#and even those who are religious are a lot more… cynical? about it

[pure-0f-heart-dumb-0f-ass]

Guys I forgot how widespread religion is in my home state.

NYC please pick me up I’m scared

[gwenllian-in-the-abbey]

What do you think of Grrm's portrayal of religion?

Hi anon, this is a really interesting question, and it took me awhile to put together what I hope is a coherent answer.

For context, I think GRRM's background is important to keep in mind. George is almost exactly my parents' age and belongs to the same demographic of American anti-war ex hippies who aged into broadly liberal baby-boomers. Their radicalism has largely mellowed over the years, they may not be the most up to date on the appropriate terminology, and they tend to prioritize nonviolent solutions to systemic problems (my mom often tells me the younger generation needs to do another March on Washington). One thing liberal boomers also tend have in common is that often they grew up religious but, as they entered their 20s and went to college, broke away from the churches of their childhood. My family is full of ex-Catholic liberal boomers like George. They might have dabbled in Buddhism or Hinduism in the 70s, New Age mysticism in the 80s or 90s, and ended up settling into statements like, "I'm spiritual, but not religious." Almost invariably, they have a sort of disdain for organized religion, which they associate with a kind of yokel mentality, a place for anti-Choice anti-LGBTQ traditionalists. Although they will profess "to each his own," to the average liberal boomer, the church represents regressive values and they cannot imagine why anyone would willingly return to it. Even those who did remain religious take great pains to make it known they are not like those Christians. And to be fair, liberal boomers have a good reason to feel this way. The churches of their childhoods were not fun places for people whose own ideas and values went against post-WW2 broadly white middle class values. Unsurprisingly, SFF authors tend to fit into this category.

And this sort of bleeds into a lot of 90s SFF. You see a lot of worlds that have religion, but rarely do you have characters that are religious, and even more rarely do you have sympathetic young protagonists who are religious. You might have the occasional kindly priest or nun type, but far more often these characters will be abusive, mean spirited, or narrow minded (think of Brienne's childhood septas). Religion is often treated with the same disdain by in-world characters as it is by the authors themselves. You might even have worlds that are almost entirely secular, with vague references to "The Gods," but without any real religious traditions constructed around them (Robin Hobb's Realm of the Elderlings series, which features two vague dieties, Eda and El, who seem to have no religious traditions surrounding them whatsoever). You might have cultish religions that are actively dangerous and must be stopped, or you might have Catholic church analogues, existing in opposition to everything cool and fun. Protagonists tend to be cynical non-believer types, or they might start off as true believers and lose their religion along the way. Rarely are they allowed to have sincere and abiding faith.

And you can see a lot of this in George's writing, in the way he portrays the Faith of the Seven and other religions, and the way the fandom receives them. The Faith of the Seven is Westeros' answer to the Catholic church, but there are also the Old Gods, the faith of R'hllor, and others, often presented in opposition to each other. George himself sees religion as a divisive force, and in ASOIAF, we see religions in conflict with each other, we see them weaponized to fuel vendettas, we see them used to drive prophesies and start wars. There's a clip somewhere, of George at a panel, where he's talking about religious conflict and his take is very reminiscent of George Carlin's-- you can tell he knows the bit. "Are you really going to kill all of these people because a giant invisible guy in the sky told you too? And your giant guy in the sky is different?" George asks, receiving a round of applause from the crowd. It's a very modern view on religion, which is fair, I think. He's writing for a modern audience who have modern conceptions of the church, and he is making a deliberate point about the harm religion can do. .

What I do think is missing, or at least downplayed, are the ways in which the medieval church was really a driving cultural and social force in medieval Europe. We live in a secular society, so we have the luxury of disregarding the church in a way that medieval people did not. This is one major way in which the worldbuilding of ASOIAF departs from the real world middle ages. To portray the medieval church as a primarily regressive institution that mostly drove conflict is too simplistic. The Catholic church is what culturally unified most of western Europe into what was known as "Christendom." The clergy served political functions, such as providing an important check upon the power of medieval kings, and when the power of the church declined, despotism grew. Socially, for most western Europeans, the church was also the center of day to day life. Insofar as medieval peasants had any opportunities for leisure time and celebrations, most of these revolved around the church. The church was for centuries a driving force behind art, music, literature, and architecture, and it also performed important social functions, such as operating poorhouses and leper-houses, and providing educations for children.

And all of this was just extremely normal. Most people prayed multiple times each day, and sincerely believed in heaven a hell. The state of one's soul after death was such a real concern that the sale of indulgences-- a way that you could pay to get your dead loved ones whose souls were in purgatory into heaven more quickly-- became a major racket for the Church. I've seen the HotD fandom react to Alicent Hightower's level of devotion calling her a religious "fanatic" and I cannot stress enough how absolutely normal Alicent would have been in medieval times. This is where I blame the framing of the show more than George, because it does set Alicent's faith in opposition to Rhaenyra's seemingly more modern values, but does it in a selective way. For instance, Alicent comes off as prudish, and modern audiences hate a prude, but we never see how her faith would have certainly inspired her, as queen, to take other more progressive actions such as giving alms to the poor or bestowing her patronage upon motherhouses. In another post about the fandom perception of Valyrian culture, I talked about how this modern view of devout belief, particularly Catholicism, tends to cast anything that is presented in opposition to it as an unequivocal good, and I see this sort of rhetoric slung around the fandom a lot, "why would you defend the pseudo-Catholics who hate women??" But the pseudo-Catholics are really just normal medieval people, and they didn't hate women, they simply lived in a patriarchal society and the material conditions did not yet exist which would allow them to challenge that in any meaningful way.

[utilitycaster]

Hi there! Do you think the Bells - and in particular Ashton's focus and indist a bit too hard on the fact that Aeor orb vision will completely change people's perceptions of gods? I tend to think that lot of people who somewhat know history are aware of the fact that Primes and Betrayers joined hands to destroy the city. As for common folk - it would be at also hard to believe that for example they would completely denounce Wildmother who is nature (all good and all bad. Bad as in destructive). I can imagine some folks reaction to this would be to feel scared, but then again. Those are Gods we speak about, not your friendly neighbors. What do you think?

So here's the thing: I've felt some of the depictions of what the average person knows this campaign have been...inconsistent isn't the right word, because, for example, the norm in the Menagerie Coast might not be the norm in Gelvaan and certainly isn't the norm in central Issylra, but also the party not recognizing the symbol of Asmodeus (for example) is something that's always struck me as like. people in the United States not knowing what a crucifix is. Like yeah those people exist - I've met very religious Jews in the US who don't know what day Christmas is other than "generally in late December" - but either we never met many of those people in Campaigns 1 and 2 and met them all in Campaign 3, or there's been some retconning (which...that's a complex discussion as to canonicity between campaigns, since the answer is, ultimately, it depends on the specifics and the magnitude and the source of that information, ie, if High Bearer Vord's creation myth is wrong that's valid because he's providing a specific perspective with plenty of bias, or if orcs were NOT created during the Calamity that's valid because unfortunately myths born of stereotype and bigotry are extremely common; but if Matt's drastically changing previously established truths of the world without in-world explanation, rather than just quietly dropping no longer relevant references as one-offs a la Ladueger, yeah that is bad storytelling and anyone who tells you it isn't is an idiot).

But actually that doesn't matter because here's just a truth about people: a whole lot of people in, for example, the United States in 2024, where 95% of adults have regular internet access, are fairly uninvested in much outside their basic day to day life, just, in general. This is going to be even more true in a world without that degree of information and interconnectedness. I think a lot of people are going to be like "ok and this thousand year old city being destroyed affects me how?" Not to get too cynical about it but think about someone whose experience with the gods is rather like what Laudna describes her youth as being: harvest festivals and wishing for rain. Like, if it's a good harvest this year, will they care?

I don't personally agree with this mentality irl, but groups of people on the whole are frequently resistant to change, do not want trouble, and want to be left alone. I think no shortage of people's attitudes will simply be "why is this motherfucker downloading the Downfall of Aeor Album to everyone's iPod when I am trying to eat breakfast." It won't even get to the point of "are the gods good or bad"; it will literally just be "who the fuck is broadcasting something? the MOON is fucked up? we have real problems?" Like, if people do not know the story of the fall of Aeor, someone being like HEY THE GODS CRASHED THIS CITY BECAUSE THEY HAD MADE A GOD-KILLING WEAPON is probably going to elicit a response of, again, "and I should care about this because? a fucking phoenix is strafing us, why are you doing a test of the emergency broadcast system?"

[spot-the-antisemitism]

I don't know if you saw that one post from mossadspypigeon about the woman who faked converting but I honestly haven't been able to stop thinking about it because it genuinely baffles me. I just can't imagine what the long term benefits would be because actual Jewish people are going to know it's bullshit and most semi-decently informed goyim like myself are going to be suspicious. Maybe it'd be different if she hadn't filmed her "conversion" and blatantly showed that she didn't know what she was doing but she did! I am not religious anymore but I was baptized as both Mormon and Baptist as a child so seeing a ceremony like this without any religious authority present set off a lot of red flags for. Even more so because of all of the updates Chaya has added to the post and the fact that I read a handful of articles about what is supposed to happen and they all said a rabbi should be there. And of course there's the whole "most Jews don't keep kosher" thing which Chaya called out. I know I'm probably baffled because I have been privileged enough to not experience or witness antisemitism firsthand and I am so sorry that you guys have to deal with people like this. I just can't believe some of the lows people will go to because they want to shove their two cents where they don't belong

Dear anon,

the benefit is to have your "asajew" card so you can engage in "well actually" combat with others in social justice spaces. Christian white women in social justice tankie adjacent spaces feel like they don't have the magical oppression points that let your tell someone to shut up and so they racefake as latina or Jewish or even convert to Islam in the most gross culturally apporiative ways sometimes they instead convert to Judiasm in those ways

the other benefit is you now are in a sacred safe space with other jews and can use this to try to convert them to christianity or worse try killing them one by one. The latter is more common in horror and crime fiction than in real life (but has happened), but the former is a constant problem. One messianic preformed marriages as a rabbi and all those couples had to remarry with a real rabbi, people have been torn from their heritage and tricked and it's bad.

this woman of course is not working with people who she has in her grift so she can work them and you are a christian these are edgelords who convert to islam for clout and eat bacon while wearing a hijab incorrectly they will fall for it

She told the attendant she was already Jewish it was a grift and her followers are in on it, sadly that means the normies like you spotted for what it was as a good grift has both a part of the grifter and their auidence actually believing it

so TL:DR she did it solely to claim her "asajew" card so she can claim "not in my name" at the JVP rally, say she would glady be killed by terrorists and real jews do too and her dumbass followers will eat it up and use her as "Jewish friend that proves they aren't antisemitic" but she did sloppily. All JVP rabbis do this and convert cynically to gain clout, this is because JVP is a messianic cult that's about culturally genociding Jews.

So why do people falsely convert? to abet genocide in one way or another

thank you for your essay,

Cecil

[fireflysummers]

Final Thoughts on GO S2

I'm probably gonna pull back on discussing S2, at least publicly, after this. I did actually like a lot of the season, but it's triggering some of my religious trauma and also the fandom is already stressing me out. So here, let's have some final thoughts.

First and foremost: I am not a Gaiman simp. I've read a decent amount of his work: comics, short stories, essays, and novels. Aside from Good Omens, I've liked Coraline and The Graveyard Book the best by far, whereas American Gods just. Did Not Connect with me, even though it's should have, given the stuff I tend to enjoy.

However. Regardless of whether I like a given work (or even like how he adapted it, a la parts of The Sandman TV series), he is a veteran writer who has proven that he does, actually, know how to write a story with consistent characters.

Beyond that, I do actually believe that he's trying to do right by Pratchett, and loves and respects the story and characters they created together. He's generally shown up as an ally to a variety of social causes, and directly and respectfully responds to fans on Tumblr. While no saint, I feel that there is cause to give the benefit of the doubt that things will resolve satisfyingly in S3, and that there is Intention about some of the things in S2.

This, of course, does not absolve it of being "bad," but even here I think we need to articulate better the different types of "bad" that people are reacting to. There seems to roughly be three camps here: 1) People who thought it was "bad" because of how it ended, with the breakup and a lot of unresolved plot threads; 2) People who thought it was "bad" because it struggled on a technical level with its set, lighting, directorial choices, editing, etc; 3) People who thought it was "bad" because they felt the characterization was significantly off and that the internal logic of the series had been violated.

With regards to Point One, the only solution is to Wait and See. Judgement should be reserved until the story is properly finished--easier said than done, especially considering the current media landscape, and the number of series or franchises that fail to live up to their promises.

Point Two isn't something I understand well enough to contribute meaningfully, except that I suspect the pandemic affected this aspect the most and am willing to give it a bit more mercy. That aside, I for the most part I don't find it bad so much as not as good as S1. Except for the parts with epilepsy warnings, surely there could've been a better way to do that.

Point Three... that's the stumbling block for me, and I find it interesting that most of the folks who struggle with this point in particular are long time fans of the book.

I trust that instinct.

There are two different directions to go from here. The first is the assumption that these problems are a result of ego, carelessness, or lack of skill from the showrunners/writers/director. It's cynical but not unjustified. The second is the belief that the breaks in lore or characterization were intentional, building towards a much grander conspiracy. Of course, even in this case I don't think it forgives the lack of signposting that would indicate that this is a choice rather than an accident. It just makes it feel clumsy and poorly constructed, a major risk on a show that hasn't had its third season confirmed.*

However, regardless, it still feels salvageable. I've enjoyed reading a lot of meta on all this, and I've pulled some things from others (particularly That Theory by @ariaste), but I don't really want to put forth a single, defined theory myself. Instead, here's some questions I've got, why those questions are important (to me, at least). Actual theorizing comes after, and anybody who snidely mentions Sherlock in the comments or tags is going to get auto-blocked. Like seriously, I'm aware that some stuff is a stretch, but it's fun??? To theorize????? And I'm here for me and my peace of mind rather than trying to argue a point.

*I have some suspicions here, particularly with Gaiman stating that the decision from Amazon would come much faster than The Sandman's second season (which was four months). I don't know enough though to say if that's actually significant.

Questions

Who the fuck is telling this story?

This is the most important piece, in my opinion. There's this assumption when reading books (or research papers, newspapers, etc...) that the narrator who is writing the words is a non-presence, Neutral and objective. That's not the case, and an important part of literature critique is figuring out who the narrator is, and what their goals are. Oftentimes, the narrator and the author are the same person, but with Pratchett's work, particularly on Good Omens and Discworld, the Narrator was its own unique character.

This is why people struggle adapting Discworld to live action--that medium requires a Reason for having a Narrator, and especially in the age of method acting that's often considered immersion-breaking. Good Omens worked so well because they not only kept the Narrator, but they made Her God.

This added some really interesting new dimensions, such as the scene where Crowley speaks to God about his fall and the destruction of humanity. He doesn't receive an answer, but we're watching from God's perspective, so we as the audience know that She's listening.

Another advantage of making God the Narrator is that it justifies all the goofy little asides we get into the lives of minor characters (i.e. Leslie the Mailman), without losing focus. It helps the world feel like it’s full of people, rather than characters and plot contrivances, and the theme that individual people and their choices are important. The Narrator is such a central character of Good Omens that without it, the story struggles to stay focused.

It also highlights a key difference in the writing styles of the two authors. Pratchett’s work tends to introduce four or five totally unique plot threads that feel completely disjointed until the last act (if not even later), when it turns into a Chekhov’s Firing Squad. Plot twists around secret identities and backstabbing and schemes are relatively rare, as the omniscient Narrator doesn’t lie about the intentions of people or their actions.

Gaiman’s writing is typically not like that, to my knowledge. He buries characters in misdirection and hints, and you never know the true identity or motives until all the chips are down. It’s a perfectly valid way to approach storytelling, but it makes it jarring to see it in S2. The lack of a Narrator is a huge reason why S2 doesn’t feel like Good Omens to some folks.

My gut feeling is that the decision to shift from the original Narrator was highly intentional. It helps to obscure the thoughts and intentions of people, and it also muddles the insights that we’re supposed to take away. (I would have loved hearing God monologue about what’s going on in Jim’s head. I think it’d do a lot to make him seem less.... obnoxiously stupid.)

More than that, it brings up a reasonable potential plot point of: Where did God go? Why isn’t She present in the story? Even in her early appearance in the Job flashback, she doesn’t sound like the narrator for last season. After the first part of her speech (which Gabriel later quotes), her tone turns casual and condescending, which might line up with her being a bit of an asshole, it doesn’t line up with the whole “dealer of a mysterious card game who is always smiling”).

Also, I don’t think it’s safe to assume that nobody is telling the story either. Just because they’re not making their presence known doesn’t mean they aren’t there, and in a story like Good Omens, that’s concerning.

Wait, where's Satan?

Another person I saw while scrolling the tags pointed out that Satan is nowhere to be seen this season. He's really only mentioned in reference to a bet God made in Job, but then Crowley is the one on the ground causing mischief. There's no Hail Satan among demons (like Hastur and Ligur did at the start of S1).

That's might be because the writers didn't want us to think it was important (a la Hastur), but that feels off. Given that Satan speaks directly through the radio to Crowley in S1, complimenting him on his work, it's safe to say that he was at least aware of and involved in the goings-on in Hell. The fact that he wasn't even an worry for Beelzebub in abandoning their post? Feels weird.

(Also if you know where that post is, I'll happy credit + link)

What is Maggie?

Look, I love cute lesbians in love as much as the next queer, but I don't like Maggie. I don’t think she’s a person. Contextually, she’s a plot device, but I agree with That Essay that she might be an actual Plot Device.

Her characterization is simple and relatively shallow—a bit of an airhead, ray of sunshine that’s supposed to remind you of Aziraphale. When she describes her past to Nina, it’s almost robotic (also, her story implies it was Mr. Fell who first rented to her ancestor, not Mr. Fell’s great-grandfather like Nina implied). Her emotions are over-dramatic and seem to be turned on and off at random (scenes with her crying to Aziraphale about her woes had my “manipulator” senses going off for some reason).

When asked about a song, she not only IDs the song, its singer, and its year, but how and on what it was distributed. (Honestly thought this would’ve been something interesting, because she’s been pretty ditzy so far, it’d be interesting if she had like... an insane memory for music history.) And then she’s the one that sets Aziraphale on his little investigation by giving him the transformed records, while also planting the seed about her love troubles with Nina. Later, her advice to Crowley is... not awful, but feels insincere and a bit too forward, given her own self-proclaimed lack of relationship experience.

I don’t know what she is (a demon, hastur with amnesia in disguise, a literal plot device inserted by the current storyteller, etc...), but there’s something not right with her.

(Also the joke of “who listens to records anymore, it’s so old fashioned” just doesn’t land, lots of people buy records, and I’m saying this as somebody who has worked at a record store before.)

What's going on with Aziraphale?

There’s something Off about Aziraphale, and it’s not his choices at the end of the season. That makes total sense if you read him as somebody with severe religious trauma getting dragged back into the abusive system because other people need him and he’s been promised the ability to change things.

But I do think something is happening to his memory. Nearly all the flashbacks are from Aziraphale’s point of view and retelling, which means that they’re less reliable than God’s version of events in the previous season. Many of them don’t make logistical sense (post-church scene in 1941), depict Crowley as meaner or more sinister than we know he is, or frame events... weirdly. The scene with him trying food for the first time feels Really Bad, especially when the series has previously established that he’s a) prim and proper and b) his interest in food is one of the beautiful things that connect him to humanity, not some kind of gluttonous sin. Also he turns down alcohol.

Their meet-cute at the  start of the universe also doesn’t line up with their reactions to each other in Eden, or the fact that knowing each other Before has never come up or been hinted at anywhere ever. I don’t know what’s causing this to happen, only that Aziraphale repeatedly looks pensive when coming out of flashbacks, and Crowley is never there afterwards to corroborate said memories.

His actions also seem pretty inconsistent with what we know of him—i.e. I refuse to believe he would ever mistreat his books, even if they’re just old encyclopedias. Also, he feels a bit too...forceful in trying to get Nina and Maggie to fall in love? I mean, he didn’t exert that much direct influence on even Warlock, when he was actively hoping that the boy would turn out angelic rather than neutral.

I don’t think this removes his agency in that last decision, so much as explains how he was in such a vulnerable place at all. He still needs to apologize and fix things, because he messed up, and even if he hadn’t he still seriously hurt Crowley.

What's going on with Crowley?

There’s something Off about Crowley. The most obvious thing, of course, is his memories. At multiple points in the present day, characters state that they remember him or have met him before, only to be met with confusion. This is especially concerning given that he has a nigh photographic memory for faces (something mentioned in the book when he immediately IDs Mary Loquacious, 11 years after a 30 second conversation).

Overall, he seems to be better known by other supernatural entities this season, in ways that often tie him back to his angelic identity (i.e. saying they fought together in the war, Aziraphale stating he knew the angel he used to be, etc...). This doesn’t feel right, because S1 we see that Hell is largely apathetic towards his schemes, and definitely does not defer to him at any point in any capacity.

Then there’s the issue of his power level. It’s always been speculated that Crowley was a powerful angel prior to falling, when he mentions in S1 his involvement with star making, his seemingly unique ability to freeze time, and creating a pocket universe for Adam before the confrontation with Satan. He also has a tendency of breathing life into inanimate objects, like his plants or car. He also has the regular demonic skillset: miracles that can adjust physical appearance; the ability to change inanimate objects (like paintball guns into real guns); the ability to manifest clothing and similar items; and summon hellfire to his fingertips. This, plus the way he monologues to God with a degree of familiarity rather than reverence seems to indicate that he was Somebody Powerful and Important Before.

But in S2, his skills are significantly expanded upon. The miracle he and Aziraphale summon sets off alarms in heaven and hell, and it’s powerful enough to mask Gabriel from the Archangels. He summons a miniature sun to rain fire on Job, which is way bigger and flashier than anything we’ve seen him summon in S1. (If he needs fire, he alters the course of a dropping bomb, without creating one himself.)

Yet he’s able to cloak his presence so well he goes wholly unnoticed in heaven, or in front of heavenly agents on earth (i.e. the Job flashback). Muriel can’t clock him as a demon, or even as another supernatural being, despite their auras usually being pretty significant, such Aziraphale immediately sensing the archangels when they arrive.  He’s able to interfere with files that Muriel claimed required clearance (although I feel like that might just be a snark about Obeying Without Thinking? I would really need a Narrator to know.)

I might be misremembering, but I don’t think we’ve seen angels or demons transmogrify living beings before either. In the book, Crowley brings Aziraphale’s dove back to life after the failed magic show, and occasionally sinks ducks, but he doesn’t alter them? Not even Adam demonstrates that skill in S1. But he has no trouble turning Job’s children into lizards, however temporarily. Boy that would’ve been convenient during the flood. Or when the guard stopped then from getting to the air strip.

I might be misremembering, but I don’t think we’ve seen angels or demons transmogrify living beings before either. In the book, Crowley brings Aziraphale’s dove back to life after the failed magic show, and occasionally sinks ducks, but he doesn’t alter them? Not even Adam demonstrates that skill in S1. But he has no trouble turning Job’s children into lizards, however temporarily. Boy that would’ve been convenient during the flood. Or when the guard stopped then from getting to the air strip.

I don’t have any real issues with his characterization in the present day parts of S2, but there’s something weird happening with Crowley.

Where's all the people?

I really like a lot of the new characters, but how were there only like, 2.5 new humans named in the present day? Flashbacks don’t count bc the humans are all dead and can’t affect the story.

As much as I like Nina, she and Maggie don’t drive the story beyond being an occasional and awkwardly inserted plot contrivance? Both are actively robbed of their agency at several points, forced into situations that they could not have avoided or escaped. I’m not really sure what growth they’re expected to experience other than deciding not to date each other after everything. I literally can’t tell you anything about Nina other than that she remembers her regular’s orders, runs a coffee shop, and has a textbook abusive partner we never see. The only meaningful interactions they have are between those two, or in conversation with Aziraphale and Crowley.

Compare that to S1, where Anathema gets hit by Aziraphale and Crowley, but her primary relationships are with Newt, Adam, and Agnes Nutter (I think that counts as a relationship). We know that she’s got a wealthy family back in Puerto Rico, and that she was literally raised to save the world, and that she isn’t happy under all that pressure. Newt on the other hand is connected to not just Anathema, but Shadwell and Madame Tracy. He never even directly interacts with Aziraphale and Crowley. We know about his hobbies, his struggle to hold down a job, and his almost supernatural ability to destroy any electronics he touches. I don’t necessarily like how their relationship came together, but they were both very, very well fleshed out characters with unique backstories and goals. They weren’t just... waiting around to give Aziraphale and Crowley a new questline.

And while there’s no requirement to include a large cast of human characters that are exerting influence over the story, the lack of it is another aspect that makes this season feel not like Good Omens.

Also, it's just. Really weird to me that the events of S1 aren't really referenced at all? Like, Adam isn't mentioned, nor is Warlock. I don't expect them to keep track of the humans they met on the airfield for 20 minutes, but none of it is ever specifically referenced as far as I can tell, beyond Crowley threatening Gabriel. Like, I get that it's been a few years, but the pair caused a big enough disturbance that you'd expect some kind of ripples in their supernatural communities.

Promised by the Narrative (Obvious Chekhov's guns that I will be legitimately upset over if they do not go off)

A sincere apology from Aziraphale to Crowley that doesn't come with the expectation that Crowley will come back to him, but because he deserves an apology, even if the choices Aziraphale made were done with good intentions. Aziraphale does not expect forgiveness, and is shocked when Crowley grants it without hesitation.

A clear declaration of love from Aziraphale, which can't be rationalized away by either of them.

An "I'm Sorry" dance between Aziraphale and Crowley, but with greater sincerity and gravity. The most important piece is that they end up dancing together, which signifies a mutual apology and dedication to come together.

Since kissing is on the table, I expect an actual joyful, mutual kiss between these two assholes.

A shared cottage in South Downs.

Predictions/Theories (just some fun thoughts I've had)

When Adam declared that Satan was not his father, he didn't make himself not the antichrist, but accidentally crowned his human dad the King of Hell. Nobody knows this, because Adam doesn't have a good measure for "normal" supernatural situations, and Mr. Young because he's so "normal" that he explains away all the magical bullshit that's started going down.

When Adam declared that Satan was not his father, he erased Satan altogether. However, this left a vacuum in both power and reality. The defection of both Gabriel and Beelzebub only widens that crack. In an attempt to Fix things, reality is warping the story. Crowley has become leagues more powerful between S1 and S2, as the narrative is trying to force him into the role of his previous boss. Aziraphale is unknowingly being pulled into a similar version on the Other Side, perhaps to replace Gabriel or perhaps to replace God herself, who has been fairly absent in all this. The alterations to their memories or past have come about to keep the narrative running smoothly.

When the Metatron asks Nina whether anybody has ever asked for death, he was actually referring to Death, the sole remaining rider of the apocalypse.

If Maggie is indeed a Plot Device, it would be a fascinating exploration of Free Will to see her become aware of this (cue existential crisis), and then fall in love with Nina on her own terms, rather than because she was written that way.

Hastur will be back. Somehow.

The reason why S2 focuses so much on the supernatural characters is because S3 will be about how the events in S1 have changed the political landscape of heaven and hell. Angels are questioning their roles, demons are yearning for something more. It's scaring upper administration, and then the two most reliable folks in employment run away to alpha centauri. Recruiting Aziraphale and getting him back in line prevents him from becoming a martyr, control the range of his influence. The series reasserts its theme of choice and agency by highlighting that Aziraphale and Crowley aren't that special, they've just had the chance to live and grow, and that the others have free will too, if they want it.

The reason why they wanted to separate Aziraphale and Crowley, is not to get Aziraphale on his own, but to get Crowley on his own. He literally stopped time and made a pocket universe in front of Satan last season. He's powerful and dangerous and somebody wants to see that reigned in.

Wishlist (stuff I desperately want to see)

Crowley getting an audience with God and an opportunity to ask his questions, only to refuse to do so because he's found his own Answers and he no longer needs hers

Aziraphale and Crowley growing more into their book incarnations. Aziraphale becomes confident in his sense of morality, which he developed the hard way through millennia on earth besides humanity. He slowly learns what it means to be loved, unconditionally, but also is better at asserting and maintaining his boundaries. Crowley, still anxious and unwinding, works through his fear of abandonment, providing him opportunities to be kind and gentle and nurturing--all traits that he's aggressively hid since being a demon.

Hand holding. I know that Gaiman was referring to Ineffable Bureaucracy, but I still feel like we'd benefit from meaningful hand holding, especially since that got cut from the adaptation of the book.

Shifted focus away from the supernatural shenanigans, and back onto the humans that actually drive the story.

Cameos from S1 characters (if not a more substantial appearance).

The Four Other Riders of the Apocalypse.

Cursed Thoughts (why I shouldn't be allowed a social platform)

Ineffable Bureaucracy turns up in season 3 because Beelzebub got Gabriel pregnant somehow.

[astralleywright]

oh yeah I totally understand why the crossovers happened and don't begrudge the cast or anyone for being excited about it - as much as it stings for me, personally, to see bh be defined for so long by their race to this endgame only to end up sharing it in such a massive way lmao. as a c3-only viewer (for now?), I could have made my peace with feeling a bit like I'm on the outside looking in in terms of plot and worlbuilding, but it is sad that bh themselves have been put in that position in the midst of all the Important Characters™ conversations.

as you say, it makes sense narratively…and by now we all know the narrative has been eating bh alive from the start. it's been going on way before the crossover episodes happened, it was basically baked into them and into the campaign in a way that - again, as I understand it - just wasn't there in the previous one. bh literally started out with an explicit personal connection, in a position of servitude, to a previous pc (and this really isn't meant as a dig to orym, it's just what his job was/is!), so that was obviously going to color their interactions with the world and the other characters.

I definetly don't want a big ass pvp fight or convo to take up anymore focus from bh, but in a way it does feel like it's too late? if the choice was made to not sacrifice the realism of the previous parties showing up (which I think/hope most people would have 'forgiven', given the nature of this storytelling), then sadly it makes a bit too much sense for those parties to also look down on bh and, as so many seem to want, punish them or whatever. I don't want to see that and don't think we will - I would be actively upset if that happened! - but emotionally it does feel like the narrative would lead to proving those people right :/

if bh just /had/ to share the spotlight, as they have been doing forever, I so wish the circumstances allowed us to just get back to the people they have built a connection with…they might not have a lot of npcs to call their own, but I def would've loved for the guests pcs to show up!

sorry for the long ask - I guess it's no use being sad about all of this, especially now, but I still am lmao. bh really invented new and exciting ways of being doomed and rejected by the narrative <3

at the end of the day I support them making bonkers choices, they're gonna end up carving an eight-room cottage out of moon crystals and taking turns taking predagen on little walks to nibble on gods to keep them humble

it turns out i don't have a super long answer to this ask other than yeah, i agree. i do have hope we won't just wrap this shit up after whatever shakes out with Predathogen (i'm now rooting at her getting to bite at the god's ankles forever, as a treat) but will fake some time to explore the quencies and the rammies of BH's decision. (which is what Matt seems to be suggesting we'll do).

and Ludinus is still out there maybe! tbh if they do get rid of the gods he might just peace out Yoda-style, bc that was his life's purpose and all, but if not there are many people who would like another round of beating up that old man. so idk maybe we'll do that? (that feels more like a oneshot thing if i'm being honest)

but even so i don't think you have to worry about interparty pvp breaking out over whatever BH decides. it isn't nearly as prominent in C3 since we mainly see Keyleth in an official, leaderly capacity, but she actually had major beef with the gods in C1-mainly the Matron, but she was also cynical abt them and their whole deal in general. she might have libbed out in the 30 years since but i still don't think she'll be too upset, if it all ends well. especially in private lmao. and the most religious person in VM is Pike, and Pike is a sweetie who has a whole arc in TLOVM abt her questioning her god and finding the power inside her all along so like. it'll be fine. certain people in the M9 might be pissed but i think the other members (ironically, probably the two clerics) would talk them down. they might get disinvited from Jester's wedding though (which is a shame because Ludinus definitely has an invite)

and i do think it's fair to be sad about all of this! i'm sad abt a lot of how BH's endgame has shook out as well! but yeah, there's nothing really to do with that sadness except feel it and then let it go. i mean, we could spend days on end in a negative spiral making a million posts abt every problem we have with c3. if we wanted to get unhealthy about it.

[no-light-left-on]

Let's talk about the Chaos System in Dishonored

“Your actions affect the city. A high number of deaths results in more rats, more weepers, different reactions from your allies and darker final outcome.”

The most important thing to note is that we need to distinguish between chaos and morality. A lot of people interpret Low Chaos as Good and High Chaos as Bad which is… not inherently correct. At the same time, it is important to acknowledge that while non-lethal takedowns of key targets result in lower chaos, they are not the only thing that contributes to the chaos rating of a mission. I highly recommend reading these two posts [1] [2] by the lovely @kirtlandswarbler who looked into the science behind the chaos system.

It is perhaps easiest to imagine as the DnD alignment of Lawful to Chaotic. Low Chaos aligns with Lawful, the player character going after their targets and not dragging bystanders into their mess. All the takedowns are tactical, some might even say deserved – the Lord Regent hanged for his crimes, Campbell branded as a heretic that he was, Hypatia cured of her madness caused by the serum, Delilah locked in a painted world she desired so. The achievement for completing the game with non-lethal ways is even called Poetic Justice in DH and In Good Conscience in DH2. If the game is completed in a self-serving, bloodthirsty, anger satiating way, the chaos ends up being high – or plain chaotic on the alignment chart. But that is what the chaos means for the playstyle.

Chaos within the world is, in short, the way the world reacts to the player’s actions. The good and the bad, but every move the player makes in the world is a choice, and the world responds accordingly.

Let us set the scene, first, in general terms. In both games, the Empire is at a point of heightened anxiety. In DH it’s the plague, in DH2 the Crown Killer. Both games deal with brutality citizens face from the City Watch/Grand Guard, religious anxieties and terror from the Overseers, gang activity and a tyrannical regime from the Regent or the Duke respectively.

This is the world we walk into as Corvo, Daud or Emily. Everyone is uneasy and somewhat distrustful, and the player character then descends into the streets with a blade in hand, carving their way through a crumbling city to reach their goal. Loved ones go missing. Fathers don’t come back from work, cousins stop responding to letters. Even the elite in their palaces aren’t spared, slaughtered in cold blood with their loyal guard lying close by, staining the expensive hardwood floors. This is the world the player creates in high chaos – a world where no one is safe, and the few survivors live in terror, afraid that every breath they take might be the last. They see no reason to trust their neighbours, become more selfish, angrier- even your allies become more cynical, watching you slaughter your way back to the top, and why are they helping you again? To replace one tyrant with another?

In low chaos, however, the people remain safe. The civilians are allowed to continue going through their day to day life, however harsh it might be. The guards and overseers are spared, for the most part, and the nobles and rich that might go missing? That is their problem. They never cared for the smaller people. Both games open with a large shift in the political landscape – the assassination of an empress, a coup that seats a witch on the throne. And yet people still die of the plague or to the bloodflies. If a couple more members of the parliament die, that is, at the end of it all, just politics. It is among those who meddle with political issues, and not the business of the rest of the world.

The chaos is calculated by the absolute body count, along with a few special actions that the player can take. Most of them make sense. The chaos is higher if Daud blows up a slaughterhouse, killing many in the process, harming an industry, terrifying people who only hear of the event. Saving a young woman and her brother as they are harassed by the overseers over witch crimes they never committed lowers your chaos, because Corvo helped people in need. It’s a balance of the good and the bad you do, in total, rather than the simple distinction between killing and not killing the key targets. The overall chaos remains low even when all the key targets are taken down lethally. However, even if they are all spared, if the player killed every guard in sight just to reach these targets, the chaos will be high.

Something that I see (wrongly) be brought up is that killing key targets grants you a High Chaos ending, while the non-lethal takedowns result in Low Chaos ending. As mentioned above, that’s not true – they do count towards your total body count, but their deaths do not have a greater weight towards High Chaos. The non-lethal neutralization thus helps maintain lower chaos, but it does not necessarily mean that these choices are the right ones to make. The best example of this is probably Lady Boyle, which is oftentimes brought up as “oh but the morality of this game!!” critique. Death vs. poetic justice has little to do with morality in these games. After all, the protagonist (not counting DLCs) is out for revenge, to an extent, on people who have wronged them and caused them to fall on hard times. Just because a character lives does not mean there are not fates worse than death – like handing a woman to her stalker under the threat of death.

Morality and lethality in Dishonored are two things that don’t necessarily overlap. Lobotomizing Jindosh is, most definitely, a horrible thing and Jindosh ends up begging the MC to rather take his life than let him live without his intellect. There is no doubt that he is a horrible person, and many people tell you so during the game, but is this really the right way to go about things? Is an existence without the one thing you truly value about yourself worth it? On a similar yet completely opposite side of things, when you overhear one of the guards talk about how they have fun killing people who break curfew, is it truly a bad thing to kill them? One or two more deaths won’t affect your chaos all that much. It gets even more worth considering with the special actions that decrease your chaos which involve saving people from getting murdered by overseers or the guard. These actions are often difficult or impossible to perform without killing the attackers (like the guard harassing the girl that worked for Bunting).

These actions then reflect on your surroundings – the more corpses litter the streets, the more weepers and rats there will be, the nastier the bloodfly infestation. With a killer on the loose, there have to be more guards around. Mind you, the special actions that cause your chaos to grow are not enough to tip you over into high chaos alone. And as you, and Corvo/Daud/Emily by extension, grow more cruel, your allies grow more cynical. The Loyalists see Corvo butcher the city, and, well, it’s working. So why shouldn’t they get more cruel to achieve their goals, too? Emily is the most impacted, in Low Chaos growing to be Emily the Wise, the beloved empress of the Isles, asking Corvo innocent questions, while in the high chaos she talks about executions, asks how many people he's killed. Some grow to despise you, like Samuel, seeing the growing corruption and wishing for the quest to be done because they now see that the person they were helping was as much of a monster as the ones they are opposing. If you are cruel, the world will be cruel back, and the world involves those you might hold closest, like your daughter or your second in command.

The world, then, behaves in the way you mold it. Chaos reflects it, the destruction or kindness that you leave in your wake. Of course the murder of a noblewoman on a party she hosted, guarded by tallboys, will cause people to worry. Of course panic will spread when civilians are murdered in the streets. The general population of Dunwall will worry when the medicine that was meant to cure the plague suddenly turns everyone into weepers. But just the same, if people are shown kindness by a stranger without having to ask, they will be soothed. A cruel political leader being executed for the crimes he committed will make people excited, hopeful even. When Emily switches the Duke for his body double, the common people won’t notice. There is no need for fear, with the non-lethal takedowns. Not for those who are not directly involved.

Chaos, at the end of it all, dictates how the world evolves from the brink of collapse. The Outsider says it best, in one of his many speeches. “I have to wonder whether you're going to give if that final nudge, or pull it back from the edge.“ You have the power to tip the scales with your actions. Your choices matter, the big and the small, each life you save and each life you take, because at the end of the game, you are the one that has shaped the world that you will rule.

[pretentious-art-love]

Album Reviews #78 - World Coming Down by Type O Negative

People always comment about how this album was a lot more serious and bleak than the previous ones, so I was wary about it. I mean, it is bolded on RYM, so I wasn't THAT wary, but still. I think that October Rust is a masterpiece in the execution of its emotions, and I called it the album that managed to turn cynicism into romanticism back again. "I might be a sarcastic motherfucker, but to be honest, I love you with all my fucking heart, even if I'm a fucking clown." That's the kind of feeling I get from October Rust.

Now, it is true, World Coming Down takes away most of the humor elements of the lyrics and also part of the music. It is true that the emotional palette in this album is not as expansive or has as many layers as October Rust has. However, this is still a good album. I feel that Type O Negative doesn't fit as most Doom Metal bands. While it is true that they take most of their sound from Black Sabbath, they do not have that affinity for the macabre or that heart for the satanic. Peter Steele is mostly a romantic with incel problems, and the sound of the band is focused more on pop ballads and Alternative Metal than any other Doom Metal band. Any religious connotations are made in a tongue-in-cheek fashion, or they focus on feelings of sadness and sex rather than horror. This is a Gothic Metal band that can appeal to the most mainstream crowd, not subversive pyros against the church.

Without most of the humor, the band gets the closest to Black Sabbath than ever before. The music is not as multifaceted or surreal as before. The songs can also feel very on the nose—the pipe organs, the chants—they make you feel like, "Fine, fine, I get it, you are gothic." Because when the songs are more serious rather than tongue-in-cheek, it makes you feel more self-conscious. So because of that, I feel that the music is inferior to the one before. Yes, people called them clowns and this album more serious, but I just can't help but feel how the chimeric and prismatic nature of October Rust is an incredible love letter to life and romance in itself. I am not blaming Peter for exploring more serious themes this time, I just feel that this collection of songs feels more naked and transparent in their purpose.

With all that said, this is still a fantastic album. The slow riffs are as powerful as ever. The melodic sensibilities, while presenting 60% of the pie for what, to me, Type O Negative is about, are still fantastic. The songs are incredible—they are the kind of songs that could make you feel like walking up a mountain in a death march for your sins. Before you ask, yes, I have done walked up Monserrate twice already with this baby, with no shoes. There are lots of moments of sardonic bitterness which complement the hole in your heart. While October Rust was 20% sadness, 20% sarcasm, 20% romance, 20% hope, 20% apathy, World Coming Down is a bit of 60% sadness and 40% sarcasm caused by bitter resignation. It is not quite the colorful package, but this being a very slow heavy metal band, it sometimes reaches those points of being almost Slow Motion Power Metal—a blend I always wanted to listen to, and only two other songs (Earth Day by Devin Townsend and You Can't Keep a Man Down by Oceansize) have managed to show me.

While most songs here are practically perfect, there are some weak moments too, like Pyretta Blaze, which has a chorus that, to me, sounds as sincere as a plastic rose and as fulfilling as a wet fart. The more Type O Negative gets closer to The Beatles, the worse their music gets.

The medley cover is also a head-scratcher to me. Are you telling me that the guy who said that rock that didn't upset you isn't really Rock was a fan of The Beatles? The most common denominator, inoffensive rock band on the planet? It might have been a way to make the metalheads mad and subvert the idea he was just a macho man or a jock, I don't know. Besides, making your label pay 75k bucks for a song sounds like a story you could tell afterwards. The joke wouldn't be worth it for me, but well, I have been told he genuinely enjoyed the music and he even noodled their riffs at concerts. So, well, let's just leave it at that.

While Pyretta Blaze and Day Tripper aren't particularly fulfilling for me, we are in luck because there are three songs from these sessions that aren't included in the album but still saw the light in The Least Worst Of. First is 12 Black Rainbows. It is alright, just one of the most straightforward songs emotionally that feels more like a simple Black Sabbath song but more upbeat and pop, kinda fun. The other two, damn, let me tell you, damn. It's Never Enough is a fantastic whirlwind of religious connotations that spirals between anger and a feeling of expiation. It reminds me a bit of the closer songs of Demanufacture. And finally, Stay Out of My Dreams, a hell of a closer that goes in full speed and with a maniacal laugh in its face. While the closer of October Rust felt like Peter taking you by the hand and swearing you loyalty beyond the end of space and time after the dream, this song feels also like the end of the dream. But he is not staying with you; he is running away and leaving you deep down in a pit of despair he pushed you toward through the whole album! It is absolutely fantastic, I tell you.

Overall, yes, the music is a bit more on the nose, a little less emotionally kaleidoscopic, but it feels as harrowing as ever, fun as ever, anthemic as ever, and big and melodramatic as ever. This is yet another album of Slow Motion Pop Metal perfection in the hands of a disillusioned, a bit of a loser soul. If you are both of these, just like me, just like that absolute moron of Peter, you will probably find a lot to love in this album. I think that you have the right to cry both the pains you cause yourself as a fool and the pains the world brings on you. I think Kenny sings more in this album and I don't like that because his register is different to mine so it is harder to sing his parts lmao, but when Peter is on, you bet your ass I used my deep male voice, and sang with all my lungs. What a blast.

Custom Tracklist: 1. Skip It 2. White Slavery 3. Sinus 4. Everyone I Love Is Dead 5. Creepy Green Light 6. Who Will Save the Sane? 7. Liver 8. World Coming Down 9. Everything Dies 10. Lung 11. All Hallows Eve 12. It's Never Enough 13. Stay Out of My Dreams Running Time: 1h 17m.

8/10

[voltstone]

A YELLOW DRESS FORGOTTEN | TWDG Retelling (Remastered - 2024) MASTER CONTENT POST

Hello! (And hello again to the TWDG fandom. At least, to anyone who remembers this fic.)

I'm VoltageStone. Still a shit uploader. I'm trying, and yes, this is one of the fics that has been in the works for...way too long, but at the same time..., glad I waited for my writing to get better?

This, quite simply, is my love-letter to the games, and to my Clementine. It's the one story I've wanted to get right, time and time again.

Especially since the comics have come out. Even though I've come to the conclusion that the comics are divorced from the games, because it's only one person's Clementine (and an...interesting interpretation of her at that), the comics did pull me away from the games for a little bit there.

But now I'm back. And I do intend to get to Season 4 this time. To finish this.

It'll take time, but I do feel ready now. I really have wanted to write out my Clementine's story, and have something that I can read back on rather than whatever Skybound's doing.

And honestly? While most of this is a self-indulgence thing, and it's because I'm bleeding my heart out here...

I do want more people to write about their Clementines. Cuz like... Maybe if there's enough people doing it, writing about their experiences, and not just the character as a whole... We'd get more enrichment from TWDG as a whole.

For anyone who wants to add on or talk about this, or follow along without having to subscribe to me, this fic will have its own tag (#aydf fic). So. If you're interested in just this, that'll be the place. :D

Anyway, now, for this specific update, this is a master post like the one I did for LYCOS (Wenclair fic). This isn't marked dead dove, but it is still a very...gritty fic. And it has a lot of very heavy themes.

It's a dark fic for different reasons, but a lot of the same. AYDF is what got me into writing gore, body & psychological horror, and the like. That being said, it's...also just a different beast.

Largely because I'm building off of what's in the games, so dead dove doesn't feel as appropriate for this.

Still. Might as well make a post here about its content. Any updates I do will be linked back to this.

So, for those who read this story before, I hope you enjoy, and thanks for sticking around through the years.

To any newcomers, to TWDG or other readers from other fics, I hope you enjoy. :)

-- -- --

Walkers. Muertos. Deadheads. Lurkers... The dead which roamed, they wore many names. Monster was yet another one. Though, Clementine knew most monsters didn't decay. Their hearts still throbbed. Their eyes, still with color. The monsters, still with words to asphyxiate.  Because she was one herself: a monster with fire in her breath, and eyes that burned her own Hell. She drank for her life. She drank to forget.

A thank-you to Telltale, a love-letter to Clementine as a character, and a passion project writing out my Clementine's story. Made by my blood, sweat, tears, and probably also mucous from the tears, but it's sanitized, I promise.

AO3 | FFnet | Wattpad | Quotev | RoyalRoad

Fic Layout:

Ep1 | Between S2 & S3. Ep2-5 | S3. Ep1.5 (Interlude) | S1, Between S1 & S2, Between S2 & S3. Ep6 | Between S2 & S3, Between S3 & S4. Ep7 | Between S3 & S4, S4. Ep8-15 | S4.

General Warnings:

Catharsis, Gore, Extreme/Graphic Violence, Fights, Murder, Horror, Body Horror, Angst, Trauma, a very Cynically Religious Clementine, Raider!Clementine, TWDG retelling (aka, a lot of the dialogue and canon-events will be here, or rewritten), (some, not a lot) Sexual Content (because it's a "growing up" thing not a horny thing, I promise, …and maybe sorta a little bit of how BPD and attachment issues do things), Violentine, a lot of homoeroticism, they are touch starved, Some fairytale symbolism, Louis will be protected and grow tf up.

Mental Health:

Alcoholism, Gambling Addiction, Addiction, Withdrawal, Relapse, Suicide Attempt(s), PTSD, Guilt, Survivor's Guilt, Rehabilitation, Psychosis, Child abuse, Parentification, and how that basically fucks Clementine in the head like a lot, and then A.J too because cycles and trauma, Borderline Personality Disorder, Trauma Trauma Trauma, and you'll never guess, a Clementine who really really really needs help and at least one (1) actual breathing adult in her life.

Oh which reminds me.

Finding guidance in adults who are already very much dead, and please Clementine, would you just bury the corpse?

…okay that's verging on dead dove, but if the game (almost) has an 8-year-old eat a dude's leg, and then a bigger dude get his head smooshed by a salt lick (which tastes gross, I dunno), I think it's still safe.

In Summary:

...okay I may have written a Carver's Clementine by accident bUT it was an ACCIDENT. My hand slipped. She's not evil, just a little demented some days, and bitter on the better ones.

I am half-joking. My hand didn't slip.

She does make the comic's Clementine look like an angel, though. So. There's that.

Anyway, if it's not clear, the tldr is this is my playthrough, and thusly my canon Clementine, just with the story tailored for indulgence and narrative reasons. Cuz. …alcoholism. …and stuff.

Not a great person. Very troubled. But you know. Tis how addiction works.

Hope you enjoy. :) If you see my blood, sweat and tears stained in the writing, no you didn't.

[hit-song-showdown]

Year-End Poll #68: 2017

[Image description: a collage of photos of the 10 musicians and musical groups featured in this poll. In order from left to right, top to bottom: Ed Sheeran, Luis Fonsi and Daddy Yankee, Bruno Mars, Kendrick Lamar, The Chainsmokers, Migos, The Chainsmokers, Sam Hunt, Imagine Dragons, Post Malone. End description]

More information about this blog here

It's easier more than ever to see the effects of streaming on the pop charts. As electropop and club music become a distant memory, the pop music of the late 2010's works better with individual listening. As mentioned before, streaming works better for album listening, much more than the iTunes era which encouraged the purchasing of individual songs (which was great for singles artists, but not necessarily for albums). Some artists were able to hack this system. For example, Drake's Views (featured on the previous poll) was notable for having 20 songs on its tracklist -- which is a lot for a pop release. Unlike the iTunes era or even the CD era before, longer albums with shorter songs flourish more in the streaming landscape.

Streaming also helped to continue blurring the line between genres and audiences. Without going too much into it (because this is a topic I could ramble on about endlessly), genres were not handed down to us from Mount Olympus or something. Genre is a tool of marketing, and the lines drawn between them can have a variety of cultural, racial, economic, gender, religious, and other variables between them. These lines were more prominent in previous years before streaming made it easier to access just about every kind of music at once. This is when we start to see the rise of a concept known as the "monogenre". In order to cater to as wide an audience as possible, everything starts to sound like everything. A little rock, a little indie, a little trap, a little tropical house, a little festival EDM. There were also those who criticized the streaming era in how it promotes a more "passive" listening style, since playlists and algorithms could continue playing ad infinitum without the listener needing to seek out new music themselves. While I certainly see the evidence of that on the charts, I don't think this tells the complete story.

As a less cynical counter-argument, streaming has made it easier for listeners to find music that otherwise wouldn't have been marketed to them. I believe that this could be one of the factors behind reggaeton finding a growing audience among English speakers. Obviously reggaeton did not originate this year. The roots of the genre can be traced back to the 1980's in Panama where it would later grow an even larger audience in Puerto Rico. The genre would grow in popularity in the States as well, especially in the early 2000's. But if you weren't paying attention to Spanish language music (and you didn't grow up in the Southwest), it was easy for mainstream audiences to miss it. Reggaeton includes influences from dancehall and hip-hop, so it makes sense that the genre would find a mainstream English-speaking audience when those two genres were also shaping pop music. Because Despacito wasn't just big for a reggaeton song. It wasn't even big for a Latin pop song. Despacito led to Daddy Yankee becoming the sixth most listened-to artist on Spotify in 2017, and led to an influx of Latin and reggaeton artists who were able to cross over without English language remixes. Billboard magazine has an article here about the "Despacito Effect".

[newnoirstories]

Dark, Surreal Noir Comedy

[Once again, the inclusion of a religious or mystical practice in any of my stories does not constitute an endorsement of it.]

"Arjuna's Bow"

Chapter I

Detective Sammy Drayson, NYPD, dealt mainly with crime in the East Village. Art, drugs and the occasional homicide, Drayson thought. Drayson specialized in the homicides.

1986 was the year, the hipsters of the new kind were rising, the kind Broadway would immortalize, the kind that would be cliché in two or three decades, but at the time, they were the new hippies, and being one meant something, whether you liked them or not.

But then, there was the other side of it: The addiction, the AIDS epidemic, both so common among the artists, and wherever there were narcotics, some would fight to the death over them, others to the death over who sold them, and then there were those who killed for reasons no one understood.

But while Drayson, who believed in nothing he could not see, pored over the tedious red tape at his desk, in an apartment in East Village, Apartment 61 on 13th Street, a woman known to her neighbors only as "Adam L", no context or explanation, was trying to invoke powers at which the cynical Sammy would have laughed, but soon he would believe.

Taking an ebony wand, hardly a traditional wand of the old Druids, given where ebony trees grow, Adam L touched it to the portrait of a man, then to a treasure chest of sorts, and back and forth, chanting in the old Enochian language of Dee and Kelley, until finally, with a yell, she exclaimed, very much in English, "Puppet!"

Chapter II

On a rainy day about a week later, the first of several unsolved homicides occurred. No robbery, no apparent motive: A 52-year-old man out walking his dog was the victim, taken by surprise with a knife. Though his faithful canine friend obviously put up a fight, and likely left some mark on the assailant, the dog, mixed in breed, was too small to prevent the crime.

Drayson heard of the case, but it seemed like the random act of a junkie, and no leads could be found… until four days later, when similar injuries were found on the remains of woman, 27, on the same street, then, just over a week later, an elderly couple, octogenarians at that, all the same: Probably the same weapon, the same lack of motive, and within a radius of less than a quarter of a mile.

Even as Sammy was on the scene of the poor elderly man and woman, in came a call that a young man of 19 died in identical circumstances in a parking lot, perhaps two hundred yards from where Drayson stood, but by now, the killer had gotten away, and Drayson was hearing no end of it from the Captain, though Captain Marsh was concerned more with bad press than with lives.

This time, though, there was a witness, but not one that a district attorney would covet. An old Cornish man, Tom Carew, a painter of some local repute, claimed to get a fleeting glimpse of the killer, but having a limp, he said, it was no use giving chase. In his Cornish dialect, he insisted that the killer was a woman wearing the mask of a man, but also rambled something that Drayson took to be about a man carrying a boom box playing music.

Nine times out of ten, Drayson would have put one word in his notes, that being "gibberish", over such a story, but his job had been threatened, and he was desperate enough to take dilligent notes, in so far as he could understand Cornish:

"Flick o' the wan' o' the cunning wom'n, 'tis what took the souls. Street 13 an' oak, proper fit for her, pale and wan wi' a wan', she is. Looks a maid, 'tis old in deed. Cunning maid pilfered the ol' swag chest 'o Blood Barq."

Such was Carew's explanation of who he thought responsible for the crime he had witnessed.

Chapter III

"I am so desperate," remarked Drayson at headquarters, "That I'm going to Sleepy Brown."

David "Sleepy" Brown was a Lieutenant in the force, 62 years of age, whose greatest asset to the force was as a historian and linguist. He had solved many an antiques caper and fraud, spoke and wrote perfect Greek, Latin, Spanish and Hebrew, as well as English and every Celtic language, and though not from Cornwall, but from Devon, originally, before his parents moved him, as a child, to New York, it was for this last bit of expertise that Drayson needed him.

With typical lack of protocol, finding an unlocked door, Drayson simply let himself in to Brown's office, where the old man seemed to be nodding off, fitting his nickname. Drayson sneered.

"Lovely sneer, Detective. By the way, the sole of your right shoe needs mending," remarked the Lieutenant, revealing that, as was so often the case, his drowsy appearance was an act, "You are here about the Cornish witness, I presume?"

Analyzing Drayson's jumbled notes, Brown opined, "Look for an Apartment 61 on 13th Street, and if you find a woman fond of Druid wands and treasure chests, you will find someone relevant to your investigation."

"How on earth do you know what apartment to look for?"

"This… shall we say, eccentric old fellow was speaking in a sort of mystical code. 61 is the gematria- that's a kind of esoteric code- for 'oak'."

"What about Blood Bark?"

"Blood Barq, with a 'q', Detective, though there are several theories as to the etymology. It's a legend of a British pirate with a lost treasure. No one knows his real name, or even whether he existed with certainty, so they call him Blood Barq."

"You are seriously proposing that a dead pirate has something to do with this case?"

"No, I am proposing that a delusional person might believe he did, however."

With that, Brown closed his eyes and returned to what was either slumber or meant to give that impression.

Chapter IV

Detective Drayson found an Apartment 61 on 13th Street, not far from where the murders occurred, but while a woman's voice answered, all she would say is that, if he had no search warrant, he was not welcome, and that she would answer no questions. It was Adam L's apartment, and Drayson scrambled off to try to find her birth name, but before this, another unexpected witness, as it seemed, came forward.

A man was at the station claiming to be the man with the boom box seen by Carew, saying that his conscience was bothering him. His name was George Clay.

"Okay, officers, I'm taking the chance. You know I got a record and I don't want no trouble, but I swear to you, I didn't know anything about a murder."

"What did you know?" asked Drayson, in his sternest voice.

"Look, all I know is this man, sunglasses and a beard, maybe a fake beard, I don't know. Sunglasses and it was rainin'. Anyhow, he shows me this freaky person, not sure if it was a guy or a girl, but anyway, he says he'll pay me $500 just to follow him, or her, or whatever around and play my boom box for a few blocks, as long as I play the song he wants."

"What song?"

"'Tragedy', a Bee Gees song. Now I'm more a funk man, and that ain't…"

"Get to the point!"

"Anyhow, this crazy person freaks hearin' the song, pulls a knife and attacks the nearest person, as far as I could see, some skinny white kid."

"And you did nothing?"

"Look, man, I got a record. I panicked, okay? But I'm here now, right, and I didn't have to tell you anything, or even let you know I was there!"

Chapter V

Kenny "Dum Dum" Wallace Jr. was the bassist for a struggling glam metal act calling itself "Long Live the Buzz Flies". On his way to a poorly-built recording studio aptly named "The Leaky Roof", he was approached by a man with a beard and sunglasses, again on an overcast day, offered $500 for the simple act of carrying a boom box playing "Tragedy" by the Bee Gees and following someone, someone with the face of a man, but a feminine walk.

Wallace shrugged, and did as instructed, but as in Clay's story, the strange person flew into a frenzy, pulled a knife, and for a moment, Dum Dum thought he was the intended target, but instead, the victim was a 39-year-old accountant, Anderson Tall. This time, though, there was a witness to the entire sequence of events, and not only the killing, Marjorie "Meddler" Davison, a 67-year-old woman feared as much as any man on the streets, in her own way, as a notorious gossip rumored to leverage information for blackmail, someone who knew everything about everybody, it seemed.

She considered blackmailing the band, until attending one of their concerts and seeing the small crowd. Instead, Davison went to the police, but tried to insist on being paid for her information.

"In the first place, Meddler," said Drayson sharply, "If we paid you, it would set a precedent where every lowlife like you could shake us down. Second, it would destroy the credibility of what you saw, to the DA. How about you tell us what happened and we won't go after you for about, maybe, six or seven blackmail operations you have going on at this moment?"

With that, Davison described what she had seen, and the pattern was undeniable, if grotesque. Drayson was planning on looking into whether anyone known to be unstable, like an escaped hospital patient, might be involved, when Lieutenant Brown casually strolled into the room with a dossier on just such a person, Courtney Randall Cline, noted as "paranoid schizophrenic", "homicidal ideations", yet for some reason given permission, just two days before the killings began, "to visit family".

Chapter VI

Uniformed police and street gossip had it that Courtney Cline was living out of a van, an old hippie one, but painted over a silvery gray. Police approached her, and she was wearing a mask in the detailed likeness of a man, though which man was unclear.

"I don't care if you're cops. You play that disco song, you die."

The officers, with great difficulty, cuffed her as a dangerous suspect, but she calmed down when promised that no disco music would be played, and after that, blandly and indifferently recounted committing all six murders, explaining that strange men kept following her with "that horrid song", and "made me do it". When asked about the mask, which she removed only with reluctance, she said that she found it in her room at the mental hospital, and it was a likeness of William "Wolf" Woolley, soon verified as an actual patient in the same wing of the same hospital, and a known murderer himself, albeit found insane. Woolley, however, had been in the hospital during all six killings, and so could not have been directly involved.

Courtney R. Cline was arrested on six counts of second-degree murder, though it was suspected that she would, like Wolf, be acquitted by an insanity defense.

"You think you have solved the case, eh, Drayson?" said Brown, ambling out of nowhere with his customary quiet ease.

"Of course, and you don't?"

"We know who physically carried out the crimes, but why this same song, and this mysterious man I hear of, the false beard and the $500 offers to random men?"

"I admit that is odd, but how can I ever prove any of that?"

The Lieutenant shook his head and smiled, "If you would only use a bit of imagination, Detective. None of Cline's notes say anything about a fixation regarding music, as one might reasonably expect if said music drove her into homidical fits."

"And what does that suggest, Sherlock Holmes?" asked Drayson insolently.

"Sherlock is suggesting that someone at the hospital conditioned Miss Cline as a sort of post-hypnotic suggestion. Follow that lead to the ends of the earth, Detective. Now, if you'll excuse me, I have to go back to earning the nickname 'Sleepy'."

Chapter VII

Again reluctantly following Sleepy's advice, Drayson found, rather to his surprise, that Wolf Woolley's notes did indeed include the warning, "Violent reaction to disco". There could also be no question that Cline's mask was a perfect likeness of Woolley.

Dr. Karl Steele gave the NYPD full access to both records and to the premises. One thing struck Drayson, however: All of the staff agreed that, at least in Cline's absence, there could be no question that Woolley was their most dangerous patient, yet Wolf was not in the "isolation room", a sort of equivalent of solitary confinement.

"That's Dr. Steele's idea," explained a nurse, "He said that Mr. Woolley is incurable, nothing changes him, but that the isolation room might change the behavior of some of the other patients."

Detective Drayson was permitted to look into the isolation room, and could scarcely believe the surreal horror within: A man in a straitjacket wore also a mask of William Woolley's likeness, as faintly, the song "Tragedy" could be heard playing, interspersed with the voice of Wolf ranting his hatred of the disco genre, and back and forth, causing the patient to writhe in torment.

The nurses and orderlies seemed to think nothing of this, calling it "an experimental therapy" and "Dr. Steele's idea". An even greater shock: Detective Drayson was suddenly face to face with the gaunt yet imposing figure of Dr. Karl Steele, his deeply recessed eyes glistening cold malevolence, a tight-lipped smile seeming to speak death.

Chapter VIII

Even Drayson's hardened nerves got a terrible start, but suddenly, Steele's demeanor seemed to relax, and he laughed, albeit with a cynical ring.

"Detective, Detective, we mustn't have anxiety. I let you see that. I knew that you would deduce it sooner or later- either you or that old Lieutenant."

"You're the killer!" exclaimed Drayson.

"The killer? I never touched a soul, never gave any instructions to anyone so much as to jaywalk, Detective."

"Conditioning… you hypnotized them!"

"Welcome to the future. The quaint moral laws of Abrahamic times are dying slowly, Detective. There are chessmasters and there are pawns. I have demonstrated that I am a chessmaster. Mr. Woolley… well, he has the will to power, but not the clarity. I have both. You have the potential for both too, Detective. I read in your eyes a deep distrust for the lies of the old ways, and a potential for the new."

"Maybe so," replied Drayson, recovering his nerve, "But what you fail to read is that I would rather die than break my oath to uphold the law. You won't touch me, will you, Doctor? You want others to do the dirty work."

"That is what you call it," shrugged Steele, "But return as you like, you have nothing on me."

The next day, Detective Samuel Drayson, instructing his uniformed help to wait outside the building, returned to the hospital, barging directly into Steele's private office.

"I've been expecting you, but to what avail?" smugly cooed the Doctor.

"That's right. You never said a word. Never told them to do a thing."

"Exactly…"

"Neither did I…" Drayson retorted, his eyes set cold as the Doctor's. Into the room, unrestrained and feral, lurched William Woolley himself, a sight that shook even Dr. Steele.

With a theatrical air, Drayson took out a tape recorder, then stepped back, so that Wolf was closest to the Doctor.

"Tragedy, when the feeling's gone, and you can't go on, it's tragedy…"

In the frenzy of a rabid beast, Wolf attacked, fists and teeth, as Dr. Steele screamed, the last sounds he would ever make, as Drayson locked the door behind the two, escaping as hospital staff desperately rushed to respond.

Chapter IX

"Wolf will be trying to escape, likely out the front way, and if not, I have men at the back," said Drayson.

Indeed, Wolf, covered in evidence of his savage attack on the late Dr. Steele, helped himself to the front exit, only to be captured by nine policemen, one of them Drayson, though not before biting one of them.

Wolf looked up at one of the cops, who in spite of the struggle, still had a cigarette in his mouth. For the first time, Woolley spoke, laughing and saying to the smoker, "You're crazy too."

Meanwhile, somewhere in the United States of America, the quality control inspector of the very cigarette this policeman smoked lived a life in turmoil, his wife having an affair as he tried to drown his sorrow. As the factory man threw a bottle of whiskey at a photograph of his wedding, Jeremy Thomas met with the flashes of cameras. Thomas was founder, chairman and CEO of Jeremy Thomas Holdings, which held a controlling share in the liquor company profiting from the broken man's sorrow, but he was announcing giving a portion of his billions to United Governments, a philanthropic organization dedicated to world peace.

The flash of the cameras gave way to the flash of lightning, however, as the money Thomas "donated" was being illicitly invested in the Medellín Cartel of Colombia, as haggard Colombian workers picked coca leaves in a storm of rain and thunder, the lightning giving way to neon lights in the middle of the night, somewhere in an American city, a man slumped over, a man broken by cocaine.

Jeremy Thomas, as it turned out, had not always been wealthy, though he had always been unscrupulous. Prior to his wealth, he was briefly married to Lillian Morgan, now calling herself "Adam L", bitter over never having touched Jeremy's later fortune. If the Fates were not capricious enough, the very secretary named as co-respondent by Morgan in her divorce from Thomas had, in turn, just married none other than Lieutenant David Brown, twenty-four years her senior, as if an aging Sherlock Holmes wed a surviving Jayne Mansfield, though Mansfield, of course, was more clever than the public knew.

Brown's loud sounds on the wedding night, in somewhat of a British accent, annoyed the neighbors. Meanwhile, Detective Sammy Drayson, ever the contrarian, was a basketball fan, but not a fan of the New York Knicks, but of the Boston Celtics, and on a rare vacation, was in Boston, watching the most successful playoff run of the 1985-86 Boston Celtics, for once forgetting the wretched world around him.

The end.

[dandelion-wings]

Seamus, at least, feels like the type who’d want more power, even if Varka doesn’t really care for it. We know he’s definitely more politically inclined than Varka at least, as indicated by him actually being present for the meeting with Dottore meanwhile Varka just sent Kaeya to do his job for him. And rarely are religious figures the paragons of virtue they often present themselves as, especially in the pre-modern era—rising through the ranks of the Church was, after all, the primary route to power for those who had neither noble blood nor great physical talent/combat prowess.

Then you look at how Barbara ended up under his parentage (i.e. not good) and yeah, I could see a Seamus as someone who would be just fine with eroding away Mondstadt’s democracy for his own personal gain.

As for Varka, if he really does get involved in such as plot (as unlikely as it is), I could only maybe see it happening because Seamus ropes him in with the reasoning of ‘less democracy = less bureaucracy and paperwork for him to deal with = more time for having fun and/or fighting monsters’—but that would very much be Seamus luring him in as a lackey, rather than Varka doing it of his own accord or even doing it as an equal partner to Seamus.

It’s more likely he’d just not notice that anything’s going on at all.

I'm gonna be honest with you, Anon, I'm... not really sure where you're getting this? Seamus' one appearance is in the manga, where he shows up for a fancy party with political implications, as a major figure in the civil side of government should, brings Kaeya in to ask a loaded question, then thanks Diluc for delaying the Fatui and expresses distress (that we have absolutely no reason to believe insincere; the manga even gives him a panel on his clenched fist) that innocents have suffered because the Ordo can't more firmly keep the Fatui out. And then tells Kaeya the Fatui have left town in what seems to be drunken excitement. (It's been a while since I re-read the manga, and I hadn't caught it before, but the way he and Kaeya coordinate there suggests an interesting relationship between those two....)

Which, overall, suggests a guy who's somewhat politically savvy, but not tremendously politically skilled (since he is polite with Dottore and gets him out of the way, but relies on Kaeya and Diluc to actually handle him), feels responsibility and/or compassion for the innocent people of Mondstadt, and participates freely in Mondstadt's drinking culture. (The last of which I am contrasting to my own headcanons about Fredrica. XD)

Religion was a path to power in pre-modern times, but there were also many, many people, including in the power structure, who genuinely believed and were doing their best to follow their own tenets! Their interpretation of those tenets may also have benefited them--that's human nature, I say as a religious person who is very aware that I am deliberately following an interpretation of my own religious tenets that many other people who share them would disagree with--but we have no evidence or reason to believe that Seamus is cynically or deliberately using his position to erode democracy and consolidate his own power. I'd argue, in fact, that his manga appearance argues against that particular take. Now, from what he says there about how if the Ordo was stronger they could have prevented the Fatui from hurting people, you could get someone who's seeking more power for himself and the Ordo with the belief that they'll better protect Mondstadt that way, but that doesn't seem to be how you're presenting it?

(Also, how Barbara turned out seems to me to be pretty explicitly, from her lore, Gunnhildr Trauma, possibly with a side of Seamus being neglectful and/or just not having a clue how to deal with it. Her lore has a lot about how her feelings of unworthiness stemmed from her mother, and only mentions him as encouraging her to become a healer; I agree that becoming a healer was bad for her mental health too, but the root cause there is the mental health, not the healing. She could be a pastry chef or a clerk and she would have the same issues.)

Now, if this interpretation is one you want to run with for a story, or even a headcanon, you can do so! We have very little on Seamus, and it's possible to say he was putting on a front in his manga appearances. That's just not the first conclusion I'm going to leap to when there's no other indications or hints of it (and Hoyo is pretty good at hinting when someone is lying or putting on a front. By 'hinting' I mean 'painting a signpost twenty feet tall.' They ain't subtle). If what you are proposing is the plot for a specific story, then... well, that's not how I'm reading the asks, but I may be missing a cue; feel free to continue exploring it yourself, but it's not really one that I'm interested in building upon myself. If what you're proposing is an overall drawing-from-canon character interpretation, then I'm sorry, but I just don't think you have the evidence.

[dmagedgoods]

1, 4, 6, 7, 8 for the BG3 asks?

Ohh thank you! ❤ 1: Where in the Faerûn is your Tav from? He was born in Red Larch but he left (fled) with his twin brother when they still were pretty young. For some years, they lived in many different places and earned money in almost every way possible. Eventually, they stayed in Baldur’s Gate and that’s where Rowley spent the major part of his life. 4: If your Tav was a companion, where would they be found? Very early, after you collected Astarion and before you find Gale, in the wreckage of the Nautiloid, hiding in the shadows and playfully threatening the MC once they cross the area. I even wrote the little scene: here. 6: What companion are you platonically close with? Shadowheart. Rowley and she had great chemistry from the start. Shadowheart gets his humor and answers with dry irony when he makes a remark. Rowley highly enjoys this. Furthermore, they share a "not my problem" demeanor in many cases. Although he doesn't understand religious zealotry at all and is skeptical of her devotion to Shar, it’s more a protective wariness because he had his share of bad experiences with fanatical cults. But as long as she doesn’t start preaching? To each their own and all that. And it’s fun for him to gather books and small treasures with Shar-connection and to gift them to her. Shadowheart started trusting him and opens up to him and in return, he views her as an actual friend. Gale. Rowley mocked him at first. “That's lots of pompous drivel for so little action.” “The doing good mage, the ‘eat your dinner’-type, the camp daddy no one asked for”. His opinion changed drastically! When he killed the monster hunter with/for Astarion, Rowley expected a ‘Gale disapproves’ and a tiring, amusing little speech about right and wrong. Instead, Gale said that he's glad he protected Astarion and to see that they have each other's back in this group and Rowley actually was highly surprised (rare). He started to see Gale with different eyes and realized that he is none of those preachers he despises but someone who means his kindness. And that he has some for people like Astarion and him too. The more he learns about his story, the more he likes him. Often, he sits with him for a while when they're in the camp. Gale makes it surprisingly easy for him to open up a little himself (rare again). With him, Rowley even talks about some of his concerns regarding Astarion and the struggles coming with his own feelings. Those two started to build a deep friendship. 7: Romantically close with? Astarion. He developed a spontaneous crush on him the very moment he felt his knife on his throat and ended up on the ground with him. His attempt amused him and he quickly found himself intrigued by his way of talking, his voice and choice of words, his gestures, his posture, his arrogance and pride, and the lofty distance he created. Rowley’s fascination only became stronger when he woke up to his fangs near his neck. (And had them in his neck about ten minutes later.) Unfortunately, this enjoyable little crush on this lying, eloquent, well-read, witty, cruel, graceful, delightfully fallible, attempting-to-be-manipulative, conceited, cynical vampire developed into actual feelings for him so fast that he still is a little overwhelmed by his own reactions. Are they close, that’s the true question. Rowley strongly wishes so. It’s clear that he can’t truly trust him so far, but he has Astarion’s back, no matter what will happen, and there is little he wouldn’t give and do to see him happy. Astarion doesn’t seem to believe him (yet). They have an amazing dynamic, a similar worldview and humor, work greatly together, and shared moments of actual intimacy here and there. But it’s all very new and a relationship that merely just started at my point in the game. While Rowley is aware that Astarion does enjoy their time together, he suspects that he mostly tries to gain an advantage with the romantic aspects. 8: Who are they suspicious of?

In the very beginning? Of Astarion more than anyone. But since Rowley falls in love with him fast, he doesn’t mind being suspicious of him, and the fact that he barely can believe a word he says for quite some time becomes painful instead of a concern for his own wellbeing.

Aside from that? Rowley doesn’t trust fast in general but also doesn’t mind that distance. Everyone tends to be out for themselves, it’s only natural. But at the same time, they are all in the tadpole mess together. He assumes no one in the camp will try to slit his throat (well, no one but Astarion and Lae’zel so far), and if he’s wrong about that? Well, they’ll have to overpower him first.

[seriousfic]

So. The First Omen. I only know about the other Omens from, y'know, osmosis, but weirdly enough, this is in continuity with those three movies from the seventies, complete with a Gregory Peck reference. It's a generally well-made movie, but odd as a prequel, with a downright bizarre sequel hook. And as you might expect, it doesn't much engage with its own religious horror nature, preferring to comment on bodily autonomy and feminism, however subtly. At one point, the heroine says "They tell us we're bad, but only because they say we're bad" or words to that effect. And you have to wonder what a devout Catholic and aspiring nun in the seventies is doing with that much pop psychology.

Personally, if I didn't believe in original sin, I probably wouldn't endeavor to become a nun, but that's just me.

Anyway, there's some interesting stuff going on, but it's all spoilery, so I'll put it behind the cut.

Okay, I haven't watched the original trilogy, so maybe this is something there's precedent for, but I was under the impression that the cultists who were supporting and enabling the Anti-Christ were... you know... run-of-the-mill Satanists. The First Omen retcons that to them actually being rogue Catholics who are creating the Anti-Christ in order to get more people to go to church.

(You'd think a bunch of priests would know that the Anti-Christ showing up is basically game over for planet Earth, not "he causes trouble for a while and gets defeated and everyone now knows the Devil is real, back to watching Dynasty everyone!.")

This plot twist makes Satan seem pretty wimpy, since he isn't even able to get his own followers to bring about the End Times, he has to hitch his wagon to naughty Catholics. Which is actually probably the most Biblical thing in this movie, that Satan doesn't have any actual strength, he can only take advantage of misguided Christians. But still, it makes it so the Apocalypse is basically the result of a bureaucratic blunder, which is a bit deflating, purely thematically speaking.

And it seems to me these villains, whoever they are, have three competing motivations.

Father Brennan, who is the movie's big conspiracy exposition guy, says that they're just ambitious assholes, essentially cynical and secular, who are afraid of losing power as atheism takes hold and want to drive people back to the Church to secure their own privileges. This doesn't make much sense to me. Like you have one evil nun who commits suicide, another who volunteers to be raped by a demon... Bill Nighty is getting on in years, does he really think he's going to be around long enough to benefit from this Anti-Christ creation and backlash plot? If these people are just in it for material gain, what are they actually getting out of this?

Also, if you ask me, it seems like they would save themselves a bunch of time and energy by just declaring for Satan in the first place instead of this roundabout "serving God by serving Satan" plot. I mean, if you're just in it for power, why prevaricate?

The villains themselves act like religious zealots: lots of talk about sacrifice and the greater good. They seem to sincerely be trying to drive people back to the Church in order to save their souls, even if they're doing it in a retarded horror movie way.

And then there's the Satanists, because there have to be legitimate hail Satan types in there somewhere, right? All the bad guys in the original movies couldn't have been devoted Catholics just trying to up church attendance, right? So did the Satanists infiltrate this plot and take it over? Were they just sitting back and letting the Catholics do the hard work and then they stepped in to legitimately take over the world? Is there a mismatched buddy comedy in there where one straitlaced Catholic has to team up with a crazy rock and roll Satanist to raise the Anti-Christ?

Wait, that's just Good Omens, never mind.

Next to lastly, I know the original trilogy ended with a movie called The Final Conflict where Christ Our Savior returned to soundly defeat Damian and usher in paradise on Earth. That would seem to close out the franchise, to me, but First ends with the reveal that there are multiple failed Anti-Christs out there who are vaguely good-aligned and just living off the grid.

So I'm trying to imagine what that sequel would look. Damian's mom and aunt and sister all going through some horror movie shit and we'll try to pretend there are some stakes even though in a couple decades, the world will end and everyone who isn't condemned to Hell gets to live in God's Glory for all eternity.

I guess people enjoyed Rogue One enough, but I'm trying to imagine what could be going on in the background of the Anti-Christ's rise to power and the Second Coming of Christ that people really need to know about.

Lastly, if you're the evil Catholic Church and you just want to get people to go to church... maybe just show them the jackal demon you've got in the basement instead of having it fuck a bunch of women. That seems simpler, right?

[grandhotelabyss]

Somewhere or other I recall you referring to a scientistic turn in the academy after the era of theory. For those of us who never got that far, what does this mean?

Around the turn of the millennium, many thinkers turned against theory on the grounds that it was politically disabling, idealist rather than materialist, and tending toward nihilism and cynicism. Some of the figureheads in this turn had themselves been associated with theory, such as Edward Said (who abandoned theory for a more grounded focus on practical politics and human rights) and Eve Kosofsky Sedgwick (who decried theory as leading toward paranoia and absolutism). Some figures newer to American academe—e.g., Žižek and Badiou, then at the peak of their influence—still drew on Continental philosophy but to bolster Marxist universalism rather than the pluralism of theory. The scientistic turn proper comes with the late Bruno Latour, who asked in 2004, "Why Has Critique Run Out of Steam?" In his view, theory led to a corrosive skepticism about the possibility of knowledge that echoed the irrationalism and anti-scientific attitudes of the political right, then dominated (in America) by its Evangelical wing, and of conspiracy theorists.

What has become of critique when my neighbor in the little Bourbonnais village where I live looks down on me as someone hopelessly naive because I believe that the United States had been attacked by terrorists? Remember the good old days when university professors could look down on unsophisticated folks because those hillbillies naively believed in church, motherhood, and apple pie? Things have changed a lot, at least in my village. I am now the one who naively believes in some facts because I am educated, while the other guys are too unsophisticated to be gullible: “Where have you been? Don’t you know that the Mossad and the CIA did it?”

He proposed instead a revival of "realism" oriented toward "matters of concern," which is to say an intellectual presumption of the obdurate reality of such urgent facts as war and the environmental crisis. In literary studies specifically, this was the moment of Franco Moretti, with his proposal for "distant reading," essentially the application of quantitative sociological methods to the newly digitized corpus of literature the better to understand literary history in terms of capitalism and domination. Digital humanities, as I understand it, follows from this. There was affect theory, which, despite the sentimental ring of the phrase, departs from psychoanalysis's focus on the inner life and poststructuralism's focus on language to re-orient attention to the transports of the body. There was the cognitive turn, applying cognitive psychology and neuroscience to the theory and practice of reading. There was even a brief fashion—counter-signaling the anti-Darwinian religious right—for evolutionary theories of literature, though this proved short-lived. And then in the last decade or so the vogue for "the anthropocene" and climate-everything. But I haven't assiduously kept up since leaving grad school in 2013 since, if I may, I don't even like theory!

Underlying this turn is probably the shift in academic leftism from a New Left orientation where humanities intellectuals saw themselves as fighting alongside the global dispossessed against a mechanized society overseen by white men in gray suits to these intellectuals' new understanding that they themselves are administrators and may turn administration toward the ends of enlightenment, especially since the global dispossessed have proved such a disappointing revolutionary subject, always running after demagogues and disparaging expertise. In other words, the professoriate once identified with the forces challenging western empire (e.g., the Maoist influence on theory) but now sees itself as this empire's ethical vanguard against the threat of backward elites, restive populisms, and their 21st-century insurgencies against the system (e.g., 9/11, Trump's election).

[theinstagrahame]

I got a bit cynical after a close family funeral a few years ago, and started to feel as though a fair number of people who cycle through your life after a funeral aren't really there to comfort you, they're there to comfort themselves about comforting you.

Like, you'll have the friends who hop in to the logistics and take care of stuff for you, this isn't about them.

This is about the people you haven't really kept up with outside of like Facebook, who emerge, condole, and vanish again. And for them, they bring their assumptions about what you need. Usually religious, even if you don't share a religion with them (at least, most of mine were people I knew when I was a Christian and hadn't spoken to in like 15 years). So they hit me with the "better place" thing and the "God's plan" nonsense. And I felt the same faux pas that OP is describing.

But it wasn't really for me, it was for them. And it was unfortunate, because I was actually dealing with some shit, but they also needed the reassurance that they had done their part. And there's not really a great way to deal with them, aside from nearly dissociating through those interactions.

I also think about a conversation on (I think) the Allusionist podcast, about how the phrase "I'm sorry for your loss" doesn't *feel* adequate (at least to the person saying it), which is another reason people try to hit you with the religious platitudes. But there are other cultures and languages where they don't even have that phrase, so those interactions tend to be more awkward, with no real script for them.

Just made me a lot more grateful for the "sorry for your loss" people, because they weren't like... Trying to impress me when I was already depressed.

I know I just restating the point of that post but respecting religious freedom will sometimes require you to respect someone's belief that religious beliefs are categorically untrue, and there are a lot of people who are unable to handle this, and even more people who think they agree with this but haven't really grappled with what it means.