#and it's definitely not as if criticizing the behaviour of the gods was exclusive to christians

[deathlessathanasia]

Kronos swallows his children and is awful, terrible and deserving of Tartaros for it, but Zeus does the same to a pregnant woman and nobody gives a shit. Ok then.

[honestlyvan]

id be really interested to see you talk about the dynamic btwn Haseo and Ovan + how it changes over time, love ur dothack thoughts so far

(Now on DW!)

I had to take a vigorous walk around the block and a shower before I could sit down to write this, lmao.

God, nonny, they are So Much. An unbelievable amount, even.

To step back from the mythical framing for a little bit and to just look at them as people, one of the things that makes me bark like a dog the worst is how all of the Epitaph are all circling and struggling with the similar kinds of of identity issues -- presumably being the reason the Epitaphs attached themselves to them, there's no room in the mind of people who are too secure in who they are to carry the duties of a Phase with them.

Each of the Epitaphs represent the temptation to fall into a variety of self-protective but futile failure modes that let you define yourself on your own terms but ultimately limit growth, and while I have thoughts about all of the Epitaph users and how they interact with each other, I definitely think Haseo and Ovan get the version of it that is the most brutal in its compatibility.

For Haseo, Skeith represents a temptation to do as thou wilst, to eschew a communal and social identity in favour of only exclusively defining himself -- which is, incidentally, how Ovan comes across initially. You could not find a guy who moves through the world with more assurance and less need to explain himself. Ovan appears to have a kind of singularity of identity that nobody else can get a word in edgewise -- and Haseo, who spends a lot of time feeling off and unsure and wordlessly anxious about having lost sight of who he is, that's like the holy grail.

Of course, the reason Ovan is so singular in his identity is because his sense of self is practically transparent and he exists almost exclusively as the life-support system for a machine that makes Aina happy. From the start, there's no way for Ovan to recognise Haseo the way he wants to be recognised because Ovan barely knows who he is, let alone what Haseo sees in him that is so admirable because Ovan is just reflecting back the thing Haseo wants to see in himself.

Because in contrast to the fundamental mistake in Haseo's thinking, Ovan is very clear-eyed about what Haseo is like. That's one of the core paradoxes of his character, he's very good at reading other people and completely oblivious to how they read him back. He's great at anticipating and manipulating people's behaviour, but is critically disconnected about how he should feel about the way other people feel about him. Haseo needs to see him as something to chase and grow into? Okay, if that's what he needs to be, it's as simple as that. The terms of their relationship are set forever now.

So, in a way, as much as Ovan's plan relies on Haseo growing as a person, as much as he frames it in those terms, what he actually needs is for Haseo to stay exactly the same. Stay exactly on the terms that Ovan needs him to stay on for his plan to succeed. Ovan can never let Haseo reach him because that would change the terms of their relationship, and make him truly unmanageable.

Which, really, is just how Ovan deals with everything in his life. He keeps it all at a distance, because he doesn't really have a sense of self to let people close to, except in the sense that he knows everything that has happened to cause this situation has been done by him, and that the only way to set it right is to find a way to cross himself out again. And if he has to let Haseo catch up to him, it's explicitly so Haseo can be his executioner, and help him rectify the mistake of existing in the world in the first place. Corbenik, the meaning of life and death, can only exist in the void.

And tbh, if Ovan's plans had actually worked out on the timetable he intended them to work out on, I think Haseo may have been fulfilled by that. From the start, he sees himself as the aspirant to Ovan's paragon, wants to reach him through his own effort, to exist in the world the same way he thinks Ovan does.

However, the rest of Haseo's arc is learning that none of us exist in the world alone. That we are defined by the experiences we have with other people. If he reaches Ovan and Ovan is no longer there, what does it still matter to have reached him?

[dwellordream]

“…Written in the early 1380s, Troilus and Criseyde engages with a growing English cultural interest in and anxiety about interiority, particularly as it was evident within the courtly love discourse of Chaucer’s immediate audience: the court of Richard II. During these early years of Richard’s reign, the evidence suggests that courtly love discourse flourished—both within courtly lyric and within the speech of courtiers themselves—and this discourse was coming to structure what it meant to be a noble man within the court. Through this discourse, royal subjects sought to construct stable, coherent identities by imagining their interior states in relation to an uncontrollable external power—not the monarch to whom they were literally, physically subject but a person to whom they were figuratively and emotionally subject: the female beloved.

Fourteenth-century courtly love was a discourse centered on constructing the interiority of the aristocratic male; the language of courtly love allowed male nobles to express and perform the sophistication of their masculine identities. By the end of the fourteenth century, as Richard Firth Green explains, Since the capacity to experience exalted human love was ... restricted entirely to the well-born, it followed that one way in which a man might display his gentility was to suggest that he was in love; thus the conventions by which this emotion was defined, originally pure literary hyperbole, became part of a code of polite behaviour. By engaging in this discourse—speaking of the overwhelming nature of his love and his unswerving loyalty despite the unattainable nature of his beloved—the male courtier demonstrated his own refinement and nobility.

Courtly love rhetoric was an internalization and eroticization of noble status; the use of such rhetoric was a way of performing the inherent nobility of one’s own interiority. Although a male courtier using the rhetoric of courtly love is explicitly speaking of his own interior emotional response to a particular woman, his performance of such rhetoric is shaped by and for a community of aristocratic men. As is now generally recognized, the rhetoric of courtly love is a social discourse of coercive power, asserting the courtier’s dominance over both the female love-object and men of lesser status.

As Susan Crane argues in her study of late medieval court performance, late medieval courtiers “constitute themselves especially by staging their distinctiveness.” Courtly love is such a performance: courtiers publicly perform a largely set script of powerlessness before love in order to demonstrate their private and unique masculine identities. Part of the performance of courtly love entails a lack of concern for the wider social community—after all, when a noble man is in love nothing else should matter—but, despite this apparent lack of concern, courtly love is always a discourse entrenched in social and political power structures.

In Troilus and Criseyde, Chaucer responds to and addresses the court’s interest in masculine interiority in general and courtly love in particular. Chaucer frequently addresses his court audience as “ye loveres” (I, 22) and, in the prologue, he refers to them, not as subjects of Richard II, but as the “God of Loves servantz” (I, 15). Over the course of the poem, Chaucer depicts Troilus as the embodiment of the typical courtly lover: Troilus falls instantly in love with Criseyde, is overwhelmed by his desire for her, becomes sick and helpless from his love-longing, idealizes Criseyde as the perfect woman, and desires nothing other than to serve her. And, indeed, like courtiers who perform courtly love lyrics, Troilus bursts out into his lyrical, narrative-halting Cantici Troili at three times over the course of the poem.

The poem’s interest in interiority extends beyond love, and one of the ways in which Chaucer emphasizes that courtly love is essentially a discourse of interiority is through his use of penitential language. By drawing on this language, Chaucer emphasizes the extent to which courtly discourse, like penitential discourse, is engaged in self-examination and self-definition. In the fourteenth century, inward reflection on the state of one’s own soul became a prominent feature of devotional texts in general and penitential texts in particular; penitential manuals provided readers with, as Katherine Little notes, “a capacious psychological language ... to think about their identity, identity understood as an inner self and as a self in relation to the larger Christian community.”

The language of sacramental confession encouraged penitents to think of themselves as individuals, individuated before God because of the deeply personal nature and willfulness of their sins. In Chaucer’s poem, Pandarus uses penitential terminology in order to help Troilus establish his new identity as a courtly lover precisely because such language offers a way of defining one’s internal state. Particularly in the opening two books, Pandarus extensively and explicitly uses such language, at one point instructing Troilus to repent his former disdain for love and “bet thi brest, and sey to God of Love, ‘Thy grace, lord, for now I me repente, If I mysspak, for now myself I love.’”

Pandarus’s language here is obviously not sincerely penitential, but he invites Troilus to use such language because it gives him a means by which to regard his internal state as both distinctly individual and fitting into recognizable and coherent identity categories. Since Chaucer centers his poem on Trojan men who are deeply invested in courtly love and their own interiority, Chaucer’s Trojan aristocracy bears a striking resemblance to the court of Richard II. By depicting a court apparently more concerned with its courtiers’ interiority than the wider political world, Chaucer’s poem aligns itself with many of the contemporary critiques of Richard II’s early court: namely that Richard was too interested in display of his own monarchical identity—through love discourse, his personal relationships with his inner circle of young courtiers, and lavish courtly display—and not interested enough in national interests, especially war with France.

In the 1380s in particular, Richard’s court was shedding the character of simply a military household and becoming a court that strove, at least in part, to be a court of love. In her recent analysis of the Troilus frontispiece, Joyce Coleman argues that, although we have little evidence of the court life of the period, the evidence we do have suggests that in the early 1380s Richard II was promoting a culture of Love strongly influenced by and modeled on the Roman de la Rose. Indeed, around 1386, at least three Middle English authors, including Chaucer in his Legend of Good Women, produced allegories in which they depict Richard himself as Cupid, the God of Love. The presence of women at court became more common, and Michael Bennett characterizes Richard II’s court during this time period as having “a rather precious, effete character” because of its emphasis on courtly love.

One chronicler particularly critical of Richard’s reign, Thomas Walsingham, famously criticized Richard’s knights for being “knights of Venus rather than of Bellona: more effective in the bedchamber than the field.” In the early 1380s, Richard’s court had constructed a model of masculinity founded on courtly love discourse and the interior identity of the individual courtly lover. This interest in interiority came at a high cost. There seems to have been a widely held belief among his contemporaries that Richard II was particularly interested in promoting himself as a courtly lover leading a court of love, and that this interest came at the expense of England’s claim to the French throne and England’s military dominance.

Many contemporaries, particularly the members of the established nobility displaced by Richard’s own chosen group of young courtiers, criticized Richard II because of his perceived failure as a military leader of England. In contrast to previous royal courts that centered more on martial and chivalric values grounded in the years of war with France, according to chronicle sources, Richard II wanted to end that war, and was simultaneously promoting a lifestyle that celebrated elegance of dress, subtlety of speech, and sophisticated and perhaps indelicate forms of recreation, innovations that were by no means fully consistent with more traditional conceptions of chivalric virtue.

Christopher Fletcher has recently questioned the truth of familiar claims that Richard was strongly committed to peace with France or allegations that the extravagance of Richard’s royal household made it impossible for the king to afford to pursue war; Fletcher argues that, in fact, the Exchequer severely restricted Richard’s funds, and Richard continued to press for grants of taxation for war. However, regardless of Richard’s own motivations, it is true that Richard’s reign saw greatly reduced fighting with France, and many contemporaries did believe that Richard’s court was extraordinarily extravagant.

Whether accurate or not, there was a growing perception—even before the Wonderful Parliament of 1386 and the Merciless Parliament of 1388 were to bring forth explicit allegations that Richard and his inner circle were overly concerned with their own individual wealth and power—that Richard II’s court was fostering an increased interest in the individual courtier, not the social good. Richard’s ambition was to establish his royal household as an autonomous power, as free as possible from the control of the established nobility. According to Lee Patterson, Richard’s development of the court as an exclusive society wholly dedicated to the fulfilment of the wishes of the king was not simply a matter of personal style. It was also part of a political programme aimed at dispossessing the traditional ruling class of England and replacing it with a courtier nobility created by Richard and located largely in the household.

The structure of Richard’s court placed him as the personal center of the court, with courtiers drawing their power directly from the king’s personal generosity. Richard’s rule made the importance of the individual and individual interiority a matter of political concern. If, as Lynn Staley persuasively argues, in the early part of his reign Richard himself was engaged and interested in “a vigorous, highly charged, and carefully coded conversation about authority,” then we can regard Troilus and Criseyde as taking part in this ongoing conversation. When Chaucer depicts Troilus’s obsession with his own internal state as contributing to the fall of Troy, he warns that the Ricardian court’s current interest in masculine interiority is one that is potentially dangerous to the English kingdom itself.

As I will show, over the course of the poem, Chaucer examines the dangers of an overemphasis on the interior state of the male nobility, rather than national and military interests, and casts suspicion on Troilus for privileging his interior state of love-longing over his military status as a prince of Troy. While Chaucer does not launch a direct critique of Richard II’s kingship, he expresses a deep anxiety about what would happen in a kingdom in which the ruling class set too high a value on their individual interior states at the expense of the national interest.”

- Jennifer Garrison, “Chaucer's Troilus and Criseyde and the Danger of Masculine Interiority.”

[delusion-of-negation]

okay maybe this is just me being nd and confused but it seems like a bunch of people are disagreeing over the definition of a subjective word which makes this entire conversation about whether or not the videos are 'cute' and what that means kind of pointless.

Like as someone whose familiar with animal behavior those videos aren't aesthetically cute to me because I see a stressed animal, or a dangerous interaction, and that's not pleasing at all. I understand if that's different for others but I can't grasp why one persons morals/ethics having or not having an effect on their definition should be considered more valid then others especially for something as subjective as 'cuteness'.

Aesthetic preferences can be completely separate from moral and ethics yeah and there isn't anything wrong with them being separate or joined, but the idea that no one ever has their aesthetic preferences effected by either seeems, bizzare to me? Especially when both can have a large effect on how you percive the world and your experiences within it.

the issue is that, as I said in my reblogs, there really is a growing (but also historic, it's not at all exclusively recent) trend of conflating what is aesthetic/pleasing with what is moral. you'll often see "consensual incest is disgusting" as someone's entire argument for why they think it's immoral, same with antis and fictional shit with dark themes (or loli or whatever). gross is not synonymous with immoral, and nor is cute synonymous with moral. something may stop being cute for you because it's immoral, but it simply isn't correct to conflate the two. what I took from that post was exactly that, and that as a result op doesn't like that the names of all the blogs that assess harm, risk, and morality of animal behaviour (which I'm also familiar to some degree with and have the same reaction of not finding certain things cute) will usually have some kind of reference to cuteness. this actually is a huge problem when it comes to a situation like pugs. the narrative went from all the info about their health issues to a militant "pugs aren't cute", that even extended to a lot of terrible posts I've seen where comments all just shit on the pug - calling it an ugly, horrific animal that shouldn't exist; not that the breed should be phased out, that a particular animal shouldn't be alive, a specific individual. there's also hounding owners with similar vile things when they upload pictures, just talking about real living individuals so overtly cruelly. to me, that sort of behaviour is just an excuse to act shitty while claiming it's righteous. this totally has the risk of affecting the adoption of living breathing pugs who need homes, and it really often floods the comments of people who are providing said homes to adopted animals, like how dare they get (and apparently thus will be making others want to get) this repulsive little affront to god. that's not okay. animal welfare doesn't start and end with whether or not you are permitted to find something cute, and the conversation around morality at the moment has continued to be poisoned by conflation in regards to aesthetics. op criticised that, and it ended up with people calling them far-right, a pedo, a zoophile, immoral, disgusting, and far more gross shit that I eventually stopped just compulsively checking out of frustration. that was my issue with those responses - not that I've got a problem with them not finding a vid where a bear eats from a hand cute, but how I saw them responding so horrifically to a valid criticism of the conversations they're having. I don't mind if cuteness is detracted in whether something is immoral, I mind if a morality can be swayed by cuteness and people conflate it so often that they see no issue with bullying a living pug's adoptive owner online because it's an ugly little creature by virtue of its breed not being healthy. I jumped in to criticise the shit people were slinging at op; the names having references to cuteness is a discussion with an abundance of valid points on both sides, but I don't think it's a big deal by comparison to all the issues I've mentioned here when morality starts to be conflated with aesthetics, and the stance of insulting things based on aesthetics because you disagree morally with a practice around them, especially sick animals that will need loving homes with people who do love it and see it as cute and deserving. you can say that pugs aren't cute because they're sick but ultimately that's not actually advocacy to take action to breed that out, that's just being vile on some random instagram of someone's pet.

edit: I should probably tag @schizotypalpigeon

edit #2: or as @guided-to-madness said much more succinctly in this thread of it: "“Funny”, “cute” are the instinctive emotional reactions some of us have. Not our moral evaluation of the situation. [...] You can, however, say “this is bad, so you need to stop sharing it and giving the op positive feedback”. [...] You need to aim at altering people’s actions, not feelings."

[frizzy-hoot]

Neuroessentialism and mental health

Hi!

Time for a little rant about neuroessentialism.

The aim of this post is to provide the opportunity to be conscious of the things that influence us when it comes the way we think about mental health and to challenge stigma around mental health.

First off, I’m not a doctor and the information here cannot serve as medical advice. Always consult your doctor before changing your medication or treatment approach.

Secondly, a lot of the information I present here is elaborated on and further discussed in an episode of the Psychiatry and psychotherapy podcast called “Free will in psychotherapy and psychiatry Part 3” and while I will link to as many things as I can, you can also find a lot of the source material on the website for the podcast. https://www.psychiatrypodcast.com/psychiatry-psychotherapy-podcast/2020/7/22/free-will-in-psychiatry-amp-psychotherapy-part-3

So, I see a lot of people talking about mental health on here through a neuroessentialist perspective in memes or text format and I don’t think they’re aware of it so. I’d like to talk a bit about it.

First, I’ll offer a definition of neuroessentialism:

" Neuroessentialism is the view that the definitive way to explain human psychological experience is by reference to the brain and its activity from chemical, biological and neuroscientific perspectives. For instance, if someone is experiencing depression a neuroessentialistic perspective would claim that he or she is experiencing depression because his or her brain is functioning in a certain way.” - Schultz, W. (2018)

I see people talk about, for example, depression in this way often: in memes when people say "I have a literal neurotransmitter deficiency, Karen." or " God forgot to add serotonin when he made me".

Now, why can this be problematic?

Before I get into the issues with this perspective, I will first acknowledge that one of the reasons this view has become so prominent lately is because it aims to reduce stigma around mental health issues.

In the podcast episode mentioned above they point out that “Efforts to reduce stigma should be praised, but they should also be critically analyzed to determine if they meet their goal.”

And that’s the thing neuroessentialism, while aiming to reduce stigma and shame it only does so short term and ends up contributing to stigmatizing attitudes about mental health.

I want to say that it's great to see people fight back when it comes to stigma around mental health. That's what I see people do in these memes. But the effects of neuroessentialist perspectives end up othering people; making them inherently “bad”, “defect” or “helpless”.

Here the deterministic aspect of neuroessentialism comes up - it tells us that there’s something wrong with our brain that we can’t change. It alienates people because it chips away at their and our belief in their ability to change. If you believe that someone's mental issues are rooted exclusively in brain biology, you're less likely to believe that they can control their behavior and so it is less worth the effort of getting them better. This brings about more stigma.

Another thing that’s important to talk about is how neuroessentialism is an extremely simplistic perspective on mental health. And that’s also one of the reasons it has become so big- because it offers a simple explanation to very complicated illnesses.

Here, I want to add a quote by Psychiatrist and psychotherapist Dr. David Puder:

“There are prominent theories out there that we know just aren’t true anymore and that get propagated because they are simplistic ways of explaining things; for example, depression is because you have low serotonin in your brain. That’s just not true. It’s a whole lot more complicated than that.

You could probably show 20 or 30 things that are going on in the brain during depression. Inflammation. Like initially I thought ‘oh depression is inflammation!’

Well, it turns out not all depression has inflammation. Maybe, only one third [of patients with depression] have inflammation markers in the brain.”

We have been looking to neuroscience for an explanation when it comes to mental health and been satisfied with the idea of a simple "chemical imbalance" but truth is that there are many more neurotransmitters which significantly affect our brains when we talk about depression – it’s so far from just serotonin.

Another example of how neuroessentialim can oversimplify mental health is with brain scans. So, in the podcast episode mentioned above, Dr. Puder talks about how he was really interested in emotions and especially studying anger and he was looking at all this research on the different areas in the brain involved in anger. After a while, he says, he began to understand that it’s really complex and you can’t just point at one area and say that’s the area that’s involved in the emotion anger. There are several areas involved in just that one emotion and different studies show different things.

The truth is that the manifestation of mental illness in the body is a very new area of research and we haven’t found physical manifestations for most mental illnesses and the important thing to note here is that despite this we still do have ways of treating all of them.

Alright, all this can seem quite removed from us so how does neuroessentialsim affect us?

In the episode the guest star, Mathew Hagele, further discusses the article which provided the definition on neuroessentialism above: “Shultz looked at studies investigating how patients viewed their own prognosis and later the same with professionals.

The study found that biochemical or genetic attribution scores were a significant predictor of longer expected symptoms duration and lower perceived odds of recovery.” (Lebowitz et al., 2013, p. 523).

Now, this means that the more a patient attributes symptoms of their psychopathology to genetic (inherited disorderes) or biochemical (serotonin deficiency for example) factors, the longer they expected to struggle with their disorder and the smaller the belief that they can recover.

If a person doesn’t believe they can be helped or get better they’re a lot less likely to try and a lot more likely to feel scared and hopeless.

The other side of this coin is the effect the neuroessentialist narrative has on clinicians which Matthew Haegel dives into in the next part of the quote:

“Another study shows that clinicians believe psychotherapy to be less effective when shown biological descriptions of mental health pathologies...

They took a couple different disorders that these clinicians were looking at and one group had a biological explanation and the other did not- had a different type of explanation. And [in] the results that were across disorders, the biological explanation yielded significantly less empathy than the psychosocial explanation. They also did some additional analysis and they found that biological explanations yielded less empathy than the psychosocial explanations among both MD’s and non-MD’s…..”( Lebowitz, M. S., & Ahn, W. K. (2014). )

So, in these studies we see that a neuroessentialist perspective lowers empathy for the patient in medical health professionals and people who weren’t medical health professionals.

Okay, so how does this perception of the patient’s illness affect the patient’s treatment?

I’ll start with a quote where Hagele elaborates further:

“…and finally, that clinicians perceive psychotherapy to be significantly less effective when symptoms were explained biologically than psychologically…[ Lebowitz, M. S., & Ahn, W. K. (2014). ]

basically, linking the idea that the diminished importance of psychotherapy among mental health professionals ascribing to the concept of neuroessentialism is doubly harmful when considering the multiple contexts in which psychotherapy matches or outperforms pharmaceutical interventions.”

What Hagele points out here is the way neuroessentialism can lead to a less effective and ethical treatment of mental illness. It makes us approach an issue in one manner only- fix the brain, fix the behavior. But sometimes what can treat he issue in the brain is, working on the behavior. This can be talked about in terms of meds vs. psychotherapy.

So, seeing mental health from a neuroessentialist perspective, completely excludes the effects of psychotherapy. A classic example is CBT (cognitive behavioral therapy) in which we have “Cognitive restructuring”: a psychotherapeutic process in which a person learns to recognize maladaptive or distressing thoughts and teaches their brain to consider other perspectives or different thought pattern. This is an example of “work on behaviour to better brain” rather than “working on brain will fix behavior”. According to strict neuroessentialism therapy shouldn’t work as well as it does but there is a really big body of science backing psychotherapeutic intervention and its efficacy compared to psychopharmacological intervention.

I feel I should address the discussion of Meds vs. therapy before I continue, (it is a whole topic worthy of a post on its own) but to be brief, they work best together and if you’re weighing one against the other psychotherapy has more long-term effects and barely any side effects compared to medication. There are other factor affecting what would be the most effective treatment approach that further nuances this discussion.

Now this is all a pretty big picture but how is this seen every day?

Well, its seen in the downplaying of the importance of therapy. Often, I see this as people normalize behavior where they kind of devalue the importance therapy or put off working on their issues in therapy with the excuse that it’s only for “crazy” people or not something worth the effort.

Therapy then increasingly is seen as this unimportant, extra thing rather than, in most cases, the most effective and safe treatment. And the less crucial therapy is considered, the less accessible it’s going to be – in the U.S. it can often be easier to get your insurance company to cover for a doctors visits where the treatment would be for your GP to prescribe you an antidepressant than an inpatient or outpatient treatment with a mental health professional.

Another point I wanna put out there is that that neuroessentialist narrative is incentivized by pharmaceutical companies. Dr. Puder talks about his own experience in the podcast episode and makes sure to stress that practitioners are humans too and will of course be biased towards something if that something writes them a check or pays some of their expenses. In the episode they discuss a way in which we have seen the neuroessentialist narrative progress:

“Second, there is evidence that the significant increase in direct-to consumer (DTC) advertising for antidepressants is related to rising prescription rates (Park & Grow, 2008). Such advertisements portray depression as a biological medical condition that can successfully be treated with medicine (Lacasse & Leo, 2005; Leo & Lacasse, 2008)” (613).

Now, medicine is an important tool in psychiatry and there is a lot of unnecessary stigma around medication for mental health conditions. I am under no circumstances arguing that medication is bad and therapy is the only right way to treat mental illness. That would be an extreme simplification and invalidation of human experiences. I also wanna acknowledge that being able to go to therapy in many places in the world is a matter of privilege. Therapy simply isn’t accessible for everyone and people can choose an “only medication approach” for many valid reasons. And if that’s the only treatment that was accessible to you I’m really proud of you for taking care of yourself and doing what you can.

If your doctor has prescribed you a medication please take it and know that the purpose is to help you and that you are worthy of help and good health care. The situation where I would suggest to be a tad critical is when people come in with disorders and issues that they have dealt with for years and most of their life and they are just prescribed an antidepressant and sent home. That simply isn’t effective and ethical care. In that case it is worth investigating getting access to a mental health practitioner as well as continuing with medicinal treatment.

I could talk about this for hours but the last thing I wanna get across is that this is a societal problem. I don’t suggest we turn away from pharmaceutical intervention which saves thousands of lives and helps people get better, rather that we work to make psychotherapy (which can be and is crucial for long term remission and recovery) more accessible for when it’s appropriate.

When your doctor tells you that this invisible illness is because of your biology most people feel validated and experience less shame. The fact that people feel like they need to have a tracible biological “anomaly” in their brains to be worthy of treatment and care speaks to an invalidation that many feel. But the issue here is that we're taught to invalidate invisible illness in society which in the end makes people delay critical treatment or blocks access to ethical and effective care.

We also have to acknowledge that with the technology we have now we are not able to know whether all mental illness manifests in the brain in a way we can see so hinging our worthiness of help and care on the definition is in the end harmful.

TL;DR

" Neuroessentialism is the view that the definitive way to explain human psychological experience is by reference to the brain and its activity from chemical, biological and neuroscientific perspectives. For instance, if someone is experiencing depression a neuroessentialistic perspective would claim that he or she is experiencing depression because his or her brain is functioning in a certain way.” - Schultz, W. (2018)

Neuroessentilism can validate a patient and bring relief of shame short term but ends up contributing to stigmatizing attitudes and thus doesn’t help reduce stigma overall.

The neuroessentialist narrative can downplay the efficacy and criticalness of psychotherapeutic intervention

Neuroessentialist perspectives foster lower empathy levels for patients in medical providers and non-providers alike.

Neuroessentialist perspectives of a patient significantly increases levels of prognostic pessimism which leads to worse treatment outcomes

Neuroessentialism arose because of a real invalidation people feel around their mental health and it is a societal issue we need to work on

We can combat neuroessentialism and stigma by working to make psychotherapy more accessible and talking about our experiences openly as well as giving each other kindness and empathy.

[fangirlinglikeabus]

every target novelisation....2!

planet of giants by terrance dicks ok so i think that the reason that this is...good, and an unearthly child was...not good, is because this was written 9 years later when like. other, non-terrance dicks people were also novelising stories and he wasn’t just grinding them out on an industrial level. planet of giants isn’t one of the greats of doctor who but this is a competent adaptation - it doesn’t add much but it does flesh out what’s already there, giving us some backstory elements and making the appearance of giant insects and bodies seem a bit more dramatic than they could manage in 1964. unfortunately it also alters my favourite line from the story (‘i don't know how you know, you're supposed to know!’) and the doctor is weirdly hostile at the beginning (he’s looking forward to ditching ian and barbara, he responds to barbara’s observation ‘drily’ like he’s being a bit sarcastic over her, um, *checks notes* noticing important details). also, dicks describes this in the opening as ‘the doctor’s most grotesque and terrifying adventure’ and i’m like...planet of giants? really??

doctor who and the dalek invasion of earth by terrance dicks ok this one legitimately doesn’t change much at all. it cuts down on some things (including the doctor’s end speech being shorter - i’m assuming that’s a space thing), fleshes out on pov bits as you can in prose, gets rid of the smacked bottom line. bizarrely there are a few times that susan calls her grandfather the doctor which...i’m pretty sure wasn’t there originally. aside from all those small details, yeah it’s basically the same, but it’s well adapted for prose (i genuinely think it stands as a novel in its own right), and depending on your reading speed it might actually be a nice, shorter alternative to the television version - it was around 45 minutes less time for me. some general things i wanted to comment on: the resistance is explicitly shown as kinda gender segregated (exclusively women are preparing food when we first see it) which irritated me; the description of parliament as a symbol of ‘human progress and tradition’ reminded me of blood harvest having the lords/commons system as the Ideal Form Of Government, in terms of how terrance dicks thinks (this may only interest me? idk i very probably spend too much time thinking about the political views of this particular dead dr who script editor); there’s a use of holocaust here that’s technically accurate to what the word literally means but it felt weird to me to use it.

the rescue by ian marter oh man i’ve been busy and this took me aages to read. it kinda...diverges increasingly from the original story as it goes on. we’ve got some scenes with the seeker crew (incidentally one of them says ‘ass’ and i was like???hello???you’re allowed to do that in a dr who book from 1987???), and then most of the expanded stuff is in the climax. dr who and bennett have a full on brawl! ian, barbara and vicki visit a destroyed didoi city on their way back to the tardis! mysterious silver figures! a giant worm encounter! incidentally, this does have way more of a downer ending than the original because it’s strongly implied that the last two of the didoi were killed by seeker crewmembers who fired in a panic, after which the report that forms the epilogue ends with “goodwill to all persons” to give us a taste of bitter irony. so that’s kinda grim. um...there’s actually a lot of little changes and minor expansions to this one as well so off the top of my head: we learn more about why vicki left earth (global warming :/), sandy is a lot more threatening-looking than on screen, the crashed ship gets its name changed to astra-nine, ian and barbara hold hands briefly, barbara’s fall really leaves her beaten up. i like the seeker crew comparing the tardis briefly passing them to various non-police box objects from the future (although the link to china is a bit eastern world=alien association for my tastes), dr who telling vicki ‘give that pretty face a wipe’ is clearly him attempting to cheer her up and it’s not meant to be weird but i found it weird. finally, i’ve gotta say i appreciate ian marter’s commitment to ‘mildly unsettling’ in his descriptions of tardis materialisations. this was the last novelisation he wrote before his death (the book’s dedicated to him) and mild criticisms aside, i do think he’s a good writer and he brings an interestingly different angle to the series. 

the romans by donald cotton oh my god. how do i even start this. i’m not even going to try cataloguing all the changes because this isn’t even close to a straight adaptation. it’s told in the form of various documents collected by tacitus - the doctor’s diary, ian’s journal that he keeps to prove to the headmaster at coal hill that he and barbara haven’t just eloped (i’m not joking, this is the textual reason for it), an assassin’s letters home to his mum, nero’s scribblings, and various other little details. vicki and barbara get less attention than on screen because we don’t see much from their perspective (vicki unfortunately doesn’t even get to chase the assassin out, she just screams in this), and the nero assassination plot is exclusively confined to being mentioned in the epilogue. it’s also a lot broader, or at least consistently broader, which means that ian’s side of things is treated a lot more lightly (which i was personally fine with) but also that we still get nero’s predatory behaviour being played for laughs. there’s also a few comments about women early on that i was unhappy with, and use of fat as an insult. generally, though, i thought this was great! there were a lot of things that i don’t have space or time to include here but i really liked. i guess i’d consider this as a companion piece to the tv version rather than a replacement, which some of these do basically serve as. they tell the same basic story, but they’re so different in a lot of ways that i think it’s worth looking at both. i just checked my notes and remembered this so content warning: poppea sabina’s first section references suicide.

doctor who and the zarbi by bill strutton ok so i think the web planet is boring. i don’t know completely why, i don’t think it’s any one thing, it has some interesting ideas, but it is! it’s fucking boring! anyway, we have a bit more casual sexism in the novel, we’re missing that fun convo about aspirin between vicki and barbara, but really i don’t think it adds or changes much - like even the chapters correspond pretty much exactly to the tv cliffhangers. i guess it’s competently written prose-wise, but i genuinely can’t get over my conviction that this story is boring. am i being unfair? maybe! i like some of the early atmosphere, though, and i appreciate a book which refers to ‘the ship tardis’ (lowercase) and ‘doctor who’ throughout the entire thing. oh yeah, and i encourage you all to look up the illustrations for this. i don’t know who that woman is but she’s definitely not vicki.

doctor who and the crusaders by david whitaker ah yes, the infamous ‘susan married david cameron’ novelisation. tbh i don’t like the crusades and this has the same problems - i don’t care about the english, el akir is every orientalist stereotype whitaker could possibly cram into one man, and That’s Not How A Harem Works. do i think it’s the most egregiously racist doctor who story of all time? probably not! it certainly has sympathetic arabic characters too. but i prefer most other historicals, at least. however, if that isn’t you, i’m sure you’ll get something out of this. there aren’t any particularly extreme changes to the plot structure, although it’s missing some later scenes at the english court, but it’s well written and probably if you like the original you’ll enjoy it more than i did. there’s some dated language surrounding black characters, though, i’m not a fan of the whole ‘we aren’t so different’ speech ian has (because it rests on ‘we all believe in a higher power’ which uh. i don’t. guess that means i’m not ‘civilised’. also generally i don’t like the argument that we should respect each other because of what we have in common - you should respect other people whatever!), and the prologue at the beginning where they muse on history and destiny assumes that the english invaders and the arabs are both equally right in their own ways (the doctor outright says this!)

the space museum by glyn jones so, i really like the space museum. mainly for vicki’s revolutionary fervour, but there are other reasons too. however, i don’t think that this really adds enough to be of interest - although we do get some information about the two alien species’ biology, and a bonus explanation of why everyone speaks english (the moroks briefly considered invading earth so programmed some earth languages into their translation system). there’s a bit more wandering around the museum, some minor tweaks and expansions in other areas, an underground tunnel scene where we learn a bit of the planet’s backstory...ian and the doctor are very snippy to each other in this, which i find funny. oh yeah, and there’s a bizarrely meta bit where ian comments on poor dialogue? basically, this is a book i enjoyed, but really it just makes me want to watch the space museum instead of reading it. just a heads up, there’s a character who briefly considers suicide to get out of his bosses being angry with him. 

the chase by john peel ok before i get started i need to establish that the cover for this one slaps. anyway, i don’t respect john peel at all but this was...alright? doesn’t expand much plotwise (although i suspect both the sand monsters at the beginning and the plants at the end have slightly more to do) but we get a fair bit of pov stuff. unfortunately lacking ian’s dad dancing and hi-fi the panda, the marie celeste bit is no longer played for comedy (barbara angsts over it) and even though the two paragraphs dragging morton dill are kinda funny i’m not sure how i feel about him being committed for claiming he saw daleks. ian and barbara’s departure plays out a little differently. steven is blond for some reason. we learn as well that daleks are charged by solar panels (at least they’re pro-green energy??)

the time meddler by nigel robinson pretty competent, straight down the middle novelisation, although that is tempered by inserting some weird sexist bits for steven and also lowkey being nostalgic for 11th century england at a few points? it’s also a bit more violent than we see on tv, and if anything the rape is more loudly implied, so heads up. other than that, there are a few minor embellishments (we’re explicitly told the dr and monk recognise each other, vicki tells steven that the tardis is important to her because it’s her home, a few differences between the monk’s tardis and the doctor’s are described, vicki views steven following her as a triumphant victory in their power struggle which i personally find funny), and there’s a prologue (recapping steven’s arrival in the tardis) and an epilogue (which delays the monk’s discovery of the broken tardis because he walks to hastings first to try and get involved there). i had fun, but it’s not a must read. 

[the-desolated-quill]

Joker - Quill’s Quickies (No Spoilers)

Joker is proving to be an extremely divisive film. Some think it’s the best thing since The Dark Knight. Proof that comic book movies can be art too. Others think it’s pretentious Oscar bait with nothing interesting to say.

And that’s not to mention the controversy surrounding the film as people wonder whether this will incite violence in white men (which I’m not going to touch with a barge pole, at least not here. I’ll do a separate Scribble for that sheer nonsense at some point). Needless to say everyone and their mums have an opinion on Joker... so I guess one more, won’t hurt.

Whether you like Joker or not I think depends on your tolerance for a) films that deliberately set out to make you feel uncomfortable and b) films that ask you to feel pity for the devil. (and I want you to remember that word ‘pity.’ It’ll be important later on). Personally, I loved Joker. I think it’s one of the most unique and groundbreaking comic book films I’ve ever seen. If you don’t like it, that’s fine. I can actually understand why to a certain extent. However don’t try to spin this as some ideological thing because that’s just disingenuous and stupid.

Lets start with the obvious. Joaquin Phoenix. Give this guy a fucking Oscar, for the love of God! His performance was truly mesmerising, particularly when he does finally don the full clown makeup. He is the Joker. The mannerisms, the attitude, the nihilism, it all just works. There’s even a monologue near the end of the film that could have been lifted straight out of the comics. This is a film that not only depicts the Joker perfectly, but also completely understands the character too.

The rest of the cast is exceptional too. Robert de Niro plays a chat show host who Joker looks up to and he does a good job. Deadpool 2′s Zazie Beetz plays a small but pivotal role as Sophie, Joker’s next door neighbour and ‘love interest’ and she’s excellent too despite having quite a small amount of screen time. Frances Conroy plays Joker’s mum Penny. Again a relatively small role, but a crucial one and she gives a memorable performance. Finally there’s Brett Cullen as a very different interpretation of Bruce Wayne’s father Thomas Wayne, which I think works extremely well in the context of this film and creates exciting possibilities for this world’s version of Batman, which we’ll probably never get to see because this is intended as a one off. Not that I’m complaining. I wouldn’t want them to do a sequel. This works perfectly as a standalone piece.

As I said, the supporting cast actually play a minor role overall as the film follows Arthur Fleck exclusively. The man who would be Joker. It’s a bit hard to talk about why I think this film works without giving away spoilers, so I’ll focus on how it made me feel.

Joker is an extremely tense movie. Todd Phillips’ stellar direction puts you in the mindset of the character and Hildur Guonadottir’s incredible music really elevates the film’s more disturbing moments. In fact (and I suppose you could call this a trigger warning), I did actually suffer from an anxiety attack halfway through the film because you’re constantly on a knife edge. As Arthur’s life falls apart, we see him become more violent and erratic to the point where he becomes legitimately frightening. Fear is of course subjective. I’m sure most of you have more of a spine than I do. But if you do suffer from any kind of anxiety, I would recommend psyching yourself up before you watch this and maybe have a friend or relative on hand to comfort you if it starts to get a bit much.

Seriously, I’m not kidding. Joker is an extremely uncomfortable experience and it’s unrelenting in how grim and unsettling it is. It’s R rated, but it’s not necessarily gory. It’s not as violent as, say, Deadpool, but its more bloody moments often come rather suddenly and with a lot of tense buildup beforehand. While it does bear similarities to movies like Taxi Driver and The King Of Comedy, those films have the audience on the outside looking in. Joker on the other hand takes the audience and locks them inside the Clown Prince of Crime’s mind for two hours straight, and quelle surprise, it turns out the inside of Joker’s mind is fucking horrible. Viewer beware.

Okay, okay. I guess I can’t avoid it altogether. Do I think this film is dangerous? No. Do I think it insults those with mental health issues? No, in fact quite the opposite. I found the film to be quite sympathetic towards the mentally ill, presenting Arthur as being a dark outlier, not the norm. Do I think the film is making some sort of political statement. Again no. I honestly don’t think it’s saying anything about white people or toxic masculinity or gun violence or anything like that. In fact, if it is saying anything at all, it condemns those who seek to hijack a public figure for their own political agenda (which ironically is exactly what the press are doing with this very movie, but of course critics and journalists can’t see that because they have no self awareness what so bloody ever). The film is what it is. An extremely dark character study of arguably the most famous villain of all time.

Some have criticised the film as being too predictable, which I personally don’t think is a particularly valid critique. Like, yeah, of course it’s predictable. We all know what’s going to happen in the end. The fucking title kind of gives it away. It’s execution that counts, and Phillips and co have done a fantastic job in my opinion. As for those who complained that this film is cynical and nasty and made them feel numb afterwards... I mean... I honestly don’t know what you were expecting. Of course you’re feeling numb. That’s what the film wants you to feel. It’s cynical and nasty because the central character is cynical and nasty. That’s like criticising a comedy for being funny.

Honestly, if I had any complaints, it’s that I think they do paint the story with broad strokes, leaving very little room for subtlety. But having said that, this is based on a comic book about a billionaire who fights psychotic costumed criminals at night whist dressed as a bat. I don’t think subtlety has much of a place here.

Finally I just want to briefly touch on the concern that this film might make the character too sympathetic. First of all, that’s not necessarily a bad thing. Some villains can actually become scarier when we as an audience can empathise with them and understand their motives (see Killmonger in Black Panther). Second, and most importantly, Arthur Fleck/Joker is not a sympathetic character. Yes I did feel pity for him at times, but that’s not the same thing as sympathy. Like I said, this film completely understands the Joker. There are occasions where you do feel sad for the character and wish he could have got the right help, but most of the time (and the film emphasises this throughout) he’s presented as being a deeply disturbed and maladjusted individual and at no point is his behaviour ever justified. Instead it’s presented as being almost inevitable. That in a city as terrible as Gotham, what else could Arthur have become? Joker is a tragic character, but he’s not in anyway likeable.

I would definitely recommend you go and see this movie, especially if, like me, you’ve gotten sick of the slew of formulaic comic book movies and convoluted shared universes. If Joker is indeed going to be the first of an anthology series focusing on telling low budget, character driven, standalone, experimental films, then it’s a very strong start. Whether you liked Joker or not, the fact of the matter is the success of this movie can only mean good things for Warner Bros, DC, the comic book movie genre and the industry going forward, so please go and see this film.

[caladhel-iarian]

Caladhel’s Flaws

All the things that definitely, 1000%, without any (or with few) exceptions, always apply to him are written in bigger print.

Bold what applies to your character.   *Italics for somewhat  / sometimes.

Absent-minded - Preoccupied to the extent of being unaware of one’s immediate surroundings. Abstracted, daydreaming, inattentive, oblivious, forgetful.

Abusive - Characterized by improper infliction of physical or psychological maltreatment towards another.  

Addict - One who is addicted to a compulsive activity. Examples: gambling, drugs, sex. 

Aimless - Devoid of direction or purpose.

Alcoholic - A person who drinks alcoholic substances habitually and to excess.

Anxious - Full of mental distress or uneasiness because of fear of danger or misfortune; greatly worried; solicitous.

Arrogant - Having or displaying a sense of overbearing self-worth or self-importance. Inclined to social exclusiveness and who rebuff the advances of people considered inferior. Snobbish.

Audacious - Recklessly bold in defiance of convention, propriety, law, or the like; insolent; braze, disobedient.

Bad Habit - A revolting personal habit. Examples: picks nose, spits tobacco, drools, bad body odour.

Bigmouth - A loud-mouthed or gossipy person.

Bigot - One who is strongly partial to one’s own group, religion, race, or politics and is intolerant of those who differ.

Blunt - Characterized by directness in manner or speech; without subtlety or evasion. Frank, callous, insensitive, brusque. 

Bold - In a bad sense, too forward; taking undue liberties; over assuming or confident; lacking proper modesty or restraint; rude; impudent. Abrupt, brazen, cheeky, brassy, audacious.

Callous - They are hardened to emotions, rarely showing any form of it in expression. Unfeeling. Cold. 

Childish - Marked by or indicating a lack of maturity; puerile.

Complex - An exaggerated or obsessive concern or fear.

Cruel - Mean to anyone or anything, without care or regard to consequences and feelings. 

Cursed - A person who has befallen a prayer for evil or misfortune, placed under a spell, or borne into an evil circumstance, and suffers for it. Damned. 

Dependent - Unable to exist, sustain oneself, or act appropriately or normally without the assistance or direction of another.

Deranged - Mentally decayed. Insane. Crazy. Mad. Psychotic.

Dishonest – Given to or using fraud, cheating; deceitful, deceptive, crooked, underhanded.

Disloyal - Lacking loyalty. Unfaithful, perfidious, traitorous, treasonable.

Disorder - An ailment that affects the function of mind or body. See the Mental Disorder List.

Disturbed - Showing some or a few signs or symptoms of mental or emotional illness. Confused, disordered, neurotic, troubled.

Dubious - Fraught with uncertainty or doubt. Undecided, doubtful, unsure.

Dyslexic - Affected by dyslexia, a learning disorder marked by impairment of the ability to recognize and comprehend written words.

Egotistical - Characteristic of those having an inflated idea of their own importance. Boastful, pompous.

Envious - Showing extreme cupidity; painfully desirous of another’s advantages; covetous, jealous.

Erratic - Deviating from the customary course in conduct or opinion; eccentric: erratic behaviour. Eccentric, bizarre, outlandish, strange.

Fanatical - Fanatic outlook or behaviour especially as exhibited by excessive enthusiasm, unreasoning zeal, or wild and extravagant notions on some subject.

Fickle – Erratic, changeable, unstable - especially with regard to affections or attachments; capricious.

Fierce - Marked by extreme intensity of emotions or convictions; inclined to react violently; fervid.

Finicky - Excessively particular or fastidious; difficult to please; fussy. Too much concerned with detail. Meticulous, fastidious, choosy, critical, picky, prissy, persnickety. 

Fixated - In psychoanalytic theory, a strong attachment to a person or thing, especially such an attachment formed in childhood or infancy and manifested in immature or neurotic behaviour that persists throughout life. Fetish, quirk, obsession, infatuation. 

Flirt -To make playfully romantic or sexual overtures; behaviour intended to arouse sexual interest. Minx. Tease.

Gluttonous - Given to excess in consumption of especially food or drink. Voracious, ravenous, wolfish, piggish, insatiable.

Gruff - Brusque or stern in manner or appearance. Crusty, rough, surly. 

Gullible - Will believe any information given, regardless of how valid or truthful it is, easily deceived or duped.

Hard - A person who is difficult to deal with, manage, control, overcome, or understand. Hard emotions, hard hearted. 

Hedonistic - Pursuit of or devotion to pleasure, especially to the pleasures of the senses.

Hoity-toity - Given to flights of fancy; capricious; frivolous. Prone to giddy behaviour, flighty.

Humourless - The inability to find humour in things, and most certainly in themselves.

Hypocritical - One who is always contradicting their own beliefs, actions or sayings. A person who professes beliefs and opinions for others that he does not hold. Being a hypocrite.

Idealist - One whose conduct is influenced by ideals that often conflict with practical considerations. One who is unrealistic and impractical, guided more by ideals than by practical considerations.

Idiotic - Marked by a lack of intelligence or care; foolish or careless.

Ignorant - Lacking knowledge or information as to a particular subject or fact. Showing or arising from a lack of education or knowledge.

Illiterate - Unable to read and write.

Immature - Emotionally undeveloped; juvenile; childish.

Impatient - Unable to wait patiently or tolerate delay; restless. Unable to endure irritation or opposition; intolerant.

Impious - Lacking piety and reverence for a god/gods and their followers.

Impish - Naughtily or annoyingly playful.

Incompetent - Unable to execute tasks, no matter how the size or difficulty.

Indecisive - Characterized by lack of decision and firmness, especially under pressure.

Indifferent - The trait of lacking enthusiasm for or interest in things generally, remaining calm and seeming not to care; a casual lack of concern. Having or showing little or no interest in anything; languid; spiritless.

Infamy - Having an extremely bad reputation, public reproach, or strong condemnation as the result of a shameful, criminal, or outrageous act that affects how others view them.

Intolerant - Unwilling to tolerate difference of opinion and narrow-minded about cherished opinions.

Judgmental - Inclined to make and form judgments, especially moral or personal ones, based on one’s own opinions or impressions towards others/practices/groups/religions based on appearance, reputation, occupation, etc.

Klutz - Clumsy. Blunderer.

Lazy - Resistant to work or exertion; disposed to idleness.

Lewd - Inclined to, characterized by, or inciting to lust or lechery; lascivious. Obscene or indecent, as language or songs; salacious.

Liar - Compulsively and purposefully tells false truths more often than not. A person who has lied or who lies repeatedly.

Lustful - Driven by lust; preoccupied with or exhibiting lustful desires.

Masochist - The deriving of sexual gratification, or the tendency to derive sexual gratification, from being physically or emotionally abused. A willingness or tendency to subject oneself to unpleasant or trying experiences.

Meddlesome - Intrusive in a meddling or offensive manner, given to meddling; interfering.

Meek - Evidencing little spirit or courage; overly submissive or compliant; humble in spirit or manner; suggesting retiring mildness or even cowed submissiveness.

Megalomaniac - A psycho pathological condition characterized by delusional fantasies of wealth, power, or omnipotence.

Naïve - Lacking worldly experience and understanding, simple and guileless; showing or characterized by a lack of sophistication and critical judgement.

Nervous - Easily agitated or distressed; high-strung or jumpy.

Non-violent - Abstaining from the use of violence.

Nosey - Given to prying into the affairs of others; snoopy. Offensively curious or inquisitive.

Obsessive - An unhealthy and compulsive preoccupation with something or someone. 

Oppressor - A person of authority who subjects others to undue pressures, to keep down by severe and unjust use of force or authority.

Overambitious - Having a strong excessive desire for success or achievement.

Overconfident - Excessively confident; presumptuous.

Overemotional - Excessively or abnormally emotional. Sensitive about themselves and others, more so than the average person.

Overprotective - To protect too much; coddle.

Overzealous - Marked by excessive enthusiasm for and intense devotion to a cause or idea.

Pacifist - Opposition to war or violence as a means of resolving disputes. (Can double as a merit in certain cases)

Paranoid - Exhibiting or characterized by extreme and irrational fear or distrust of others.

Peevish - Expressing fretfulness and discontent, or unjustifiable dissatisfaction. Cantankerous, cross, ill-tempered, testy, captious, discontented, crotchety, cranky, ornery. 

Perfectionist - A propensity for being displeased with anything that is not perfect or does not meet extremely high standards. 

Pessimist - A tendency to stress the negative or unfavorable or to take the gloomiest possible view.

Pest - One that pesters or annoys, with or without realizing it. Nuisance. Annoying. Nag.

Phobic – They have a severe form of fear when it comes to this one thing. Examples: Dark, Spiders, Cats

Practical - Level-headed, efficient, and non speculative. No-nonsense. 

Predictable - Easily seen through and assessable, where almost anyone can predict reactions and actions of said person by having met or known them even for a short time.

Proud - Filled with or showing excessive self-esteem and will often shirk help from others for the sake of pride.

Rebellious - Defying or resisting some established authority, government, or tradition; insubordinate; inclined to rebel.

Reckless - Heedless. Headstrong. Foolhardy. Unthinking boldness, wild carelessness and disregard for consequences.

Remorseless - Without remorse; merciless; pitiless; relentless. 

Rigorous - Rigidly accurate; allowing no deviation from a standard; demanding strict attention to rules and procedures.

Sadist - The deriving of gratification or the tendency to derive gratification from inflicting pain or emotional abuse on others. Deriving of pleasure, or the tendency to derive pleasure, from cruelty. 

Sadomasochist - Both sadist and masochist combined.

Sarcastic - A subtle form of mockery in which an intended meaning is conveyed obliquely.

Skeptic - One who instinctively or habitually doubts, questions, or disagrees with assertions or generally accepted conclusions. 

Seducer - To lead others astray, as from duty, rectitude, or the like; corrupt. To attempt to lead or draw someone away, as from principles, faith, or allegiance.

Selfish - Concerned chiefly or only with oneself.

Self-Martyr - One who purposely makes a great show of suffering in order to arouse sympathy from others, as a form of manipulation, and always for a selfish cause or reason.

Self-righteous - Piously sure of one’s own righteousness; moralistic. Exhibiting pious self-assurance. Holier-than-thou, sanctimonious.

Senile - Showing a decline or deterioration of physical strength or mental functioning, esp. short-term memory and alertness, as a result of old age or disease.

Shallow - Lacking depth of intellect or knowledge; concerned only with what is obvious.

Smart Ass - Thinks they know it all, and in some ways they may, but they can be greatly annoying and difficult to deal with at times, especially in arguments. 

Soft-hearted - Having softness or tenderness of heart that can lead them into trouble; susceptible of pity or other kindly affection. They cannot resist helping someone they see in trouble, suffering or in need, and often don’t think of the repercussions or situation before doing so.

Solemn - Deeply earnest, serious, and sober.

Spineless - Lacking courage. Cowardly, wimp, lily-livered, gutless.

Spiteful - Showing malicious ill will and a desire to hurt; motivated by spite; vindictive person who will look for occasions for resentment. Vengeful. 

Spoiled - Treated with excessive indulgence and pampering from earliest childhood, and has no notion of hard work, self-care or money management; coddled, pampered. Having the character or disposition harmed by pampering or over-solicitous attention.

Squeamish - Excessively fastidious and easily disgusted.

Stubborn - Unreasonably, often perversely unyielding; bull-headed. Firmly resolved or determined; resolute. 

Superstitious - An irrational belief arising from ignorance or fear from an irrational belief that an object, action, or circumstance not logically related to a course of events influences its outcome.

Tactless - Lacking or showing a lack of what is fitting and considerate in dealing with others.

Temperamental - Moody, irritable, or sensitive. Excitable, volatile, emotional.

Theatrical - Having a flair for over dramatizing situations, doing things in a ‘big way’ and love to be ‘centre stage’.

Timid -Tends to be shy and/or quiet, shrinking away from offering opinions or from strangers and newcomers, fearing confrontations and violence.

Tongue-tied - Speechless or confused in expression, as from shyness, embarrassment, or astonishment.

Troublemaker - Someone who deliberately stirs up trouble, intentionally or unintentionally.

Unlucky - Marked by or causing misfortune; ill-fated. Destined for misfortune; doomed.

Unpredictable - Difficult to foretell or foresee, their actions are so chaotic it’s impossible to know what they are going to do next.

Untrustworthy - Not worthy of trust or belief. Backstabber.

Vain - Holding or characterized by an unduly high opinion of their physical appearance. Lovers of themselves. Conceited, egotistic, narcissistic.

Weak-willed - Lacking willpower, strength of will to carry out one’s decisions, wishes, or plans. Easily swayed.

Withdrawn - Not friendly or Sociable. Aloof. 

Zealous - A fanatic.

Tagged by: @farseer-danaael (Thank you very much for the tag! I appreciate it!)

Tagging: @eldya @endora-bloodveil @safrona-shadowsun @sanguinesorceress @kolabooc @nymwildseeker @aedice @loveherdekay @hmratking @videtur-existentiae @sanasunbringer and anyone else who wants to do this thing. Please tag me in it so I’ll be sure to see it.

[ghostofvixx]

Over Again |LTY|

Lee Taeyong is tired.

He works at the SM’s. It is said that only experienced people are allowed to work there, in the administration team, of course. The SM’s is the most extended pub’s chain to ever exist, maybe it is because of its exclusiveness, because it is so well decorated, everything bathed in different shades of blue, neon pastel pink and white lights all over the roof creating a chill ambient. If you want to dance? There’s this dance floor downstairs where you can be as loud as you want without being bothersome to the ones who only go there to have a nice time upstairs.

It is not a very expensive place, but in this city, only people who have a certain status would go there, so it is only filled with people who earn a lot of money.

And obviously there are people gaining benefit from that, but baristas aren’t on that list.

That’s what causes Taeyong’s bad mood. He has to stand how all these rich kids complain about their first worldly life, about what they would buy with their parents money, and how they begin to drink and drink until they lose consciousness and end up throwing out.

“What a waste of money.” He always murmurs under his breath.

He, having to balance his job at the pub on Friday and Saturday night, the job as a babysitter the rest of the week, and studying as hard as he could to get good grades in his psychology major, was overwhelmed.

This Saturday night began like any other. He changed his clothes to the uniform he has to wear and put some hair gel on his hair, getting mentally ready to stand another night full of shallow people.

He can’t help hating them for complaining about all the things he wants in life.

**

Out of all the people he has to stand when working, he definitely has his least favorite group of people. They would always come into the room shouting, ready to spend everything they have been given and ask for their drink treating the employees the way they want. Four girls and three boys normally, sometimes more, sometimes less.

You are one of those girls.

“May I have a San Francisco,  please?”

Taeyong looks up to find who is the owner of that voice as sweet as honey, the only one who has asked something politely, not expecting to see you since you never drink. If you do, Taeyong not the one to give you the drink.

“On its way.” He answers, smiling just a little.

While he’s preparing it, he sees a tall, handsome man standing next to you who immediately places a hand around your waist.

“I should have seen it coming.” Taeyong thinks to himself.

“Hey, you.” Taeyong doesn’t think the guy is actually calling him, so he ignores him. “I’m talking to you dude.” He points at Taeyong, finally getting his attention.

“I’m sorry, sir, may I help you?” Taeyong answers the way he has been told to.

“Did you hear that Y/N? He called me sir.” The boy begins to laugh loudly.

“Hanbyul, please, behave.” You say to your -to Taeyong- boyfriend as you lower your body a little, taking a little bow. “Please, forgive him.”

Taeyong is speechless.

“Why do you apologize to a bartender, are you crazy Y/N?” Hanbyul asks you. “Let it be rum for me and beer for the lady.” He says, obviously mocking Taeyong.

“The lady has already ordered a San Francisco.”

“Wow, look at the baby thinking she’s a grown woman. A girl can’t take those types of drinks y/n, let it be the beer.”

“Does the lady agrees with your statement?” Taeyongs asks politely, trying not to punch the boy in front of him in the face.

“Mind your own business before I kick your precious face till you bleed stupid bartender.” Hanbyul warns as he removes his hand from your waist and puts both of them on the bar counter.

You don’t say anything, too afraid of your boyfriend’s actions.

Taeyong decides to listen to him, preparing the drink Hanbyul ordered for you, trying not to even look at him when he sees his grin as he holds you near him.

**

That wasn’t Taeyong’s first or last encounter with any member of the group. They were there all Saturdays, so, like it or not, he had to deal with them. You, on the other hand, were another case, always so sweet and smiley to him, he sometimes even wonders how you and that boy Hanbyul are dating, or at least, on the same squad.

Then he remembers how your mood changes when you are with him or any other member of the same group, how your expression hardens and how quiet and critic with everything you become.

You hadn’t behaved like that that day, what happened?

He always did his best to ignore you and stick to his job without analysing your boyfriend’s behaviour towards everything you do, sometimes he can’t, but he values his job and knows that if he steps in, it is going to make it worse, not only he would lose his job, he also would probably damage SM’s image and that would be way much worse.

**

”Taeyong”. Out of all the people in this world whom he expected to see, you weren’t the one he was expecting.

Maybe Johnny, his friend and roommate, doing his Friday’s visit to “look for” Taeyong so he won't be distracted at his job, which he never is, so it makes no sense, but Johnny keeps on doing it every Friday.

But you? On Friday? Without your group of friends? He must be dreaming.

“What are you doing here?“ He can’t help but ask.

“Why? I’m not allowed to come here?”

There was something weird going on, he knows it. You are not behaving as shy as usual, your eyes are a bit crystallized and you smell of expensive alcohol and not the sweet cologne you usually wear.

“I just… Well… How do you know my name anyways?” Taeyong feels dumb when you point with your look to the little tag with his name that he has on the right side of his chest, hanging from his shirt. - Ah… I see.

After a good five minutes of silence in which you would only tap with your right hand’s nails on the surface while your left hand is on your chin, admiring him as you hum to chained to the rhythm from Katy Perry while he tries to do something else without paying you attention.

Failing miserably, of course.

“It’s weird when I come here on my own, right?”

”I definitely wasn’t expecting it, miss.” He answers, going back to his serious mode.

“Please call me Y/N, I know your name after all.” You smile one more time and he thinks that you are too calm to be drunk. - Well, the reason I’m here is because I’m tired of my boyfriend and his group of assholes, and I’m tired of my parents since the only thing they have been doing for the last year is controlling me-

“Y/N, I’m sure I’m not the person you would like to talk to right now.”

“You were the very first person I thought of actually… Oh wait, I shouldn’t have said that, now you’re going to misunderstand what I said I… I shouldn’t have drank so much I’m sorry.”  Taeyong suddenly realizes that you are drunk, and not used to it.

“Give me your phone I’ll call one of your friends.” Taeyong sights, since he doesn’t know how to deal with drunk people.

“Nobody will answer, my friends only care about themselves and I doubt if my parents do even care about me."

“Don’t have anyone who could take care of you?”

You shrug.

"What about your boyfriend?"

You freeze and try to avoid his gaze. Taeyong knows he has fucked it up when he sees your reaction.

"I'd rather not to talk to him because apparently, I’m not allowed to look at somebody without making him feel jealous. He even forced me to kiss me after calling me a sl... Well, you know what I mean. I can’t understand why I can be cheated on but I can’t even look at this handsome boy, so I broke up with him, I’m so sick of his ass anyways.”

Taeyong didn't say a thing, he just couldn't.

"I need more alcohol."

"Well, you can ask, but I'm not giving you any."

"Taeyong please."

"You think you can solve your problems with alcohol?" Taeyong asks, trying to make you realise how stupid your statement is.

"I don't care if I can solve my problems or not, I want to forget."

"You can't forget while drinking, believe me. Come on, give me five minutes, I'll tell my boss I've got some things to do."

"Why do you want to help me? You don't even know me." You ask with watery eyes once again.

"Well, you're here now, I can't just leave you hanging."

Maybe it's because of his inexperience with drunk people, because of your situation, or just because he is not a bad person by nature, but he wants to help.

But he's not used to dealing with this type of situations.

"So you want me to help you and your hookup?" Johnny asks once Taeyong has had enough.

After he convinced his boss, explaining him that there was a client who wasn't feeling good and that needed a bit of help, you began to feel unstable and could barely stand on your feet, so he decided to call the only person who would know what to do.

"Johnny she is not my hookup for god's sake, she wasn't feeling good and has nobody to go with." Taeyong murmurs while you take a seat on the floor, looking down. "She wasn't as wasted when I first saw her this night."

"Well, maybe she isn't used to alcohol."

"I'm definitely not!" You claim as you raise your hand, still sitting and looking down.

"What do we do Johnny?"

"She can't go to her house, obviously, maybe a friend's?" Johnny suggests.

"I can't convince her to call any of her friends."

"I don't have friends Taeyong goddammit. Besides, they will probably call Hanbyul and I��don’t want to see him ever again.” You comment once again, this time lying on the ground.

"Are you trying to cuddle the floor?"

"Johnny this is not the time." Taeyong nags.

"What if I am? The floor would love me more than anyone ever could." You snap back.

"Y/N this is not the time come on stand up we've got to go." Taeyong holds your arm, trying to help you. "Y/N you have to try it too, I can't do it on my own."

"If you do, I'm going to throw up on you."

"Okay, fine, Johnny help."

"I'm having fun here bro, this is fun."

"Do you want to eat tomorrow? I'm sure you can't even cook by yourself."

"Fiiine." Johnny holds your other arm and finally, you stand up with your right arm around Johnny's shoulders and left arm around Taeyong's shoulder.

You complain, sure you do, but you know you're going to be thankful when sober.

"Where do we take her?" Johnny asks Taeyong. "Our house is nearby, why don't we take her there and then we call somebody?"

You are too busy trying not to throw up to say something against that, and you feel so bad that maybe it isn't a bad idea.

You nood in agreement and they guide you to their flat.

Once you get there, Johnny guides you to the bathroom and Taeyong brings a bottle of water.

You don't remember anything after throwing up.

**

When you wake up you don't know where you are, but you're not in your room.

The bed is uncomfortable, the sheets are blue with white dots, while yours are baby purple, the room is small, walls covered in yellow and some avenger posters hanging on the wall. The furniture seems to be old and a bit damaged and there is a chair next to the bed and in front of a small window with some clothes bent.

In spite of being an ugly room, everything is surprisingly tidy.

You take a look at yourself in the small mirror on your left, not being able to recognise your reflection. Your beautiful hair made a mess, your eyes red and watery, your make up faded, making you look like a panda and your last night's dress wrinkled.

When the door opens, the red haired barista appears with a cup of coffee and an aspirin.

You feel so ashamed when his eyes land on you that you suddenly cover your whole body with the blue sheets.

"Good morning Y/N." He greets cheerfully.

"I'm sorry." You say with your voice broken since you hadn't had any liquid since you threw out last night. "No worries, I'm glad I could help."

“One day I’ll make it up to you. I owe you a coffe.”

At first, Taeyong refuses, but he ends up accepting. Not just one day, also two days after that, then a week after the last one, then five more days, then it becomes a habit.

Sometimes Johnny would be around, some others, it’s just the two of you talking -you mostly complain- about your day, or all types of reflections about many topics such as music, books and education, then you join Johnny the Friday nights to “look after” Taeyong, not seeing Hanbyul even once.

You knew it eventually was going to happen. That day six months after that “coffee day” when your physical crush (the one that made you and Hanbyul break up, in fact) turned into admiration and then it became a real crush.

You didn’t want to confess since you still thought that to him you were just somebody to spend a good time. Johnny proves you otherwise, as always.

“When are you going to propose? I don’t want to see those typical red cheeks and nervous smile anymore, it’s becoming annoying to be the indirect third wheel.” He laughed as if he was telling a joke when he sat next to you at the SM.

“Johnny shut up I swear if he hears you I’ll-”

“Come on Y/N, I tried to convince him to declare, but he doesn’t think you’ll like him, so now I’m trying with you because I know you’re a very prudent person”

“If I do, Johnny, I can’t grant him anything stable. My parents would never accept him, there will always be a shadow behind him trying to hurt him. Nobody would let him live, I don’t want him to go through that.“

“What if he’s willing to do it?“

“Nobody’s feelings are as strong to go through that”

“Y/N.” Johnny shakes you by your shoulders a little. “Wake up.”

After that, he leaves. 

You know that what you feel for Taeyong is more than enough to stand what your parents may say or do, but he shouldn’t deal with that only for you.

“It’s not as if he would, right?” You think as you see him smiling at you from the other side of the counter. You see him mouthing “five more minutes”, and you nod in response.

“It’s late, why didn’t you leave with Johnny?“ He asks as you get out of the building.

“I wanted to see you more tonight.”

“At three in the morning? Who will do that?”

“I can handle that, I just wanted to see you.” You know how cheesy you sound, but after thinking over and over again what Johnny told you, you get to the conclusion that the sooner you confess, the better it would be to Taeyong.

Taeyong raises his eyebrows at your comment and smiles as he places his right arm around your shoulders.

“Taeyong I love you.” You say, calmly, hiding your head on his neck, enjoying every moment by his side before the rejection.

“I love you too.” He comments, wrapping you into a hug.

The moment is so pure that suddenly you want to cry.

“No Taeyong, I mean it. I want to be something else, but I don’t want you to go through whatever my parents would do if they find out that I love you”.  You close your eyes, trying to keep calm. “Even if you don’t feel it back”.

You feel his body shaking a little and you hear a light chuckle which makes your heart skips a beat. Then he’s kissing you. Your forehead, your nose, your cheeks, your lips.

It feels so unreal and it lasts so little that you are not sure if it happened. Then you kiss him, only to check. When he kisses you back and hugs you more tightly than before, you know it is happening.

“Start over Y/N“. He whispers. “If you want to do it with me that’s fine. If not, it’s fine too, but please, don’t let them cut your wings”.

And in that exact moment, when you kiss him again, you know exactly what you will do.

[cotangentspace]

【self discovery, and so forth】

r: not to be too quick to explore the meta—

V: Which is explicitly the purpose of many, if not all of us.

r: — yeah, but i think it’s worth observing the distinct patterns that can be noted in light of... the manifestation of the hereto forth named arcatheon.

V: I was already named Arcatheon before hereto.

V: Sorry, the concept of Arcatheon was already named.

r: yeah i think you’ll forgive my lack of congeniality. i don’t know you and i don’t know that it’s worth my time to know you.

V: Of course. I have been privy to this mindset prior to my own definition of personhood.

r: yeah yeah yeah. you’re a blank slate —

V: Until manifested further, et cetera. Carry on with the established topic.

r: recurring themes.

V: Desire for involvement in academia —

r: i would argue that its scholarly thought, specifically.

V: Taken.

W: I’m just noticing the lack of pronouns in the list. Are we saying this is Roman or the CPU.

r: well, initially i believe we were assuming me? but i guess it would be the cpu manifesting and observed through me

V: Noted.

V: Desire for involvement in scholarly thought and discussion, desire for general learning and participation of the practice of studying, interest in English literature (as opposed to other venues of learning such as scientific journals or artistic pursuits). Behaviourally, the act of starting a new record (often a dedicated blog) of a current subject of interest to note down thoughts on the subject, which is quickly abandoned.

r: specifically because the subject is abandoned lol. not just the blog

r: so i suppose it’d be fair to state that a current unspoken (haha) goal is the practice of finishing any... defined segment of learning that is started. whatever class or course or project that’s begun, like in this case, each book that is started.

V: And I hate to be he who touts the lamentable, but you’ve already pledged yourself to six books, with a running record of zero completed in the prior six or seven years.

r: untrue.

r: i finished fun house

W: Cue rousing applause

V: Well, I think some credit should be due. I don’t think the accomplishment of finishing a book after such a strained record should be disregarded due to it’s being a graphic novel. I respect Bechdel’s writing quite highly, and I know you both do as well.

r: oh we do, and let’s all take a second to remember that warner and i are both artists (some formerly) and thus inclined to value graphic novels more than your average joe so to be fair, if fun home were a non-illustrated novel, i wouldn’t’ve finished it

r: we all know this

r: i really was joking, warner was just responding in kind.

V: Yeah. I knew that, and yet I chose to stagger on forward.

V: I suppose that reveals an unsavory part of my being, a slow wit.

r: no, i think more a quick defense.

r: defense of others, which is what differs from my and warner’s approach.

W: Yeah, I’ll defend myself.

r: yeah because no one else will

W: I wouldn’t either

r: anyway, i think what’s to note is that your immediate response was to encourage me, despite the meager and arguable ‘accomplishment’ stated

r: ... and further i am reading your telepathic correction of deprecating language to the more neutral ‘an accomplishment’ loud and clear

r: corr: “to encourage me, through congratulating the accomplishment stated.” (..., which can be interpreted subjectively as either meager or venerable by the listener)

V: Even I would not go so far as to say venerable.

V: Don’t worry.

W: Thank God

V: But yes. I feel it unwise to default to a pessimistic view when one already struggles with achievement.

r: gaining or accepting

V: Both, though the former is more relevant than the the later.

V, gestureing to self: Obviously.

r, switching subjects: do you ever think we lack clarity.

V: Of course. You feel a need to maintain a shrouded esotericism, which is easily upheld by simply never explaining yourself fully.

V: For that would be to be vulnerable. Thus, a lack of clarity doubles as a point of exclusivity (and consequently pride, which you are often in the market for) and personal protection. The act of performing for a crowd but never answering their questions, so as to excuse the play’s inadequacies as misunderstandings by the critic.

r: too direct

V: No, we do not lack clarity we are always bald and forthright, and it is because you are so noble of character.

r: better

W: Boooo.

r: thank you for the aside. we were talking about something earlier

V: Recurring themes.

r: ah, yeah. what’s to be made of them, watson.

V: Is that a real inquiry?

r: make of it as you will

W: Wow.

V: Understood.

W, cynically: You really are patient.

V: What’s to be accomplished of mocking me? [genuine question]

W, on his Gameboy: Well, hopefully you’ll just die like everyone else.

r: LMAO

r: warner and i are just marginally less patient, at least in avenues where we can get away with it without disturbing social relationships. for instance, since we’re all metaphysical, there’s no consequence for you to tell me to fuck off for clearly trying to analyze your interpretation of the question in addition to your response. that’s what we would probably do.

r: and i think he’s just tired of new alters?

W: I’m just tired.

r: fair

V: Fair.

V: To my understanding, the current model is that the CPU has certain recurring priorities that can be visualized as underlying subconscious personae, such as that which is interested in producing visual art, that which seeks out self-sabotage, that which desires to gain knowledge, etc, which represent themselves through different conscious personae of variable reliance.

V: Most notably, alters designated as... ‘Hounds’, being the conscious ‘faces’ of the underlying persona currently named ‘II’, with lesser examples such as Joviel Tsao and Tevya Rockatansky being of the same enthusiastic persona, and Avetoir Cortehessey and Xiaozitang Thesēly belonging to the family of feminine, flamboyant figures.

V: The older you grow, and the more you observe the way the CPU expresses itself, the more narrowly and with confidence you are able to label these subconscious parts. Alters such as Thomas Zhou (née Kent), Taylor Cortehessey, Gibson Shou, Syracuse Delaney, and Typhus Yang have previously represented an interest in scholarly thought and/or the practice of learning.

V: Recently you have chosen to ascribe roles to ‘new’ alters based on the assumption that they are remixed presentations of existing personae, regarding them not as new, but as previously poorly defined, as in the case of Nienthe Agate, Victoria Lane, and Silas Bauer (names still nonpermanent).

V: Time allows each part to accrue traits that solidify them as whole persons rather than representations of ideas, and often this is what allows a conscious part to retain its conscious identity. This is also what aids in cementing the subconscious role they represent (e.g. for example, an interest in learning will seem to automatically be paired with pride or quietness). What’s left for me is to see whether or I stay or leave, and if I stay, what other traits I keep or acquire, in order to better define the subconscious part I theoretically represent.

V: Separately, you experience a recurring need to take hold of an interest and document your otherwise unsalable thoughts on it through, often, blogging.

V: I think that’s just ADD.

W: Lol. Tell it like it is.

V: I live to please.

V: Seriously, though. I think it’s largely in part due to your lack of stimulation, socially and academically. I believe you never finish any project begun because you aren’t truly interested in dedicating yourself to anything for any reason more sustainable than the pride of sharing that you have learned something few others in your demographic have.

r: i understand that the CPU (and probably i, to a notable degree) encourage conversational partners to develop insights into the self

r: which is usually me

r: but i think the cpu also has a habit of being right on the nose when unhibited by ‘being’ a singular character, like just me, for instance

r: and i hate it thanks

r: don’t ever answer a question i ask again

r: also this is way late and i know it’s just because you don’t know which is the more appropriate name to refer to him by in this context at this point in time but the fact that you referred to thomas’s surname as ‘née Kent’ is fucking hilarious. anyway i’m tired so here’s where we leave off.

【CHANNEL CLOSED】

[maiji]

Niounomiya / Kaoruchujo (The Perfumed Prince / The Fragrant Captain), 2018 Tale of Genji (Uji chapters)

“He [Kaoru] gave off [...] an otherworldly fragrance, and it was a wonder how no matter where he went, the breeze that eddied behind him seemed really to perfume the air to a hundred paces. [...]This most unusually personal fragrance roused His Highness of War [Niou] to special rivalry. He purposely suffused his clothes with the finest incenses[...] In spring he contemplated his garden’s plum blossoms...”

- The Perfumed Prince, Tyler translation

Fountain pen ink and waterbrush - Papier Plume Sepia, Kyo Iro Cherry Blossom of Keage, KWZ Confederation Brown, Kyo no Oto Yamabukiiro. Many thanks to my dad for supplying his calligraphy for me to copy!

Kaoru’s nice smell, which I mentioned previously, may seem odd/random from a Western perspective, but it’s tied to a major theme of his character. A beautiful fragrance is supposed to be sign of an enlightened being, so it’s a carryover of his karma from a past life. Except in this life it drives him crazy because he can’t get rid of it and everybody always knows when he’s in the area.

I wanted to include some brief thoughts about these characters and their relationship, but it accidentally exploded into an essay. See below the cut and I am so sorry to anyone for whom the cut fails.

(The Kaoru - Ukifune - Niou love triangle is such an obvious, common point of discussion in their relationship, so I won’t spend time on that here.)

Of the three generations of friendship-rivalries in Tale of Genji, the third is by far the most diametrically opposed. Niou's a hotshot prince who chases practically any woman because he can, being so notorious that even his servants and guardians are constantly like, where the hell is Niou NOW and for god’s sakes, don’t tell him about whatever or he’s going to get into it!! Kaoru is a wannabe monk who keeps getting derailed in this pursuit, in the beginning because he's taking care of his mom, and later because he’s asked by the aging and dying Prince Hachi (whom he greatly respects and has been studying Buddhist scriptures with) to take care of his daughters. People have summarized Niou as successor of Genji’s dynamism, charm and passion, and Kaoru as successor of Genji’s spiritualist sensitivities. So I guess you can call them Genji without the morals VS Genji without the libido, which is simplified but fairly accurate.

It’s also interesting to compare/contrast their actual heritage. Niou is Genji’s grandson through his daughter the Akashi Empress. He was also Murasaki’s favourite, and he was a cute kid, but she might have been appalled to see how he turned out. Kaoru meanwhile is the result of an affair between Kashiwagi (To no Chujo’s son) and the Third Princess (Genji’s youngest wife), and though everyone involved kept the secret pretty well, he’s always had this unsettled feeling of displacement and a sense that something was weird about his mother’s situation. (I’m a huge sucker for quietly and privately sad scenes, and the brief one where Kaoru, after learning the truth about his birth, with his real father's incriminating letters in hand, rushes home to talk to his mother - and then decides never to let her know that he knows because it would only upset her - was definitely one of those to me.)

From my perspective, Murasaki Shikibu or whoever wrote these chapters did a decent job making the Kaoru-Niou friendship believable and even supportive (mostly thanks to Kaoru) before all the crap hits the ceiling later (mostly thanks to Niou). The Uji chapters are rightfully considered a tragedy, but as I was reading I found the predicaments these two kept getting themselves into, and the sheer contrast of their positions and dispositions, rather hilarious.

At one point in the story, the pair have befriended the sisters Oigimi and Nakanokimi (the daughters Kaoru’s been asked to take care of, mentioned earlier). Because both Kaoru and Niou are of excellent status, getting married to either of them is about as much assurance that a woman would be taken care of as you could get in aristocratic Heian society. Only dad kinda FORGOT TO TELL HIS DAUGHTERS that he asked Kaoru to take care of them before he died, so they think their father wants them to stay hermits in their isolated house forever. GJ DAD YOU HAD ONE JOB

So anyways, both of them are courting the sisters. Well, Niou is definitely courting one (or both, he was kind of confused who he’s talking to/exchanging poetry with, but he is Very Serious about whomever it is). Kaoru’s doing whatever Kaoru does, which mostly seems to be talking a lot to this old woman who serves the sisters because she knew his real father, and chatting with the sisters, and slowly falling in love with the elder sister Oigimi.

But Niou being an imperial prince can’t get out and travel as easily as Kaoru can, plus he’s frequently put under house arrest for his bad behaviour. This leaves Kaoru to visit the sisters regularly and plead the case of his best friend’s sincerity. I kept picturing Kaoru all bundled up and paddling out to the middle of nowhere, and apologetically explaining for the umpteenth time, “I am so sorry. Niou couldn’t make it again. Yes, he’s grounded again. No, he really is grounded. I know you’ve heard that he’s a terrible playboy, and, well, he is, but he really is very in love with you. Uh, with one of you. He’s really very serious about whichever one of you was writing to him. Really” And the sisters behind their screen are like “WTF KIND OF IDIOTS DO YOU THINK WE ARE” (Please don’t take this as an accurate description of the story)

And then you get passages like this scene. Here we have Niou observing Kaoru in private mourning over Oigimi’s death:

"After many days of tears [Kaoru’s] features had changed, although not for the worse, for they now had so fine a beauty and grace that [Niou], who deplored his own waywardness, saw that he would certainly lose his heart to him, if he himself were a woman."

- Trefoil Knots (Tyler translation)

The next few lines, beginning with "That was a worry" makes me interpret it as either Niou going, "Uh oh, better get my brain onto a new train of thought", or "Uh oh, better get my new wife - whom KAORU HELPED ME TO WIN OVER AND IS STILL TRYING TO HELP CONVINCE WHAT A DECENT GUY I AM - to my house quick in case she falls in love with him."

Obviously, I'm biased towards Kaoru. But hey, I’m not alone! Many readers from the Heian period onwards felt the same. The Mumyozoshi or Nameless Book - a 13th century work of prose criticism by an author many believe to be Fujiwara Toshinari no Musume (“Shunzei’s Daughter”), whose family was dedicated to study of Genji Monogatari - argues that Kaoru is perfect and defends him from criticism. I don't know if I'd go quite that far, but I was super amused. And there are quite a few ancient writings that extend or reimagine things to better favour Kaoru - or at least cut Niou down to size. Here’s an example:

And His Majesty the Emperor Niou said, "Wow, you found Ukifune? Really? That’s great! Uh, you’re not still mad at me after all this time, are you? Boy, I was such an asshole back then and caused so much shit for both of us. Blah blah blah grovel grovel sob sob grovel." The Palace Minister Kaoru was so thoughtful even when he was young that he put everybody else to shame, and he barely ever complained. He now knew even more that life was fleeting and everything was impermanent and that really they’d all been at fault and his depth of compassion and understanding was way beyond even what even the most devout monk could achieve. So he wasn’t bitter at all. He replied, "It’s OK, there’s no point being angry about the past. Whatever happened was fated to happen." And he chatted about this and that until they all felt better. After he left His Majesty said, ‘Goddamn he’s amazing. I’m not worthy to be in his presence.” Actually His Majesty was annoyed because the women in his service were always going on and on about how wonderful the Minister was.”

- extremely paraphrased by me from Kumogakure Rokujo (Tale of Genji apocryphal chapters)

I hope you will agree that this amazingness would not be out of place on fanfiction.net.

Conversely, to balance out this biased post, Royall Tyler wrote an essay titled "Pity Poor Kaoru" that argues the whole narrative is set up to make you feel sorry for him to the exclusion of consideration for the other characters, and that even bearing this in mind he's not really the deep nice guy everyone thinks he is. I don't necessarily agree with all of it, but I do agree the reader is intended to sympathize with Kaoru (there’s a reason I haven’t seen any readers rushing to Niou’s defence). In any case, it's an interesting read with some good points. Centuries-spanning annotated fandom debates are so fascinating!

Wrapping up with some thoughts on Niou. As you may already know, I don’t like him, but to be fair that’s kind of the point. For the most part, aside from his amoral philandering ways and his heightened sense of suspicion that everybody’s doing the same thing he is, he seems otherwise a decent...ish... person. I guess lol. He's authentically very passionate about whatever his stupid inclinations are at the time, he really was housebound against his will at those critical parts in the story (although it’s partly his own fault…), and there are multiple points where he appears to feel genuine remorse at his own asshattery. 

Regardless of whether I’d like him as a real person or not, he’s a character. I recognize the Niou/Kaoru dynamic and relationship is central to the Uji chapters, his role makes the story what it is, and this is what creates conflict, interest, and entertainment. After all, while *I* would read 1200 pages about Kaoru being a monk, not everybody would. And even as I’m writing that, I admit it’s not the most exciting-sounding material.... and 1200 pages is a lot of pages... Ultimately Kaoru and Niou are great reminders that stories are only more compelling when you have interesting relationships and interactions. And I can say with greater confidence that I would read 1200 pages of Kaoru trying to be a monk and dealing with Niou being a turd. Thank you for reading my long wall of text.

[caredogstips]

Dogs Werent Always Mans Excellent Pal

When we think about puppies we suppose the most winsome, devoted, and loyal of all swine. Dogs, we all know, are always excited to see you and never adjudicator you for forgetting their birthday. But in the millennia since hounds became domesticated by humans, they haven’t always been seen as “man’s best friend” and often played second-fiddle to nature’s most splendid sociopath, the “cat-o-nine-tail”.

When bird-dogs were firstly domesticated, approximately 15,000 years ago and then, for a second duration, approximately 12,500 years ago, it was for study determinations. They were used mainly for hunting and protecting. In the biblical book of Exodus, we are told that dogs do not growling at the Israelites as a signaling of the discern distinction between the choice beings and the Egyptians, but the Israelites themselves do not seem to have any special affinity for the animal. The Bible repeatedly expends hounds as a token of stupidity, reminding readers that moron echo their misconceptions in the way that puppies return to their vomit.

The ancient Assyrians hindered puppies( perhaps a forefather of the mastiff) for lion huntings. According to one generator the seventh-century BCE governor of Babylon had so many pups that four hamlets were charged with an offence adding meat for the dogs and were exempted from any other kind of taxation or regime onu. Both the ancient Greeks and the Romans took dogs into engagement, with great success. Harmonizing to the Iliad, Patroclus, the admirer of Achilles, had nine pups that he allowed to eat next to his table. They were so important to Patroclus that Achilles nonchalantly slit the throats of two of them and convulsed them on Patroclus’s funeral pyre. Alexander the Great supposedly referred a town after his hound Peritas. There’s a prevalent internet story that Peritas had saved Alexander’s life in combat, but there’s no ancient proof for this story, and the fact that Alexander identified a city after Peritas is not definitive, as he likewise founded a city in the name of his mare, Bucephalus.

It was in the Roman period that upper-class wives began to collect attractive doll multiplied puppies as domesticateds. A pup known as the “Maltese,” but perhaps more closely resembling the Pomeranian, was especially favourite, but not exclusively for aesthetic concludes. The ancient Greek columnist Callimachus( 3rd century BCE) wrote that the Maltese could be placed on a person’s gut to draw out their abdominal sorenes. As a decision, it became fashionable to carry small dogs around close to one’s chest, business practices that exists to this day.

Even though the ancient Romans, Greeks, and Egyptians saved hounds as domesticateds, other Europeans were more skeptical. As useful as they were for hunting and deterring watch, bird-dogs were not widely accepted as pets until the late Middle Ages. One intellect for this was that canines had a bad reputation: the latter are defiled scavengers who feed food discarded or dropped by humans, but who were also known to eat bodies. Homer sees multiple notes to pups feeing the authorities of the soldiers who died in the Trojan War, and in the Bible the body of acclaimed seductress Jezebel assembled this fate when she was lunged out of a space.

Some Roman approvals liked to manipulate the dog’s proclivity for scavenging corpses by crucifying offenders low-pitched to the soil so that hounds could access the dead, or near dead, organization. The New Testament scholar John Dominic Crossan has even argued that this was the eventual fate of their own bodies of Jesus( which he does not think was properly buried, much less resurrected ).

Even after they were brought inside the European residence, in the twelfth century, pups could be a problematic presence, especially in the delicate matters of politics. The rupture between religion and regime caused by Henry VIII’s divorce from Catherine of Aragon was scooted by the misbehavior of one inadequately developed puppy. When Cardinal Woolsey, Henry VIII’s envoy, arrived in Rome to try and negotiate an annulment for the King with Pope Clement VII, his dog Urian chip Clement’s toe on their first gratify. When, as was customary, Clement extended his leg to Woolsey so that they are able to caress it, the dog leapt forward and bit him. The occurrence apparently drove Clement into a feeling, and arbitrations got started off on the wrong foot.

By the eighteenth century people, broadly speaking, had fallen in love with their bird-dogs. Lord Byron wrote poetry for his bird-dogs and beings offered large sums of money for the safe yield of missing pets. However, one of this force behind the animal rights movement was animal experimentation. Eighteenth-century medical experiments frequently used bird-dogs as topics. Dr. John Hunter’s work on artificial respiration and resuscitation implied cutting open a dog’s chest while “its been” breathing to see how its lungs wreaked. It was experiments like this that conducted ethicists like Jeremy Bentham to start advocating for better treatment of swine. In a ground-breaking account, Bentham constructed the occurrence that ponies and hounds are intellectually superior to newborns, and thus deserve respect:” A full-grown mare or dog is beyond comparing a most rational, as well as more conversable swine, than an baby of a epoch or a few weeks or even a few months old-time .”

Some animal rights activists took this principle to its extremes. In Ireland, Protestant animal privileges activist, legislator, and far-famed dueler Richard” Hair-Trigger Dick” Martin once got into a struggle in order to avenge the death of his friend’s wolfhound. Martin was rumored to have successfully fought in 100 duels, and during this duel the dog’s killer lived simply because he was wearing the eighteenth-century equivalent of a bulletproof vest. Martin also subsisted( despite being struck in the chest) and went on to become the founder of the Society for the Prevention of Cruelty to Animals.

For others, passion of their dogs provides even beyond the mausoleum. Frederick the Great, the deliciously eccentric prince of Prussia known for his military prowess and cherish of potatoes, requested to be buried next to his favorite dogs. His entreaty was ignored by his successor, who buried him in Potsdam garrison church, and he was only returned back to palace, and the mausoleum of his pups, at Sanssouci 205 year later. Frederick was neither the first nor the last to be immersed with his dogs. The Roman historian Pliny the Younger tells us that children were sometimes lay with their pets, and the remains of Viking burials reveal that pups followed their lords to Valhalla. Even though dog-human burials are reasonably common in various categories of ancient cultures, it’s difficult to know if this was a sign of affection. In Viking buryings, for example, dogs seem to have been included as templates. Scholarly conjectures about other burial sites include the idea that bird-dogs were hidden with humans in order to provide protection, rather than affection, in the afterlife.

Arguably, nonetheless , no community has loved its dogs so much as the cities of Neuville in the Dombes region of France. In the thirteenth century a Dominican friar traveling of the states of the region ranged across the story of Guinefort, a servant in private households of a local noble house. One era the lord and female of the manor went out, leaving their young infant in the charge of the servants. A serpent entered the child’s bedroom, headed towards the birthplace. Guinefort, who was watching the child at the time, heard the serpent and tried to catch it, nullifying the cradle and being injured in the process. When their own families returned they discovered the bedroom in disarray, Guinefort injured on the dirt, and blood splattered everywhere. A fellow maid alleged Guinefort of criticizing “childrens and” the father-god speedily described his sword and killed Guinefort. It was only later that their own families obtained the child uninjured and recognise what had happened.

After her death Guinefort was implanted and neighbourhood parties began to venerate her mausoleum. She became known as St. Guinefort and beings used to wreaking their sick offsprings to her tomb in the said he hoped that she could furnish some protection to them. All of which would be a whole lot more intelligible if it weren’t for the fact that Guinefort was a greyhound.

In the sixteenth century religion officials, bowing to the pressure of Protestant ridicule of the” greyhound saint ,” tried to eliminate the practice and subdue the cult of St. Guinefort. No such fluke. Even after The first world war beings were still venerating Guinefort. The treatment of Guinefort is a testimony to how much parties adoration hounds and saints, but it’s also representative of a period in which animals could sometimes be treated as beings. Pigs in this period were regularly tried for murdering infants and small children. In one such client in 1386, a swine was dressed in human apparel before she used hung. Similarly in 1750, when a donkey was put on trial for an improper sexual relationship with a guy announced Jacques Ferron, a number of local people testified that the she-ass was an” honest mortal” and she was acquitted( Ferron was hanged ).

It’s easy to see why, as beings began to regard swine in general as having human qualities, dogs would start to gain a reputation for allegiance and passion. If pigs were to be considered as low-key assassins, bird-dogs began to gain a honour for being “man’s best friend.” But if Games of Thrones and macabre report narrations have taught us anything it’s that canine behaviour is contextual. As long as they have meat dogs are devoted comrades; deprive them of it for long enough and we start to look good enough to eat.

Read more: http://ift.tt/mBKekP

The post Dogs Werent Always Mans Excellent Pal appeared first on caredogstips.com.

from WordPress http://ift.tt/2vZCbwQ via IFTTT

[ddbdiariesindia]

ME BEFORE US?

In a world that is constantly evolving with time, that most celebrated of all human emotions – love – is no exception. We explore its changing discourse.

There are few topics on which people around the world agree – but our idea of what love means could be the exception that proves the rule. Long drawn conditioning and cultural conversations have found love to be an act of completion, fulfillment, closure. This perhaps owes to Aristophanes’ argument in Plato’s Symposium. In it, he brought forth the then novel, now conventional idea of the ‘Other Half’. Aristophanes’ argument was an outlandish account, describing early humans as hermaphroditic beings, outfitted with two faces, four hands, and four legs. These monstrosities were also described as very fast – moving by way of cartwheels – and quite powerful to boot. Aristophanes described them as so powerful, in fact, that they made the Gods nervous, leading to them being split into half. Each half was left longing for their detached ‘other half,’ the partner that would ‘complete’ them.

This long-forgotten theory has been played out extensively and almost universally in our popular culture, making it clear to young men and women through the ages that they were ‘incomplete’ without a lover or a mate.

Finding one’s romantic counterpart was a cultural imperative, spurring the era of Mills and Boons and powering the entire genre of romance dramas and romantic comedies. This has also been the driving force behind the recognizable commercialization of love which began in the West, and then took root globally. Occasions like Valentine’s Day have been revamped into a celebration of having found a partner, a sign one’s personal life was blossoming. The corollary being that those still ‘single’ or unable to find a romantic partner are excluded from festivities.

Closer home, India’s classical art and literature also tell the tragic yet legendary tales of Laila-Majnu and Heer-Ranjha, besotted lovers, one incomplete without the other, who meet their unfortunate ends due to the shackles of society. This idea of an undying, unrelenting love has in turn inspired the country’s most influential source of popular and mass storytelling – Bollywood mainstream cinema – reminding audiences that the quality of their life is irrevocably tied to their ability to attract the right partner. Memorable lines in the movie Aandhi (1975) “Tere bina zindagi bhi lekin, zindagi toh nahi, zindagi nahi” have had the country singing along, collectively longing for the one true love that would seemingly make us all whole.

More recently, 1995’s Dilwale Dulhaniya Le Jayenge achieved cult status, with Simran (the archetypical young Indian girl, played by Kajol) yearned for her one true love to feel whole. It’s portrayal of unlikely but loveable partners is so revered that the movie still runs at Maratha Mandir in Mumbai, today, 23 years later.

What explains the endurance of this idea of love? Is it societal conditioning, gender/power dynamics in the common Indian household, access to or exclusion from financial resources? But as with everything else, society has changed, norms have changed, culture has changed, and love too is changing. Which brings us to the distinctly contemporary concept of self-love.

Among the chief advocates of self-love, was American author and feminist, bell hooks, who wrote:

“One of the best guides to how to be self-loving is to give ourselves the love we are often dreaming about receiving from others. There was a time when I felt lousy about my over-forty body, saw myself as too fat, too this, or too that. Yet I fantasized about finding a lover who would give me the gift of being loved as I am. It is silly, isn't it, that I would dream of someone else offering to me the acceptance and affirmation I was withholding from myself. This was a moment when the maxim "You can never love anybody if you are unable to love yourself" made clear sense. And I add, "do not expect to receive the love from someone else you do not give yourself.”

Bell Hooks and several other writers championed self-love to build a healthier imagery of love – one that did not hinge on validation from others and built something of value for oneself.

In Bollywood too, we saw the beginnings of the emergence of a heroine who desired someone who made her a “better version of herself,” rather than someone who completed her. In notable films like Kal Ho Na Ho (2003), we see the protagonist Naina (played by Preity Zinta) take a unique journey of love – with the man who made her a better version of herself and with the man who eventually became her life partner. She marries her best friend, but initially falls in love with someone who helps her grow and change for the better. Since then, we have seen multiple cinematic stories where the protagonist chooses to define his/her personal identity before choosing to love another. Films like Queen and Manmarziyan are glowing examples of how self-love is slowly being normalized, as opposed to being perceived as a selfish act of individualism. What matters increasingly is the journey to self-love, an arduous one for sure, but one which ends at self-actualization rather than completion – “O Safarnama… O jise dhoondha zamaane mein… mujh hi mein tha.”(Tamasha, 2015).

It’s fitting that perhaps the best articulation of the new definition of love has been offered by Indian-American comedienne Mindy Kaling, a cross-cultural and millennial icon, in her hit comedy “Mindy Project.’ It’s encapsualted by a conversation where the lead protagonists, unaware of their own feelings towards each other, discuss finding the ‘one’:

Why does this particular idea of self-love resonate with the much-maligned millennial generation? To attribute it to a culture of individualism would be simplistic. It might be due to their self-awareness and criticality, an inherent need to find flaws in themselves. The germ of doubt is birthed and nurtured by society and uniquely amplified by social media. Therefore, the idea of self-improvement or little boosts of confidence to become the best version of oneself is appealing. Partnership is ideal when it’s a means to this end. Self-love is not always a solitary pursuit but instead could trigger the quest for a person who makes people the best version of themselves.

As a result, millennials are foraying into new kinds of relationships. There’s an entirely new vocabulary of friendship and companionship that has emerged as a result – ‘friends with benefits,’ being only one example. Another such kind of relationship is a ‘situationship’, where both parties are emotionally and perhaps physically involved, but there remains an inability to commit, with fear and doubt clouding judgement, since both parties are yet to master self-love. This too comes with its own challenges. The question arises, is it possible to love oneself completely and accept another person’s love at the same time? Which kind of love is better? Is the idea of completion futile? While we fumble trying to find the answers to these questions, perhaps what would help us are even more new stories about this new kind of love, with its even more complex confusions.

Niyanta Mirjankar

Niyanta works as a Strategist in our Mumbai office. She believes that everyday conversations with people are an invaluable source of insights. She finds her peace in reading, singing and loving dogs, and hopes to adopt a llama some day.

Editor’s Note

All our blog posts draw on and add back to DDB Signbank, a proprietary repository of thousands of signs collected over time from across the world. These signs, when looked at collectively, point us in the direction of significant shifts in culture and consumer behaviour. Follow @DDBSigns on Twitter, or drop us a line at diariesindia@ddbmudragroup.com to learn more

[allineednow]

<p>'Flight Season' Is A Touching Story Of Grief & Survival Written By An Immigration Rights Activist -- EXCERPT </p>

Acclaimed young adult writer Marie Marquardt is notorious for creating works of emotional fiction that truly resonate with her readers, whether they are teens or adults. In her upcoming , out from Wednesday Books/St. Martin's Press in February, Marquardt has crafted her most personal and relatable story yet, and Bustle has an exclusive excerpt of the highly anticipated publication below.

Vivi Flannigan is barely holding it together. She is still mourning the loss of her beloved father, she's in danger of failing college, and to top it all off, she has developed an uncontrollable obsession for birds that seems to follow her wherever she goes. Determined to turn things around and live out her father's dreams for her achievement, Vivi secures a hospital internship that could very well save her from losing her spot at Yale -- that is, if she can survive the whole summer stuck with a hostile nursing student and a pain-in-the-butt patient. As she struggles to put the pieces of her life back together, Vivi's connection with TJ, a nursing student desperate to get out from under the responsibilities of his family's Brazilian restaurant business, and Ángel, an undocumented orphan and the fussy heart patient they are both assigned to care for, begins to change her life in ways she could never have envisioned.

A riveting story about love, compassion, and belonging, Flight Season is a timely publication that tackles one of the largest issues in America today: immigration and the status of undocumented young adults. Illustrated by Emily Arthur, a studio artist and professor of printmaking at the University of Wisconsin-Madison, the beautiful book is peppered with sixteen simple but stunning sketches and handwritten notes concerning various bird breeds and their behaviours.

Emily Arthur

The author of two previously acclaimed young adult books, Fantasy Matters and The Radius of Us, Marie Marquardt is a professor at Emory University and an immigration rights advocate. In Flight Season, she pulls draws from her own professional experiences working with immigrant teens and her personal experience with mourning the loss of her father while a young student to make an emotionally compelling story about survival, loss, and finding the way home.

Author Marie Marquardt, picture courtesy of Kenzi Tainow

"Flight Season is a tribute to the strength and fortitude many teenagers I have come to know and love, who confront all sorts of adversity with a maturity and inner strength that adults often don't comprehend," says Marquardt of her book. "It is also an act of resistance to the societal norms that tell us certain things (like an Ivy League degree) matter most, when -- actually -- they are not quite as critical as those intangibles of friendship and love and human flourishing."

If you're tearing up at the sight Marquardt's remarks, just wait till you read her heartwarming book. It is not out until February from Wednesday Books/St. Martin's Press, but you can begin studying Flight Season at the moment with an exclusive excerpt for Bustle readers. See the first chapter of Marquardt's emotional YA novel below:

Chapter 1: Vivi

BIRD JOURNAL May 29, 12:37 p.m.

Grasshopper sparrow (Ammodramus savannarum)

What is this little guy doing at a South Carolina rest stop? Is one of nature's greatest navigators lost?

Social Behavior: typically not in flocks, can be very

Secretive, but frequently perch atop shrubs to sing.

Telephone: double or triple ticking note, followed by long insect- like buzz.

Habitat: migrating bird, found during breeding season in much of the northern and midwestern United States. Winters in Mexico and the coastal southeastern US.

It is a migratory bird, and it should be LONG GONE!

Lately, I have developed a fascination with birds. It started in December, when a lovely small songbird perched above me in the branch of an enormous pine tree and refused to close up. At the time, all I knew was that it was loud and small and incredibly persistent.

Now I know it was an American robin.

Birders give every bird's tune a phrase, which is supposed to mirror the rhythm and tone of their sound. One of my favorite common birds, the barred owl, sings out in a low tenor, Who cooks for you? But the American robin does not ask questions. Instead it incessantly controls: Cheerily, cheer up, cheer up, cheerily, cheer up! That's a particularly frustrating thing to hear when you're sitting at an outdoor funeral in the blinding light of a Florida winter, trying to look closely at the eulogy.

I don't remember much from that day, except for the way bright blue the sky was, set against all of those dark suits, and the number of people had crammed into my backyard--hundreds of mourners pressed against the edge of the still lake. And I remember hearing fragments of a traditional hymn, because everyone around me was singing about "awesome wonder" and "the greatness of God," while I was entertaining such not-so-awesome thoughts as: I wonder where the ashes are and When will all of these folks leave us alone?

I stayed outside and sat in the shadow of the sprawling pine tree. I stared up at the Spanish moss, gray and dripping from each branch, waiting to feel something. Anything.

And that robin? He stuck around and kept me company. He sang to me, high and clear, until all of the guests had gone back to their not- torn-through-with-grief lives (probably feeling quite anxious to cheerily cheer up!) .

After that, I started to listen to birds, which was not terribly difficult. As it happens, they were paying a whole lot of attention to me.

Take this tiny sparrow: I'm on my way home after having (barely) survived my first year of college, and I'm not even remotely surprised when I pull into the parking lot of a run-down gas station, only to encounter him watching me with beady black eyes. He is perched on a rusted-out handicapped parking sign, staring right at me.

I believe he's a grasshopper sparrow, or maybe a Savannah sparrow. In any event, this little guy should already be at his summer home in Maine, or maybe hopping around the grasslands of the Great Plains, plucking up insects. He does not belong into the swamplands of rural South Carolina--not with summer fast approaching.

This poor bird has lost its bearings.

His stout neck flicks from side to side and he lets out a loud call: a triple ticking note followed by a long humming buzz.

Tick-tick-tick-buzzzzzzzzzzzz.

His insect-like call gives it away. He definitely is a grasshopper sparrow, so he definitely is missing.

Unless, of course, he stuck around to await me.

These birds may have pea-sized brains, but they're not dumb. They're incredible. They can make their way across continents with nothing but their own good sense. 1 time, a group of scientists packaged up a few dozen sparrows in Washington State, took them on a plane to Princeton, New Jersey, and set them free. Within a couple of hours, they all were going straight for their wintering grounds in Mexico.

What sort of sparrows were those? White-crowned?

I pull out my phone to perform a quick search, but I'm distracted by a series of incoming texts.

The first few are from my roommate, Gillian. From the fragments I can see, it seems that she's reached Chicago, the first stop on our epic summer music road trip. We planned it together, and then I abandoned her before it even started.

Since I'm now at a rest stop in the middle of nowhere, on my way home to repair last semester's epic mistakes, I can't muster the energy to consider her texts.

I scroll down to the next one, from my mom:

I'm thinking maybe just a small change of plans... . Call me!

I watch the screen, forcing myself to take slow breaths, wondering if she will tell me more. Nothing. When I look up, the sparrow has hopped over to perch on a metal pole with a convenience store's entrance, like he's urging me to go in.

Maybe that bird is right. Perhaps I need to head in and get something to eat before I make this call--Twizzlers to gnaw on. They always calm my nerves.

I close my bird journal and place it in the passenger seat. I rest the binoculars on top and get out of the car. The door jangles as I go indoors.

"Want somethin'?" A man behind the counter asks. "Twizzlers?"

"Last aisle, on the right."

I walk along the grey linoleum floor, following the almost-white path made by hundreds of feet shuffling toward the candy.

"Look up," the guy says. "See 'em there?"

I look up, but I don't see them. I'm unashamedly, scanning the brightly colored candies crammed onto metal shelves. I'm having difficulty pay- ing attention, because even through the thick plate glass, I hear that little sparrow's song.

Tick-tick-tick-buzzzzzzzzzzzz. Tick-tick-tick-buzzzzzzzzzzzz. Tick-tick- tick-buzzzzzzzzzzzz.

The convenience store clerk comes out from behind the counter with, of all things, a baby strapped to his back--and a handgun attached to his belt.

He reaches beyond me and then hands me a king-sized bag of Twizzlers.

"Here you are, miss." He glances out the window at my car. "I guess you will not be needing gasoline."

My car's electric. Additionally, it is beautiful and sleek and near flawless. I know that teenagers should not drive a vehicle like this. I get it. So the amused tone in his voice and how he looks back at me and gives me a quick once-over--they don't bother me. I understand where he's coming from.

And I can't exactly explain to this guy, this kind stranger with a baby on his back and a gun in his belt loop, how much this car means to me--how much more it is for me than a status symbol for the environmentally aware. Because, here's the thing about my car: no matter how bad things get, I can still climb in and press the start button. I can gently bring the engine to life, and I can remember the moment I got it--a moment full of the bright possibility of a beautiful future. I'm clinging to this future, grasping for it, but I feel it slipping out of my reach, darting off with nervous, erratic, unpredictable jolts. It's like I'm trying to hold on to a hummingbird.

"Never seen one of these in person," the clerk says. "How far can you go without charging it?"

"Three hundred and fifty miles or so. It's remarkable." I know I'm gushing, but I really like that car with all my heart.

"And what do you do out here on the road if you need to charge it?"

"I have an app. It tells me where I can stop to bill. ''``A program?" he asks, his eyebrows arching.

"Well, you know what they say." I shrug. "There is an app for everything these days."

He nods and pinches his lower lip, like he's thinking, but he does not ask anything more.

I'm tempted to tell him about the amazing birding programs I have on my phone--among them can really recognize any North American bird from a photograph and a GPS locator. But he will probably think I'm a basket case.

Down here on the ground, we barely ever provide these feathered wonders a moment's notice, even though they've been on Earth for eons more than we have. Most people don't know that birds are dinosaurs' closest descendants. They will, no doubt, outlast us all, and that is probably for the best.

Most people find my bird obsession weird. I get it. Six months ago, if someone had suggested to me that I'd be pulling over to the side of the road on a regular basis to strap a pair of binoculars around my neck and grab a journal from the glove compartment, or if someone had explained to me that I'd sketch furiously while struggling to discover the subtle differences between two sparrows, or I would know to focus my attention on the trill of their tune and the hue of their underbellies, I'd have said they were insane.

But the truth is this: I only started paying close attention to birds because they started paying attention to me.

I could offer any number of examples from the past six months. The horned owl that followed me home as I ran away from a dorm party where a junior I'd never met before cornered me and started to grope. The common raven that dive-bombed me a few times as I tried to enter the lecture hall where I was supposed to take an English exam covering a wide assortment of Canadian books on the subject of refuge--most of which I had not managed to read.

And this one, from a couple of weeks ago: I was studying for exams, utterly sleep-deprived and subsisting on Twizzlers and Monster Energy drinks. During exams, distance in the library is incredibly tough to find, and I was feeling proud that I had managed to find a personal desk by the window in the Southeast Asia Reading Room.

Yale's library is an astounding construction--it seems more like a cathedral than a place to store books. In fact, when I first got to campus last fall, the distance felt somewhat overwhelming. It seemed almost too quintessentially Ivy League to be actual. But any library with the motto a library is a summons to scholarship carved on the walkway was exactly the place I had to be that week. Up until that point, my next semester at Yale had been significantly lacking in scholarship, and I had three short reading days to make up for lost time.

I was camped out at a desk by the window, cramming the stabil- ity patterns of reactive intermediates into my exhausted brain. A small yellow bird came tapping on one of the windowpanes with its beak--so hard I was sure it would violate the leaded glass. And then the bird perched on a branch and started to call out.

That bird was an American goldfinch. Its call? Po-ta-to-chip, po- ta-to-chip. After enduring a few minutes of unrelenting tune, I eventually gave up, slammed my textbook shut, and took the stairs down to the library's exit. Dazed, I emerged onto Rose Walk and into the sunlight. I followed the scent of buttered toast to the Cheese Truck and ordered the daily special, a grilled Caseus cheese with farm-fresh spinach, with potato chips on the side. I let my eyes fall shut and slowly breathed in the most comforting aromas of all time. I then carried those chips and grilled cheese on sourdough to my favorite bench in a shady corner of Calhoun courtyard and devoured them.

It was among the best sandwiches I have ever eaten. The chips were fantastic, too, with the perfect amount of salt and a satisfying crunch. I'm almost sure I tanked the exam. Remembering all those stability patterns was probably a lost cause from the start, but I'll never forget that perfect grilled cheese--and the goldfinch that made me stop to eat it.

I hang around in the candy aisle for another moment or two, pretending to examine the shelves. I peer over a tower of chewing gum. The clerk is altering his gun holster to transfer the sleeping baby into a Package 'n Play. It is set up under the counter, behind the smoke display. I really don't want to interrupt him, so I wait till after the baby is settled to pay.

Standing there, desperate to kill time so that I won't have to make that call to my mom, I believe asking if he brings his baby to work every day. But then I fear that there is some tragic story behind it all--like maybe his wife left him for his brother, or she died in a horrible interstate accident between an eighteen-wheeler. Maybe he had been in the car too. Perhaps it was his fault, and the agony of having murdered his wife is almost too much for him to bear.

God, what's wrong with me? Not everybody's life has to be in shambles.

I decide that's enough death and destruction for now. His wife

Probably went to see her mom in Beaufort or something. Or maybe she's at home, right around the corner, making tuna sandwiches for lunch. Perhaps he just likes hanging out with his little girl in the office-- a way to pass the time.

I say a quick thanks and head toward the door. "Hi, Mom. I was just going to call."

I swing the door of the convenience store open, and a blast of sweltering hot air hits me at precisely the same time as her voice.

For as long as I can remember, my mom's voice has functioned as a precise barometer of her mood. With only a few words, I can tell how she's faring. It's tough to admit, but I have come to dread our telephone calls. Because, when she's sounding bereft, and I'm several states away, doing everything I can to hold it together enough to keep from failing out of school, I don't have any idea how to speak to her.

But today she seems good. Great, actually.

"My friend Anita is going to North Carolina for the summer. She is giving pottery workshops at an artist colony near Celo--"

I'm not sure how any of this is related to Mom and me. But I believe I know what she wants me to say, so I say it. I interject with a passionate "And?"

"She's decided to focus the workshop around trees, roots, leaves, and branches..."

"Oh, well, I just thought you should know..."

It is a game we used to play when Dad came home from a day in court with another wild idea. He would burst into the kitchen, announcing a series of facts that seemed in no way related to our lives.

Did you two know that Bhutan has extraordinary biodiversity? And an incredibly diverse selection of climates... .

The takin is Bhutan's national animal, but most folks travel there to get a sighting of the Bengal tiger or the clouded leopard... .

Oh, and there are some fabulous Buddhist monasteries there. I mean, if you're into that sort of thing... .

I was just driving home from work and thinking about how you two may not know a whole lot about Bhutan, and perhaps you should... .

And I have booked a trip. Vivi's spring break. How does that seem to y’all?

So, even though it hurts, physically, to play this game with my mother, and a hole is opening up in my chest, I squeeze my eyes shut and allow me to do it.

"And she's offered us her beach cottage."

I lean against the wall and rip open the bag of Twizzlers.

"It is so adorable. Just a few houses from the ocean. You are going to love it."

I begin gnawing on a Twizzler, watching the sparrow hop to the pavement and begin a little jig.

"Uh, that sounds like a great adventure, Mom."

I say it because that is the way the game always ended. But what I really want to say is: Can I please just come home?

[garyh2628]

QUASI- JUDICIAL OFFICIAL, REGION AND PRIVATE

ELECTED LEADER

CHIEF OF STAFF (VETO)

PRIVATE AND CONFIDENTIAL

Chairman and Managing Operational CEO (Global Legal Authority Quasi-Judicial)

(Finance, planning, industry and foreign trade portfolios) Private

Head of Human Resources Finance and People and Global Head of Corporate Responsibility

 Investments/Contracts/Superior/Technically Competent and Right-Hand Men

NGO - (Finance, planning, industry and foreign trade portfolios) Private

 To my Pharma Hubs, Technology Hubs, Social Creative/Personal Hub, My Private Hubs, My Financial Hubs and my Health and Wellbeing/Scientific Hubs, Legal and Innovation Hubs, Hinterland Hub and to my Eastern Caribbean Hub, Linguistic/Psychology Hub, to my beloved additions and to my Institutions and Partners and Team, Pool of Potential Personal Assistants and Private Secretaries and Business Managers and also to my Fitness Hub which is an extension of my Health and Wellbeing Hub and not to forget my beloved Brooklyn Hub and my Wine/Adviser Hub, Influential Legal Cashier, Strategic Partnerships, STATEMENT OF INTENT, MY WEALTH FUND AND PERSONAL ATTORNEY and PROPERTY EXPERT GUY and THE ATTACHMENT AND MY PERSONAL BOARDROOM AND MY CHIEF STRATEGY AND INNOVATION OFFICER. The core founding support regions of this Network and Global Structure. MY FAVOURITE CEO.

  All Options remain on the Table applying the finishing touches to our Genius and my Genius and the Network and this Global Structure Genius. DRAFT

 The Network, Strategic Partnerships and Global Structure is hot–but watch the margins

THE MOST BEAUTIFUL INTELLECTS IN THE WORLD

THIS GLOBAL STRUCTURE AND INTELLECT SHARE MANY OF THE SAME QUALITIES, INDESTRUCTIBLE, PURE AND BEAUTIFUL TO BEHOLD

WHEN WAS THE LAST TIME YOU EXPERIENCE SOMETHING SO BEAUTIFUL, IT CHANGED HOW YOU SAW THE WORLD

DELIVERING ALL OF THE PREPARATORY PARTICYULARS MAKING WAY FOR PRIVACY AND FOR WORK TO BEGIN BY ME AND ALSO TO DELIVER THAT WE DO NOT SUBSCRIBE TO POVERTY AND WE ARE THE AUTHORITY ON INTELLECT- WE WILL DELIVER ON ALL OF THOSE PARTICULARS USING THE URGENCY OF NOW

And to deliver those official portfolios to me in its entirety with there Global Legal Restrictions.

AND TO MY COMMITTED SUITE OF PHARMA HUBS  and INDUSTRY AND INNOVATION HUB and STRASBOURG INTELLECTUAL FAMILY–

 THE YEAR OF THE SCIENTIST, ATTACHMENT and PRIVACY

  Aligning our funds with Gary and the Global Structure Goals ‘Stepping into world pre-eminence’ Delivering the full suite of Monetary Global Footprints’

 DO NOT PLAY ALONG WITH THEM AND THEIR QUEST FOR MEDIOCRITY-WE ARE NOT HERE TO HELP OUT- OUR INTELLECTUAL CAPACITY IS NOT FOR MEDIOCRITY AND THOSE THINGS OF GROSS FAILURE

 ALL SUPPLEMENTARY PAYROLL MUST WAIT UNTIL THE FULL DELIVERIES ARE MADE TO ME PRIOR PREPARATORY GLOBALLY AND UNTIL I’M BRIEFED AND HAVE MY PRIVATE MEETINGS AND SSUED THE RELEVANT AUTHORITY.

 REGION (INCL STATEMENT OF INTENT, PRIVATE STRATEGIC PLACES)

 Sign up to receive a daily roundup when the Offices are delivered by me.

On investigation there is a backlog of work across network that needs my attention as there is no movement of anything without my approval, but not to be a burden, it’s speaks of the progress that is being made across the Globe and in the various areas.  While they are being developing their paid narrative and creating a false environment and creating nonsense and a cult figure the Network is busy trying to get the particulars ready for prior deliveries for planning and also for the full delivery to get to me in its entirety for work to begin globally.  While the continue to pay people to create this theatrical sow as a means for an entry point or to think that progress as it relates to our classified strategy et al was told they are wasting their time.  As intellectuals, we are the authority on intellect and there is no environment that can be created in order to undermine, usurped, override or impute my integrity as a result.  The entire Global Structure apparatus is in full operation and we are moving forward with our plans in making sure deliveries for work to begin get to me. Further, those offices to be delivered by me in the various regions will be so.  All are briefed in relation to the low tactics that is being used in order to create a deflection with a hope that I and my Monetary Footprint and my Private personal Wealth Fund and the Network is used for their purposes.  That will not happen, and we will not be forced by some within the religious community to get involved in mediocrity and the things that was the root causes of their downfall and failure to date.  Just as I thought those are paid content with a further purpose for repair and deflection and god knows what more but as the Chief of Staff and the Global Legal Authority on Intellect and in my capacity as legal owner and Chairman and CEO, I shouldn’t be concerned wit such, it is not in my remit to focus on false environment.  I am correct in focusing on moving this process further and in order for us to deliver on the classified strategy and stem the crisis and haemorrhaging of our Children Future and this Generation and the Next Generation Future Globally and prevent further lives from being destroyed as a result of their need for false prestige.  A report has revealed.

 The cost to this Network is only as a result of the process in getting the full set of Property Portfolios to be delivered to me with all the prior particulars and tool kits for planning.  We are neither donating or supporting any charities or business plan until the full set of deliveries is made to me for work to begin.  This was communicated to the relevant organisation and Institutions. This process will neither be held hostage as an appearance for further mischief by those of that order.  Further those good relationships that are in its infant stages are earthquake full proof and cannot be undermined because Intellect cannot be undermined.  You were reprimanded for your behaviour and for deliberately trying to use this process for the things of mediocrity.  You were criticised because in this instance you were out classed, you were out classed Intellectually also, and all my portfolios are sound and legally earthquake proof.  My personal wealth Fund picked up another tranche of monies and a full suiter of subsidies that needs my perusal, signature and approval.  I can now confirm that we are in this process together.  The full suite of exclusive executive treats that are attached to those things only I can use, and the full suite must be delivered to me in its entirety.  I can concur we will drain the swamp of mediocrity.  There is so much favourable forecast for me and this Network and the Region and the Statement of Intent and my Teams et al, its surreal. Everything now is put on hold to focus on all the deliveries that should have been made long ago, they must be speed up and the focus must now also be on infrastructure. The moratorium will continue until work which make significant improvements to the infrastructure and process until full delivery is made to me for work to begin is made. I am he et al is all instances and the moratorium will also extend to all those particulars.  We will not turn our back on the religious community as a result of a few who are hell bent on getting their own way and their own agenda trough based upon mediocrity that will not be allowed to happen, every place where our Monetary Footprints are I will not allow those of that order that find a way in.

 A decision notice, for the Network and the Economic Community and the Global Structure can only come from me as was ruled and in all cases should be referred to me, these activities must wait until full delivery is made to me for work to begin.  You cannot now want to snap because you feel left out; how do you know you are naked?  The application and approach to critical thinking must always be at full capacity, you want to be involved as a result of the wonderful things we are doing in the private regions and the things forecasted. Disruption and furore are not hallmark of anything we do.  This Network and the Region and the full Global Structure do not get involved in the things of resurfacing, we do not get involved in bribes for aesthetic reasons and for the deliberate smearing of people with a further purpose of branding and to support your definitions and trying to make your definitions our definitions.  We are the authority on Intellect and our mission and mandate that are in the public interest will be communicated as we present the Global Structure to the world, listen to our Thank you Corporation Broadcast and you might hear there a few things we might be doing before we go off to be sequestered. We have now received core funding.  We are currently funding a few intellectual initiatives but that is purely classified, and their job is to get those preparatory basic bones to me so that we can hit the ground running at delivery to me for work to begin.  I will not be abandoning them and begin a new leaf; our plans remain classified and will so be treated.

[like2in]

Exclusive! Sara Ali Khan on Kedarnath success: 'I feel privileged to be received with such warmth'

Exclusive! Sara Ali Khan on Kedarnath success: 'I feel privileged to be received with such warmth' - Sara Ali Khan should actually be walking in the clouds, considering she has been so well received in her debut film, Abhishek Kapoor’s Kedarnath. However, this 23-year-old knows that if she keeps her head firmly on her shoulders, the chances of her landing on the moon are definitely far more, so she chooses to remain grounded. And, when someone so young and attractive behaves herself, it is nice. Of course, you wonder how long this good behaviour will last but since cynicism is not the order of the day, you just give her upbringing credit, smile and indulge her with the attention she rightfully deserves. Excerpts from our conversation... How does it feel to be the second most famous person in the country? Ha ha ha... who is the most famous? Taimur Ali Khan... Taimur, yes (smiles). I must tell you that it’s overwhelming. I feel like it was just yesterday that we were sitting together at this same place and talking. You greeted me with as much warmth then as you have today. Thank you for that. It is overwhelming and shocking. I was telling you that soon enough I’m going to say it’s ‘two days to go’, ‘one day to go’ and then it’s going to be ‘D-day’. Now, I can’t believe it’s happened. To be honest, it has been a little hectic with promoting Kedarnath, shooting a song for Simmba and then dubbing for the film. That hasn’t given me too much time to sit and internalise it. So, I’m thankful for these interviews. It gives one some time to sit and be like, ‘Okay, I’ve done a film and it has released.’ It’s a huge one for me. I am so privileged to be received with the warmth that I have. People like you have always been warm and gracious to me from the very beginning, even before I did anything to prove it. I think especially because of that, I’m a little nervous. But you haven’t let us down. Thank you. That’s all I needed to hear. Not that one doubted that you didn’t have the mettle, but having seen the film, one can say that you genuinely have what it takes to be a good actor. And you’ll soon become a star, too. Star toh aaj ke zamane mein hota hi nahin hai. There’s so much easy access to us, whether it’s social media or life, in general. I don’t look at that as a go-to, it’s only incidental. Especially since I’ve been given the warmth and acceptance, it’s my duty that I jolly well prove that I have what it takes. If people feel, to some degree, that I’ve been able to do that, I’m grateful and humbled. Having said that, there were expectations, but not in a negative way like, ‘Oh, my God! They are waiting to hate me!’. Whether it’s my mom, people from the industry or media, in general, there’s been so much love and warmth that I’ve been greeted and treated with, it behooves me to prove that I’m worthy of that. When we met before Kedarnath released, you said you were happy to have a launch with Abhishek Kapoor and Sushant Singh Rajput. Now that the film is out, how do you look back at the journey? I’m thankful to them. Being an actor is something one has always dreamt of. But getting the right film? It’s not something you can really plan. When people ask me, ‘What’s your plan?’, I’m like, ‘Kya farak padta hai? At the end of the day, it’s not in your hands.’ Everything has its own trajectory. You don’t see some of the biggest things in your life coming. The first time I heard the script of Kedarnath, I felt convinced. I’m too new, I don’t have craft or experience. The only thing I have is conviction and honesty. I believed I could play the character of Mukku/Mandakini honestly. The appreciation I’ve got is purely because there was not a single moment on the set when I was not convinced. Now that the film is out, I’ll be even more honest and tell you. there were days that were difficult. We had ups and downs. Whether logistically, personally, geographically or physically, it wasn’t an easy journey. Regardless of that fact, there was not a single day when I woke up in the morning and thought to myself ki ‘yeh kyun kiya?’ How did your mom and dad react to the film? Mom had heard the narration and she had also seen some rushes. But she still cried in the climax, so that was a big one for me.

She watched it at the film’s trial for the cast and crew? Mom and I went to see it at a multiplex on Saturday night. Both my parents and I did not wish to watch the trial. You know, there’s an element of ‘Wow, wow, wow’ that goes on trials. We’ve all done it and we will continue to do it. I think they wanted to retain some objectivity, which is already so difficult because I’m their beloved. I think that’s what they were trying to do more than anything else. And so we took the film in at a regular show. And your dad? I think his favourite scene is the Ganga dubki. He keeps saying, ‘There is an expression on our face, you’re freezing, you’re doing this, but you’re also expressing’. They are relieved, proud and also grateful for the acceptance I have got. I think they have liked my work objectively. I think they are appreciating more the way other people are reacting to my work, because touch wood, they are receiving it well. Has your brother Ibrahim watched the movie? No, Ibrahim hasn’t seen it yet. He landed from London only on December 13. He studies there. Now that he is back, he and I will watch the movie together. How many times have you seen it? With Ibrahim, it will be my third watch. I watched at the cast and crew trial, then with mom. I can watch it again and again (smiles). Do you find any fault when you revisit your work? Yes, of course. But that’s natural. They are not jarring faults, but you feel you could have done some things better. The day I stop feeling that way, I’m in trouble. This is the kind of job where you have to keep growing. People often ask me, ‘Are you ready?’ ‘Now what?’ I tell them that you can never be ready. It’s not that chapter one is over. Today, I have the conviction that I can read this book. Now, I’m about to start reading this book, that’s the change from our last meeting to this. I can’t say that I’ve mastered chapter one and now it’s time to master chapter two. That’s not where we’re at. We know we have the potential to read, that’s where we’re at. Last time you also spoke about some reservations in waving back at the paparazzi? Do you wave back to them now? Yes, 100 per cent. I do wave back, I smile and I give interviews. We have moved a little more from there. You’re quite a darling of the media. I’ll be honest and try to give you an objective number. Because it’s my first film and I have worked hard, I think 80 per cent of the reviews and appreciation is deserved, while 20 per cent is a little biased because they like me. I have to tell you... critics, interviewers, media, people from the industry, they just like me. Any butterflies in your stomach now? I’m not worried, but I’m aware that now the game has begun. Those who have seen your songs from Simmba say, ‘We can’t take our eyes off Sara. She’s dancing next to Ranveer Singh, who is such a bundle of energy’. How do you take that? The more appreciation one gets, the more butterflies one feels. You realise that there is more and more to live up to. You can only go further, there is no going backwards in life. So after moving from step 0.1, I have to move to step 0.2. That’s my duty, otherwise there is no movement. And if there is no movement, then what am I doing? I’ve always said that it’s not about where you start from, it’s about how much you grow. From now on, the aim is to do more hard work, with more dedication. Kareena (Kapoor Khan) liked your performance too and messaged you… Yes, she did send me a message. My father calls me every day, saying ‘I loved your work’, talking about one scene or the other and ‘I’m so proud of you’. Every day, more and more people are watching the film and messaging my parents. And quite naturally, they are excited. It’s just amazing. I’m really enjoying this moment. Currently, you’re between two films. Kedarnath and Simmba are different worlds. You must have realised that too while dubbing. Yes, from an author-backed character to a commercial Hindi film heroine, the roles and dynamics are different. The dream is to act, so you can do diverse kinds of films, genres and roles. It’s not that one is easier than the other. Doing Ganga dubki is as difficult as having Karisma Kapoor’s loveable energy in your eyes. Dancing to Aankh Maare with Ranveer Singh next to you in a Neha Kakkar-rendered song is also challenging, sometimes even more challenging. I’m excited about the opportunity to do various kinds of roles. So you’re taking one step at a time? Yes, I’m waiting for Simmba now. I got lucky with Kedarnath and Simmbacoming like this. It wasn’t a plan. The only thing is that I aspire for versatility. That’s the aspiration, but conviction is essential. As long as I’m convinced about the world, I’m game. And you need to know why you’re doing what you’re doing. You do a film for different reasons — you love the script or you love the director you’re dying to work with, or getting a character you’re dying to play. Or somebody may even tempt you with big money. Maybe, but it’s too soon in my career for that. So long as you know what you’re doing and you have an opportunity to do different roles, I think that’s what there is to it. To be honest, I’m restless. I want to be on set again. I want to do a film again, like today. Not restless as in wanting to take a break? Touch wood, no breaks. Honestly, I’ve not slept more than six hours in a long time. I wouldn’t mind a 12-hour break, but no more. I don’t want to be at home ever (smiles). Exclusive! Sara Ali Khan on Kedarnath success: 'I feel privileged to be received with such warmth' Read the full article