider something to send a chill down your spine that isn’t necessarily from the weather. It is one of the oldest traditions after all. And as Dickens reminds us, “let us keep Christmas well.”

Andrew Huntley is a Gallery Experience Presenter in CMNH’s Life Long Learning Department. Museum staff, volunteers, and interns are encouraged to blog about their unique experiences and knowledge gained from working at the museum.

#Carnegie Museum of Natural History #Holiday Ghost Stories #Holidays #Ghost Stories #A Christmas Carol #Super Science

60 notes · View notes

ayamari-no-goshi · 4 years ago

Text

Verboten 10 | (T)

ff.net | AO3

Fandom: Danny Phantom (DP)

Summary: AU. When Danny was five years old, he went missing for 2 weeks. In the years that follow, his family tried to make sense of what happened, only for the truth to be discovered years later.

Warnings: rated T for violence, mentions of death, language. Be prepared for some very weird things

Chapter warning: child kidnappings mentioned

Parings: Danny/Sam

Notes: originally uploaded to Ff.net. Cross-posted to AO3 and tumblr. This fic is very heavily inspired by folklore surrounding mysterious wilderness disappearances

Chapter 10

Frostbite was close lipped on their journey to Clockwork's lair, at least in regards to the mysterious and ancient ghost. He instead talked to Danny about different aspects of ghosts and their realm. Although the yeti ghost wanted Danny to return home, he wanted Danny to know about the realm as a precaution, and Danny reluctantly agreed.

As they passed by some of the floating islands, buildings, and doors, Frostbite would occasionally mention which of his allies or neutral acquaintances lived there. It was all so strange. There were buildings which looked like they were from ancient Greece or Rome, while there was another which looked like a modern library. Frostbite explained the form of the lair was heavily influenced by its ruler. A ghost needed to be a fairly strong to be able to create such a large lair, and while the architecture often reflected what the ghost knew while they were alive, it wasn't a necessity.

Eventually, a dark and imposing clock tower could be seen in the distance. "I guess that's the place?" Danny questioned as he tried to get a better look at it.

"It is. When we arrive, it is unlikely I will be able to go in with you."

"Wait, what?" Danny hadn't expected this would be a one on one meeting. From the way Frostbite spoke, he figured someone would be guarding him, at least until he had answers.

The older ghost gave him a sheepish look. "The invitation was only for you. Unless Clockworks invites me in, I will do no more than ferry you to the location and wait for your return."

"Is this Clockwork really so scary?"

"He is far more powerful than I am, so I have no desire to anger him. There are stories regarding how no foe has been able to sway or harm him."

"So you're just going to allow a teenager to go to meet a ridiculously powerful ghost by himself? That's just great. What if he incinerates me or something?"

Frostbite just chuckled. "I do not think you have anything to fear, unless you try to attack him. Clockwork is not known for going out of his way to do damage to someone."

"Great. That makes me feel so much better." Danny's sarcasm was lost on Frostbite.

…

A short time later, Frostbite's sleigh landed in front of the clock tower. Upon closer inspection, the building appeared to be made of a dark gray stone with large wooden doors. Thankfully, there was a small amount of land surrounding the building, so Danny wasn't worried about falling to his death. After being coaxed out of the sleigh, Danny, feeling incredibly self-conscious, knocked on the door.

The door opened, but he didn't see anyone when he cautiously stepped inside. He half expected the door to slam behind him, but instead, it remained open until he started moving towards the only thing in the room, a stair case. Once he reached it, the door slowly closed on its own.

While uneasy, he wasn't exactly scared. Whoever this Clockwork was, he was at least somewhat courteous.

After reaching the top of the stairs, he found himself in a large room filled with gears, pendulums, and what appeared to be mirrors set within large gears. However, after a closer inspection, the mirrors showed shadowy images which didn't appear to be him or anything in the room.

"Do you see anything interesting?" a pleasant voice asked from somewhere behind him, making him jump. He sheepishly spun around to find a ghost with blue skin, red eyes, and a clock pendulum in his chest watching him. The ghost initially appeared maybe around thirty, but after a few moments shifted to appear much older.

"I'm sorry! I shouldn't have looked." Danny wasn't exactly certain why, but he felt almost as if he was being caught in the act by a favorite relative. There was something familiar and personable about this ghost, even when his form shifted again. This time, his appearance was childlike.

The ghost chuckled as he approached. "It is quite alright. Most of my visitors have been drawn to them." He gestured towards the closest one, and the images suddenly became more vivid. It was almost as if it was playing some sort of video. "As you have guessed, I am Clockwork, master of time. I am able to see all events which may or may not come to pass." His form again shifted.

"Err… Frostbite said you wanted to see me?"

"Correct. Beings such as yourself have only shown up a handful of times over the millennia, and each time one does, it often brings great change."

"But what am I? Am I dead? Am I alive?"

The ghost gave a gentle chuckle. "You are still very much alive. You're just able to access the power of your soul, which is not usually feasible while one is still has a living body. However, this is not possible unless you are able to resist the pull of this realm."

"What does that mean?" Although Danny was relieved to know he was classified as living, he was still deeply confused by everything. "Does it deal with what Frostbite explained regarding what could trigger the change?"

"Yes. This world is similar to the human concept of limbo. It is a place where some souls wander until they are lead to the Evermore – true death. But, it is still a world of the dead, and the living are not meant to be here. It has defenses to prevent the dead from crossing back into your world, which unfortunately can cause the wayward human to become a denizen."

"However, there is more to it than that," Clockwork continued as he gestured to the mirror. Strange images flickered within it. "Over millennia, this realm became corrupted. The guides, beings unique to this realm, which used to help guide those wayward souls, are all but gone now. No longer being able to find true rest, souls that remain here often become tainted and become ghosts. Many can spread that taint as well, and some use that to create others like themselves."

"You're telling me that's why my classmates were abducted?" A cold chill ran through him as his body decided to return to his human form.

"Not in this case." Clockwork gestured to the mirror as an image flickered to the first ghost Danny and his friends saw. After a moment, another ghostly figure who suspiciously resembled Mikey came into view. "In Youngblood's case, whether or better or worse, wanted a companion more than anything else. This isn't an isolated case. However, many abductors have a far more insidious reason." The ghost turned to face him. "The living have an energy that the dead do not. It's probably easiest to refer to it as vitality. Returning to your previous question, you still produce that energy so it is safe to say you are still alive."

"Alright. So what makes that so appealing? Does it give, I don't know, special abilities?"

"Some believe so. Others believe vitality will help them restore some of the memories commonly lost upon death."

"That's so messed up," Danny replied after mulling over the information. "The memory loss thing, does that happen to everyone? Will it happen to me? Will I…?" He didn't want to admit it out loud, but he was worried he might become a danger to his friends and family.

The ghost, who was back in his child form, gave him a soft smile. "As long as you're alive, you don't need to worry. As for death, most souls do not come to this realm, but instead find their way to the Evermore. Also, as long as the soul is strong, it can avoid being tainted by this realm and become a force of good or of balance. Those which do have no need to seek out and harm the living." It was impossible for Danny to hide the relief on his face, which made Clockwork chuckle.

"Now let us move on to some of your other concerns. You want to know if you can return home and how you became like that, correct?" When Danny nodded, Clockwork again gestured to the mirrors. An image of a young Danny berry picking with his aunt and sister. The view changed to show a creature, some other ghost, peering at them from behind a tree. After Danny caught sight of it, his family members disappeared from the scene. "This is where your journey began. As you saw earlier, a distraction from this realm can accidently pull you into it."

"What is that thing?" Danny felt uneasy as he watched the ghost beckon to his younger self which somehow triggered his body to switch forms again. There was something about the ghost which made him unsettled. It looked humanoid with dark skin, but did not have any facial features. "I don't remember seeing it, but then again, I don't remember much from that."

Clockwork stared at the image for another moment before glancing at Danny. "Most of them no longer have names. We call them 'Recruiters', but it was believed they had been destroyed several centuries ago. They worked for the previous king."

"Wait, king? You guys have a king? And what do you mean they were supposed to be destroyed?"

"We once did," Clockwork replied as he shifted to his elderly form. "He waged war against this realm and yours, so he was sealed away. The members of his court, made mostly of purposely modified ghosts, were either destroyed or sealed. It appears someone has resurrected those modification techniques."

Danny was about to ask another question when the images in the mirror caught his attention again. It showed the ghost, the Recruiter, examining him. It then handed him something which looked like some type of candy. After young Danny ate it, the Recruiter watched him for a while before attempting to grab him. When the attempt failed, young Danny tried to escape.

Images flashed as his younger self ran away from the Recruiter. Eventually, the boy collapsed outside of what appeared to be some sort of wall and began to cry as a faint glow started to surround him. As the Recruiter again appeared in the scene, it was blasted away by a strange beam. The boy looked up to see Plasmius staring curiously at him.

"Wow… so Plasmius actually wasn't lying when he said how he first met me."

"For the most part, no," Clockwork replied as he raised his staff, which caused the scene to shift to the inside of Plasmius' mansion. The older ghost had given Danny more food and was watching him carefully. "Plasmius did accidently find you, but if he hadn't provided you with more food from this realm, you may have been able to return home as a fairly normal human, albeit with form of minor psychic ability. However, he saw potential in you and became interested."

The teenager was silent for a moment as he continued to watch the images. After Plasmius took him back to the human world, the scene shifted to show him a little older. With a jolt, he realized it was when he disappeared the second time. Instead of the Recruiter, it was Plasmius who beckoned him. The ghost didn't do anything other than talk and play with his younger self. However, Danny was showing evidence of ghostly traits again. "He wanted to make sure he was right, didn't he?"

"Yes. Plasmius has grand ambitions in this realm. He wants power and having someone like you at his side would be a great boon. However," Clockwork froze the image and somehow zoomed into a spot in the background. There was a Recruiter watching them, "you were not alone. This is troubling."

"You mentioned earlier you are able to see all possible events, didn't you? So why do you seem so surprised?"

The ghost, still in his elderly form, wore a tenebrous expression. "While my abilities allow me to see any number of possibilities, it can be difficult to sort through the amount of information I receive. It is also possible, though unlikely, someone powerful was able to block them from my abilities. However, now that I am aware of the concern, it is much easier to locate similar events." The ghost shifted to his child form. "I had wanted to send you home while you adjust to the changes in your body, but you may need trained first."

Uncertain how to respond while the ghost took a few moments to think, Danny turned back to the mirror. It was no longer showing images of his past. Instead, it was flickering through a multitude of scenes at a blinding rate. For a second, he thought he saw Sam and Tucker, but the image changed before he could be certain. Some of the images seemed to show an army of some sort. Overall, it left him unsettled.

"I believe I will need to let Frostbite into the Clock Tower," Clockwork stated, making Danny jump. "I will need him to spread the word of my discovery, and he has information for both of us."

Moments later, the white furred ghost hurried up the stairs with two of his guards. After taking a moment to collect himself, he bowed towards Clockwork. "I humbly thank you for allowing us into your presence."

"There is no need for that. My abilities and agreement with the Observants force me to remain neutral under most circumstances. As such, I prefer to keep to myself, but sometimes when extraordinary people appear," Clockwork gestured to Danny, "curiosity gets in the way. However, this time, I am glad it did." The ghost brought their attention to the mirrors and showed the Yetis the image of the Recruiter.

Frostbite's shock was quickly replaced by rage. "Who would dare attempt to recreate such a vile creature? However, we have unsettling news of our own. The entourage who were escorting the other humans Danny knows home were attacked by the Fright Knight and a horde of Reanimated." When the yeti caught sight of Danny's horrified expression, he gave a small smile. "Fear not. Pandora herself stepped into assist my men and drove them back; not even the Fright Knight dares raise his blade to her. Your friends should be arriving home soon." His attention turned back towards Clockwork. "Pandora explained one of her spies caught sight of them shortly before they attacked my men and took it upon herself to intervene. Her ambassadors will request an audience of the counsel within the day."

"As much as I dislike dealing with the Observants, I believe this is necessary," Clockwork agreed. "Whoever is employing the techniques of the old king has been able to exploit the blind spots in my abilities. It also seems as if they are aware of Daniel and what his existence means. They may also be watching Plasmius."

"This is most troubling."

"Uh, excuse me, but I have no idea what's going on here," Danny interrupted. The conversation had lost him some time ago, but he was relieved to hear his friends were safe.

Frostbite gave him a sheepish smile as Clockwork explained, "It appears someone is trying to make a grab for power. The last time this happened, war overtook this realm and spilled into yours."

"That… that doesn't sound good."

"No. Last time, it was only through the power of the Ancients that we were able to defeat the King. If someone has found a way to access his abilities, then it needs to be stopped before catastrophe happens." The yeti's expression was grim as he addressed Clockwork. "So what becomes of Danny? Will he need to remain with us, or can he travel home? Is it even safe for someone like him to return to the human realm?"

"As he is still alive, there is no harm in him returning him. His parents are working on several projects, one of which will provide his home with enough ambient energy to allow his core to remain stable. However, the more I attempt to peer into the future, the more muddled the images become. There is definitely interference. So, I am uncertain what route will allow the most favorable outcome." He shifted to his adult form. "So, Daniel, I leave the choice to you."

"You said that whoever attacked my friends know about me?"

The time ghost nodded. "Yes. Since you can traverse both worlds without ill effects, your abilities would be of great interest. You could remain here and train with Frostbite…"

"But I would not be able to guarantee your safety as today proved," the Yeti admitted.

"There is also a concern the Observant and the Counsel will not approve of your existence," Clockwork continued. "You could return home, but you would be forced to develop your abilities on your own. However, you would be much safer there for the time being."

Danny looked down at his hands and momentarily stared at the faint glow surrounding them. "Am I a danger to my family and friends if I go home?"

"No, but it is possible to make them more open to this world. If we are unable to prevent our enemies from gaining power, it may cause them to be targeted again."

"Is it okay if I take some time to think about it?"

"Of course. Take all of the time you need."

=========================================

Note: The Evermore is something within DP lore. It was mentioned in a video Butch Hartman released which expanded upon more information regarding the different residents.

Clockwork's mention of limbo and soul guides. To my knowledge, the concept of Limbo is most prevalent to Christians (particularly Catholics). This is a place in between life and Heaven/Hell. In previous Catholic tradition, Limbo is the place where unbaptized souls go upon death, and there were circumstances which could help those souls find rest (the Catholic Church modified its views on Limbo in 2007). Some people say Limbo is also the realm of the fairies, elves, and any creature/entity which lives in another realm that is not heaven or hell. There is a similar concept in Greek mythology which was referred to as the Asphodel Fields/Meadows.

And for completion sake, Purgatory is not the same as Limbo. Purgatory (also per Catholic tradition) is a place of fiery cleansing after death. It's a temporary stop as once the cleansing is completed, the soul moves on to Heaven. While it is not mentioned much, Purgatory is still considered to exist.

Soul guides, also called psychopomps, are creatures responsible for guiding the deceased souls to the afterlife. The belief in them is ancient. Depending on tradition, they can be anything or look like anything. There's even some thought that certain entities known to spirit away people, faeries come to mind, may have derived from this concept. A great representation of this are the Alebrijes found in Mexican traditions (they were recently featured in the movie "Coco.")

The Recruiters are kind of based of off "Shadow People" mixed in with other legends like "Tall Man" spirit and Stick Men/Indians seen in some First Nation lore. Shadow People are a weird phenomenon, even for the paranormal. True Shadow People are not usually considered to be ghosts, but no one is exactly certain of what they are. The inter-dimensional theory often pops up with them because they don't seem to act like "normal ghosts" and are usually considered dangerous. They are reported to negatively influence and harm humans. There are some reports of them attempting to steal people.

Stick Men/Indians and the Tall Man are described as creatures similar to that of the modern tale of Slenderman, and they are again said to either negatively influence or take children. I used these descriptions due to some supposed reports from missing and found children saying creatures of similar descriptions wanted to take them with them, but they didn't meet the correct criteria.

Also, regarding Clockwork's powers… per the show, he "knows everything." However, it would very difficult of an entity to be able to take and absorb all of the information he gets at a time. So, my mind is viewing it as if he's skimming the majority of the information, which could allow events in the background to get missed.

9 notes · View notes

kemetic-dreams · 4 years ago

Photo

The Legend (and Truth) of the Voodoo Priestess Who Haunts a Louisiana Swamp

he Manchac wetlands, about a half hour northwest of New Orleans, are thick with swamp ooze. In the summer the water is pea-green, covered in tiny leaves and crawling with insects that hide in the shadows of the ancient, ghost-gray cypress trees. The boaters who enter the swamps face two main threats, aside from sunstroke and dehydration: the alligators, who mostly lurk just out of view, and the broken logs that float through the muck, remnants of the days when the swamp was home to the now-abandoned logging town of Ruddock.

But some say that anyone entering the swamp should beware a more supernatural threat—the curse of local voodoo queen Julia Brown. Brown, sometimes also called Julie White or Julia Black, is described in local legend as a voodoo priestess who lived at the edge of the swamp and worked with residents of the town of Frenier. She was known for her charms and her curses, as well as for singing eerie songs with her guitar on her porch. One of the most memorable (and disturbing) went: "One day I’m going to die and take the whole town with me."

Back when Brown was alive at the turn of the 20th century, the towns of Ruddock, Frenier, and Napton were prosperous settlements clustered on the edge of Lake Pontchartrain, sustained by logging the centuries-old cypress trees and farming cabbages in the thick black soil. The railroad was the towns' lifeline, bringing groceries from New Orleans and hauling away the logs and cabbages as far as Chicago. They had no roads, no doctors, and no electricity, but had managed to carve out cohesive and self-reliant communities.

That all changed on September 29, 1915, when a massive hurricane swept in from the Caribbean. In Frenier, where Julia lived, the storm surge rose 13 feet, and the winds howled at 125 miles an hour. Many of the townsfolk sought refuge in the railroad depot, which collapsed and killed 25 people. Altogether, close to 300 people in Louisiana died, with almost 60 in Frenier and Ruddock alone. When the storm cleared on October 1, Frenier, Ruddock, and Napton had been entirely destroyed—homes flattened, buildings demolished, and miles of railway tracks washed away. One of the few survivors later described how he’d clung to an upturned cypress tree and shut his ears against the screams of those drowning in the swamp.

The hurricane seemed to come out of nowhere. But if you listen to the guides who take tourists into the Manchac swamp, the storm was the result of the wrath of Julia Brown. Brown, they say, laid a curse on the town because she felt taken for granted—a curse that came true when the storm swept through on the day of her funeral and killed everyone around. On certain tours, the guides take people past a run-down swamp graveyard marked "1915"—it’s a prop, but a good place to tell people that Brown’s ghost still haunts the swamp, as do the souls of those who perished in the hurricane. The legend of Julia Brown has become the area's most popular ghost story, spreading to paranormal shows and even Reddit, where some claim to have seen Brown cackling at the edge of the water.

After I visited the swamp earlier this year and heard Julia Brown's story, I got curious about separating fact from fiction. It turns out Julia Brown was a real person: Census records suggest she was born Julia Bernard in Louisiana around 1845, then married a laborer named Celestin Brown in 1880. About 20 years later, the federal government gave her husband a 40-acre homestead plot to farm, property that likely passed on to Julia after her husband’s death around 1914.

Official census and property records don’t make any mention of Brown’s voodoo work, but that's not especially surprising. A modern New Orleans voodoo priestess, Bloody Mary, told Mental Floss she has found references to a voodoo priestess or queen by the name of Brown who worked in New Orleans around the 1860s before moving out to Frenier. Mary notes that because the towns had no doctors, Brown likely served as the local healer (or traiteur, a folk healer in Louisiana tradition) and midwife, using whatever knowledge and materials she could find to care for local residents.

Brown’s song is documented, too. An oral history account from long-time area resident Helen Schlosser Burg records that "Aunt Julia Brown … always sat on her front porch and played her guitar and sang songs that she would make up. The words to one of the songs she sang said that one day, she would die and everything would die with her."

There’s even one newspaper account from 1915 that describes Brown's funeral on the day of the storm. In the words of the New Orleans Times-Picayune from October 2, 1915 (warning: offensive language ahead):

Many pranks were played by wind and tide. Negroes had gathered for miles around to attend the funeral of ‘Aunt’ Julia Brown, an old negress who was well known in that section, and was a big property owner. The funeral was scheduled … and ‘Aunt’ Julia had been placed in her casket and the casket in turn had been placed in the customary wooden box and sealed. At 4 o’clock, however, the storm had become so violent that the negroes left the house in a stampede, abandoning the corpse. The corpse was found Thursday and so was the wooden box, but the casket never has been found.

Bloody Mary, however, doesn’t think Brown laid any kind of curse on the town. "Voodoo isn’t as much about curses as it is about healing," she says. The locals she has spoken to remember Julia as a beloved local healer, not a revengeful type. In fact, Mary suggests that Julia’s song may have been more warning to the townsfolk than a curse against them. Perhaps Brown even tried to perform an anti-storm ritual and was unable to stop the hurricane before it was too late. Whatever she did, Mary says, it wasn’t out of malevolence. And if she’s still in the swamp, you have less to fear from her than from the alligators.

This story originally ran in 2016.

#vodun #vodoo #julia brown #africanspirituality #african culture #african #africans #louisiana

23 notes · View notes

solsticejcink · 5 years ago

Text

preview - species part one.

the sister cities of ostara and litha are home to a host of species, each with their own unique set of abilities. below, you can read more about each species. a species’ rarity will be noted by their name through stars. 0 stars would mean extinct, while 6 stars would mean they make up a significant portion of the population.

WITCHES ✮ ✮ ✮ ✮ ✮ ✮

witches are spiritual beings who live and thrive in communities called ‘covens’ - although typically communal and made of multiple families, smaller covens aren’t unheard of. their magic doesn’t come from within, but rather from their relationship to nature, to the old gods, and through the strength of their coven. most witches have a singular, refined talent such as potion making or spellwork, but almost all of them can access basic arcane knowledge. since witches magic isn’t inherent, humans can study to become one, and most witches need a vessel through which to create magic - such as herbs, charms, wands or incantations.

witches appear human, and as such have a human lifespan.

witches can access the following abilities:

spell casting the ability to cast spells, typically through words, although some witches may be able to do so through hand gestures.

telekinesis the ability to move objects through mental power.

scrying the ability to locate items or people through an object, typically a crystal ball.

potion brewing the enhanced ability to create magical concoctions.

hex casting the ability to place temporary curses on others.

blood magic the ability to perform rituals through blood, often times allowing the user to manipulate the substance.

ALCHEMISTS ✮ ✮ ✮ ✮

the ‘scientists’ of the magic community, alchemists follow a unique method of science focused on the transformation of matter, following one golden rule: everything must have a give and a take. this ‘magic’ relies on carefully drawn transmutation circles, of which many alchemists get tattoo’d for ease. humans can study and learn the ways of alchemy, but alchemists by blood are known for being stingy with their own personal methods.

alchemists appear human, and as such have a human lifespan. alchemists are hindered by the requirement of a transmutation circle, and the nature of their magic - unlike witches, they cannot create magic out of nothing, and have to work with pre-existing materials.

alchemists can access the following abilities:

transmutation the ability to transform objects or beings into something else completely.

alchemy the ability to utilize all aspects of the science of alchemy.

curse altering the ability to modify curses and hexes - swaps out a person’s curse for a different ailment, a gambling trade.

density manipulation the ability to alter the density of themselves or objects, making them light enough to walk on air or heavy enough to withstand attacks.

PROPHETS ✮

serving as vessels for a higher power, prophets are those with the unique ability to foresee the future, although these visions may not always be clear. some prophets convey their findings through the traditional mediums of art or song, while less artistic prophets find theirs coming to them in cold-sweat dreams and hallucinations. unlike many other species, two prophets cannot conceive another of their kind - instead, prophets are stuck in an endless cycle of reincarnation without retaining past memories - their new form born to the last person to see them before their death. for this reason, many infertile women will seek out aging prophets for a chance to bear a child.

prophets appear human, and as such have a human life-span. unfortunately, as a ‘give and take’ with their ability to have visions of the future, many modern prophets find themselves born with another one of their senses either dulled or completely gone. this can range from hearing disabilities to blindness.

prophets can access the following abilities:

precognition the ability to perceive future events before they happen. many prophets have a ‘trigger’ for this, whether it be art, dreams, emotionally charged situations, etc.

danger intuition the ability to sense threats.

prophecy construction the ability to create prophecies that manipulate events that will happen in the present or future.

accelerated probability the ability to foresee outcomes of decisions.

GHOSTS ✮ ✮ ✮

ghosts are typically spirits who died in gruesome or tragic ways, unfinished with the living world, and clinging in the ‘in-between’. while ostara quickly disposes of any spirits haunting their city, it’s not uncommon to find ghosts floating through litha with muffled moans, bringing chills and a sense of foreboding with them everywhere they go. their desperate cling to life, or upsets over unfinished business often turns their frustration into chaos, while others are sober in the wake of their loss.

ghosts can will a corporeal form to appear, and they will appear as they did right before they died. ghosts can only move on if dealt with by a psychopomp - like a reaper. ghosts can posses others, but rarely are able to fully take over the vessel fully.

cyrokinesis the ability to manipulate coldness and ice.

teleportation the ability to teleport from one location to another.

levitation the ability to float and walk on air.

intangibility the ability to turn into a non-corporeal form.

possession the power to possess bodies of the living.

sonic scream the ability to emit a super-powered scream, can be used as an offensive attack.

DEMONS ✮ ✮

demons do not necessarily have to die to become what they are - any corrupted soul, overrun by evil and greed can find themselves in the process of becoming one. a relatively aggressive ghost that is able to both posses and take over a body can also result in a demon, although this is less common. the most malevolent of all the species, demons thrive on chaos - and their only goal is to create more of their kind. the change is often marred by a sudden, drastic physical change, but demons can usually blend themselves into society - only given away by patches of red skin, black eyes, and jagged wings that will begin to form on their body over time.

demons are technically immortal, but will only survive as long as their body can. they can be mortally wounded, or exorcised out of their body.

rage inducement the power to incite anger and violence in others.

fire manipulation the ability to manipulate and call the element of fire at will.

intangibility the ability to turn into a non-corporeal form.

possession the power to possess bodies of the living.

pain inducement the power to inflict pain on others without physical violence.

HUMANS ✮ ✮

in ostara - humans are a bit of an oddity. poor tourists that find their way into the city usually make it out alive past night fall, falling prey to species with particular appetites or vengeful individuals who remember the age of witch hunts. they are treated the way some would consider flies - they’ll allow you to exist, but at the slightest hint of annoyance, they’ll swat.

in litha - humans are much more common, thanks in part to the academy recruiting college students. tourists aren’t uncommon either, easily enchanted by the simplest display of magic. a small minority of non-student humans live in litha, although they’ve had to learn to be street smart and alert to survive their supernatural neighbors.

humans have no abilities, but with rigorous study, could become a witch or alchemist.

FAMILIARS ✮ ✮ ✮ ✮

familiars are guardian spirits, serving to protect those they are bonded to as well as help heighten their partners powers. born with the ability to transform in between an animal or human form, familiars' animal state is influenced by the person they are tied to, and different familiars forms can represent social status. this form can appear in the dreams of someone who is fated to cross the path of their partner. there are two types of familiars and familiar bonds: legacy and non-legacy. legacy familiars are tied to a bloodline instead of an individual, and can live for multiple centuries, serving an entire family line. non-legacy familiars are tied to a single person, and the relationship tends to be in favor of companionship rather than protection.

familiars lifespan will match to their partners, and legacy familiars can live for multiple centuries. familiar’s are emotionally and physically tethered to their partner, and the breaking of a bond can be incredibly traumatizing.

enhanced senses sight, smell, touch, sound, and taste are all intensified.

animal form the ability to transform into their animal counterpart.

claw retraction the ability to extend and retract claws from one’s hands.

magic amplification the ability to strengthen the abilities of their bonded partner

DRAGONS ✮ ✮ ✮

dragons, the most fearsome guardians of mythos, have decidedly different reputations depending on who you ask. european dragons were solitary creatures, often hot-headed or villainous in nature - often revered for their hoards of treasure and wealth, and born with the innate ability to breathe fire. eastern dragons, however, reigned over bodies of water and were instead associated with power and good fortune. modern dragon-borns found in the sister cities tend to be of a lineage that blends both halves of the myth. unlike many other species that thrive in family units, dragons are considered mainly solitary creatures, and adolescents of the species move out earlier than most. they tend to exist on the fringes of the city, stubborn to the idea of being governed, but are still regarded with high respect. dragons are born with the innate ability to manipulate water or fire, but never both.

dragons have developed a human-esque form over time, but can still be seen with any combo of the following: horns of varying sizes, slitted pupils, small patches of scales, or wings. dragons can live up to 100 years, and their aging process slows once they reach adulthood.

social magnetism the ability to attract or repel others.

fear inducement the ability to provoke irrational fear in others.

wing manifestation the power to develop or form wings.

fire OR water manipulation the ability to control and generate electricity OR ice.

dragon physiology the ability to gain dragon-like features at will.

#solsticejcink #jcink #site buzz #jcink rp

3 notes · View notes

tomeandflickcorner · 5 years ago

Text

Episode Review- The Real Ghostbusters: When Halloween Was Forever

The episode in which we are introduced to what is quite possibly the most iconic villain of the show’s run. And just as well, as it’s certainly the best episode I’ve reviewed so far.

The episode begins on October 29th, a few hours before midnight. Meaning it’s almost the day before Halloween. The Ghostbusters are in the middle of their typical ghost extraction task, catching a small group of small ghosts that are occupying some building somewhere. Once they’ve managed to capture all of the ghosts, they head outside where they are met by Cynthia Crawford, a reporter for the fictional newsgroup UBN News. We get a brief moment of levity when Cynthia confronts Peter, who apparently claimed this job would be super easy. Peter now denies he ever said such a thing.

It then turns out that this news story had aired a while ago, as Ray is rewatching the clip on the TV back at the Firehouse, as he’d apparently had taped it. And I am thoroughly impressed with the whole TV unit they have set up. It’s complete with speakers, various VCR players and the like. I readily admit I don’t remember the 80s that well, as I was a toddler through the latter half of the decade. But did they normally have displays this sizable back then? Or are we just supposed to chalk this up to the fact that Egon and Ray are particularly intelligent people who probably personally manufactured the unit themselves? Either way, the Ghostbusters are discussing how their latest cases seem to be more difficult than they should be. Even busts that should be a walk in the park are putting them through their paces. Ray ends up speculating if it has something to do with Halloween coming up. However, they then notice that Egon is being particularly quiet about the matter, and is barely looking up from his books and maps of the city.

Here, we get a wonderfully done scene where Peter sneaks up on Egon, scaring him out of his trance-like concentration. And then, when Egon still hesitates to confer with the others about what he’s so focused on, Peter forces him to open up by threatening to tell Slimer that there’s a cupcake in Egon’s sock. While this was probably just done to give the audience a good laugh, it really did a great job at demonstrating the overall dynamic between Peter and Egon, reminding us that they’re not just co-workers, but that they’re also friends that go back a bit and can therefore joke around and maintain a friendly banter.

Anyway, Egon proceeds to discuss how the sudden increase of PKE readings around the city seem to coincide with the arrival of some ancient ruins from Ireland, which had been brought to a local museum two weeks ago. He and Ray then begin to discuss the very origins of Halloween, stating the holiday started off in 7th century Ireland as a festival to mark the point in time when nights began to get longer. And that Irish and Scottish immigrants brought those traditions over to America, leading to what we now call Halloween. (All I can say is, bless this episode for delving into educational territory.) Egon goes on to speculate that perhaps these ancient ruins might have some ties to the origins of Halloween, and the Ghostbusters figure it might be advantageous if they head over to inspect these ruins, and perhaps convince the museum curator to keep them locked up until after Halloween. But first, Egon decides to get back at Peter for his earlier attempt at blackmail by slyly telling Slimer that there’s a lollypop in Peter’s sock. Because again, these two are good friends who will sometimes playfully bicker and play jokes on one another.

Unfortunately, the Ghostbusters don’t get the opportunity to investigate the ancient ruins. That very night, two small goblins sneak into the museum where the ruins are being kept and they proceed to draw an infinity symbol on the ruins. The moment the symbol is drawn, the ruins burst open, releasing a formidable looking entity. This, as the goblin chants indicate, is Samhain. While Samhain is actually the name of the Gaelic festival that marked the beginning of winter (which is the festival Egon and Ray were referring to), this entity is basically the physical manifestation of everything it, and its modern-day ‘equivalent,’ represents. Though I probably should mention that, regardless of what this episode suggests, it’s supposed to be pronounced ‘sow-win.’

Upon being freed, Samhain proceeds to fly about the city, gathering up minions. Which triggers a sequence where various inanimate objects become animate. The face of a clock becomes a literal face, and a stone gargoyle comes to life. As well as a bunch of apples that children at some Halloween party are using in a Bobbing for Apples game. I won’t hesitate to say I loved this sequence, as it seemed rather reminiscent of the montages from the movies. Particularly Ghostbusters II, which I’ll review on a later date. But because Samhain’s influence either severed the phonelines or caused the phones themselves to become possessed, The Ghostbusters aren’t alerted to this wave of disturbances until those same two goblins from earlier appear at the Firehouse, where Janine briefly mistakes them for Trick-or-Treaters. Until they blow her back into the wall, revealing that they aren’t children in costumes seeking candy. The Ghostbusters promptly hurry out into the streets to take on the fresh wave of paranormal disturbances all across the city.

Meanwhile, Samhain has taken up perch atop a skyscraper, where he calls out to all the ghosts within the city, beckoning them to come to him. This apparently incudes Slimer, who is forcibly dragged out of the Firehouse, despite his efforts at grabbing onto various objects. Including a lamp that is bolted down to the floor for some reason. Once all the ghosts in the city are gathered around him, Samhain announces his plan to ensure that Halloween never ends, with the world knowing nothing but eternal night. But that’s when Samhain notices Slimer, whom he denounces as a traitor on the grounds that Slimer backed up a little bit. Which seems like a rather strange way to identify someone as a traitor. Likewise, when Samhain states that Slimer has the stench of mortals on him, he immediately concludes that Slimer lives with and helps humans. While he’s not wrong, since Slimer IS the Ghostbuster’s pet ghost and all, wouldn’t the ghosts that haunt buildings that humans occupy also have the stench of mortals on them? Confusing reasoning aside, Samhain orders Slimer to join his army, because if he doesn’t he will pay dearly. The other ghosts proceed to torture Slimer. But in spite of the torment, Slimer still refuses to denounce his allegiance to humans. Which is an impressive display of loyalty from the little green ghost.

Elsewhere, the Ghostbusters are at work at rounding up the ghosts roaming around the streets. And it’s made clear that they’ve got their work cut out for them, as we get a scene where two people duck inside a diner to escape from a pack of ghosts, only to find that the diner’s patrons and staff have already been replaced by ghosts as well. The Ghostbusters soon realize that their watches have all stopped working, signifying that time is no longer moving. As this revelation is sinking in, Samhain himself appears before them, demanding to know why they’re harming his ‘little ones.’ He then proceeds to attack them with black lightning, introducing himself as Samhain. Ray immediately is able to recall that Halloween began as the feast of Samhain, a creature of the night that nobody could stop. The fact that Ray knows about him seemingly impresses Samhain, though he still proceeds to explain his plan to make it an eternal Halloween night, so the ghosts of the world will be free to roam free forever. However, Egon is able to drive him off by shining a flashlight he just happens to be carrying at the entity. Upon being hit with the light from the flashlight, Samhain recoils and retreats.

Seeing Samhain’s reaction to the light gives Egon an idea. Realizing that Samhain, as a creature of the night, hates the light, Egon announces that they can weaken him by simply turning on all the lights in the city. Unfortunately, Samhain apparently anticipated this, as all the lights start to turn off in a citywide blackout. Still, Egon is not deterred and simply decides to come up with an alternative solution. And he starts to head off on his own. Before leaving, he tasks the others to keep Samhain distracted with a frontal assault. So Peter, Ray and Winston slowly make their way up to the roof of the skyscraper where Samhain is waiting, catching various ghosts that block their path as they make their way upwards. Upon reaching the roof, they find themselves face to face with Samhain and his personal army of ghost underlings. But before the Ghostbusters could even try to attack, Samhain reveals that he’s got a weakened Slimer as hostage. He orders the Ghostbusters to lower their weapons, or he’ll proceed to harm Slimer even more. Peter is particularly irritated by the underhanded tactic, stating that he’s the only one who is allowed to pick on Slimer. (Always nice to be reminded that Peter doesn’t really hate Slimer.) Thankfully, Ray gets an idea and shouts out the word ‘pizza.’ Hearing the mention of food gives Slimer the incentive he needs to break free from Samhain’s grasp.

However, even though Slimer is now out of harm’s way, there’s still the issue of Samhain, whose power has grown to the point where night is also falling over Europe, Asia and South Africa, as was indicated by an earlier scene when the Ghostbusters caught a bit of a news broadcast. (Pretty awesome how this is happening on a global scale and it’s not just the city itself that’s in danger.) But that’s when Egon’s plan comes in. He’s managed to gather up a set of spotlights (how he managed to get them isn’t clear) and tricked a pair of ghosts joyriding in a car to move them into position. Once the spotlights are all set up, Egon activates them by wiring them up to the generator in his Proton Pack. The spotlights all shine on Samhain, thereby keeping him weak enough for the Ghostbusters to effectively trap him, despite the best efforts of the ghost minions trying to stop them.

Upon returning to the Firehouse, the Ghostbusters are able to load Samhain into the Containment Unit. Once the entity of Halloween is contained, they are able to observe him inside the Containment Unit with this viewing device they happen to have. As such, they see Samhain is seemingly sitting patiently, as if waiting for something. They speculate that he’d been waiting for years to achieve his goal of securing an eternal Halloween night, so he might be planning to wait a bit longer. Which does set up a bit of foreshadowing that he might be able to figure out how to escape again at some point. But at that moment, the lights in the basement switch off, and the Ghostbusters are alarmed by the sight of a floating Jack-o-Lantern, which resembles Samhain’s head. Although, this turns out to be just a harmless Halloween prank Janine orchestrated with Slimer’s assistance. In response to this, the Ghostbusters seemingly direct a tickle attack against Janine, though we can only speculate this, as we can only hear Janine’s voice over an exterior shot of the Firehouse.

As I said, I really enjoyed this episode, as it was certainly among the better ones of the first season. Though it was not without flaws. Of course, those flaws were animation errors that had nothing to do with the actual story. For instance, there’s a scene when the Ghostbusters are running down the street but are drawn rather silly. Particularly Egon, who looks incredibly goofy. Later on, when Egon is heading off to set up his spotlight plan, the animation staff accidently drew a second Egon where Peter was supposed to standing. Something similar happens a bit later, where they accidently drew Peter in an aerial shot instead of Egon. But apart from errors like that, it’s a solid episode. Even though I’m still wondering about one thing. It’s established that Samhain has been sealed away in those ancient runes since the 7th Century. So who exactly sealed him in there in the first place? Can we get that story, please?

(Click here for more Ghostbusters reviews)

#the real ghostbusters #rgb episode review #ghostbusters franchise

2 notes · View notes

rassilon-imprimatur · 6 years ago

Text

A Guide to “A Bloody (and Public) Domaine,” my contribution to Faction Paradox: The Book of the Enemy

Faction Paradox: The Book of the Enemy was released by Obverse Books in January 2018 (already over a year ago, sheesh), and it included my first published short story, A Bloody (and Public) Domaine. Last March, Andrew Hickey published a list of all the references to other stories (Faction, Doctor Who, or otherwise) in his Book of the Enemy story on his blog. Fellow Book of the Enemy contributor and good egg Nate Bumber followed suit with a rundown of references in his wonderful story, and the powerhouse that is Niki Haringsma has done the same with The Book of the Peace.

I’ve had a fairly rough year beside really struggling to find any merit in my Book of the Enemy and Book of the Peace stories (a writer really is his own worst critic), but finally felt the gumption to dive in! This is a mix of some (not all) of the references in my story, as well as just some general commentary. I’ll be making a similar post for my Book of the Peace and connecting Dossier material next!

Obviously, spoilers ahead. You should probably have read the story first. If you haven’t and still read through this, please purchase the book, available on the Obverse site! I’m not going through everything, just giving a little bit of commentary.

But first let me say, I will be forever grateful to the book’s editor Simon Bucher-Jones (@thebrakespearevoyage-blog), for taking such a big chance on me with this story, dealing with a rookie like me, and letting me play in his sandbox. An absolute gem of a human being.

Enjoy!

“The black lessens, crumbles, an Empire sky of temporal red focuses.” A nod to the Eleven-Day Empire and my own assertion of the typical “look” of a Faction alter-time realm, the sky color taken from the Empire’s appearance in the Faction Paradox comic.

“EXT: THE SHADOW SPIRE... (very Dr. Caligari meets Trying Too Hard).” I’m going to save most of what Auteur and his home Shadow Spire are references to for my Book of the Peace post, but, as a hint, basically picture a crumbling lighthouse as pencilled by the Doctor Who Magazine comic strip legend John Ridgeway... nudge nudge, wink wink.

Gideon exists as little more than the audience of Auteur’s madness (and to die at the end), but I had fun sketching out this character. He’s a member of the Faction who doesn’t care that he is, a renegade Homeworlder that just had nowhere else to go. I think of all the possible characterizations of various Faction members, the idea of a member of the Houses rushing into the ideology they don’t believe in, embracing the aesthetic because they have no choice, is my favorite. Gideon has more recently received something of a second life in White Canvas by James Wylder.

This story is set definitively before the Eleven-Day Empire’s destruction in The Faction Paradox Protocols. I felt this was the safer choice given the scope of the full anthology. I went the “definitely after the Eleven-Day Empire’s death” route in my Book of the Peace story.

“A few Loa, smears of age as twisted as the Spire, swarm the peak like vultures.” Key to Faction Paradox lore and a rather damning example of the Faction’s appropriation of Haitian voodoo, the term “loa” (spirits) refer to the alter-time structures and temporal processes the Faction claim to worship. I have always interpreted them as the familiar gobbledygook we’d hear as “time orbits” or “temporal loops” from the Doct-AHEM-a certain time traveler, but from the Faction’s POV, very much alive. Which POV is accurate? That’s up to you.

“A phonograph, straight out of Hammer, operating diligently on a shard of glittering sapphire.” Hammer Film Productions’ “Hammer Horror,” naturally.

“Godfather Morlock’s Personal Record, kept on Phonograph.” Morlock is a major character in Faction lore, appearing in The Book of the War and the BBV Faction Paradox Protocols. He comes across as something of a creepy Victorian taxidermist and scientist, with unknown plans for the Faction and the War. Recording his musings on a phonograph is a reference to Dr. Jack Seward from Bram Stoker’s Dracula.

Morlock’s account of Vlad the Impaler and the Celestis is all from The Book of the War, an earlier Faction Paradox use of the historic figure that rather interestingly asserts he can’t be Dracula. Believe it or not based on this story, I actually hate when modern Dracula adaptations or remakes try to make him Vlad directly.

Mention of the Impaler’s “history tangling with the Incremental Effect,” is a reference to the Iris Wildthyme novella The Found World, published in Iris Wildthyme and Friends Investigate, one of my favorite Iris collections. You’ll actually see a lot of crossing with Miss Wildthyme in my stories. I’ve always felt the two series shared a fascinating relationship and rather love what wonderful recontextualization can happen when you view them as partners in crime as opposed to rivals or strangers.

The “woman in a black dress and porcelain skin” is Lilith, and is, perhaps obviously, Lolita, the true villain of the series. More on her later.

The timeline Morlock describes, a “What If Dracula Won?” scenario, starts as a soft reference to Kim Newman’s Anno Dracula novels before literally launching into space to become a reference to Hideyuki Kikuchi’s Vampire Hunter D series.

“They embraced the flesh and blood and were proudly organic, with none of the clinical and pristine mathematics of the Ships of the Great Houses.” A lot of detail is often given to how the Great Houses despise their organic nature, and we know that the enemy have timeships of some fashion if we take Lolita’s word in Lawrence Miles’ Interference-interlude Toy Story as gospel.

The stuttered “Ghost Point” is the period in the early 21st century where mankind’s limitless potential ground to a halt, effectively killing the advanced civilization humanity should have been. An interestingly important part of the series lore.

“Plus, Morlock can baise lui-même on a candlelit evening.” He can fuck himself. My dear friend Liria has very happily and comfortably let me know that my French is absolutely atrocious. I merely look to The Adventuress of Henrietta Street and hold my head high for maintaining a Faction Paradox tradition.

I don’t know why the VHS tapes are “crumbling like mouldering Metsovone” because I swear I wrote that they were “crumbling like mortar” when sending my draft in. Either a) Simon has hidden a secret message throughout the entire book, b) I’m losing my mind, changed it and forgot it, or c) I’ve been infected by the either the enemy or the Houses in an attempt to replace my account of things with Grecian dairy. It is a more creative metaphor.

The “Homeworlder Observer Effect” is just a term given to the Faction Paradox assertion in The Book of the War and The Cosmology of the Spiral Politic that the Great Houses literally force potential into reality by merely observing (while I’m taking cues and terminology from the loose concept scattered throughout the works of Lance Parkin, Kate Orman, and Jon Blum, most notably the unwritten novel Mentor, where an insane Time Lord could literally observe his own will and madness into reality). This plays a major part in my Book of the Peace story as well, so I’ll talk a bit about it there.

I was a very late addition to the Book of the Enemy’s team, so literally any perceived intelligence and coalescence with my story’s metafictional take on Dracula and the rest of the book’s metafictional take on nearly every example of global literature and imagination is all Simon’s brilliance and the genius of the other contributors. I’ve probably shared a total of three words with anyone else in the book other than Nate. Simon turned all of this into a wonderful, organic unit, and it makes me absolutely proud to be a part, even if I’m still rather embarrassed by my contribution. Give them all the credit!

“Mina Harker,” the inarguable and objective hero of Stoker’s Dracula. Van Helsing who?

“Brides of Dracula.” Hammer made exactly three good Dracula movies, and this is one of them, despite not actually having Dracula in it. It’s pretty much a feature length “Look How Badass Peter Cushing Is As Van Helsing, Guys.”

“God’s gaze was nowhere near Bedfordshire that night.” As seen in The Book of the War’s superb take on Dronid (an element of the infamous serial Shada), things that remain unobserved by the Great Houses, either by choice or design, tend to become rather unhappy and miserable places (to put it lightly).

“Not quite the discrete puncture marks of legend” is a line said by Alan Moore’s take on Mina in The League of Extraordinary Gentlemen. I then realized her crimson scarf could be seen as a reference to the comic as well, but I was actually intending to give a nod to the definitive Edward Gorey illustration.

“Something cruel, built by invaders of metal and spite, digging too deeply and too greedily into Earth’s crust.” An absolutely subtle and completely obscure reference to another Peter Cushing film.

“A History wrapped tightly into a coil of absence, locked in the rock and dark of the planet.” No comment other than a friendly reminder that the caldera, the lodestone of the structure of History, is described as an “absence” in The Book of the War, later clarified to be a “singularity” in Lawrence Burton’s Against Nature, invoking familiar thoughts of the mythic Eye of Harmony...

“The aliens were rejected by that History, blown to smithereens, left to die in the streets and in their echoing control rooms.”

“Because he’s fucking Dracula. He’s not some evil god, or conquering demon. He’s a parasite, torn between trying to leech off society’s elite and building a goddamn harem.” Dracula is absolutely one of the greatest villains in all English literature but he is also absolutely abhorrent and literally every attempt to romanticize or “Badass” him into anything other than a diseased and rotting rapist need to show themselves out.

“Lilith” again. A terrifying revelation in the Faction Paradox series is that the War between the enemy and the Great Houses is a distraction from the real threat to the universe. Her. This has, naturally, spurred theorizing and discussion over the years about whether or not Lolita created the enemy. That’s naturally what this story is implying, but this story is also a stapled together mess crafted by a mad Homeworlder. Lolita seemed very concerned about the enemy in her first appearance in Toy Story...

My interpretation of my story (and The Book of the Enemy as a whole) is that the enemy has so many identities and timelines and possibilities and metafictional infections that it has nonsense like this written around it as a sort of defense mechanism. Auteur’s bizarre narrative is an identity and story to be used as a drifting shield, a history the Houses could nuke to nothing and still leave the enemy happy and safe to continue Warring.

The “Very Fabric” is a cheeky nod to the “Very Fabric of Time and Space” from the Iris Wildthyme side of the universe, first seen in Paul Magrs’ Mad Dogs and Englishmen.

“’Yssgaroth,’ she hissed, her tongue sliding through her razor teeth behind her mask, ‘the Taint which boils within you.’” The Yssgaroth first appeared in The Pit and were always meant to be a retcon and redefinition of the vague history and lore of the Vampires seen in 1980′s State of Decay. This approach was massively improved by Interference and The Book of the War (though I still assert Philip Purser-Hallard’s Predating the Predators is probably the definitive take on the bastards).

“Queen Charlotte” was Lolita’s disguise and historical role in the Faction Paradox Protocols. The audios and other stories such as Hickey’s Head of State (and, I suppose, this one right here) show that Lolita takes on these “acting roles” throughout history. “Lady Waki” at first glance may, understandably, be seen as a misspelling of her role of Lady Wakai from The Book of the War, but “Waki” is actually the term for the antagonist/villain performance in Japanese “Noh” musical theatre.

The blood of the Earth is the same “green pus” from Inferno, later implied to be the Yssgaroth taint in Interference’s assertion that Earth is built around an Yssgaroth bolthole. So what, is the Earth somehow a link to the centre of History, or an Yssgaroth bolthole? Can it possibly be both?

Yes.

“A new kind of History.” The literal definition of the enemy in The Book of the War and Lolita in BBV Faction audios.

“Not like he has a copyright.” Hence the “Public Domaine” of the title. You are reading the work of a comedic genius. Though, the spelling of “Domaine” was Simon’s idea and I like it much better.

Biodata looking like silver threads pops up a lot in what I write and I completely blame Kate Orman and Jon Blum’s seminal Unnatural History. That book changes a man.

And there you have it! I’m still convinced that Simon Bucher-Jones is a wizard, as The Book of the Enemy somehow becoming centered on the idea of the enemy as a meta-fictional infection with dozens upon dozens of cobbled together narratives of myth and fact improves this mess of a story rather drastically, I think.

#Me #Faction Paradox #The Book of the Enemy #Obverse Books #Simon Bucher-Jones #Dracula #Count Dracula #The War in Heaven #Doctor Who

16 notes · View notes

romancatholicreflections · 6 years ago

Photo

30th September >> Sunday Homilies and Reflections for Roman Catholics on the Twenty-Sixth Sunday in Ordinary Time, Year B

Twenty-Sixth Sunday in Ordinary Time

Gospel reading: Mark 9:38-43, 45, 47-48

vs.38 John said to Jesus, “Master, we saw a man who is not one of us casting out devils in your name; and because he was not one of us we tried to stop him.” vs.39 But Jesus said, “You must not stop him; no one who works a miracle in my name is likely to speak evil of me. vs.40 Anyone who is not against us is for us. vs.41 If anyone gives you a cup of water to drink just because you belong to Christ, then I tell you solemnly, he will most certainly not lose his reward. vs.42 But anyone who is an obstacle to bring down one of these little ones who have faith, would be better thrown into the sea with a great millstone round his neck. vs.43 And if your hand should cause you to sin, cut it off; it is better for you to enter into life crippled, than to have two hands and go to hell, into the fire that cannot be put out. vs.45 And if your foot should cause you to sin, cut it off; it is better for you to enter into life lame, than to have two feet and be thrown into hell. vs.47 And if your eye should cause you to sin, tear it out; it is better for you to enter into the kingdom of God with one eye, than to have two eyes and be thrown into hell vs.48 where their worm does not die nor their fire go out.”

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

We have four commentators available from whom you may wish to choose

Michel DeVerteuil :A Trinidadian Holy Ghost Priest, director of the Centre of Biblical renewal . Thomas O’Loughlin: Prof, MRIA, FRHistS, FSA , President of the Catholic Theological Association of Great Britain, Director Studia Traditionis Theologiae, Professor of Historical Theology University of Nottingham NG7 2RD Sean Goan:Studied scripture in Rome, Jerusalem and Chicago and teaches at Blackrock College and is now a Religious Education/Religious Studies teacher at Blackrock College located in Blackrock, Dublin. Donal Neary SJ: Editor of The Sacred Heart Messenger and National Director of The Apostlship of Prayer.

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

Michel DeVerteuil Lectio Divina with the Sunday Gospels www.columba.ie

Textual Comments

Today’s passage is in two sections: – a narrative: verses 38 – 40 – a series of five sayings: verses 41 – 48.

Modern bible shcolarship has shown that the different sections of a gospel passage were often written at different times and their juxtaposition may be a matter of chance. But coming to a passage in faith, we take it that divine inspiration brought the sections together, and therefore look for the inner logic linking them, and also linking the individual sayings. This inner logic is then a Word of God for us.

I suggest the following logic in this passage:

1. The basic theme of the passage is expressed in the three sayings in verses 43 to 48. Using different images they all say that in order to “enter into life” we must from time to time make the painful choice to renounce something that is very dear to us.

2. Making this choice sets us free is two ways:

a) from pettiness, illustrated by contrasting attitudes of the disciple John who is not free and Jesus who is (verses 38-40);

b) from ego-centredness, as a result of which we can give ourselves totally to the cause of the “little ones”

– positively: we are deeply touched by those who show them the smallest sign of compassion, e.g. “give a cup of water”; we affirm that “they will most certainly have their reward (verse 41);

– negatively: we are extremely angry against those who put obstacles which bring them down – “they would be better thrown into the sea with a great millstone round thier necks (verse 42).

Making the connection in this way reminds us that Jesus never gave abstract teachings. His teachings are always his reflections on his personal spiritual journey. Correspondingly, we who receive those teachings see in them the story of his life.

Verse 42 is a precious jewel in that it repudiates conclusively the error of contrasting the “vengeful God” of the Old Testament with the “loving God” of the New. This false opposition has bedevilled Catholic spirituality for many centuries and continues to do so today. Both Testaments reveal the one true God who is passionately committed to the cause of his lowly people. Woe to those who keep them down in any way whatsoever! Far from wanting to “curb his anger” (or asking the Blesseed Virgin Mary to do it for us!) we enter into his anger (as Mary did in her Magnificat).

We must be careful therefore not to “interpret” Jesus’ words in a way which downplays his passion – what our Catholic tradition has called his “righteous indignation”. God’s passionate commitment to the poor spells salvation for us all, even those of us who are oppressors – we will be brought low and so be lifted up.

We must identify the “obstacles” referred to by Jesus, starting form our experience. We think of the various things in the world today which prevent the lowly from realizing their full potential – the lack of material goods, of opportunities for education and health, of credit facilities; the lack of a sense of self-worth, of access to sources of grace, spiritual formation. The “obstacles” can be put by individuals or they can be embedded in the culture (English society recognized recently that it suffers from “institutional racism”). They may be caused by selfishness or by social and economic structures.

Verses 43 – 48 contain dramatic language which we must enter into, getting a feel for the painful choices we must make. We also enter fully into the two possibilities open to us, allowing them to come alive for us – “life” on the one hand, “hell” on the other. Experience (our own or that of people whose lives have touched us) will reveal the meaning of “the fire that does not go out” and “the worm that does not die.”

Prayer Reflection

Lord, we thank you for great moments of grace when we decide to renounce something that is precious in order to be true to a higher value: – take a lower paying job in order to have quality time for our family; – terminate a relationship that is destroying our marriage; – refuse a post in the workplace which would compromise our integrity; – accept that our marriage is destroying us and move on; – lose an election rather than appeal to racism; – take the risk of confronting authority in the Church.

Jesus, says when you make your choice don’t go for the acts of power and miracles. Don’t get caught up by the razzle dazzle.

Before making the decision, it seems impossible, almost like cutting off a hand or a foot or tearing out an eye; but once we make the choice, everything flows spontaneously, we just know that it is better to enter into life crippled or lame or with one eye, rather than continue living in hell, being burnt up by fire that cannot be put out, and eaten by a worm that does not die.

Now we find that we have become free of spirit, we are no longer worried about whether other people are one of us, or whether we are personally popular or influential. As long as the devils of racism, sexism and elitism are driven out, we don’t stop those who are doing it, we know that those who are not against what we stand for are for us. We feel an overwhelming compassion for the little ones of the world, Jesus’ special people, we will do anything to reward those who give them even a cup of water, and feel anger at those who put obstacles which bring them down. .

Lord, we thank you that so often in our time you have sent us someone who was not one of us but cast out the demons which afflicted our community: -Gandhi preached the non-violence of Jesus; – Marxist atheists put us believers to shame in their commitment to the poor; – warring communities in our country were brought to the negotiating table by foreigners; the World Council of Churches committed itself to ecumenism long before our church joined in; – the biblical renewal arose among other Christian churches.

Some people tried to stop them, but you brought them to realize that no one who works a miracle in your name is likely to speak evil against you, and that those who are not against you are for you. Lord, remind us that the poor don’t need long speeches or grand gestures; what they want is to experience that they belong to you and therefore are entitled to have a cup of water to drink.

Lord, we pray that your church throughout the world will not be afraid to renounce the things that give us security, – customs and rituals that have sprung up over the centuries; – large numbers; – beautiful churches; – prestigious health and educational institutions; – the patronage of the powerful.

We pray that once we recognize that any of these things is an obstacle bringing down little ones who have faith, we will not be afraid to throw it into the sea with a great millstone around it. It may be something that is as precious to us as a hand, a foot or an eye, but we must not be afraid to tear it out so that we can enter into the glorious life of being your church, experience your Kingdom here on earth, rather than living far from your presence, burning with desires that can never be satisfied, eaten by the worm of jealousy that never dies.

Lord, we think with great compassion of those who are paying the penalty for wrong choices made earlier in their lives; – parents who were afraid to give up a high lifestyle in order to give time to their children and are now consigned to senior citizens’ homes with no one to visit them; – public figures who compromised their integrity in the search for power and were eventually discarded by the powerful; – those who feel isolated because they neglected their neighbours who were poor. Deliver them from the hell of loneliness and remorse they now live in, the fire that never goes out and the worm that does not die.

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

Thomas O’Loughlin Liturgical Resources for the Year of Matthew www.columba.ie

Introduction to the Celebration

We gather here as a community, but we are not a club. A club is a group of like-minded people who see themselves or their interests as distinctive from others. We are a community whose deepest desires are pursued by every human being of good will. Whoever is seeking to do what is right; whoever is seeking peace; whoever is bearing witness to the truth; whoever is caring for the creation; whoever is helping the poor – with all these we make common cause and, gathered here, we commend them to our heavenly Father.

We desire to accept Jesus’ inclusive vision that all who are not against us are for us, but know that often we fall short of this calling. So now let us reflect on how we live as disciples and recognise our need of forgiveness and healing.

The Christian Church is ecumenical in nature

Gospel

Today’s lection is made up of two distinct pieces of Mark’s story: first, the incident of ‘the stranger’ exorcist (vv 38-41); and second, teaching on temptations (vv 42-8). The ‘link’ in Mark’s eyes presumably being the reference to ‘his reward’ in v 40 acting as an introduction to various ways by which one could lose one’s reward. However, neither Matthew nor Luke understood Mark’s linking of the two passages as each responded to the two sections differently from Mark (and one another).

The first section is by far the most interesting as it gives an insight into ‘open’ attitude of Jesus to the whole work of inaugurating the kingdom (a kingdom that for Jesus is characterised by healing, forgiveness, and restoration, rather than the advent of judgement and retribution). This is the very opposite of a sectarian view: you do not have to join the right huddle in order to be part of the coming kingdom of God. This openness is the antithesis of most of the preaching of the time: the people in Qumran believed one had to go off and live in a separate settlement; John the Baptist preached the need to become associated with the special group that was distinguishing itself from the sinful mass of the people by a baptism of repentance; the zealots were preaching a political sectarianism, the Pharisees a distinctiveness of precise adherence to the law. Now Jesus tells people that the Father’s love knows no bounds and extends to everyone who seeks him and, therefore, this stranger is as much a member of the kingdom as the visible group. This openness was too much for the more sectarian minded in the early church: Matthew simply ignores the incident and then, at a suitable point, has Jesus preach the opposite position (Mt 12:30).

The second section is a single piece of teaching expressed through a fourfold repetition of a warning: any amount of physical suffering is better than sin or causing others to sin. It is with these highly visual warnings that Mark rounds off his teaching on discipleship. The examples show how the early church took over the imagery of a place of continual torment, Gehenna (rendered in our translations as ‘hell’), awaiting those who accept a sinful way of life. The most gruesome image is that of ‘where their worm does not die, and the fire is not quenched’ which is a quotation from the final verse of the Book of Isaiah (66:24). In Isaiah, this was read as the final destiny of those who had rejected the reign of God; now the image is invoked as the alternative to discipleship. Placed immediately after the statement about people being rewarded for the smallest acts of mercy (v 40), the combined text has a very particular flavour. On the one hand, the least acts of mercy can bring one into the kingdom of God, but, by contrast, to deliberately lead ‘little ones’ — this refers to the poor and the marginalised, and not simply children — astray leads to death.

Homily Notes

All means inclusive

1. ‘Inclusiveness’ is a modern virtue! We are told of the importance of ‘inclusive language,’ sales people and politicians stress that all references to people must be ‘inclusive’: we are this, we are that, and we are moving forward. As soon as any person or group is not ‘in the loop’ or consulted or mentioned, then there is trouble. Every decision must be inclusive because if someone or group is excluded, then there will be trouble. In this simple world nice people are inclusive and nasty people are exclusive. But this desire to be inclusive is often only a facade, a marketing ploy, or formulaic adherence to political correctness.

2. ‘Exclusiveness’ seems also to be virtue! A chic, expensive restaurant where people want to be seen is an ‘exclusive restaurant’ — ‘exclusive’ is an adjective of quality and approval. ‘An exclusive holiday destination’ is where only a few, ‘the better people’ — just like us, go. In an exclusive resort there will be no riff-raff! An ‘exclusive offer’ for this or that comes with every postal delivery: it means we, just a few of us, are special. Unlike the great-unwashed mass of humanity, we appreciate such an exclusive opportunity and, indeed, being the special sort of people we are, we deserve this exclusive offer. Exclusiveness is even a desirable quality in tinned fish: ‘It is the fish John West rejects that make John West salmon the best.’

3. Exclusion as a tool within society is deeply programmed into us. The tribe is defined by the people who-do-not-belong. Then they become’the others’ and because they are not’with us,’ they are opposite us, and so they can easily be seen as opposed to us, and a threat. The others must be kept in place, they must be controlled, excluded from power, made subject to us and, if necessary, be destroyed. Exclusiveness is ideal as a means of making us united, but then can often destroy us in the conflicts and wars that it makes possible. How many leaders down the centuries who, when they found themselves without any positive vision with which to lead a people, turned to exclusiveness and preached the fear of others, and held sway by the threat of the others.

No altargirl girls wanted here!

4. We can see this demonising of ‘the others,’ the pernicious attitude that only ‘we’ are OK / saved / normal, in the way countries are run (e.g. apartheid), in the way churches are run (e.g. sectarianism), or how some club or association is run (there must be careful ‘screening’ of who joins the residents’ association lest the area’s value be undermined). We see it at work in today’s gospel: someone was doing the same things as the disciples, but because the person was not inside the group, then he was a threat; therefore he was to be stopped.

5. The reply of Jesus clearly shocked them: he who is not against us is for us. This is the very opposite of exclusiveness, this is true inclusiveness — not simply a facade to make an impression. This is the inclusiveness that is based in the infinity of God’s goodness and love, and it is that openness and generosity that we are called to imitate.

6. Sadly, it was just too shocking for the disciples, and the record of the churches ever since has not been very honourable. It shocked the first followers because it was reversed in Matthew (12:30) to become: ‘He who is not with me is against me!’ Matthew wanted a neat little world where people’knew where they stood’ and if they were not with Jesus, then they must be against him. Matthew’s clarity is all too human; Mark’s statement could only come from someone who fully embraced the world with love. And, the church has been closer to Matthew than to Mark: we are very good at noting who does not belong, who should be excluded from communion, who is to be seen as a threat. Equally, we have been very good at dividing up the Body of Christ into exclusivist sections: clergy — lay; those with ‘authority’ and those who are supposed to be led. An inclusive love that sees each Christian, indeed each human, as someone called by God to participate in the growth of the kingdom seems utopian. Yet, it is just such a communion of love that we, as the church, are to model to faction-riven humanity.

7. Today’s gospel calls all of us to examine our behaviour. Does it reflect inclusive love: anyone who is not against us is with us; or, is it that all too human exclusivist vision: anyone who is not with us is against us?

8. In that shift in perspective lies the difference between religious observance as an aspect of human life and true discipleship of Jesus.

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

Sean Goan Let the reader understand www.columba.ie

Gospel

At first glance this collection of sayings do not appear to have a lot in common but in fact everything here is a challenge to those who claim to follow Christ to pay attention to their attitudes and motivation. This is because they have been given an awesome responsibility and they must not presume they are somehow superior to others. Jesus first corrects John for stopping someone doing the work of the kingdom because he is ‘not one of us.’ There is no on place for elitism among his followers and indeed anyone who shows them a simple kindness will be blessed. This means that there is an onus on the disciples to reflect the work and attitudes of their master. Just as he reached out to the sinners and outcasts so must they – failure to do so will result in harsh judgement because they will be undermining the very project they are called to serve. This is why they must avoid anything that would lead them to sin. The true disciple will be the one who knows how to rejoice in the good that is done by whatever source and who also knows that his or her own behaviour can make it hard for others to come to faith. The lesson here is to examine ourselves and to judge no-one else!

Reflection

Two aspects of what might be called worldly thinking are challenged in the first and second readings. It is often the case that people with power and authority will guard it jealously and exercise it in a way which promotes their status more than it actually serves others. It is this behaviour which is shown to be at odds with what God wants in the Book of Numbers. Joshua has to learn that leadership is about service and Moses as a true leader has the humility to teach him. So too in the Letter of James the worldly view that wealth brings freedom to live our lives exactly as we would like is knocked on the head. We are only travellers and we should always live with an eye to our final destination.

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

Donal Neary SJ Gospel Reflections for Sundays of Year B www.messenger.ie/bookshop.

Making a Difference

There’s’ a certain definiteness in the gospel today. Like a team going on a field to win. We are either with Jesus or against him, and this is proved in our way of life. Following Jesus does not necessarily mean being different from others. It means throwing ourselves into the everyday life and needs of people and giving what we can.

It comes out also in public life. We can make our voices heard about issues which deeply effect others, like respecting and protecting life, like ensuring we care for our children in fact as well as in law, legislating wisely about marriage, in how we legislate for the care of our elderly. We may work to free our country from the effects of addiction with drugs and alcohol.

Jesus is asking for a definite way of life and of wanting to make a difference. Faith is more than assent of the mind, but a way of life and of trust – a way of life in not hindering others, but helping with compassion and good deeds. Our way of life is a sharing of faith one to another – “Faith is passed on by contact, from one person to another, just as one candle is lighted from another” – Pope Francis.

The people who make a difference are building blocks rather than stumbling blocks. Every good cause will have its begrudgers. The apostles themselves were like that and bit by bit realised that following Jesus can be seen in many ways, and in the giving of cold water or hot soup, or in any way, making a big difference in life is being a true follower.

Remember a time you made a difference in someone’s life. Ask to continue to be able to do this.Lord, teach me to serve you as you deserve.

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

1 note · View note

aion-rsa · 4 years ago

Text

Best Movies Coming to Netflix in April 2021

https://ift.tt/2PMiCas

When 2021 began, many movie lovers were hopeful April would be the month of the rebound. James Bond was scheduled to (finally) return at the beginning of the month, and Marvel’s Black Widow was waiting at just the end of it. This of course did not happen.

Nevertheless, for those looking for more bite-sized distractions over the usual binging blur on streaming services, there is still relief coming on Netflix. While all of the below movies are relatively recent, chances are you haven’t seen any of them in a long time, if at all. So sit back, relax, and find out the best options to Netflix and chill this April.

Insidious (2011)

April 1

As the movie that arguably ushered in the horror movie renaissance of the 2010s—or at least cemented the Blumhouse Productions formula—Insidious has become strangely overlooked. This is probably due to director James Wan and star Patrick Wilson refining this style to even greater success a few years later with The Conjuring. Nevertheless, Insidious is a creepy delight, one which reworked Steven Spielberg’s Poltergeist for the 21st century with its vision of a haunted house in suburbia. The logline, though is what really made this scary: it isn’t the house that’s haunted… it’s your son. With their lad pursued by a demon from a place called “the Further,” a father (Wilson) and mother (Rose Byrne) will have to confront some repressed supernatural trauma and team-up with Lin Shaye’s marvelous ghost hunter. Just beware the Woman in Black.

Legally Blonde (2001)

April 1

Legally Blonde remains the best kind of comedy: one that’s as socially relevant as it is fun. The feminist comedy about a “sorority girl” who decides to go to Harvard Law School to get her ex-boyfriend back became an immediate classic when it hit theaters in 2001. Starring Reese Witherspoon as protagonist Elle Woods, and based on a book of the same name by Amanda Brown, Legally Blonde came out at a time when most pop culture feminism took the form of Strong Female Characters who had to be traditionally masculine in order to be taken seriously as female role models.

Legally Blonde, by contrast, gave us a character who not only didn’t have to give up her femininity to be seen as smart, competent, and powerful, but whose exhibition of those qualities stems from her femininity. The film would go on to launch several sequels (one theatrical and one straight-to-home video release), with another one in development, plus a musical. But the original movie’s cultural legacy lives on far beyond that.

The Pianist (2002)

April 1

We cannot in good conscience recommend this movie without noting the film is directed by the reprehensible Roman Polanski. If that is a deal-breaker, please move on. However, there is a powerful piece of cinema here, and in a subject matter the director is all too familiar with: the Holocaust. Starring Adrien Brody in the role that won him an Oscar, the film provides a searing biographical portrait of Władysław Szpilman, a Polish classical composer of Jewish descent. After the Germans invaded his homeland, Szpilman is confined to the Warsaw Ghetto, where he first continues performing for Polish radio and then spends the last two years of the war in hiding, evading Nazi detection and death in the concentration camps. It’s unforgettable for those who can watch.

Yes Man (2008)

April 1

This Jim Carrey comedy based on a memoir by Danny Wallace sees a buttoned up businessman make a covenant to say ‘yes’ to every opportunity he is presented with. While it’s structurally pretty similar to his earlier hit Liar Liar, this is good-natured, classic Carrey which might just provide some much needed escapism during these dark times. The director is Peyton Reed, who went on to make Ant-Man and Ant-Man and the Wasp, and although the story—essentially a romance co-starring Zooey Deschanel in manic pixie dream girl mode—is formulaic, Reed brings a pace and energy that keeps it buzzing until the end.

The Master (2012)

April 15

Paul Thomas Anderson’s deliciously opaque satire of Scientology (or sympathetic love letter to the misled?) has new poignancy in 2021. With its depiction of a traumatized veteran (Joaquin Phoenix) falling for the bait of a charismatic charlatan (Philip Seymour Hoffman), it rings truer than ever. It also still features bizarrely fascinating performances from both Phoenix and Hoffman, with the latter being particularly bombastic as a science fiction writer who’s become a profit. It’s never really clear if he believes his own line of BS, but what is obvious is the one to really watch out for is Amy Adams as Hoffman’s lethally smiling wife.

Crimson Peak (2015)

April 16

Pan’s Labyrinth and The Shape of Water director Guillermo del Toro took things back to the late 1800s for his Gothic romance film Crimson Peak. This horror-tinged drama stars Mia Wasikowska and Tom Hiddleston as star-crossed lovers, and Jessica Chastain as Tom’s conniving sister and lady of a haunted castle in the English countryside. Like a Roger Corman Edgar Allan Poe flick from the ’60s, Crimson Peak begins as an unlikely love story but soon devolves into a nightmare come to life for Wasikowska’s Edith, who discovers that there’s more to her new husband, his sister, and their home than meets the eye.

Movies

Guillermo del Toro’s Pinocchio Netflix Film Reveals Cast with Cate Blanchett, Ewan McGregor, Tilda Swinton, More

By Joseph Baxter

Movies

8 Essential Gothic Horror Movies

By David Crow and 1 other

While not quite on par with del Toro’s other films from a narrative perspective, Crimson Peak is a masterclass in atmosphere and spooky imagery. The movie is less a jump scare-heavy cheap thrill and more of an unnerving slow-burn. It may feel a bit dated to modern audiences, but those who like a good haunted house story will find plenty to love in this picture.

Rush (2013)

April 16

A little bit Ford v. Ferrari before Ford v. Ferrari was a film, Rush is a surprisingly underrated biopic from director Ron Howard. With its traditional Hollywood filmmaker operating at top performance, Rush provides a highly dramatized portrayal of a rivalry between two Formula One drivers, British wheelman James Hunt (Chris Hemsworth), and Austrian driver Niki Lauda (Daniel Brühl). In real-life, the pair began as good drinking mates on the Formula Three circuit before becoming superstar rivals at a higher level between 1973 and ’79. The film tracks their speed, bravado, and sometimes horrific crashes with steady doses of adrenaline. And hey, it stars Thor and Baron Zemo!

Synchronic (2020)

April 16

Synchronic is the fourth and most ambitious film yet from the directing-writing-producing (and sometimes acting) team of Aaron Moorhead and Justin Benson. The pair have explored the grip of addiction and the passage of time in all of their features to date, and this sci-fi/horror hybrid continues with those themes. Anthony Mackie (the MCU��s Falcon) stars as Steve, a New Orleans paramedic who learns he has six weeks to live just as he and his partner Dennis (Jamie Dornan) respond to a series of bizarre deaths linked to a new designer drug called Synchronic. What the drug does and how it affects the two friends personally propels Steve on a mind-bending, frightening, yet ultimately compassionate journey, told extremely well here with strong performances and shocking imagery.

cnx.cmd.push(function() { cnx({ playerId: "106e33c0-3911-473c-b599-b1426db57530", }).render("0270c398a82f44f49c23c16122516796"); });

The post Best Movies Coming to Netflix in April 2021 appeared first on Den of Geek.

from Den of Geek https://ift.tt/3rFKk5K

#aion-rsa #Den of Geek

0 notes

frederickwiddowson · 5 years ago

Photo

Genesis 46:5-34 comments: Jacob goes down to Egypt

Genesis 46:5 ¶ And Jacob rose up from Beersheba: and the sons of Israel carried Jacob their father, and their little ones, and their wives, in the wagons which Pharaoh had sent to carry him. 6 And they took their cattle, and their goods, which they had gotten in the land of Canaan, and came into Egypt, Jacob, and all his seed with him: 7 His sons, and his sons’ sons with him, his daughters, and his sons’ daughters, and all his seed brought he with him into Egypt. 8 And these are the names of the children of Israel, which came into Egypt, Jacob and his sons: Reuben, Jacob’s firstborn. 9 And the sons of Reuben; Hanoch, and Phallu, and Hezron, and Carmi. 10 And the sons of Simeon; Jemuel, and Jamin, and Ohad, and Jachin, and Zohar, and Shaul the son of a Canaanitish woman. 11 And the sons of Levi; Gershon, Kohath, and Merari. 12 And the sons of Judah; Er, and Onan, and Shelah, and Pharez, and Zerah: but Er and Onan died in the land of Canaan. And the sons of Pharez were Hezron and Hamul. 13 And the sons of Issachar; Tola, and Phuvah, and Job, and Shimron. 14 And the sons of Zebulun; Sered, and Elon, and Jahleel. 15 These be the sons of Leah, which she bare unto Jacob in Padanaram, with his daughter Dinah: all the souls of his sons and his daughters were thirty and three. 16 And the sons of Gad; Ziphion, and Haggi, Shuni, and Ezbon, Eri, and Arodi, and Areli. 17 And the sons of Asher; Jimnah, and Ishuah, and Isui, and Beriah, and Serah their sister: and the sons of Beriah; Heber, and Malchiel. 18 These are the sons of Zilpah, whom Laban gave to Leah his daughter, and these she bare unto Jacob, even sixteen souls. 19 The sons of Rachel Jacob’s wife; Joseph, and Benjamin. 20 And unto Joseph in the land of Egypt were born Manasseh and Ephraim, which Asenath the daughter of Potipherah priest of On bare unto him. 21 And the sons of Benjamin were Belah, and Becher, and Ashbel, Gera, and Naaman, Ehi, and Rosh, Muppim, and Huppim, and Ard. 22 These are the sons of Rachel, which were born to Jacob: all the souls were fourteen. 23 And the sons of Dan; Hushim. 24 And the sons of Naphtali; Jahzeel, and Guni, and Jezer, and Shillem. 25 These are the sons of Bilhah, which Laban gave unto Rachel his daughter, and she bare these unto Jacob: all the souls were seven. 26 All the souls that came with Jacob into Egypt, which came out of his loins, besides Jacob’s sons’ wives, all the souls were threescore and six; 27 And the sons of Joseph, which were born him in Egypt, were two souls: all the souls of the house of Jacob, which came into Egypt, were threescore and ten.

Verse 15 tells us for that either Dinah wasn’t Jacob’s only daughter or, as said earlier, the daughters could logically include daughters-in-law. Arguing about the count becomes nonsensical when we know everyone wasn’t included in the count of those that mattered to God’s ministry of reconciliation. There are obviously servants to consider, as well, which are not mentioned.

We also come to differences in the count given for different reasons at different times.

Exodus 1:5 And all the souls that came out of the loins of Jacob were seventy souls: for Joseph was in Egypt already.

Deuteronomy 10:22 Thy fathers went down into Egypt with threescore and ten persons; and now the LORD thy God hath made thee as the stars of heaven for multitude.

Acts 7:14 Then sent Joseph, and called his father Jacob to him, and all his kindred, threescore and fifteen souls.

Some argue about these differences with fundamentalists trying to gloss over what they fear naggingly in the back of their minds is an error in the text. However, the problem is with the modern reader who is infected with a mental problem I call modernism. You read the Bible like you would read the owner’s manual for your car rather than as you would read a letter sent to you from afar, in this case a distant time, a personal account of something dear to the writer. The Holy Ghost, through the wisdom and understanding, the meaning of Biblical inspiration which is not word-for-word dictation, given to Moses, refers to events from the perspective of their importance to the point He is trying to get across (see Job 32:8; 2Peter 3:15). In one reference He may include wives who are not included in another or He may be referring to an event from another angle and only include specific others. The modern fundamentalist who claims to believe the Bible literally, which they don’t really, in their attempts to explain by juggling numbers what the Bible says, is really expressing their own disbelief and lack of faith by trying to explain a contradiction that isn’t there.

I went over this kind of thinking when I was discussing years, back in my comments on 15:12-16, regarding the length of years that the Hebrews were to be persecuted. The point is all of the number references are correct and any differences can be explained by the Holy Ghost counting people in one who are not counted in another. We will find this again in the numbers who will die in a plague later in another book. Verses 26 and 27 warn us that our calculations may not be based on God’s calculations which will keep the doubter or the skeptic spinning his or her wheels trying to find an equation that will make him or her feel better.

Genesis 46:28 ¶ And he sent Judah before him unto Joseph, to direct his face unto Goshen; and they came into the land of Goshen. 29 And Joseph made ready his chariot, and went up to meet Israel his father, to Goshen, and presented himself unto him; and he fell on his neck, and wept on his neck a good while. 30 And Israel said unto Joseph, Now let me die, since I have seen thy face, because thou art yet alive. 31 And Joseph said unto his brethren, and unto his father’s house, I will go up, and shew Pharaoh, and say unto him, My brethren, and my father’s house, which were in the land of Canaan, are come unto me; 32 And the men are shepherds, for their trade hath been to feed cattle; and they have brought their flocks, and their herds, and all that they have. 33 And it shall come to pass, when Pharaoh shall call you, and shall say, What is your occupation? 34 That ye shall say, Thy servants’ trade hath been about cattle from our youth even until now, both we, and also our fathers: that ye may dwell in the land of Goshen; for every shepherd is an abomination unto the Egyptians.

Chapter 45, verse 10 told us that Goshen was close to where Joseph ruled from. It is commonly understood that the New Kingdom period of ancient Egypt, the period of the Egyptian Empire was from around the 16th century BC to the 11th century BC. This marked the peak of Egypt’s power. It includes the time that Egypt had hegemony over the land of Canaan which is important to understanding Numbers 14:9 and various extra-Biblical documents from Canaan pleading for help from the Egyptians. It was preceded by the Hyksos invasion and rule. I believe that Joseph’s Pharaoh was from this time, that he was a Hyksos, and that is why he was favorable to Joseph and his family. This is called Egypt’s Second Intermediate Period. Of course, much of this is educated guesswork as the Egyptians did not refer to any of their eras the way we refer to them and no one ever called themselves, “the Hyksos.” These are all made-up terms by scholars.

In any event, Judah went first to meet Joseph and Jacob and the rest followed. Christ is the first to rise from the dead never to physically die again, to be resurrected. Judah is Christ’s physical ancestor. Here is more typology that is great subject material for sermons. Joseph prepared himself to greet his father in Goshen.

Joseph promised to introduce them to Pharaoh. Here is more evidence for my view that the Pharaoh of Joseph’s time was a Hyksos, of the so-called Shepherd-kings. To the leadership Joseph’s family of herders would be welcome but to the Egyptians they were an abomination. The land of Goshen separates their living from the rest of Egypt.

The word cattle includes all herd animals not just beef cows as we use the word today.

Genesis 13:7 And there was a strife between the herdmen of Abram’s cattle and the herdmen of Lot’s cattle: and the Canaanite and the Perizzite dwelled then in the land.

Genesis 30:32 I will pass through all thy flock to day, removing from thence all the speckled and spotted cattle, and all the brown cattle among the sheep, and the spotted and speckled among the goats: and of such shall be my hire.

0 notes