#and its good literature and its great that we celebrate it still

[curtwilde]

Ram cannot have a janmabhoomi because Ram is a mythological figure and not a real person.

[566-hope-street]

Austin Osman Spare and His Theory of Sigils

by Frater U:.D:.

The end of the 19th and the beginning of the 20th centuries was a time characterized by radical changes and great heretics. The secret lore and the occult in general were triumphant, and there were good reasons for this. The materialist positivism with its Manchester industrialism was beginning to show its malice, resulting in social and psychological uprooting. The destruction of nature had already begun to bear its first poisonous fruits. In brief, it was a time when it seemed appropriate to question the belief in technology and the omnipotence of the celebrated natural sciences. Particularly intellectuals, artists, and the so-called "Bohemians" became advocates of values critical of civilization in general as can be seen in the literature of Naturalism, in Expressionist Art and in the whole Decadent Movement, which was quite notorious at the time. 

Austin Osman Spare was a typical child of this era and, after Aleister Crowley, was definitely one of the most interesting occultists and practicing magicians of the English-speaking world. Despite his various publications after the turn of the century, he remained practically unnoticed until the late sixties. He was born in 1886, the son of a London police officer, and we know very little about his childhood. He claimed to have experienced while a child an initiation of sorts by an elderly witch, one Mrs. Paterson who, as far as we know, must have been quite a Wiccan-like character. Spare found his intellectual and creative vocation as an artist and illustrator, and he attended the Royal College of Art, where he soon was celebrated as a forthcoming young artist. But he rebelled against a bourgeois middle-class career in the arts. Disgusted by commercialism, he retreated from the artistic scene soon afterwards, though he still continued editing various magazines for quite a while. From 1927 until his death in 1956, he virtually lived as a weird hermit in a London slum, where he sometimes held exhibitions in a local pub. 

Spare in 1904

Around the beginning of the First World War, he released some privately published editions, and today one can acquire—at least in Great Britain—numerous, usually highly expensive, reprints of his works. However, we are primarily interested in his well-known Book of Pleasure (Self-Love): The Psychology of Ecstasy (London, 1913). Spare's actual philosophy will not be analyzed in depth here because this is not really necessary for the practice of sigil theory and it would lead away from the subject of this study. Before we begin with Spare's theory of sigils, it is perhaps useful to write a few words about the part sigils play in a magical working. Occidental magic is known to rest on two main pillars, which are will and imagination. Connected with these are analogous thinking and symbolic images. For example, Agrippa used a special sigil for each of the planetary intelligences. These are not, as has been assumed for quite some time, arbitrarily constructed, nor were they received by "revelation," but are based on Cabalistic consideration. The Hermetic Order of the Golden Dawn also employed sigils as "images of the souls" of magical entities, which enabled the magician to establish contact with them; nevertheless, the technique of their construction was not explained. The same may be said for the Ordo Templi Orientis (O.T.O.) under Crowley's leadership and for the Fraternitas Saturni under Gregorius. The name Agrippa already hints at the fact that magical sigils have a long historical tradition, which we will not discuss here because then we would have to cover the whole complex of occult iconology as well. 

In general, people think of "correct" and "incorrect" sigils. The grimoires of the late Middle Ages were often little else but magical recipe books, and practitioners believed in the following principle: to know the "true" name and the "true" sigil of a demon means to have power over it. Pragmatic magic, which developed in the Anglo-Saxon realms, completely tidied up this concept. Often Crowley's revolt in the Golden Dawn is seen as the actual beginning of modern magic. It would certainly not be wrong to say that Crowley was an important supporter of pragmatic thought in modern magic. But in the end, the Master Therion preferred to remain within the hierarchical dogmatic system due to his Aiwass revelation in Liber Al vel Legis. His key phrase "Do what thou wilt shall be the whole of the Law. Love is the law, love under will," as well as his whole Thelemic concept, prove him a dogmatic magician. 

English magic of the turn of the century was also influenced by an important young science which would actually achieve its major triumphs only after the Second World War: the psychology of Sigmund Freud. Before that, Blavatsky's Isis Unveiled and The Secret Doctrine, as well as Frazer's The Golden Bough, had given important impulses to the occult in general. William James's comparative psychology of religion influenced deeply the intellectuality of this time, but Freud, Adler, and especially Carl G. Jung eventually effected major breakthroughs. From then on, people started to consider the unconscious in earnest. We will not analyze by whom Spare was influenced. Rather, we will discuss his greatest achievement: his psychological approach towards magic. This leads us to magical practice proper. 

In Spare's system there are no "correct" or "incorrect" sigils; neither is there a list of ready-made symbols. It is of no import whether a sigil is the "correct" one or not, but it is crucial that it has been created by the magician and is therefore meaningful to him/her. Because s/he has constructed it for personal use, the sigil easily becomes a catalyst of his/her magical desire. This pragmatic approach which dominates present-day Anglo-Saxon magic (Israel Regardie, Francis King, Stephen Skinner, W. B. Gray, David Conway, Lemuel Johnstone, to name but a few relevant authors) goes to show that Austin Osman Spare, rather than Aleister Crowley, should be considered the real Father of Modern Pragmatic Magic. In the German-speaking countries, the situation is quite different. Writers like Quintscher, Gregorius, Bardon, Klingsor and even Spiesberger allow but little room to maneuver when creating magical coordinates individually. Here the adept is expected to grow into a ready-made system instead of fashioning one. This is a completely different approach, the value or non-value of which we will not discuss here. The works by Mahamudra, which have of late been receiving some attention, are mainly of a descriptive nature and deal with traditions and new interpretations, thus remaining within the context of German magical heritage; however, they do take heed of recent results in scientific psychology and are, therefore, at least partially related to the pragmatic approach. Pragmatic magic will become more and more important because today's magicians have to face a psychologized and psychologizing environment whose philosophical relativism has been shaping all of us, and still does. Regardless of the significance or amount of truth one concedes to psychology, we all are infiltrated by its way of thinking and its vocabulary. So even we magicians will have to attain to a critical, sensible look at it. It will be left to another era to find different models of explanation, description and practice. 

How does Spare proceed in practice? Sigils are developed by fusion and stylization of letters. First of all, a sentence of desire has to be formulated. Let us take the example Spare himself gives in his Book of Pleasure, the declaration of intent: THIS MY WISH TO OBTAIN THE STRENGTH OF A TIGER. This sentence must be written down in capitals. Next, all the letters which appear more than once are deleted so that only one of each letter remains. Thus, the following letters remain: THISMYWOBANERGF. The sigil is created from these letters. It is permissible to consider one part (for example, M) as a reversed W or, seen from the side, as an E. Hence, these three letters do not have to appear in the sigil three separate times. Of course, there are numerous possibilities of representation and stylization. However, it is important that in the end the sigil is as simple as possible with the various letters recognizable (even with slight difficulty). The artistic quality of the sigil is irrelevant, but for simple psychological reasons it should be obvious that you should not just scribble or doodle in haste. You should strive to make it to the best of your abilities. The finished sigil, which in the beginning will probably take a few attempts to construe, will then be fixated. You may draw it on parchment, on paper, in the sand, or even on a wall. According to Spare's short instructions, it should be destroyed after its internalization. Thus, you will either burn the parchment, wipe it out in the sand, etc.

Example of a sigil

Spare's basic idea is that the sigil, together with its meaning, must be planted into the unconscious. Afterwards, the consciousness has to forget it so that the unconscious can obey its encoded direction without hindrance. When the sigil is ready, it is activated by implanting it into the psyche. This is the most difficult part in this process, and Spare offers only very few hints on practical procedures. However, it is crucial that the sigil is internalized in a trance of sorts. This may take place in a state of euphoria (for example, by means of drugs), in ecstasy (for example, by masturbation or sexual intercourse), or in a state of physical fatigue. For the latter example, eyes and arms may be tired by folding your arms behind the head while standing in front of a mirror and staring fixedly at your image. The important thing is that it should click, meaning that the sigil must be internalized spasmodically, which, of course, requires some exercise and control. This procedure may be supported by repeating the sentence of desire rhythmically and monotonously like a mantra, becoming faster and faster. In doing so, one must stare fixedly at the sigil. After spasmodical internalization, the symbol must be destroyed and deleted from the conscious mind. As mentioned before, from now on it will be the unconscious which has to do the work.

In my own practical work I have discovered that it may even be useful to keep the sigil on you, such as wearing a ring engraved with it, etc. But this will depend upon the magician's individual predilection, and everybody should find his/her own way. Occasionally, it may prove necessary to repeat the whole procedure, especially if the goal is a very problematical one, requiring an outstanding amount of energy. Nevertheless, experience shows that it is of prime importance not to bring back the meaning and aim of the sigil into consciousness at any time. We are, after all, dealing with a technique akin to autosuggestion; thus, the rules are the same as with autosuggestions themselves. Therefore, you may not use negative formulas such as "THIS MY WISH NOT TO ..." because very often the unconscious tends neither to recognize nor understand this "not," and you might end up getting the opposite result than that which you originally desired. If you see a sigil every day, perhaps on a wall or engraved on the outer side of a ring, this should only take place unconsciously, just as one might not consciously notice an object which is in use all the time. Of course, you should keep your operation secret, for discussing it with skeptics or even good friends may dissolve the sigil's power. The advantages of this method, of which only a short summary can be given here, are obvious. It is temptingly easy, and with only a little practice it may be performed at any time and at any place. It does not call for any costly paraphernalia. Protective circles and pentagram rituals are not required, though sometimes may prove useful, especially with operations of magical protection. People who tend to psychic instability should, however, be cautious. Although the threshold to schizophrenia is not as easily crossed with this method as with common evocations, it does involve cutting deeply into the ecology of the psyche, an act which should be considered carefully in any case. The psycho-magical consequences are sometimes quite incalculable. 

As is well known, the real problem with magic is not so much the question whether it works, but rather the fact that it does. Used with responsibility, this method offers the magician a tool which provides him/her with a limitless variety of possible magical applications.

Austin Osman Spare, Self-Portrait, 1935

[greypetrel]

Some spoilers from a person trained in literary criticism, after opening youtube and cringing hard at the title of a video and it had me screeching in annoyance at people who thinks consuming a lot of fiction automatically makes you a Literary Critic, and that will mix personal taste with objective truth.

A long, rantful tirade under the cut that I may or may not delete later.

ALL art is derivative. Or at least, Literature surely is. The great breakthroughs are so because they refused some conventions. Meaning that they had those conventions in mind and actively chose not to follow them. They're still derivative. Using "Fanfiction" as a slur is perfectly pointless and not that slur you think it could be, and "originality" is not something we should praise so much and looks so much to... Not if we don't want to be disappointed. Nothing is truely original in art, not in the "Never done before" way (one could argue that early cinema was original? Oh sure, as a mean of expression! But take a moment and consider "People travelling to the moon" as a theme in literature. I can trace it back at the II century AD, and I wouldn't be surprised if the theme came up before that in other cultures I am not so knowledgeable of. Méliès' Voyage dans la Lune is original in execution because cinema was new... As for the story? Still derivative!

The concept of "Mary Sue" as a slur should die. Really. Stop. That type of character may not speak to you and that's very valid, it's your right in not liking it! still doesn't make it objectively bad or evil, or something to despise. Two people will read the same book in two different ways. That's the beauty of literature: it's not high school math which has a right and a wrong answer. Literature and Humanities work in shades of grey. If some people need to have a main character that's clumsy, that's beautiful but very unsure of herself, that's important to the story, so they can identify themselves in her and maybe gain some more trust in themselves, what's wrong? There's nothing wrong in liking, in needing a Mary Sue, and there's equally nothing wrong in disliking her. It's just a matter of taste and of the right moment you read her. I read Twilight in three days because by that time I WAS clumsy and unsure of myself, I WAS just in high school after years of middle school being bullied. I could relate to Bella, and it felt nice, at 14, to see that even if you can't stand on your feet for more than 10 minutes, you can still live adventures and be loved. I stopped reading the saga because the "Edward dumped me and I stopped living" didn't resonate with me at all, and I didn't go further in my reading. Years of Liceo Classico and Academies got me hating Twilight because EEEEEW BELLA IS A MARY SUE EEEEEEW. That's bullshit.

Personal taste =/= Judgement over how good or bad is a book. I am sorry to relate this to you, but no, reading a lot of fiction doesn't make you a literary critic. Because good literary criticism takes the context into account to judge a book. You can't separate a book from its context, particularly when you're talking about classics, but also talking about modern books. Because no author lives in a bubble and doesn't act influenced by the society they live in. There are objective parameters to judge a book! But beside the fact that most authors played around it, and that those parameters are also HIGHLY depending on the context we're in (just as an example: Shakespeare was HIGLY unpopular in XVIII century Enlightment criticism. Voltaire hated the guts out of him and didn't consider him a good playwriter... Because Shakespeare didn't follow the Ancient Greek/Roman theatre criteria that the Enlightment preferred. That's just it. So you see, criteria vary too with the historical context. A book celebrated today may not be celebrated tomorrow.). But: you can like and dislike Classics. It's ok. It's normal. You have a personal taste, and the fact that a book has some objective value that makes it a classic and makes the book worth studying is totally separated from your personal taste and should always be kept separate. I majored in English Literature: I know that Dickens is a hugely important author, I know why he is and why he's in literature history books, why we study him and with reason. It doesn't change that I find Dickens' books terribly boring, they don't speak to me, they're out of my taste and preferences. Hard Times was probably the only book in my uni I couldn't bring myself to finish and read the summary on Wikipedia of. I tried, it isn't for me. I still think they should be studied in school, because they're very important for their period, and hugely useful to understand Victorian mentality and context.

That's it, welcome to my TED talk, I'm sorry for the tirade but I opened Youtube and there was a video titled "Is Rings of Power Galadriel a Mary Sue??" which had me fuming from my ears.

What if she is? Who cares? Just say you didn't like the show, that you imagined Galadriel in a different way and that's it. Don't deminish people who on the other hand liked her.

I promise, you can write your opinion of a book/show/media as just your personal opinion and impression. I swear it's fine, anyone who studied Literature would know that criticism is just that and doesn't mean much, that you can like a movie that's technically bad and dislike a movie that's technically great and that's perfectly fine and valid.

You don't need to make it an universal experience and an objective truth to be entitled to your opinion. Good taste is overestimated anyway. Embrace the trash. You're not a better person if you only like critically acclaimed stories, believe me, it took me years to realise it.

But still, if you want to write some proper criticism... Context is essential. Otherwise you read Jane Austen and you think she wrote romances. Which she didn't. She was a social satyrist and a terribly brilliant one. We just read her out of her context, we have lost the parameters to grasp the criticism because we live in a different society. The romance is all that's left. You can read Pride and Prejudice just as a love story... But if you want to write a critic essay over it, you can't treat it as such. You can say "I liked the romance plot the best!" and still say it's a brilliant satyre. But you have to know it's satyre.

[90363462]

Kendrick Lamar’s Pulitzer Prize just shows how far hip-hop has taken us

Jazz, rock and R&B all help us define who we are and show that ‘times are a-changin’

Jeff RiversApril 23, 2018

When Kendrick Lamar, a 30-year-old rapper, won the Pulitzer Prize for music, it was as if the millennials had followed the baby boomers in having one of their defining philosophers venerated in an unexpected way. In 2016, Bob Dylan, a bard for baby boomers — and, we like to think, for the ages — won the Nobel Prize in literature “for having created new poetic expressions within the great American song tradition.” He was the first songwriter to win the Nobel Prize in the literature category.

And earlier this month, Lamar won a Pulitzer Prize for his DAMN. recording, the first hip-hop artist to win in the music category.

Dylan’s surprising Nobel Prize win changed the conversation and the definitions of what could be considered literature, just as hip-hop and rap have challenged many notions about music and art.

Still, when I think of it, I heard a vague inkling of rap’s rise to primacy, if not Lamar’s Pulitzer Prize, in a Hartford, Connecticut, barbershop, although I didn’t know what I was hearing. Here is what happened.

Years ago, a man I think of as “Conscious Bob” led a conversation about music at a Hartford barbershop where he worked. I think of the man as “Conscious Bob” because Bob was his name and he once told anyone and everyone in the shop that he didn’t watch BET because there was nothing on the cable channel for a “conscious brother.”

As Bob talked, the 30-something government worker and barber brushed his shoulder-length locs from his shoulders. He was tall and thin, tightly coiled like one of those skinny cigars that cowboys smoked in 1960s Italian westerns.

Bob acted as the music conversation’s conductor, pointing his clippers at the participants when it was their turn to talk, even me.

I don’t usually talk in black barbershops; through the years, I’ve learned so much by listening. Black barbershops span the generations and our economic and color spectrums. Barbers, patrons and folks, just passing time, drop knowledge on everything from surviving bad bosses to surviving too much of a good time.

Consequently, when that barbershop conversation turned to music, I perked up. I like to think I know a little about music. Besides being a great fan of pop, rhythm and blues and the Great American Songbook, I’ve also written about jazz and classical music as a newspaper journalist.

But this conversation, though erudite, passionate and quick-moving, never landed on anything I knew much about. A baby boomer, I was about 10 to 15 years older than the other guys in the barbershop.

So nobody said a word about Marvin Gaye’s What’s Going On. Nobody said anything about Stevie Wonder’s Innervisions or Miles Davis’ Kind of Blue. And not a word was spoken about Pet Sounds by the Beach Boys,the Beatles’ Sgt. Pepper’s Lonely Hearts Club Band or Bob Dylan’s Highway 61 Revisited and Blonde on Blonde, all celebrated masterworks, especially by baby boomers.

According to the consensus in the barbershop, the greatest albums (showing my age with that term) were all produced by rap artists, especially Nas, especially illimatic. I was out of it.

Damn.

In those days, I did little more than sample rap and its scandals and feuds, just enough to be current in a very surface way. But the barbershop conversation long ago announced to me that my generation’s grip on what was hip was loosening with time; the hip-hop generation was replacing the rock and soul generation’s bards, philosophers and gods. Nas and those who followed him would be venerated the way my cohorts had celebrated, even worshipped, Bob Dylan, the Beatles and Marvin Gaye.

Indeed, since my Hartford barbershop revelation, hip-hop and R&B have replaced rock as America’s favorite genre of music. The Pulitzer Prize-winning musical Hamiltonhas used rap to cast a multiracial and multicultural gaze upon the nation’s founding and its founders. And Barack Obama, the nation’s first black president, a baby boomer with millennial tastes in technology and music, has put rap on his playlist and the nation’s, including “Humble” from Lamar’s DAMN. recording.

Some lament the change that the rise of hip-hop and rap represent. They look backward to a time when America and the world danced to an American Motown beat or sound or a British Merseybeat or sound.

But no generation, no race, no single worldview can be the sole arbiter of what is hip, what music is serious and whose artists are important, at least not forever. The world makes no apology for that.

Damn.

A young Bob Dylan once told all who knew how to listen in the ’60s, the times are changing. It’s time to celebrate change.

DAMN. winning the Pulitzer prize signals a change that has been happening all around us for decades.

Today, hip-hop and rap, rippling crosscurrents, are broadening and deepening the mainstream in the arts and beyond, just as rock and jazz did before it.

Kendrick Lamar wins the Pulitzer Prize, and it is just the latest and most salient evidence of the change Dylan, now 76, once heralded: the change that always comes before most people know they need it.

A graduate of Hampton University, Jeff Rivers worked for Ebony, HBO and three daily newspapers, winning multiple awards for his columns. Jeff and his wife live in New Jersey and have two children, a son Marc and a daughter Lauren.

[notjustla]

The Comey Rule (Billy Ray, 2020)

Was supposedly “rushed out to arrive before Election Day”; was Made by the same apparatus that made House of Cards, Newsroom; some of these actors appear; It is dramatic - the actors and designers find plenty to work with, but the question is figuring out how much of this drama comes from the ongoing context around these events; this is sort of like a chorus commentary on the news cycle by an cinema apparatus whose story can suddenly barely compete; in the end, it won’t be really analyzable as a piece of media for another 20 years and by then, arg

Necessary to analyze the show as a fiction and a drama to get intowhat it is—but even if you do this you still have the constant upsetting reminder that the characters in the show all correspond directly to actual people in the actual world and in turn realize that the reality of the situation is even darker than what is portrayed;

Scrupulously historical, reflecting the methodology even exceeding most historians, and more at the level of a prosecution team gather granular understandings of what happened at a crime scene; condenses a massive body of literature, recreating entire meetings, parties, phone calls, text etc, sometimes down to the last person and word; it is uncanny and more so because it the sophistication of the apparatus and the production STILL somehow make it seem to take place in a different world; 

...which is the point, of course: that the Framing apparatus, which excludes and condenses in order to “bring focus” to its subject, usually does not succeed in penetrating the world deep enough to create an opening back into that which is familiar on an everyday level; this is nowhere near reality TV, for example, although it endeavors to a similar  kind of reveal; but it is still made to be slick, to find the humanity, and to push the ideas through the truth-process of the dialogue, dialectic, whatever

Some cinema here:

The first scenes of Trump are the most cinematic, opening over his shoulder, POV, at a beauty pageant (great script

Also a scene of the Pulse nightclub aftermath that is laudably visceral

the Core scene at 45:00 minutes where they attempt to create the language to represent the situation within impossible parameters

Obama is portrayed (one of many recent screen depictions) and is shown concerned principally with preserving the image of a reliable electoral system; history of course, proved that this was not even feasible; the furor that unfolded during Trump’s presidency was scarcely containable, and anyone watching from here OR afar had to re-evaluate the sheer amount of work and commitment that goes into the maintenance of a democratic system, and recognize that the transfer of power sometimes will not be acknowledged by the populace;

CENTRAL THEME: the irrelevance of the moral character of an institutional director in America, and the difference between this and what is expected from a father; this aggravating fault echoed here in Comey and Obama; both are shown to be vaguely in thrall to celebrity, but ultimately both believe moral vigilance will keep them afloat; this has different results for both of them, because of them is not Barack Obama: Comey is implicated for being a showboater — that is, informed by the same hyper performative morality of Trump and Obama alike; and this this is why he, ultimately, also, fails as a leader to an entire nation, instead serving in both cases as the dividers of its central tenets through their attempt to refine them;

We spend a lot of time, with Comey, in the company of his wife and daughters; their reactions of the young women to the various scandals unfolding are probably the most poignant scenes here (really good color grading on the interiors) and probably the most worthy moment to preserve in this historiography; the powerful women we meet are exceptional but also forced to keep their personal frustrations at bay, where men are not obligated, in order to preserve their position and credibility; the girls meanwhile confront the fact that the leader of their home nation is corrupt charismatic daddy figure with a sporting love for predatory rape; the tension between the morality of the home and the morality of the institution: Comey’s wife confronting him in tears, pleading with him to stop; the profound psychological complex the situation creates for American women, forced in every domain to explain things so personal deeply felt;

Poignant lines:

“Honey, I can stand the whole world being mad at me, but not you.”

“How do you hold up under the strain?”

“Same as you. Family.”

It would be really hard to go back and watch this now. Even in a context where the American democracy has been (at least partially) restored from its side-step into tyranny, too much has since happened, and has happened in too short a time; too much of the poetics within which (at least some) Americans lived has been ripped asunder; too much of the idealism that informed the tone of the law of the land has been tainted, and there is not yet enough young, strong and sufficiently immune to take its place; Quentin Tarantino won’t be around in 70 years to throw grenades at these people and we shouldn’t be waiting for that kind of redemption; fighting fascists begins with the careful reorganization and recalibration of one’s own psyche, sealing its own fears and paranoias against those arising in others;

in the wake of the events whose opening is represented here -- almost in real time to the events themselves! -- the psychomoral incrementalism of the culture has not so much switched gears as replaced its drive chain; it has continued to re-evaluate its internal politics in terms of ongoing arguments and exaggerations and drama on a much larger scale; the traumas - yes, traumas - that occurred here, wrought through and mostly by the information apparatus itself, were difficult to explain then and in hindsight we find they have been closed off with thick layers of scar tissue;

For many today it is now more a question of maintaining one step in front of the other, of guarding their mental health in a world where narrative-psychosis is a very real possibility; For many today it is now it is a matter more of playing defense, wary in the vanguarding of the various liberational projects of representation that have emerged in the recent years but remain tenuous and unresolved in their own poetics; the Latin Christian framework continues to exercise the greatest sway, with a logic sometimes seemingly incommensurate with the ambiguity and neutrality of the new terms being put forth by the most radicalizing poets in the world;

Judgment is undeniably passed on certain characters; Flynn’s lies are shown with quick cuts between reality and falsehood; The judgment creates more force; A tragedy about the flawed moral faculty of individual before the overwhelmingly flawed masses of the dēmos; Corporate drama is one of the most irreducibly American genres, hinged on the relationship between institutions, directors, and their employees; the criminal underworld is well represented, and shown to be not too different from the their counterparts in the world of PR and campaigns advisors

In the film the the FBI gradually realizes that it’s MO for independent autonomous investigation is impossible, that they are all enmeshed in a fractured landscape of competing narratives and deceptions, and that they are ultimately lead astray in different directions. In other words, they confront the fact that everyone has an asshole and that by extension everyone has an opinion.

[screeching-0wl]

Hi! It's been a while since I wanted start to be an Apollo devotee, since I was a child I was drawn to him, I even tried archery, I tried to play the guitar, I had tarot cards, I studied literature but I wasn't really aware that all of that is related to him

Anyway, today I decided that I was gonna make an altar for him, but I didn't know where to install it, and when I considered to put it on my bookshelf near my poetry books and next my guitar I smelled something! It was sweet and kinda fresh, and it was all of a sudden, I still don't know where it came from, then it was gone, it was so fast but I still think that it was definitely a sign from him. Could it be? Is he manifesting to me?

I'm a bit unsure on how to communicate to him, how to pray or make offerings, could you give me some tips please?

Thanks!! Have a good day!

Hi there!

Honestly, I've been interested in similar things since early childhood and it also kind of helped me figure out Apollo was trying to get my attention! It's not uncommon for the devotee to have interests that fall within the domain of the deity.

The smell could indeed be a sign but I can't determine that for sure. But interestingly enough, sweet and overall pleasant smells are associated with the presence of the divine. Plenty of ancient texts mention the fragrance of the deity.

Let's take a look at a couple of those texts:

Homeric Hymn to Demeter [275 - 257]

So saying, the goddess changed her size and appearance, shedding her old age, and she was totally enveloped in beauty. And a lovely fragrance wafted from her perfumed robes.

The Elegiac Poems of Theognis [5-10]

Mighty Phoebus, when the great goddess Leto, clasping the palm-tree with her slender arms, gave birth to you, the most beautiful of gods, beside the round lake, the whole island of Delos was filled with holy perfume, the wide earth smiled, and the vast deeps below the white-capped waves rejoiced.

So, yeah apparently gods smell nice, at least according to ancient accounts ¯\_(ツ)_/¯ Perhaps it's their nature but on a side note, since we're already talking about this, ambrosia was also thought to be very fragrant and was sometimes used as some sort of perfume by the gods (aside from its other miraculous properties).

We see an example of this in The Iliad (Book XIV) when Hera wanted Hypnos to help her by putting Zeus to sleep. Before going to Zeus, she washed herself with ambrosia, dressed in exceptionally beautiful robes and borrowed Aphrodite's griddle. This made her especially impossible to resist for Zeus.

Texts aside, I actually did experience something similar to what you described several times - a sudden presence of a pleasant smell which was in fact a sign from a deity. It happened to me with Apollo, actually. It's difficult to describe but I smelled something fresh, sweet, maybe kind of floral with warm notes. A few times there was also something that reminded me of cinnamon. I knew he was present within my space and the smell just came out of nowhere.

So, although I can't say anything for sure I do think it's probable the smell you mentioned could be some sort of a sign from him.

Now, the other question!

Here are some links you might find useful:

Some basics - altars, clothing, rules, texts, prayer

Prayer - more details about prayer

Disposing of offerings

Divination - for communication, different types of divination

Apollo's cheat sheet - basic info (myths, epithets, associations, etc.)

Apollo's festivals - basic info on several festivals + their celebration

Hope this helps!

[fatehbaz]

“Making people feel helpless, powerless, and hopeless is part of the propaganda. [...] I think we all need to become seriously mutinous.”

-------

That candle is burning at both ends and down the middle, too.

It cannot all be laid at the door of resource-plundering or strategic thinking. Eventually it develops a momentum and a logic of its own. 

As the storm builds, the ethno-nationalists are out harnessing the wind, giving each other courage. [...] While it is easy to take lofty moral positions, in truth, there is nothing simple about this problem. Because it is not a problem. It is a symptom of a great churning and a deep malaise. The assertion of ethnicity, race, caste, nationalism, sub-nationalism, patriarchy, and all kinds of identity, by exploiters as well as the exploited, has a lot -- but of course not everything -- to do with laying collective claim to resources (water, land, jobs, money) that are fast disappearing. [...]

If we go down this warren and choose to stay there, if we allow our imaginations to be trapped within this matrix, and come to believe there is no other way of seeing things, if we lose sight of the sky and the bigger picture, then we are bound to find ourselves in conflicts that spiral and spread and multiply and could very easily turn apocalyptic. [...]

Empire is not just an idea. It is a kind of momentum. An impetus to dominate that contains within its circuitry the inevitability of overreach and self-destruction.

-------

In the spirit of the globalization of fascism, U.S. alt-right organizations are good friends of Hindu nationalists. Look to India, if you want to understand the world in microcosm. [...]

It is interesting that countries that call themselves democracies -- India, Israel, and the United States -- are busy running military occupations. Kashmir is one of the deadliest and densest military occupations in the world. India transformed from colony to imperial power virtually overnight. There has not been a day since the British left India in August 1947 that the Indian army and paramilitary have not been deployed within the country’s borders against its “own people”: Mizoram, Manipur, Nagaland, Assam, Kashmir, Jammu, Hyderabad, Goa, Punjab, Bengal, and now Chhattisgarh, Orissa, Jharkhand. [...]

As hatred is dripped into peoples’ souls, every day, with sickened hearts we wake up to Muslim-lynching videos put up on YouT*be by gloating vigilantes, news of Dalits being publicly flogged, of women and infants being raped, of thousands marching in support of people who have been arrested for rape, of those convicted for mass murder in the Gujarat pogrom being let out of jail while human rights defenders and thousands of indigenous people are in jail on charges of sedition, of children’s history textbooks being written by complete fools, of glaciers melting and of water tables plummeting [...].

But it is all OK, because we are buying more weapons from Europe and the United States than almost anyone else. So, India, which has the largest population of malnutritioned children in the world, where hundreds of thousands of debt-ridden farmers and farm laborers have committed suicide [...], is still being celebrated as one of the fastest growing economies in the world. [...]

Corporations are hosting happiness fairs and dissent seminars and sponsoring literature festivals in which free speech is stoutly defended by great writers. Dissent Is the Cool (and Corporate) New Way To Be.

What can we do about that?

When you think about the grandeur of the civil rights movement in the United States, the anti–Vietnam War protests, it makes you wonder whether real protest is even possible any more.

It is. It surely is.

I was in Gothenburg, Sweden, recently, when the largest Nazi march since World War II took place. The Nazis were outnumbered by anti-Nazi demonstrators, including the ferocious Ant*fa, by more than ten to one. In Kashmir, unarmed villagers face down army bullets. In Bastar, in Central India, the armed struggle by the poorest people in the world has stopped some of the richest corporations in their tracks.

It is important to salute people’s victories, even if they don’t always get reported on TV. At least the ones we know about.

Making people feel helpless, powerless, and hopeless is part of the propaganda.

But what is going on in the world right now is coming from every direction and has already gone too far. It has to stop. But how? I don’t have any cure-all advice, really. I think we all need to become seriously mutinous.

-------

Arundhati Roy, interviewed by Avni Sejpal. “How to Think About Empire.” Boston Review. 3 January 2019.

[shirophantomvox]

Professor Sweetheart - Jon. Joestar x Professor Reader

Hello Anon! Thank you for this wonderful request! I hope you like it! I plan on finishing the requests by the end of September…. hopefully. Most of my classes are in person this time, but I should be able to manage my time as I have done so before. Most of my classes are art-based but they are still requiring a lot of energy. I apologize for this being so short! I wanted to produce more content.

Today’s story features Jonathan Joestar and his spouse, a professor at the University of Chicago. I changed the location and year to 1969. Most of the Jonathan and Dio stores will take place in the early 1900s. Be sure you watch for more stories to come!

STORY NAVIGATION

~♡~

It was a chilly December day in the big city of Chicago. Snow fell from the sky in droves, covering the newly paved cement. The sky was cloudy, but the sun tried its best to peak in between the clouds. It cast a sunny clouded display over the Earth, something that made the scenery much more beautiful, imitating something out of a movie. Everyone on campus was as jubilant as could be. Christmas was two weeks away, a holiday that many people looked forward to. Many students went ice skating, took part in holiday sales, and even gave more than they received. Just the scenery was breathtaking. The earth is a fascinating thing, indeed.

Inside Room 3B, Professor Joestar had finished speaking about next semester’s English class and what literature they would discuss. The students seemed to be excited; some were excited to get their curriculum finished once and for all and it excited others for the different texts they were going to be reading. Silently humming to himself, Mr. Joestar turned to his beat chalkboard and wrote his CRN, class section, and office hours. His availability was oddly open so much, the students questioned whether he had a family. Professor Joestar was an intriguing man; he loved football; loves reading anything from news articles to comic books, and is very kind. He rarely yells, even when students come into the class disrupting or projecting. Sometimes he was too nice and the overbearing staff over-talked him and took advantage of his kindness.

Jonathan turned around again, placing the chalk on the holder, huffed, and folded his arms. He smiled somberly, gently scratching the back of his navy blue hair.

“I am very proud of you all. You have made it this far, and I hope that every single one of you will achieve greatness. All of my students have potential; you will be something great!”

Constant compliments and encouragement are almost necessary for all people working to achieve a complicated goal. When someone uplifts you at your lowest, that bit of hope gives you the motivation to keep pushing.

For the last time, Professor Joestar high-fived his students as they left the door. It was the corny gestures that made everyone smile. Jonathan Joestar will surely be remembered.

I remember sitting in the teacher’s lounge watching the weather report. It stated that the snow would continue to fall for the rest of the day and although I love the winter; I am not a fan of icy roads. I sipped my coffee as the steam hitting my nostrils signaled it was still burning hot. The pumpkin coffee cake added a perfect taste to the bitter coffee on my tongue. The holiday commercials were full of family and couples celebrating, and the sight of them sharing a kiss under the mistletoe made me blush. Jonathan and I had been dating for over 2 years and this Christmas I would join him and his family. As I sipped again, I heard a creak from behind, and as I looked, my eyesight went blank. I felt something warm over my eyes.

“Guess who?” the voice said.

“Is it my 6-foot burley fiancee,” I asked, giggling.

‘Wow, you’re good!”

“It’s common sense, Jonathan. No one has baseball gloves for hands except for you.”

My sense of humor may sound bold, but rest assure Jonathan and I have established such a relationship that my striking jokes do not hurt him at all. Jonathan smiled brightly, as he always does.

“What were you smiling at on the television?”

“Oh, just a commercial promoting sales. I saw a happy couple, and it reminded me of us. I saw a man that was as big as you. Sometimes I often wonder, would you start a club for weight lifting?”

I laughed at my joke (as usual, expecting Jonathan to laugh as well, but when I glanced back at him, he was gawking. His hand was under his chin, head tilted, eyes half-lidded, and smiled softly. I ajar my head, suddenly realizing what he was looking at. I couldn’t help but smile big this time, confirming that we will be together forever.

“Oh, come on, you lug! Stop starin’ at me!”

“How can I not? You have such a cute smile.”

Before I could protest, he placed his large right arms around my torso and slid me over within seconds. Never mind the chair ruining the newly epoxied floor, but my bottom almost fell out of the chair, not expecting Jonathan to use so much force. His right bicep provided so much warmth around my cheek, accompanied by the strength alone, made me feel like Mary Jane and Spiderman. Jonathan pressed his nose against mine, snatching a kiss from my lips twice.

“I can’t wait to spend Christmas with you.”

~♡~

[falcor-thee-luck-dragon]

Interviews - Henry Cavill x wife/actress reader

Summary: You and Henry have been married for a couple years now, and when you’re both part of the Witcher cast, fun interviews are to be had.

Warning: nothing but a good time, btw I’ve never written anything like this so I hope it’s good enough that I might feel motivated to write more

-Readers Witcher character is loosely based off my Geralt fic from here (just a little self promotion), but in this case you play a full vampire in this Witcher universe

The days have been long and grueling, filming hours upon hours of stunts and regular acting had taken its toll. Not to mention the countless times in hair and make up paired with costume changes and traveling to film on certain locations.

To say being apart of Netflix’s The Witcher was full of tiring days and some accidental bruises would be a huge understatement. But none of that mattered, nor did you bother to complain when through the thick and thin of it all did you have Henry with you along the way. And your favorite big slobbery bear, Kal whenever he was allowed on set.

Fortunately for you in the beginning of all the craziness, the casting and writers had wanted you specifically for the part of Y/C/N in the new series before Henry even auditioned for the role of Geralt, that was soon given to him after you accepted your fresh role of vampiric heroine.

It was ironically strange in a good way, you had watched your dork of a husband play the Witcher: Wild Hunt a few times before, eventually learning of what Geralt of Rivia was, who Y/C/N was in the story, who Yennefer and Ciri were, Tris and even Jaskier.

Who would have thought that you’d finally get to snag a role side by side with Henry in quite literally one of the most fantastic shows you’ve ever heard of. You didn’t even need to see the show yet to know how well it was most likely to be reviewed. Being a key character in the grand storyline was enough to convince you of how amazing it would most certainly turn out in the finished product.

And after all was said and done, you couldn’t believe how well loved and popular the show truly became in the following months after shooting and its eventual release onto Netflix. The after parties and cast celebrations truly made you blessedly grateful for pulling through to the vary end.

Then again you had your mans Henry by your side every step of the way. He was your rock and you were most definitely his. You know life on set would have been far less entertaining and dreadfully long if not for the lovely company of your dear Witcher, Henry. And so far after the fact, you and a good portion of the cast have been placed in random interviews for the majority of the day.

Reason being, The Witcher has at long last finally premiered and as per usual the people and media live for those cast interviews that always reveal some interesting events. So far this morning you’ve done some interviews with Anya that have gone perfectly fine since the two of you seem to click so well.

Also it helps ease the anxiety of your fellow newer cast mates to the world of continuous interviews with an experienced veteran actor like yourself, who’s gone round the ring more times then you can count. Though you can’t help but wonder how Henry’s doing, considering you’ve been separated since the sessions began at 10am, you’ve had lunch and now it’s about 1 in the afternoon with more hours to go.

Luckily for you, you’ve just been informed of another interview with the man of the hour himself. Saying your goodbyes and well wishes to your fellow cast mates, you stand and follow the guide into the advised place. Aka some really nice hotel room that’s been done up real nice for efficient interviewing, complete with the Witcher insignia on a large background poster and three chairs that happen to look rather comfy.

The camera and sound people nod in acknowledgment as you walk in, you nod back no doubt making their day with your friendliness and adorable smile that quite literally lights up a room. Soon you spot the bubbly yet nervous interviewee who instantly welcomes you into her space like you’re an old friend.

You sit, a bit confused as to where your partner happens to be at the moment, the interviewer, Lauren makes small talk before a door opens and her big bright doe eyes go wide in nervous excitement. A telling smile upon her face as she shifts in her chair before looking back to you again with a happy grin.

Henry says a quick hello to the behind the scenes crew before waving to Lauren, you smirk while watching him get comfortable next to you, “Well, well, well. Get lost on your way up, you know they have guides for a reason.” You tease as he chuckles at your humorous jab, relieved to see you again after a couple hours apart.

“Traffic.” He quips with a shrug.

“Uh huh.” You mutter with a shake of your head before drawing your attention back to Laura, “Can’t take him anywhere I swear, he does this all the time.”

She laughs as Henry pretends to gasp at your teasing, you chuckle along with them before she finally collects herself, “Well, welcome back to London. It’s fantastic to have you both in town once again, and your big beautiful faces all over Leicester Square.”

You both laugh, “Right.” Says Henry, “I guess we do look pretty cool.”

“Hell yeah, I mean where else can I see myself with a giant sword on a building? And anyways look at this beautiful mug,” You say gently squeezing Henry’s cheeks in your hand, “he’s literally killing it out there.” They laugh as you give Hen another playful squeeze before letting go and setting your arm against the chairs cushioned armrest. 

“Alight let’s start.” She says enthusiastically before glancing down at her cards then back up to you and Henry. Then into one of the two the cameras, “Hi I’m Lauren from Entertainment Weekly and today we’re here with the two stars of Netflix’s The Witcher.” She says enthusiastically while giving a nod to you two, indicating that the camera is now focused on you both, “Henry Cavill and Y/N Cavill.”

You both smile in acknowledgment as Henry gives a slight nod, “How you doing?”

“I’m great,” She beams, “So, I’ll get right into it, what do you like most about the story? What really drew you into the script that made you say, yes this is going to be awesome?”

Slapping a hand against Henry’s muscular leg, you hum, “I’ll let Hen take this one he’s a real expert on the linguistics of the whole show.”

“Thanks Y/N/N.” Replies Henry, bemused that you’re making him take the first question.

You nod to him knowingly with a smirk, “Of course.” Knowing how much he loves to talk about the show and also because you’d rather have him use his energy to talk about it then do that yourself. Priorities, right, though in your defense it’s been a long day.

“Well I absolutely love the games and the books themselves are phenomenal works of literature.” He explains, his face glowing with that usual glimmer of excitement in his eyes, “The story and the world of the Witcher is just so rich and full of potential that when I signed on for the show, I immediately knew it would be amazing, no doubt.”

You lean into the arm of you chair, “And of course I was there so that’s always a bonus.”

“That too.” He smiles adorably, “That too of course.”

Lauren smiles, “Great. So, what was it like working together, how was it having your characters interact with one another?”

You smile, setting a hand against Henry’s forearm, “This guy right here.” You deadpan before waving him off dramatically, “So annoying, my god he whined all the time and he was such a drama queen dear lord so ugh....” You start cackling before you can even finish the sentence causing Henry to loose it as well and with that the interviewer.

Shaking your head you rest your hand against his shoulder, “I joke, he was a gem to work with as usual...I mean I feel incredibly blessed to be able to act alongside my husband for months and months every single day. It’s a rarity in this line of work and I’m grateful to have shared this experience...and I guess more so this whole adventure with him as well.”

The interviewer aww’s as Henry tilts his head to lean into your hand that’s still resting atop his shoulder before pulling away just as quickly, the intimate sentiment not going unnoticed by you or Lauren who looks to be enjoying your loving yet calm energy with one another. “That’s so sweet, what about you Henry?”

“Oh yes absolutely,” Agrees Henry to your recent statement, “not only did I have her by my side through it all but the dynamic of our characters interacting together was so fun to shoot. I think the audience will really be able to see their relationship grow on screen into something strong and beautiful like in the books.”

Slow clapping you give him a curt nod of approval, “Well said.”

Lauren smirks, “Seems like it. Well, I was able to catch the premier yesterday and I gotta say...it was fantastic! I couldn’t believe how diffident the two of you looked from how you are now.” She gushes enthusiastically.

The corners of Henry’s lips curl into a proud smile for the fellow crew of the Witcher’s, “Oh that’s great then, honestly we gotta give all the props to the costume and makeup team, they’re so talented and know how to make us look like real badasses.” He adds.

You nod in agreement before grinning at a positive memory of your first interaction with Henry as Geralt, “Oh for sure, I remember during the early stages of production when our characters met each other for the first time, before this we came to set together but went separate ways to shoot our own stuff in the meantime so I never got a real look at him.” You recall with a bright smile as Henry watches your every move, beaming just the same.

“It was so funny, I was in the tent with Freya Allen, the wonderful girl who plays Ciri, and then suddenly her eyes got all big and nervous and I was like, that’s not me right? Something weird didn’t just happen with my costume? And then I turned around to find this man, wig on, face a mess, and his eyes looked so fearsome and different...it was a bit startling.” You say with a chuckle, “I clearly wasn’t expecting to see Geralt right then and there. He just looked so unlike Henry.”

“Yeah, I was almost hurt.” Laughs Henry, “She had to like squint and make sure it was me.”

Rolling your eyes, you shrug, “He had some real creepy looking colored contacts, yunno?”

Henry fake scoffs, “You’re one to talk, I mean when I first say her, Y/N’s eyes were red and she had fake blood spattered all over her face and shirt. Oh, and not to mention those fangs they put on your teeth...we probably traumatized poor Freya that day.”

“Oh shit you’re right!” You exclaim with a snort of concealed laughter, “God I completely forgot about how I looked...now since I think about it, I did that a lot too. I would just walk up to people and be completely oblivious as to what kind of nightmare I looked like, honestly I might have scared one of our producers a couple of times.” You add with a half nervous laugh, it’s true, you did scare some of the crew unintentionally. Most of the time.

Lauren lightly chuckles, “That sounds like you were quite the sight to see then.” She says before glancing back down at her notes, “Alright I have’ta ask, is there anything that you two took home with you from set?”

“Besides Henry every night,” He holds back a laugh while covering his mouth as you nonchalantly continue, “Uh, yes actually I got to take home Y/C/N’s wolf ring that I loved so much and just thought was the coolist thing ever and....uh, I might have stolen some socks too.”

“So that’s why after filming the amount of socks of yours I had to fold increased?” Wonders Henry with a surprised snort of realization.

Turning your head to give him a “no shit” kinda look, you look back at Lauren, pointing your thumb at Henry, “Master sleuth right here, but hey, he folds my laundry.”

“Aw that’s great.” Adds Lauren with a smile before turning her attention to Henry, “What about you Henry? Take anything from set?”

“More then Y/N did actually...”

“He just about took the whole makeup trailer most nights, I swear.”

Henry chuckles, “That. Is true.” He agrees with a nod, “Interesting enough, at home I’ve got Geralt’s armor hung up in our living room and a multitude of other nicknacks that I’ve collected during filming.” He adds, glancing over to you, “So uh, yeah, we were fairly lucky to be able to snag what we could.”

Lauren smiles, absentmindedly shuffling her cards, “That’s awesome to have such special memorabilia, you guys really are fortunate.” She adds before reading off from another card, “Alright you two, care to play a game called guess the image? Witcher style.”

Your face perks up at this, you’re a sucker for interview games and Henry knows it, “Are you reading my mind or something, I have been waiting all day for someone to ask about playing a game.” You gush rather enthusiastically. 

He smiles at your adorableness and how excited you’ve just become, Lauren grins, happy that her suggestion has been so well received, “Okay so how it works is, I’ll show you an image on my iPad and then you have to guess who or what I’m showing you.”

“Oh, cool I’ve heard of this,” You reply, turning to Henry with a smirk, “Loser has to clean Kal’s yard poop for a week.”

Rolling his gorgeous blue eyes he chuckles, “You’re on.”

“Alright, the stakes are high, you two ready?” Beams Lauren, holding her iPad to her chest as she awaits an answer.

“Yes, I’m ready to kick his ass.” You quip, leaning an arm against your chair while Henry does about the same, though he does his best to contain his laughter.

“Okay, first image.” She holds up the device to show some sort of weird golden thing, it’s shiny and hard, worst part is that you’re not entirely sure what the hell it could be.

Sensing your confusion Henry nudges your shoulder, though you ignore it before he smartly answers, “Oh, is that...Renfri’s brooch?” Little shit knows exactly what that is, of course he does.

Lauren claps, “Correct.” Zooming out of the image to show the full picture of the golden brooch, “Right on, that’s one point for Mr. Cavill.”

You scoff playfully, “Beginners luck.” While Henry side eyes you with a humorous grin upon his plush lips, he nudges your arm, “I’m going to really enjoy not cleaning up Kal’s grass turds for awhile.” He mutters lightheartedly, though you know deep down he’s being serious, no way is he going to win this, you think. You won’t have it, hopefully the next few pictures aren’t as difficult, Kal duty is not fun by any means.

“Shut up.” You grumble with a dismissive wave of your hand, though just teasing of course.

“Okay next image.” This time the blurred photo looks much more familiar, soon it clicks as to what the obscured blurriness actually is, yes!

“Got it! Anya’s er I guess Yennefer’s dress from the fight at Sodden.” Lauren giggles, zooming the image out to reveal Yennefer in her tasseled blue and purple dress from the battle at Sodden Hill. “I’m amazing I know.” You boast at Henry with a casual little bow in your seat.

“It’s the second question.” He deadpans, eyes crinkling in amusement as you shake your head at him.

“Pffff get outta here.” You mutter back, gently pushing his arm off of your chairs armrest and setting yours in its place while he gives you a fake shocked expression.

In turn you can’t help the smile that tugs at the corner of your lips, so instead of saying some sassy remark that would no doubt get a reaction out of him, you turn your attention back over to Lauren who’s looking over her notes again.

“Fantastic,” She says, glancing back up at you and Henry, “you’re both tied with one point each. Alright, anyone know what this is?” She asks showing something red and fuzzy, a bit of dirty skin showing from one corner but with The Witcher this bloody image could literally be anything.

The both of you squint, puzzled as to what this could be, “Y/N you got any ideas.” Wonders Henry, brows furrowed as his face contorts into deep concentrated thought.

Raising a brow, you hum, “If I knew I wouldn’t tell you.”

“Fair point.” He chuckles.

Lauren smiles, “Any guesses?”

 After a few concentrated moments, Henry shrugs in defeat,  “I’m stumped.” He admits as you study the image harder, mind racing to put the pieces together as to what the hell you’re looking at.

“No, I think I might know this....erm is it...me?” You wonder, voice raising in question, hoping to be correct about this or face the teasing of Henry.

Lauren quickly zooms out of the obscured image, “It is!” She says excitedly, revealing the picture of you from your characters debut in episode 2 where you save a girl from a werewolf, your mouth is covered in blood and so is most of your costumes chest area and left arm from the struggle. Not to mention the make-up teams fun 20 minutes of throwing fake sticky blood all over you to get the right look for the taxing scene.

You grimace a bit, “Oh god that was quite the day on set,” You recall with a half smile, “I was doing stunts all day covered in that red syrupy dye, I think it took a week to get out of my skin.”

Henry suddenly snorts with laughter, “Right! That reminds me, I thought Kal had gotten cut or something, it was just Y/N who had hugged him not realizing she still had some fake blood on her arm.”

“Jeez that’s right, I felt so bad, but I couldn’t stop laughing once we realized it was just me.”

Lauren grins, excited to hear some hidden information about little things that happens behind the scenes, “Oh wow that must have been a sight, alright Henry, Y/N’s taken the lead with a two to one score.” She says as you playfully nudge his strong shoulder. “Second to last image, what is this?”

Without missing a single beat Henry replies, “Jaskier.”

Squinting at the image you lean closer to the iPad, “How the hell do you see Jaskier?”

Smiling the interviewer zooms out to reveal the bards full outfit from the banquet scene, though he’s in the background of a fight between Geralt and some Cintran knights. “Right on!” She exclaims as you lean back into your seat dumbfounded, shoulder flush against Henry’s as he clutches your arm and squeezes it affectionately.

Ignoring his silent show of victory you shrug, “And they say he’s just another pretty face,” Earning a laugh from Lauren and some of the crew as you smirk at the camera, face them shifting to apologetic, “also I’m so sorry Joey you beautiful bastard apparently I’m blind. Uh, we don’t have to dwell on it, Lauren whatcha got?”

“You guys are both tied with two points each, last chance to win.” She replies before glancing down at her iPad, “Alright, what is this?” She asks, her iPad showing that of fuzzy bright colors, with a small corner smear of dull white that clearly wouldn’t make much sense to the untrained eye.

Smirking you glance at a puzzled Henry before sitting up in your seat, feeling rather good about yourself, “Would that happen to be, Hen in Stregobor’s illusion?” You answer with, though sounding a bit as a question considering you aren’t entirely confident as to what image this is.

Lauren’s brows raise in surprise, “Henry, looks like we have a winner. Y/N you are correct.” She beams, enlarging the image to reveal Geralt’s side profile as he talks to the old wizard while the background stays colorful and shrouded in various arrays of sunlight..

Shaking your fist victoriously in the air you give a couple enthusiastic whoop whoops while Henry simply takes it like a champ, “Have fun cleaning up Karl’s monster turds, cause this lucky lady doesn’t have to.” You boast as Henry and the crew laugh.

“Well that was something,” Beams Lauren, “I’m so glad to have chatted for a bit about your guys’ amazing new series, and maybe ended a relationship in the process.” She says jokingly as both you and Henry chuckle.

Patting his thigh affectionately, you smirk, “He’s a tough old bear, but yeah, it was awesome having you talk to us.”

“Yes, take care now.” Adds Henry while the interviewer Lauren stands, saying her goodbyes as she goes to exit the room.

The camera crew take a small break to adjust things and whatnot as you and Henry wait patiently for the next interviewer. He turns, an adorable smile pulling at his lips while you pretend to ignore his fiery gaze. “Well that went pretty well, minus the fact that I’m on Kal poop duty for a week...but uh...” He leans in close to you now, “I missed you all morning.”

Breaking out into a smile you raise a brow, “Boring without me huh?”

“Always.”

You casually shrug, “I figured as much. Don’t worry, we have a hotel all to ourselves tonight.” Your brows wiggle suggestively causing your blue eyed lover to shake his head with amusement.

“Say it louder next time.” He jokes.

Side eyeing the oblivious crew you begin to speak a couple octaves louder, “Henry I can’t wait to fu..” Suddenly his hand presses against your mouth before you’re able to call any attention to yourself. He gives you a warning look before slowly pulling his hand from your mouth.

You grin mischievously, “I wasn’t gonna say that...”

“Sure Y/N,” He mutters in your ear as a new interviewer walks into the room and finds their chair, “and I’m wasn’t going to make you scream tonight.”

Your brows raise in surprise and admittedly slight arousal at his choice of wording in this room of all places. Eyeing him up, face still showing surprise, you finally break out into a satisfied smirk. “You know what? I think you should consider changing your offer.”

He thinks deeply for a moment, though you know he’s only pretending to get you riled up, “Hrmm...maybe, possibly, should I? Should we? You are my co-star after all, that wouldn’t be very professional now would it Y/N?” He states with a shit eating grin, all done while the crew and interviewer get ready, minding their business and completely unaware to yourself and Henry’s teasing.

Scoffing playfully you lightly swat his arm, “We are way past being professional.”

He chuckles, looking from you to the rest of the room, “Oh, they have no idea.”

[dylanlila]

Ok another thing!

I really like how... feminine Jack is. It's sort of an extension of his manic-pixie-dream-boy status. He's kind, soft-spoken and Rose generally makes him pretty nervous (though he's socially talented enough to work through that really well). This particularly stands out to me during their sex scene. I think it's my favourite sex scene of all time, actually. That may be a weird thing to have, but still. Rose is the one who initiates it ("Put your hands on me, Jack" is a GREAT line) and we immediately see Jack at the most nervous he's ever been. Then when they're done he's literally shaking so Rose asks if he's okay, and then SHE holds HIM as they (mostly Jack tho) calm down.

The movie is so conventional and so unconventional at the same time which speaks to its genius.

Reversal of gender roles isn't something that didn't exist before Titanic though. (and I KNOW that's not what you're saying here, but hear me out) LMA has done it in 1860s!!!!!!!! Greek mythology deals with gender themes (where do you think the term hermaphrodite came from?) In my opinion, Titanic didn't handle the concept in an innovative enough manner (and everybody knows I'm a BIG fan of that concept). It's cool! It's great! Blockbusters introduce the wider audience to great many things, but that doesn't mean they should be praised for every remotely unconventional idea that's a part of the story they're trying to tell. (making the already existing concept your own? that's another thing entirely and I LOVE IT!) What makes a good movie for me is taking what's already there and crowning it with your own unique perspective. What you're praising Titanic for is actually what I appreciate about Lady Bird (2017). It makes you think that it's all about tropes and cliches and everything that's stereotypically meant to speak to the female audience, but then it surprises you and does this fantastic spin on everything you've ever known without disregarding the tropes completely. But it's not just about simultaneously defying and celebrating the tropes (and here's the main difference), it's about this very personal viewpoint that Gerwig incorporated into the film. It's kinda like when you're adapting a book, you shouldn't try to make the movie resemble the source material (because that's NEVER gonna work, you simply can't meet everyone's expectations), you should make it resemble your own understanding of the source material. That's what makes it feel more personal to the viewer. Titanic didn't feel personal to me despite being meant to appeal to people. My point is: it's a movie that was made to be liked and appreciated which yes, isn't inherently a bad thing, but maybe I'm just too into modernism and avant-garde to appreciate that. It really is a personal preference! I like it better when the art I'm consuming doesn't make a big deal out of itself and ends up hitting the emotional mark without meaning to. (the main goal is usually to send some kind of message that tends to be controversial in some way) I don't like it when movie directors assume I'm going to relate to something because "everybody relates to it in some way". You CAN'T know that. (it puts a pressure on people, like you have to be a part of that specific circle or you're not human enough or whatever) This feels like that literature discussion about supposedly pointless overanalysing of motifs or claiming that classic lit is inherently difficult to read or whatever... Maybe it's not just propaganda coming from the male dominated world, maybe I LIKE long discussions on life and death and politics in my movies. (and just because something is problematic in one regard, it doesn't mean it has no significant value or worse, that it shouldn't be explored. you can always learn! from everything!) Which doesn't mean that I don't like a good coming of age story about a teenage girl. Or spend my time watching a teen soap. Or that somebody can't enjoy a romantic comedy if they love Dostoyevsky. Or that these art branches necessarily cancel each other out. (I'm referring to some of the points you made earlier, sorry for drifting away djsjdkkd)

What you can always do in film is present your own unique perspective and celebrate that uniqueness. That's something people can connect with, regardless of the topic. If it makes its way to the heart of ONE person, it's a winner. And Titanic is definitely a winner in that respect! It just didn't get to me. And that's fine too.

Also! The intention behind a certain line doesn't make the line itself good (same goes for film in general)!!!!!! "Put your hands on me, Jack" is just... it's funny. I laughed when I heard it. This movie is just... way better in theory. I LOVED what you had to say about the ideas that went into it, but I didn't really catch that on screen. Both the characters and their love story failed to be compelling in my eyes, the aesthetics got in the way of that even if it wasn't supposed to. That's what happened if you ask me. Oh and disliking traditionally feminine tropes and plot directions and things such as grand romantic gestures or melodramatic confessions of love doesn't immediately mean that you're sexist or have internalized misogyny? Society is responsible for giving those things a bad rep, but disliking them doesn't always have to go beyond disliking them.

I'm making a lot of points here and I'm not wearing my contacts, dear tumblr forgive me. (I don't need you to, I'm just trying to be polite dhjdjdi)

[nicklloydnow]

“I came of age during a relatively mellow period of the Soviet rule, post-Stalin. Still, the ideology permeated all aspects of life, and survival required strict adherence to the party line and enthusiastic displays of ideologically proper behavior. Not joining a young communist organization (Komsomol) would be career suicide—nonmembers were barred from higher education. Openly practicing religion could lead to more grim consequences, up to imprisonment. So could reading the wrong book (Orwell, Solzhenitsyn, etc.). Even a poetry book that was not on the state-approved list could get one in trouble.

Mere compliance was not sufficient—the ideology committees were constantly on the lookout for individuals whose support of the regime was not sufficiently enthusiastic. It was not uncommon to get disciplined for being too quiet during mandatory political assemblies (politinformation or komsomolskoe sobranie) or for showing up late to mandatory mass-celebrations (such as the May or November demonstrations). Once I got a notice for promoting an imperialistic agenda by showing up in jeans for an informal school event. A friend’s dossier was permanently blemished—making him ineligible for Ph.D. programs—for not fully participating in a trip required of university students: an act of “voluntary” help to comrades in collective farms

(…)

Science was not spared from this strict ideological control. (6) Western influences were considered to be dangerous. Textbooks and scientific papers tirelessly emphasized the priority and pre-eminence of Russian and Soviet science. Entire disciplines were declared ideologically impure, reactionary, and hostile to the cause of working-class dominance and the World Revolution. Notable examples of “bourgeois pseudo-science” included genetics and cybernetics. Quantum mechanics and general relativity were also criticized for insufficient alignment with dialectic materialism.

(…)

Fast forward to 2021—another century. The Cold War is a distant memory and the country shown on my birth certificate and school and university diplomas, the USSR, is no longer on the map. But I find myself experiencing its legacy some thousands of miles to the west, as if I am living in an Orwellian twilight zone. I witness ever-increasing attempts to subject science and education to ideological control and censorship. Just as in Soviet times, the censorship is being justified by the greater good. Whereas in 1950, the greater good was advancing the World Revolution (in the USSR; in the USA the greater good meant fighting Communism), in 2021 the greater good is “Social Justice” (the capitalization is important: “Social Justice” is a specific ideology, with goals that have little in common with what lower-case “social justice” means in plain English). (10−12) As in the USSR, the censorship is enthusiastically imposed also from the bottom, by members of the scientific community, whose motives vary from naive idealism to cynical power-grabbing.

Just as during the time of the Great Terror, (5,13) dangerous conspiracies and plots against the World Revolution were seen everywhere, from illustrations in children’s books to hairstyles and fashions; today we are told that racism, patriarchy, misogyny, and other reprehensible ideas are encoded in scientific terms, names of equations, and in plain English words. We are told that in order to build a better world and to address societal inequalities, we need to purge our literature of the names of people whose personal records are not up to the high standards of the self-anointed bearers of the new truth, the Elect. (11) We are told that we need to rewrite our syllabi and change the way we teach and speak. (14,15)

As an example of political censorship and cancel culture, consider a recent viewpoint (16) discussing the centuries-old tradition of attaching names to scientific concepts and discoveries (Archimede’s Principle, Newton’s Laws of Motion, Schrödinger equation, Curie Law, etc.). The authors call for vigilance in naming discoveries and assert that “basing the name with inclusive priorities may provide a path to a richer, deeper, and more robust understanding of the science and its advancement.” Really? On what empirical grounds is this based? History teaches us the opposite: the outcomes of the merit-based science of liberal, pluralistic societies are vastly superior to those of the ideologically controlled science of the USSR and other totalitarian regimes. (17) The authors call for removing the names of people who “crossed the line” of moral or ethical standards. Examples (16) include Fritz Haber, Peter Debye, and William Shockley, but the list could have been easily extended to include Stark (defended expulsion of Jews from German institutions), (18) Heisenberg (led Germany’s nuclear weapons program), (19) and Schrödinger (had romantic relationships with under-age girls). (19) Indeed, learned societies are now devoting considerable effort to such renaming campaigns—among the most-recent cancellations is the renaming of the Fisher Prize by the Evolution Society, despite well-argued opposition by 10 past presidents and vice-presidents of the society. (20)

(…)

Some famous scientists were brave dissidents, and some were conformists and opportunists. Should we judge their scientific contributions by their political standing, the extent to which they collaborated with repressive regimes, or by how wholesome their personal lives were? The authors of the viewpoint (16) go as far as to suggest that we should use names of scientific discoveries and institutions as a vehicle to promote ideology—that is, as a propaganda tool—as was done by the Soviet, Nazi, and Maoist regimes.

The intersection of science, morality, and ideology has been studied by many scholars and historians. History provides ample evidence that totalitarian censorship of science is harmful to the progress and well-being of societies. Merton’s norms of science prescribe a clear separation between science and morality. (24) Particularly relevant is Merton’s principle of universality, which states that claims to truth are evaluated in terms of universal or impersonal criteria, and not on the basis of race, class, gender, religion, or nationality. (24) Simply put, we should evaluate, reward, and acknowledge scientific contributions strictly on the basis of their intellectual merit and not on the basis of personal traits of the scientists or a current political agenda.

Conversations about the history of science and the complexity of its social and ethical aspects can enrich our lives and should be a welcome addition to science curricula. The history of science can teach us to appreciate the complexity of the world and humanity. It can also help us to navigate urgent contemporary issues. (25) Censorship and cancellation will not make us smarter, will not lead to better science, and will not help the next generation of scientists to make better choices.

(…)

Today’s censorship does not stop at purging the scientific vocabulary of the names of scientists who “crossed the line” or fail the ideological litmus tests of the Elect. (11) In some schools, (33,34) physics classes no longer teach “Newton’s Laws”, but “the three fundamental laws of physics”. Why was Newton canceled? Because he was white, and the new ideology (10,12,15) calls for “decentering whiteness” and “decolonizing” the curriculum. A comment in Nature (35) calls for replacing the accepted technical term “quantum supremacy” by “quantum advantage”. The authors regard the English word “supremacy” as “violent” and equate its usage with promoting racism and colonialism. They also warn us about “damage” inflicted by using such terms as “conquest”. I assume “divide-and-conquer” will have to go too. Remarkably, this Soviet-style ghost-chasing gains traction. In partnership with their Diversity, Equity, and Inclusion taskforce, the Information and Technology Services Department of the University of Michigan set out to purge the language within the university and without (by imposing restrictions on university vendors) from such hurtful and racist terms as “picnic”, “brown bag lunch”, “black-and-white thinking”, “master password”, “dummy variable”, “disabled system”, “grandfathered account”, “strawman argument”, and “long time no see”. (36) “The list is not exhaustive and will continue to grow”, warns the memo. Indeed, new words are canceled every day—I just learned that the word “normal” will no longer be used on Dove soap packaging because “it makes most people feel excluded” (…)

Do words have life and power of their own? Can they really cause injury? Do they carry hidden messages? The ideology claims so and encourages us all to be on the constant lookout for offenses. If you are not sure when you should be offended—check out the list of microagressions—a quick google search can deliver plenty of official documents from serious institutions that, with a few exceptions, sound like a sketch for the next Borat movie. (38) If nothing fits the bill, you can always find malice in the sounds of a foreign language. At the University of Southern California, a professor was recently suspended because students claimed to have been offended by the sounds of Chinese words used to illustrate the concept of filler words in a communications class. (39,40)

(…)

The answer is simple: our future is at stake. As a community, we face an important choice. We can succumb to extreme left ideology and spend the rest of our lives ghost-chasing and witch-hunting, rewriting history, politicizing science, redefining elements of language, and turning STEM (science, technology, engineering, and mathematics) education into a farce. (41−44) Or we can uphold a key principle of democratic society—the free and uncensored exchange of ideas—and continue our core mission, the pursuit of truth, focusing attention on solving real, important problems of humankind.

The lessons of history are numerous and unambiguous. (17) Despite vast natural and human resources, the USSR lost the Cold War, crumbled, and collapsed. Interestingly, even the leaders of the most repressive regimes were able to understand, to some extent, the weakness of totalitarian science. For example, in the midst of the Great Terror, (5,13) Kapitsa and Ioffe were able to convince Stalin about the importance of physics to military and technological advantage, to the extent that he reversed some arrests; for example, Fock and Landau were set free (however, an estimated ∼10% of physicists perished during this time (17)). In the late forties, after nuclear physicists explained that without relativity theory there will be no nuclear bomb, Stalin rolled back the planned campaign against physics and instructed Beria to give physicists some space; this led to significant advances and accomplishments by Soviet scientists in several domains. However, neither Stalin nor the subsequent Soviet leaders were able to let go of the controls completely. Government control over science turned out to be a grand failure, and the attempts to patch the widening gap between the West and the East by espionage did not help. (17) Today Russia is hopelessly behind the West, in both technology and quality of life. The book Totalitarian Science and Technology provides many more examples of such failed experiments. (17)

Today, STEM holds the key to solving problems far more important than the nuclear arms race: reversing climate change, fighting global hunger and poverty, controlling pandemics, and harnessing the power of new technologies (quantum computing, bioengineering, and renewable energy) for the benefit of humanity.

Normalizing ideological intrusion into science and abandoning Mertonian principles (24) will cost us dearly. We cannot afford it.”

“The insinuation of political agendas into science is nothing new; I wrote about it in my 1993 book “Kindly Inquisitors: The New Attacks on Free Thought.” Back then, factions like creationists, Afrocentrists, and Marxists were hawking alternatives to mainstream biology, math, and social science. Today, the political right is hard at work scrubbing school libraries and curricula of what they deem to be critical race theory (whatever that is) and LGBT “grooming” (whatever that is).

Meanwhile, on the left, scholars are calling for rethinking academic freedom so that it does not protect “some ideas [that] don’t deserve a hearing.” Just recently, the California state community college system directed its employees, including faculty, to contribute “to DEI and anti-racism research and scholarship,” in violation of academic freedom and possibly the Constitution (as FIRE points out). Anna Krylov, in her important article “The Peril of Politicizing Science,” gives other examples of social-justice activism masquerading as science. “I witness ever-increasing attempts to subject science and education to ideological control and censorship,” she writes, adding that she recalls similar efforts in the Soviet Union of her childhood.

(…)

In Quillette, the social psychologist Bo Winegard does a masterly job dissecting them. He takes note of the guidance’s terminal vagueness. “Ambiguity is piled upon ambiguity to expand the capricious purview of the censor,” he writes. “It does not require clairvoyance to predict that these criteria will not be consistently applied.” He notes the tendentious ideological assumptions embedded in the document. He identifies some of the legitimate research that could be squelched and chilled.

(…)

A dilemma, here, is fundamental. How can science consider social responsibility without politicizing research? This problem is hard. Over the centuries, science has worked out an imperfect but very functional answer: subsidiarity.

Subsidiarity is the notion of reducing centralized control over decision-making by pushing it down to lower levels, such as individuals, local governments, non-commissioned officers, franchise managers, and community groups. Subsidiarity taps local knowledge; it encourages experimentation and retards bureaucratic ossification; it encourages personal initiative; it deters systemic takeover by special interests.

To a great extent, science works on the same principle. Accrediting bodies, scientific societies, and professional organizations set general guidelines. Yet, in implementing those guidelines, they give broad discretion to universities, which give broad discretion to their faculties, which give broad discretion to individual researchers. For the most part, we trust trained professionals to make socially responsible research decisions. For the most part, they do. Questions about social harm and social justice are hashed out in conversations and debates among members of the research community, not settled peremptorily by a handful of editors.

In this disaggregated, decentralized system, journals play the essential role of middlemen. They assess research’s importance, vet its quality, and, on approval, usher it into the marketplace of ideas. Of course, they can’t be perfectly apolitical, because they’re human; but, traditionally, they aspire to be ideologically neutral so that the political inclinations of editors don’t supersede the scientific expertise of researchers. We want them to act as quality controls, not political checkpoints.

By explicitly making social justice an element of editorial policy, NHB breaks with this tradition. To the extent it does so, the results will be bad. However professional and well intentioned NHB’s editors may be, they are not qualified to decide on society’s behalf whether research is socially harmful or desirable. In fact, they have no idea how a piece of research will ramify.

(…)

Good luck, NHB, with your good intentions. We have 300 years of scientific tradition that helps researchers and editors understand what constitutes scientific merit. We know that Bayesian reasoning is more reliable than cherry-picking; that double-blind controlled trials are better than convenience samples; that equating correlation with causality is an error; and much, much more.

“Preventing harm,” by contrast, is a completely and inherently subjective criterion. The new policy invites activists and interest groups to veto “harmful” research. They will accept the invitation, claiming that whatever research offends them is oppressive, unequal, stigmatizing, traumatic, racist, colonialist, homophobic, transphobic, violent, and — you get the idea.

(…)

Moreover, NHB’s guidance patently is political. Consider this criterion for problematic content: “Submissions that embody singular, privileged perspectives, which are exclusionary of a diversity of voices in relation to socially constructed or socially relevant human groupings, and which purport such perspectives to be generalizable and/or assumed.” If you can figure out what this gobbledygook means, you are smarter than I am. What it does unambiguously convey, however, is woke-left identity politics. The editors might as well post a sign that says, “Conservatives Not Welcome.”

According to the Pew Research Center, from 2015 to 2019 the share of Americans saying colleges and universities have a “negative effect” on the country rose from 28% to 38%: a startlingly (and depressingly) dramatic increase. A lot of that hostility is attributable to the perception that the academy is left-dominated and intolerant. Even if scholars and editors do not deliberately inject politics into their work (and most don’t), multiple surveys show that conservative viewpoints are so rare in some disciplines that progressive orthodoxies are simply taken for granted.

Everything about the NHB statement will make this problem worse.

(…)

Understand that it is not your job to stop science from “perpetuating structural inequalities and discrimination in society.” Go back to doing what you know how to do. Understand yourselves not as riding astride the stream of research, judging what does and does not advance justice or harm society, but as humbly serving a community of scholars who collectively have infinitely more knowledge, wisdom, and experience than you do.

Allow your thousands of researchers, reviewers, and readers to make their own various and diverse determinations of how research might ultimately benefit or harm groups, individuals, and the public good. Accept that it is arrogant and self-important for anyone, including yourselves, to set themselves up as visionaries capable of prejudging the scientific process. Apply the non-political standards of scientific merit and editorial excellence which have been honed over centuries.

Above all, remember that by far the greatest engine of social justice, human rights, and equality has been the advancement of knowledge, and the rolling back of ignorance, by a community of truth-seekers empowered to follow evidence wherever it leads. If you care about making society better and fairer, you will serve that community, not appoint yourselves to direct it.”

[ducavalentinos]

Hello, What were the opinions of the people who personally knew Cesare ? Thank you !

Hello ;) So, there were a lot of opinions made about Cesare by his contemporaries, but most of the opinions come from people who met him, not knew him intimately. The unfortunate thing here is that Cesare is mostly seen through the lenses of people outside his inner circle: ambassadors, orators, enemies who wrote daily dispatches, reports, letters to their employers and others. Some of this material has weight and it’s helpful, but still they all contain the unavoidable political element and focus towards Cesare as the political figure, not Cesare as a person. There are interesting glimpses of his personality and intimate life here and there, but never enough to make more than a sketch of it, and often much of it is distorted, with incorrect information and/or evaluations which were believed at the time to have been accurate. Cesare through the lenses of people inside his inner circle: people who knew him intimately, people he trusted and loved and vice-versa, are frustratingly limited, there’s almost nothing, which creates a big unbalance about his figure and his life. I believe the opinions of his beloved tutor Giovanni Vera, his most known secretary and adviser Agapito Geraldini di Amelia, or Miguel da Corella, or of his mother, his sister, his wife, would be incredibly valuable in order to have more precise knowledge, and a more rounded assessment about his person, in all of its facets, since we don’t have that, what fills up this gap are the words of one of his first secretaries, the alleged words of his father, Rodrigo, and the words of intellectuals and poets who interacted with him at his father’s court in Rome, some later following him at his own court in the Romagna, beneath the exaggerated flattery common in these writings, these men make some interesting observations, and express a genuine opinion about Cesare, aside from just the political man, which helps to shed a light into his personality, his qualities, and other aspects of his life. With this in mind, I gathered opinions that can be confirmed by Cesare’s own documented actions, and that I find are generally reliable: not entirely dominated by personal/political bias, and absent of the malice and gossip which became more common the more powerful Cesare and his family became. There are mix between the first group (ambassadors, orators, enemies, etc), the second group (people close to him, intellectuals and poets), and maybe there will be one or two which does not belong to either group, so I’ll leave them for last as a type of miscellaneous third group, in chronological order: 1488:

“What thanks can I give you, Cesare Borgia? May this auspicious day be celebrated as a festive day, in which this work comes to light only out of your love, and if our judgment is worth something, it will be most useful for general prosperity. In this book, we teach how to write a poem, exploring and manifesting all the secrets of metric art. Certainly a work that will please you very much. [...]Add to that your great and truly effective love for beautiful letters.You, Cesare, are truly worthy of much commendation, if at such a young age you act with the wisdom of an old man. Forward, then, O hope and ornament of the Borgia family, and accept with a good heart our Syllables, an offering of your devoted friend. So I believe that my name, joined to your eternal name and that of [your house], will have ornament and life."

- Extracts from a dedication written to Cesare by Paolo Pompilio,h in his Syllabica, a literature text-book of verse composition, published in the same year. 1492:

“Cesare Borgia profited so much that, with ardent ingenuity, he discussed the questions posed to him both in Canon law and in Civil law.”

- Paolo Giovio, concerning the Disputation for the laurea at the University of Pisa, where Cesare studied from 1491 to 1492. 1493:

"On the day before yesterday I found Cesare at home in Trastevere. He was on the point of setting out to go hunting, and entirely in secular habit. that is to say, dressed in silk and armed. Riding together, we talked a while, I am among his most intimate acquaintances. He is a man of great talent and of an excellent nature; his manners are those of the son of a great prince; above everything, he is joyous and light-hearted. He is very modest**, much superior to, and of a much finer appearance than his brother the Duke of Gandia, who also is not short of natural gifts."

- Disp. written by Gianandrea Boccaccio to his employer, the Duke of Ferrara, Ercole d'Este. 1497:

"Nature has engendered in you not the seed of virtù, but virtù itself, and in occupying herself to form you, [she] has adorned your body with an excellent form, dignity, and every beauty, and provided the soul with moderation**, decorum, gravity, benevolence, and above all royal liberality**, which nature seemed to have surpassed herself. And this liberality of yours, is shown with writers and artists."

- Extract from a dedication written by one of Cesare's secretaries, Carlo Valgulio, in the first transl. of Cleomedes: De contemplatione orbium excelsorum. 1499:

“By his modesty, his readiness, his prudence, and his other virtues he has known how to earn the affections of every one.”

- Letter written by Giuliano Della Rovere, to pope Alexander VI, concerning Cesare's arrival in France.**

"The Pope's son was very gallant..."

- Baldassare Castiglione, in a letter after seeing the entrance of Cesare and his suite alongside King Louis XII of France in Milan. 1500:

“To-day, about the twenty-second hour (four in the afternoon), after he had dined, he had signor Ramiro fetch me to him; and with great frankness and amiability his Majesty first made his excuses for not granting me an audience the preceding day, owing to his having so much to do in the castle and also on account of the pain caused by his ulcer. Following this, and after I had stated that the sole object of my misson was to wait upon his Majesty to congratulate and thank thim, and to offer your services, he answered me in carefully chosen words, covering each point and very fluently. The gist of it was, that knowing your Excellency’s ability and goodness, he had always loved you and had hoped to enjoy personal relations with you. He had looked forward to this when you were in Milan, but events and circumstances then prevented it. But now that he had come to this country, he --determined to have his wish-- had written the letter announcing his successes, of his own free will and as proof of his love, and feeling certain that you Majesty would be pleased by it. He says he will continue to keep you informed of his doings**, as he desires to establish a firm friendship with your Majesty, and he proffers everything he owns and in his power should you ever have need.[...]When I take both the actual facts and his words into consideration, I see why he wishes to establish some sort of friendly alliance with your Majesty. I believe in his professions, and I can see nothing but good in them.”

Postscript: “The Duke’s daily life is as follows: he goes to bed at eight, nine, or ten o’clock at night (three to five o’clock in the morning). Consequently, the eighteenth hour is his dawn, the nineteenth his sunrise, and the twentieth his time for rising. Immediately on getting up he sits down to the table, and while there and afterwards he attends to his business affairs. He is considered brave, strong, and generous, and it is said he lays great store by straightforward men.[...]He is great of spirit and he seeks eminence and glory.”

- Extracts from a Disp. of Pandolfo Collenuccio to his employer, the Duke of Ferrara, Ercole d’Este, from Pesaro. 1501:

"This lord is very magnificent and splendid, and so spirited in feats of arms that there is nothing so great but that it must seem small to him. In the pursuit of glory and to acquire a State he never rests, and he knows neither danger nor fatigue. He moves so swiftly that he arrives at a place before it is known that he has set out for it. He knows how to make himself beloved of his soldiers, and he has in his service the best men of Italy. These things render him victorious and formidable, and to these is yet to be added his perpetual good fortune."

- Disp. written by Niccolò Machiavelli to the Signory of Florence. 1502:

"He [Cesare] argues with such sound reason that to dispute with him would be a long affair, for his wit and eloquence never fail him (dello ingegno e della lingua si vale quanto vuole...)

-Disp. written by Francesco Soderini, from Urbino, to the Signory of Florence.

"The duke[Cesare] is good-natured, but he cannot tolerate offenses."

- Rodrigo Borgia, to the Ferrarese ambassador B. Constabili.

Miscellaneous: A certain author named Camillo di Leonardo from Pesaro dedicates to Cesare, in the year of 1502, his famous work Speculum Lapidum, in which he 'commends the duke for his great love of letters, his courteous liberality towards the scholarly, the care he used when collecting the beautiful and numerous [works] of the library of Cesena, and even his sweetness and his gentleness.' Gaspare Torella, one of Cesare's personal physician and advisers also dedicated to him his Dialogus de Dolore, in which he says he is "...pleased that [Cesare's] virtù surpassed those of the great ones of Rome, such as the justice of Brutus, the constancy of Decius, the continence of Scipio, the loyalty of Marco Regolo, and the magnanimity of Paolo Emilio.” The French commanders used to say of Cesare: “At war he was a good companion and a brave man." The Spanish historian Zurita, atypically pays a compliment to Cesare when assessing the situation in Italy and of pope Julius' panic when hearing about Cesare's escape from the Spanish prison in 1506, he writes: "The duke was such that his very presence was enough to set all Italy agog; and he was greatly beloved, not only by men of war, but also by many people of Tuscany and of the States of the Church." Lastly, during the winter of 1500-1501, a scholar and poet named Francesco Uberti, native of Cesena, adressed to Cesare a volume of epigrams, all which show the Romagnese opinion about him. According to Uberti, Cesare's Romagnese subjects learned his temper was 'mitissima' (gentle), 'placidissima' (calm) and his 'crueltà' (cruelty) was the severity necessary to repress political disorders. There is also other epigrams where Tiberti praises Cesare's clemency, "pious and kind Cesare..." ** The terms modesty and moderation, according to Gregorovius, can be also taken to 'understand as part and manifestation of a liberal education,...’ and the term liberality means generous, which Cesare was particularly reputed as being, to such a degree his genorosity was called at the time after his own name as “liberalità cesarea”. ** I decided to add Della Rovere’s words about Cesare, because as writer and historian Anthony Everitt said in one of his books: “Praise from one’s worst enemy is the most annoying, but also the most credible, of compliments.” and because even if Della Rovere’s words are insincere, likely, these words can nevertheless be confirmed by the opinions of others about Cesare, esp. in the historical records about his soujour at France. **Cesare had sent long letters to Ercole d'Este while he was at the conquest of Imola and Forlì, telling him the details of the military campaign.

[mirkwoodest]

@fishwantmewomenfearme

[TL;DR: Tbh there’s some iffy stuff in lotr and I won’t defend it, but that has nothing to do with his interest in languages, history, and folklore. Tolkien denounced white supremacy and antisemitism in 1938 when a German publishing house wanted to translate his book. I compared that to how Taylor Swift handled her own white-supremacist fans in 2009-2019.]

I'm not going to be the guy to stand up and say that Tolkien's works are totally free of racist and antisemitic undertones, because that would be incorrect (sad to say, but facts are facts). Still, I think that the fuck-off letter he wrote to a German publisher in 1983 when they asked him to provide documentation of his Aryan heritage puts him at LEAST one step above Taylor Swift, as low as that bar is.

Actually, that’s a pretty good comparison. Taylor Swift and Tolkien both have qualities that make white supremacists fawn over them. Taylor, because she’s an “Aryan queen” or whatever bullshit, and Tolkien because he, as you mentioned, is “into german history and language” and weaves a lot of northern European mythology into his works. So they both had/have white supremacist fans. How should one handle this? Tolkien wrote:

"I am not of Aryan extraction: that is Indo-Iranian; as far as I am aware none of my ancestors spoke Hindustani, Persian, Gypsy, or any related dialects. But if I am to understand that you are enquiring whether I am of Jewish origin, I can only reply that I regret that I appear to have no ancestors of that gifted people. My great-great-grandfather came to England in the eighteenth century from Germany: the main part of my descent is therefore purely English, and I am an English subject — which should be sufficient. I have been accustomed, nonetheless, to regard my German name with pride, and continued to do so throughout the period of the late regrettable war, in which I served in the English army. I cannot, however, forbear to comment that if impertinent and irrelevant inquiries of this sort are to become the rule in matters of literature, then the time is not far distant when a German name will no longer be a source of pride. Your enquiry is doubtless made in order to comply with the laws of your own country, but that this should be held to apply to the subjects of another state would be improper, even if it had (as it has not) any bearing whatsoever on the merits of my work or its sustainability for publication, of which you appear to have satisfied yourselves without reference to my Abstammung."

[emphasis mine]

This letter alone isn’t the kind of “hey FUCK off” I would have preferred, but it’s at least a comfort that Tolkien stated outright that he thought Aryan purity and anti-semitism was, at the very least, nonsense, and that the rise of white supremacy in Germany was making him actively lose pride in his German heritage. There is also documentation that he was less diplomatic in private, telling his publisher that he despised the Nazi “race-doctrine” and found it “wholly pernicious and unscientific.”

Comparatively, Swift posed with Swastika Guy in 2009. It almost immediately went public, but the only comment made was by her publicist, who only said that “She doesn't know who this guy is and she didn't realize what was on his shirt.” Swift then became an alt-right icon in 2016, and didn’t comment on that until 2019, when she finally said “white supremacy is repulsive” with her whole chest, but brushed off criticism that she should have said so 4-10 years earlier. (I'm bringing up Swift not to make Tolkien look better, but because she’s the first person I could think of who was in a similar situation of suddenly encountering white supremacist fans.)

Once again, that’s a LOW bar, but I think it’s important to discuss how a person’s interests and characteristics (an interest in germanic history/mythology/languages for Tolkien, aesthetically appealing to Nazi beauty ideals for Swift) are not in themselves inherently racist or an indication of racism, but they do attract racists, and how these figures should respond to that attention. (Quickly and with strong language, in my opinion, which neither Tolkien or Swift managed to do, although I personally believe Tolkien gets more credit for saying what he did in the pre-internet era and while there were out-and-proud nazi sympathizers in Engand before Britain went to war with Germany.)

Anyway, my intention here isn’t to shield Tolkien from all criticism, because it’s really important to be critical of racism and antisemitism even in the works we love. But I do have an issue with you throwing these tags up so casually in the notes of a post where I was simply talking about celebrating Tolkien’s use of Old English, Old Norse, and germanic words and names. If you start to draw a direct line between studying linguistics, history, and mythology to being a white supremacist, you should possibly pause and reflect.

Once again, there are elements in Tolkien’s works that can and should be criticized and analyzed for racism and antisemitism, but his playful use of language and his merit as an academic and linguist are not it. Thank you for engaging with my post, however. It’s given me a chance to offer people potentially new information and encouraged fans of Tolkien and the fantasy genre to look at these important but difficult topics with care.

If anyone takes issue with any of the above points, I am open to hearing them. My goal is not to fight, but to talk, listen, learn, and grow in understanding.

[trashy-mctrash]

I know that Rook’s birthday has passed, but I saw a post today asking why Rook speaks French and I did look into this in an Rook Analaysis essay that I wrote for his birthday but didn’t post it here. So that post kinda made me want to post it to explain or hopefully look more into his character. 

Rook Hunt is a mysterious and attractive character. Despite his unusual habits, he’s a true gentleman but is often seen as having strange characteristics. Here I will attempt to look into Rook’s character design to celebrate his birthday!!

Rook so far in the game is the only character we see speaking a language from our world, French. Some have found this confusing or unnecessary but actually, Rook speaking French makes perfect sense. Rook comes from Afterglow Savannah, a land based on the movie, the Lion King just like it’s NRC dorm counterpart. The Lion King is said to take place in Africa, specifically Kenya. Inspiration on the landscapes in the movie was from the animators visiting Kenya (Bake, 2019). French is the official language of 11 countries in Africa and the secondary language in 10, making it the 5th most spoken language in the world (Chutel, 2018). Kenya is one of the countries with french as its main language. Since rook comes from Afterglow Savannah, it’s natural that he would have qualities matching the area just like Ruggie and Leona who also come from the same place. But unlike them, Rook resides in the Pomefiore dorm, therefore he holds qualities for both of these. Therefore, Rook does not come from France or represent France, he is based on Africa and most likely comes from the twst version of it which would be Afterglow Savannah.

Although Rook is not French, many white Africans in Africa, especially South Africa originated from France, Germany and the Netherlands in 1652 (jyu.fi). It's common for some twst characters to be a mix of cultures and themes. Rook is one example of this, he’s a blend of Afterglow Savannah and Pomefiore as he comes from Afterglow and is based on the hunter from Snow White. Snow White is said to be based in Germany, specifically Germany during the Holy Roman Empire (esri). Germany is one of the three main countries previously mentioned, that majority of white Africans came from, which suits Rook’s appearance. Rook’s hats also resemble fashion from this time as well as matching his Snow White counterpart. As seen below:

Rook’s hair also appeals to both the hunter from Snow White and the matching time period. These hat styles were worn by those of higher class and by Rook wearing it, reflecting his position as deputy dorm leader of Pomefiore. 

The 14th century was a time of vibrant poetry explosion fitting Rook’s personality. An example of a famous poet from this time is Dante, famously known for writing “The Divine Comedy” (Interesting Literature). He chose to write in Italian instead of Latin which was common during these times. French and Italian are both known as “romance” languages that both derived from Latin, which was the language of the Holy Roman Empire during this time (Language TSAR). When it comes to Rook giving out nicknames, these too fit the time period as it was common for people to be named after their place or qualities which is what Rook is seen as doing. An example is Riddle who he calls “Roi de Roses” which means “King of Roses” which fits the style of names of those of the high class (Benicoeur and Gwynek, 2003). 

Bows were very common and practical in armies from the 12th to 16th centuries despite barely being recorded in history (Towens, 2019). This reflects perfectly onto Rook due to how little we know about him and the little trace he leaves behind which pairs well with his stealthy personality as a hunter but also shows his side as a “soldier” or a “guard” to Vil, his beliefs of beauty and possible other things we aren’t aware about. The main role of professional archers were for defense but were also used as mercenaries during crusades. Rook fits both of these as he plays the role of Vil’s defense and the protector of beauty wanting to cherish it. He can also be seen as a double edged sword as even though he stands by Vil, many have speculated that he may at some point betray Vil or help Neige doing what he believes to be most advantageous. Archery symbolises “aligning with the target” (Girvin, 2013) which means to give support towards something. Rook is seen as taking more supportive roles throughout the game by helping other students like Epel as seen in Leona’s lab coat story, helping him make a potion for his class (Twisted Wonderland Wiki). It can also mean to become the heart of a community, be truthful, in their times of need to be the voice of their minds to help solve their problems. Rook being honest can also be reflected in his arrows as they symbolise the sharp and accurate truths they contain, this can be seen in Vil’s lab coast story as he blatantly calls Vil “fat” with the intention of helping to increase his beauty, which despite his protests, Vil is seen appreciating (Twisted Wonderland Wiki).The archer is linked with the Centaur and Sagittarius (ironically his birth sign) which represents having insight which can be linked to Rook having knowledge of other students and of other things that normal people would not. Rook is known to freely speak his mind with what we see as with intentions of helping them even if his words or actions may be seen as weird or out of place, but in the end they have the effects he was aiming for or benefit the person in some way. Also “that hearts align in embracing the perfection of that targeting” (Girvin, 2013) which is poetic in Rook being a hunter and calling himself the “Hunter of Love.” An archer remains cool and observes from afar, becoming the symbol of honour, precision and patience.

In the Spanish caves of Cova dels Cavalls, they found etched carvings of archers estimated to be from about 7000 years ago (Stanley, 2020). They were believed to be a form or hunting magic ritual to manifest good hunting, this fits well with Rook being a magic user in the game and makes him wielding a bow make sense as well as again representing his Snow White counterpart. Archery and magic connections as referenced when Rook is in battle as he summons his magic attacks with an arrow releasing maneuver, as seen below:

This can also reference his love for art, arrows bound in one of the first forms of art for centuries and also shows their use and endless help throughout time. A metaphorical and physical weapon just like with Rook, attacking metaphorically with his words and physically with his arrows/magic. Arrows are meant to be simple yet two dimensional (with its pointy and flat ends), Rook too is portrayed as being simple yet ironically he is also not. Two dimensional as in maybe despite all our theorising, he may just be a simple man who loves beauty yet there are still many unanswered questions about him and his past. However this can be said for other characters in the game as well, so perhaps Rook Hunt is just a simple man with weird qualities? That is still to be discovered. “The durability of the arrow metaphor, as with archery in general, looks unlikely to go anywhere soon,” (Stanley, 2020) this is a simple symbol linked with archery which can further be associated with the idea of Rook being simple and not as complicated as we believe. Rook being able to use light and dark magic can reflect this as humans are neither dark or light, they are simple beings with desires and goals that can be either good or bad. Rook too has his desires that some might perceive as odd, his goals are simple to (as seen in the wish upon the stars event) see all the beauty in the world.

In Japan, Zen archery (or Kyudo) where the goal was to “achieve a balance among mind, body, and bow, which gives rise to a unity that links the spirit to the target,” (Encyclopedia.com, 2020). Which again reflects Rook’s ability of using both types of magic, showing his inner peace and balance and ability to use both types of magic. He is a character that we don't see explode or express vivid emotions which could be linked with his hunting too. Bow and arrows have been known as symbols of good luck against evil in Japan since immemorial. We will probably see this in action during Vil’s overblot as that will be the evil to defeat in Chapter 5 alongside the other characters. 

The word “rook” has multiple meanings, like crows. Many have associated this and Rook’s poem about Crowley as them being signs of a possible connection between the two. Although this theory is very interesting and I would love for a twist like this, Disney is honestly too stupid to make a story as wonderful as that, but I could be wrong (please prove me wrong Disney). On the other hand it could symbolise Rook’s knowledge of everyone and how he could be aware of some of Crowley’s secrets or the secrets/mysterious of the school. They tend to be watchful creatures with great insight, which can be said the same for Rook as he observes other students and has knowledge of things that others normally do not have. Crows are also associated with transformation and change (Clifford, 2020)  which could represent Rook helping Vil and Epel, along with others to bring forth their beauty. There is also a well known nursery rhyme about crows, as seen below:

Although the history behind the rhyme is not that clear, the seventh line does hold some connection to  Rook’s wide range of secrets that he knows and holds himself. Rook is also used for loud and sociable people or animals who love to talk, Rook is known for his loud and expressive persona that fits this description. Rook can also mean cheat, which could link to him sabotaging Vil to save Neige. The name is given to those with dark hair which is clearly not Rook (with his blond locks) but could refer to his hunter counterpart instead.

Rook is famous for his golden bob that is quite the debate. However bobs have a deep history. In the 20th century, bobs used to symbolise independent, progessive people encouraging a more daring personality during those times. Movies have been the main reason for the spread and back in style of the bob. Rook embodies a free personality with his odd attire in the dorm that symbolises beauty (hunting boots and hats) showing his more bold side that can also be seen by his freely open speech. Joan of Arc is the main inspiration of the bob that was brought back by Antoine, a celebrity hairdresser, which he showed in his salon in 1909 (V is for Vintage, 2012). Although she wore it for more practical meanings, she still stands for representing the people and doing what she believed in. It’s likely though that the bob was more inspired by the hunter’s hair style for Rook yet it still represents daring and progressive people which Rook is commonly known for with his views and actions. 

In conclusion, Rook Hunt is an odd yet interesting character. He is neither complex or simple. We still have much to learn about him which we hopefully will in the coming chapters and his birthday event. Although his character design may seem strange, in the end they make perfect sense when looking at the connections they all have towards the game and it’s details. I hope that this managed to clear up Rook’s character and explain more about him. However, there are a few attributes that are still questionable which if Disney has any concept of storytelling, they will explain...I hope for Rook’s sake. His stalking and obsession could be linked to how he sees himself as nothing much and viewing others as better or more beautiful, in that case he’s got some emotional package. Still does not excuse his actions. These tendencies might also be them expanding on a hunter stalking and keeping track of their prey, in this case for Rook it would be people he finds interesting. In the end he’s one of the many wonderful boys we have to learn more about and love.

References:

Baker, Craig. 2019. 25 Surprising Facts about the Lion King. Mental Floss.

https://www.mentalfloss.com/article/57386/30-facts-about-lion-king

Benicoeur, Arval and Gwynek, Talan. 2003. Fourteenth Century Venetian Personal Names. S-gabriel.org.

https://www.s-gabriel.org/names/arval/venice14/

Chutel, Lynsey. 2018. French is now the fifth most spoken world language and growing—thanks to Africans. QuartzAfrica.

https://qz.com/africa/1428637/french-is-worlds-fifth-spoken-language-thanks-to-africans/#:~:text=French%20remains%20the%20sole%20official,second%20official%20language%20in%2010.

Clifford, C Garth. 2020. Crow Symbolism & Meaning (+Totem, Spirit & Omens). World Birds.

https://www.worldbirds.org/crow-symbolism/

Encyclopedia.com. 2020. Sport and Religion. Encyclopedia.com.

https://www.encyclopedia.com/environment/encyclopedias-almanacs-transcripts-and-maps/sports-and-religion#:~:text=Throughout%20human%20history%2C%20sports%20and,their%20primary%20means%20of%20communication.

Girvin, Tim. 2013. The Symbolism Of Archery. Girvin.

https://www.girvin.com/the-symbolism-of-archery/

Interesting Literature. The Best Fourteenth-Century Poems Everyone Should Read. Interesting  Literature.

https://interestingliterature.com/2019/11/the-best-fourteenth-century-poems-everyone-should-read/#:~:text=The%20fourteenth%20century%20was%2C%20in,vibrant%20language%20for%20vernacular%20poetry.

Jyu.fi. Ethinic Groups. Jyu.fi.

https://www.jyu.fi/viesti/verkkotuotanto/kp/sa/peop_ethnicgrps.shtml

Stanley, John. 2020. Archery HIstory: Arrows of the Imagination, Art and Culture Symbolism. World Archery.

https://worldarchery.org/news/178453/archery-history-arrows-imagination-art-and-cultural-symbolism

Twisted Wonderland Wiki. Leona Kingscholar/Personal Story/SR Lab Coat. Twisted Wonderland Fandom.

https://twisted-wonderland.fandom.com/wiki/Leona_Kingscholar/Personal_Story/SR_Lab_Coat

Twisted Wonderland Wiki. Vil Schoenheit/Personal Story/SR Lab Coat. Twisted Wonderland Fandom. 

https://twisted-wonderland.fandom.com/wiki/Vil_Schoenheit/Personal_Story/SR_Lab_Coat

Towens. 2019. Arrows in the Middle Ages. Bow International.

https://www.bow-international.com/features/arrows-in-the-middle-ages/

V is for Vintage. 2012. The Bob: History of a Hairstyle. V is for Vintage. 

https://visforvintage.net/2012/04/03/history-of-bob-hairstyle/

[lastxviolet]

Madripoor is for Lovers (Zemo x F!Reader) - Ch. 2

Summary: Y/N is a SWORD agent recruited to help Sam and Bucky track down Karli and the super-soldiers. When Helmut Zemo joins the team, he takes a special interest in her. The friendly union is wrought for disaster, but then things take a turn for the worst when Y/N is taken as collateral. Will Zemo keep her forever? Does she even want to escape? And what happened in Madripoor that made the whole thing so complicated?

Warnings: 18+ / eventual smut / kidnapping

https://archiveofourown.org/works/32878015/chapters/81589774

The plane completed its descent, jolting you awake and away from the dream of what happened next.

His hands inside your dress and the moment in the evening that stopped feeling like an act.

“We are here,” he confirmed, gripping your hand and leading you from the plane.

The air wasn’t cold anymore and smelled like spring. It was May in the states and DC had felt the same so it was possible that you were still in the northern hemisphere. The United States and Canada weren’t options for the criminal, neither was Germany.

Italy?

He spoke to the driver in German and although you recognized the words, you had no clue what they meant. A short drive later and the car stopped. He untied the blindfold and you took in the sight of a lone chateau at the end of a lavish driveway. He opened the door and motioned for you to follow.

“No gun,” you questioned, eyeing his relaxed demeanor.

He smiled. Although you were angry and the sun was too bright, you were glad to finally be able to see something again.

“Not necessary,” he nodded at the rolling hills around them. “Where would you run?”

You glared at him, letting him know that this was still against your will and that any familiarity you’d had, was gone.

“You’re very confident that I prefer your company over death,” you hissed, eyeing the wilderness.

“You’ve come with me this far.”

Your eyes met his. It was impossible to know what he was thinking beneath the stern exterior.

“You could’ve screamed for your comrades,” he shrugged.

“There was a gun aimed at my temple.”

“Or jumped out of the plane.”

Again, you glared at him. If looks could kill.

“This way,” he said, clearing his throat. “Please.”

You followed him, debating if you could make it to the car or even out of the compound before Zemo shot you or caught up.

The terrain was unfamiliar, and now you were in a foreign country, alone and uncounted for.

Zemo slowed and matched your snail’s pace, signaling that it was time to hurry up. You moved slower despite his hand on your back and he clicked his tongue. You made the journey last as long as possible until there was no choice but to cross the threshold.

“Your room is up the stairs and to the right,” he said, eyes on your face.

You stormed up the wooden stairs, making each groan with your anger.

“Dinner will be ready soon,” he called after you.

You slammed your door in response. The wall shook and you half hoped it’d bring the whole house down, taking you and Zemo with it.

An hour later, you entered the small and intimate dining room. A round table sat in a nook surrounded by windows, looking out onto the cliff-like drop below. You didn’t even glance at the food before you. There was only Zemo, and convincing him to let you go.

“Is your room to your liking?”

You scoffed. “My cell is fine, thank you.”

Unfortunately, your warden was fond of conflict, and difficult people. The words only seemed to intrigue him further. His eyes danced over your face, glancing down towards the exposed skin on your chest and then up to your lips.

“They say a pessimist sees the difficulty in every opportunity,” he mused.

“I’m a pessimist because of intelligence,” you quoted.

His eyes twinkled again, he knew, as you did, that it came from an Italian philosopher. It was applicable but also, a guess.

He raised his glass towards you before finishing the quote. “But an optimist because of will.”

In true Zemo fashion, he neither confirmed nor denied your suspicion. You lifted your glass of red wine towards him with a scowl.

You ate in silence for a while, you, staring out the window, Zemo, eyeing you. You made it half an hour before the weight of his stare became unbearable.

“So what’s your game plan, with all this,” you asked, waving your fork to yourself and then to him and the house.

“Do not ask questions you already know the answer to,” he chided. “It is beneath you.”

“My life for your freedom.”

He sighed then, almost like he didn’t like that answer either. It was the right one, you both knew that but it looked like it pained him. Seeing that flicker of humanity hurt more than you wanted to admit. It'd be easier if the man beneath the mask wasn't real. It'd be easier if he'd been lying and there weren’t two versions of him. You wished that there wasn’t a charming and passionate man beneath the evil Baron facade, but there he was again.

“Prison is not an option for me,” he admitted, laying down his fork. “But I am sorry that it had to be you.”

You nodded and scoffed, rolling your eyes for good measure.

“I do hope to make you comfortable, in the meantime — ”

“Before you kill me,” you interrupted.

He clicked his tongue again and glared. It was the plan he orchestrated and yet, he didn’t seem to like it.

“I may not have to,” he corrected.

You laughed then, with little care for his strained expression. “Have you met the Dora Milage? They’ll go through whoever they need to, to avenge their king. They don’t know me nor do they care about me. You don’t have the winning hand that you think you do.”

“You are forgetting about your colleagues. They've lost one of their own. If not loyalty, then pride will make them come for you,” he corrected.

Again, you smiled at his miscalculation. “I’m a foot soldier, not an avenger; not a super soldier; not one of them.”

"There is no such thing as small people, only small — ”

“Great,” you bellowed. “More wisdom! Your riddles and literature are useless now. You should’ve spent more time studying negotiations while you were incarcerated. Why didn’t you take Bucky? Or Caps little assistant? The US would’ve been at your feet for them back. You could’ve gotten a pardon and a reward!”

“I have no need for a reward,” he spat.

Your chest was heaving, out of anger, out of nerves, but most of all because the man in front of you was once again, impenetrable.

“Or a pardon from the great United States,” he continued, almost in a whisper.

Your eyes snapped to his but he avoided your gaze. He swirled his wine and stared off into space before inspecting you again. Something was missing, something that didn’t make sense.

The glimmer of humanity returned, despite his best efforts to hide it.

He’d been the main orchestrator of his outbreak from jail. He had private homes, apartments, transportation, weapons, cars, everything. He could run forever but he didn’t need you to do it. How was this life any different than what it would be if he was free? He watched you come to the realization and winced as it clicked into place.

“Why am I here,” you whispered, squinting.

He was silent and looked back to the window.

“Zemo,” you whispered. “Look at me.”

Funny enough, he followed the order.

His lips moved in silence but words didn’t escape.

“Why did you choose me?”

He pursed his lips in exasperation. It was no secret that he liked having the upper hand but he’d shown you all his cards a moment ago. You wondered why he hadn’t bothered to lie.

“I chose you because they wouldn’t — they won’t.”

He stood up and leaned against the sill, sipping wine in small swigs and staring out at the greenery.

“You would die for your country, Y/N,” he explained. “I find that admirable — heroic even but the problem, for me, is that they would let you.”

“Let me?” You repeated the phrase slowly, trying to understand the point.

He let out a huff. “If you caught a grenade in the name of bettering America, what would happen?”

You cocked your head in question. “I die? Maybe get a Purple Heart?”

“And then what? Would they bat an eye before rejoicing you — celebrating you and your sacrifice? Encouraging others to do the same in your name?” He paused and stared at you.

“No….no they wouldn’t because your death would mean that their wars are working. Another name in the long list of people that they were willing to gift to the god of war.”

“That sacrifice is what I signed up for — it’s my choice,” you explained, confused about where he was taking this.

He nodded and yet made no amends or clarification. The angry veins in his forehead receded and his gaze flitted away like he couldn’t bear to continue. You suddenly wondered if he'd even sent a ransom note, or whatever kidnappers do. The look in his eyes, told you no. The tone of his voice told you that he might not ever.

“Then you are doing your duty as a prisoner of war here, with me.”

He smiled and your anger dissipated. You lunged to grab onto any remaining frayed piece of it but there was nothing left. All those years of training and fighting, all to succumb to an evil man in a fitted turtleneck. You hardened your expression in an attempt to remain vexed.

“Your circumstance could be worse,” he concluded.

“And what of your circumstance?”

Silence ate up space between you. His gaze was set on you once again and then it seemed like you were the only two in this room, this home…the world.

“Better than it has been in a long time, schatzi,” he sighed.

“How so,” you asked, pushing for information.

He shrugged. “I am free and I am alone….with you.”

You winced and shook your head. “Don’t,” you whispered.

His brows furrowed. “In previous interactions, you did not seem to resent my…affections, Y/N.”

Butterflies ravaged your sternum, bringing memories of the night at Sharon’s with it. If it was different, if he had turned over a new leaf, then it would be easier to admit your feelings.

“Is this your version of affection? Holding me hostage?”

“Yes,” he breathed, coming to sit next to you, so close you thought he might touch you.

“Let’s not…talk about it,” you whispered, trying to push away the longing in your chest.

“I would like to,” he pushed.

All you could do was stare. The memories should've stayed in Madripoor. It should live in your brief collective drunk past. But you could see that it weighed on him as heavy as it did on you.

“That is fine,” he sighed. “I can talk if you will listen.”

You nodded once. The residual affections plagued you and it was impossible to keep your heartbeat at bay. The thought that he might feel the same was exhilarating and terrifying.

“It was you who assisted me with my escape plan. You who tracked Karli. You who guessed that I’d betray you on countless occasions. You who ensured that we evaded Captain America as long as we did. You who played your part so well that everyone in Madripoor thinks I have taken a wife.”

“Your point,” you hissed, deadpan.

“The super soldier solution does not increase intelligence, as you know. Nothing does. Even all the books in the world cannot alter what is already there. Either you are born with the glorious burden, or you live in ignorant bliss,” he explained.

He reached up and brushed his thumb along your forehead. “I know your burden, Y/N, because I share it.”

A stuttering breath left your chest. Compliments were the easiest forms of manipulation. You’d studied it, known it, resisted it in many years of training but this felt different. Everything he did and said, felt different.

“I do my job Zemo, that’s it.”

“You excel,” he corrected. “You make the rest of your colleagues look like newborns and yet they don’t...value you. Not like I do, Liebling.”

“If this is about the incident at Sharon’s,” you said, recognizing the nickname. “It was a mistake.”

He chuckled. “An optimist would call it a happy accident.”

“I’d call it life-ruining,” you said, trying to decipher the feelings of anger and something warm inside your chest. “If it led you to this.”

“I understand if you hate me,” he explained. “But you should know that living here with your hatred will be akin to breathing, for me, if it means you are safe. Natural and life-bringing.”

Your face gave nothing away but he’d stunned you.

“The evil baron is becoming less and less of a character.”

“They say hate itself is a version of love,” he mused, ignoring your words and staring at your lips.

The word knocked thought and common sense back into your head. This wasn’t love. This was ownership and selfishness. A myriad of terrible things that had tangled you both in this mess. It’d spurred from fascination and proximity but for love to grow, there has to be more. There has to be more good than bad. You looked around the home, owned by the man in front of you. Both beautiful, breathtaking even. But not enough to trade your freedom for.

“How convenient for someone with so many enemies,” you hissed.

His eyes squinted then and the Baron who commanded respect in Madripoor returned. There was this side of him too, you reminded yourself. And it seemed to be winning over the side who loved books and witty conversation.

“Are you my enemy, Y/N?”

For the first time, you didn’t know what to say. Before this, it wasn’t safe to call him anything other than an enemy but now? He ruined any chance of normalcy or redemption. The question lingered between you and it struck you how close he’d gotten. It would take almost nothing to start a repeat of the night at Sharon’s. But this was a different man.

“I didn’t have to be,” you breathed before breaking eye contact. You gave him no time to answer before fleeing back to your room.

[maxwell-grant]

What’s the difference between a pulp hero and a super hero?

There is a common sentiment when discussing pulp heroes, when compared to superheroes, that positions the two as if they were separate by entire eras, with pulp heroes being as distinct from the superheroes as the dinosaurs are to mankind. But then again, the dinosaurs never really went away, did they? 

Oh sure, they endured a great extinction, they downsized and ceded their thrones to the tiny little rats that scurried in their shadow, who then grew to become just as big, and then even bigger, but they never went away. They simply adapted into new forms and formed new ecosystems. We call them birds now.

The gap between Superman and The Shadow is merely 6 years, hardly much of a generation. There are those that argue that the Marvel and DC universes still have pulp heroes, that Batman is (or was) one, that characters like The Question and Moon Knight carry on the tradition. We have characters like Hellboy, Grendel, Tom Strong and Zack Overkill as original, modern examples of pulp characters, strongly identified as such. Venture Bros had in 2016 the best modern take on the Green Hornet. Lavender Jack is still going strong. So the idea that pulp heroes are defined solely by being old and outdated isn’t exactly true, when clearly there’s still enough gas in the tank centuries later for stories with them to be told.

Is there any meaningful distinction between pulp heroes and superheroes? If not, can we identify one?

Costume is definitely a big part of it, as Grant Morrison famously argued in his own summation. Of what he considers the big difference between the two: 

“What makes the superhero more current is the performance aspect. That's what The Shadow and those other guys don't really have. Their costumes are not bright, and they don't have their initials on their chest, and everything isn't out front and popping like the superheroes. I think we can relate to that about them because in the world we live in, everyone has a constant need to be a star. I think superheroes are keyed into that parallelism. They're performers. They're rock stars, and they always have been.

And he’s right, to an extent. It’s definitely tied into the central differences between The Shadow and Batman, as I’ve elaborated. While The Shadow was far, far from the only type of pulp hero, the superhero’s costume has long been defined as THE thing that sets it apart from every other type of fictional character. At least, when it comes to American superheroes. 

Because the “criteria” for superheroes is nowhere near as set in stone as some would like to believe. Our basic definition of superheroes is based around comparisons and contrasts to Superman and Batman, and how they fit into what we call “the superhero genre”. The existence of a superhero genre is, in and of itself, debatable, and any working definition for superheroes is inevitably going to have too many exceptions. 

Superheroes are not defined by settings, like cowboys or spacemen, or their profession, like detectives. They can’t be defined by superpowers (Batman), a mission statement, having secret identities (Fantastic Four, Tony Stark), being good people, or good at their jobs. The costume, the closest there is to a true, defining convention, still has a considerable share of exceptions like Jack Knight’s Starman, a great deal of the X-Men who do not wear uniforms, or most superheroes created outside the US. The most basic definition of superhero is of comic book characters with iconic costumes and enhanced abilities who fight villains in shared superhero universes, but even that falls short of exceptions by including characters who are not superheroes (John Constantine and other Vertigo characters, Jonah Hex, the Punisher). Some people would call Goku or Harry Potter or Lucky Luke or Monica’s Gang superheroes, Donald Duck has literally been one. “Character with a distinctive design and unusual talents who fights evil” includes virtually every fictional hero that’s ever achieved a modicum of popularity in a visual medium.

Even telling stories with super characters doesn’t mean you’re going to be writing a superhero story (Joker). Superheroes are not defined by settings and genres, but they can inhabit just about any of them you can imagine. Horror, westerns, gritty crime drama, historical reconstruction, romance, space adventure, war stories, surrealism stories. As Morrison put it, they aren’t so much a genre as they are “a special chilli pepper-like ingredient designed to energize other genres”, part of the reason why they colonized the entire blockbuster landscape.

Aviation became a thing in the war years, so they started producing en masse aviation pulps as a subgenre. Zeppelins became popular, so they had a short-lived zeppelin subgenre. Celebrities starred in their own magazines. The American pulps were different from the German pulps, or the Italian pulps, or the Canadian pulps. In China, wuxia arose at a similar time period and with similar themes and distribution. In Brazil, we have “folhetos”, short, poetic, extremely cheap prose often written about romantic heroes and “cangaçeiros”, the closest local equivalent to the American cowboys. In Japan, “light novels” began life as pulp fiction, distributed in exactly the same format and literally sold as such. Pulp fiction has long outlived any and all attempts to define it as 30s literary fiction only.

Likewise, “pulp” and “pulp heroes” are terms employed very, very loosely. Characters like The Shadow and Doc Savage arrived quite late in the history of pulp fiction. You had characters like Jimmie Dale, Bulldog Drummond, Tarzan, Conan, a billion non-descript trenchcoat guys, and before those the likes of Nick Carter and Sexton Blake, dime novel detectives who made the jump to pulp. You had your hero pulps, villain pulps, adventure pulps, romance pulps, horror pulps, weird menace pulps. Science fiction, planetary romance, roman-era adventures, lost race adventures, anything that publishers could sell was turned into pulp stories starring, what else, pulp heroes. 

How do you make sense of it all?

The main difference to consider is the mediums they were made for. 

Pulp heroes were made for literature, superheroes were made for comic books.

Superheroes NEED to pop out visually, to have bold and flashy and striking designs, because comic books are visual stories first and foremost, who live and die on having attractive, catching character designs and the promise of an entertaining story with them. Pulp heroes, in turn, can often just be ordinary dudes and dudettes and anything in between in trenchcoats or evening wear or furry underwear, or masters of disguise rarely identifiable, because the only thing that needs to visually striking at first glance in a pulp magazine is the cover, so your imagination can get ready to do the rest. Smoking guns, bloody daggers, a romantic embrace, monsters hunched over ladies in peril, incendiary escapes. The characters can look like and be literally anything.

Comic books are a sequential art form where art and writing come together to tell a story, and every illustration must serve the story and vice-versa. It needs to give you an incentive to keep being visually invested in whatever’s going on. Pulp literature stays dead on the page unless animated by your expectations; you may have the illusion of submitting to an experience, but really it’s you expending your imagination to otherwise inert signals. You have to provide the colors and flashy sequences and great meaning yourself, and as a trade, you get much more text to work with in novels than you do in comic books, where the dialogue and narration are fundamentally secondary to the visual, whether it’s a superhero punching stars or a monster covered in blood.

Each art form has its strengths and weaknesses, of course, which are only accentuated when each tries to be of a different kind. There's been pulp heroes that tried making the jump to comics, and comic heroes that made the jump to literature. There’s good, even great examples, of both, but even at their best, there's always some incongruity, because that's not the medium these characters were made for. 

Superheroes are characters defined by being extraordinary. The pulp heroes are too, in many cases, distinguished from their literary antecessors because they were too uncanny and weird, a middleground between the folklore/fairy tale heroes and the grounded detective and adventure characters such as Sherlock, and the later far out superheroes. But they don’t necessarily have to be extraordinary. Sometimes they can very well just be completely ordinary characters, caught in bizarre circumstances and managing them as best they can, or simply using skills available to anyone who puts in effort to do good. Often enough the extraordinary comes in the form of a bizarre villain, or a tangled conspiracy, a monster from outside the world, a unique time period. The extraordinary is there, but it doesn’t have to be in the hero. 

That is, I’d argue, the other big fundamental difference between the two. "Superhero” is a name we use to define a type of character who fits an extraordinary mold, a Super Hero. It’s a genre, it can be every genre, it’s a shared universe and a stand-alone epic. There are guidelines, structures at work here. Grids, page count, illustrators. The Big Two and their domain over the concept. Academic usage of the term, standards that rule the “genre”, when it is defined as a genre. Malleable and overpowering and adaptable and timeless as the superhero may be, it’s still bound by a certain set of rules and trends.

The term “pulp hero” is a term that we use to label just about any character that happens to star in something we recognize as “pulp fiction”, even if it isn’t literally written in pulp, even if it’s decades later. It’s a “metaphor with no brakes in it”. Superheroes can be pulp heroes. The most powerless, unlucky, homeless bum can be a pulp hero, there were entire subgenres of pulp stories based on homeless protagonists or talltale stories told in bars. The cruelest villain can be a pulp hero. Boris Karloff about to stab you with a knife named Ike IS a pulp hero, and so is a space slug on a warpath (look up what happened when Lovecraft and R.E Howard collaborated).

As much as I may dislike the idea of pulp heroes largely only existing in the shadow of superheroes nowadays...that is kinda appropriate, isn’t it? Of course they are going to live and make their homes in the place where the sun doesn’t shine. Where Superman and co would never go to. 

Of course the 90s reboots of these characters failed. Because they tried turning these characters into superheroes, and they are not superheroes. They can visit those world, but they don’t belong in them, or anywhere else. They live in places where the light doesn’t touch, worlds much bigger and darker and more vast than you’d ever think at first glance, worlds that we still haven’t fully discovered (over 38% of American pulps no longer exist, 14% survive in less than five scattered copies, to say nothing of all pulps and pulp heroes outside of America). Not lesser, not gone, despite having every reason to. Just different, reborn time and time again. The shadow opposites.

In short: One is represented by Superman. The other is represented by The Shadow. There are worlds far beyond those two, but when you think of the concepts, those are the ones that things always seem to come back to.