#and then realizing its something more. something essential. something perfected and 100% purposeful. | Explore Tumblr posts and blogs

crybabykiko · 4 years ago

Note

queen, how about a kenma nsfw alphabet if you haven’t 👀

Haha- hah- yeah 😌 yeah let’s do that....

NSFW Alphabet: Kozume Kenma

Gn!Reader like always

Nsfw below the cut, you should know this drill by now... 😘

𝕬 - 𝕬𝖋𝖙𝖊𝖗𝖈𝖆𝖗𝖊

He needs it just as much as you do. He has a tendency to drop afterwards, so he finds it comforting to spend time coming down from it all with you. Lots of cuddling and definitely food and knocking out together, both making sure to constantly reassure each other.

𝕭 - 𝕭𝖔𝖉𝖞 𝕻𝖆𝖗𝖙

Does- does hair count as a body part? You know what fuck it its my blog I make the rules. He’s into hair pulling, both doing the pulling and having his pulled. He’ll give it a rough tug when he's behind you, but also expects you to take hold of his hair from time to time as well- with a very tight grip.

𝕮 - 𝕮𝖚𝖒

Facials. That’s really it. It’s facials. He isn’t a fan of super messy, but he always makes an exception when it comes to painting your pretty face. It;s a reminder that you belong to him so intimately in this sense.

𝕯 - 𝕯𝖎𝖗𝖙𝖞 𝕾𝖊𝖈𝖗𝖊𝖙

Kenma doesn’t only spend his money on video games. He actually has spent a significant amount of money on a very lavish collection of lingerie and little costumes for you to wear around the house. He’s always buying new pieces and adding them to your playroom- oh yeah... you have a playroom.

𝕰 - 𝕰𝖝𝖕𝖊𝖗𝖎𝖊𝖓𝖈𝖊

I feel like Kenma’s experience comes solely from porn and stories Kuroo has told him that he never wanted to hear in the first place. But- that is a good enough teacher. He knows enough of what he’s doing to get you there, and prefers the challenge of trying various things on you until he realizes what really works to get you there fastest- like a game.

𝕱 - 𝕱𝖆𝖛𝖔𝖗𝖎𝖙𝖊 𝕻𝖔𝖘𝖎𝖙𝖎𝖔𝖓

8/10 times he’s going to want you on top. It doesn’t matter how. He likes you on top because of the pressure your weight provides. Since he’s so little he likes to feel surrounded.

He also loves to fuck your face. The sight of your face getting lost in his pubes while you gag and get all teary-eyed as you struggle to meet his gaze drives him insane.

𝕲 - 𝕲𝖔𝖔𝖋𝖞

He’s not really the type to make jokes or anything in the moment. He’s focused on making sure you feel good and nothing else.

𝕳 - 𝕳𝖆𝖎𝖗

I’m so sorry- but like…. no lol. It’s almost a jungle. It’s not that he doesn’t care but he can’t be bothered. If you ask him he’ll definitely clean up, but you have to ask him or it’s just gonna stay that way.

𝕴 - 𝕴𝖓𝖙𝖎𝖒𝖆𝖈𝖞

Likes cockwarming for the closeness. You two can be laying in bed or chilling on the couch and he’ll just slip in, rutting into you every once in a while but mostly staying still and enjoying your warmth and tightness. You both enjoy it when you’re to tired to have sex, but still want to feel something

𝕵 - 𝕵𝖆𝖈𝖐 𝕺𝖋𝖋

He doesn’t like to do it himself, but instead opts for you to do so sometimes while he streams. You mostly do so because you want to though, he’s pretty indifferent. It’s just not really his thing. When he feels like he just has to- he’s 100% a pillow humper.

𝕶 - 𝕶𝖎𝖓𝖐

Roleplay: Anything that’s an escape from his normal he enjoys, and that also comes with your sex life too.

Breath Play: Kenma is 300% into breath play, and no I will not explain it he just is and I won’t take criticism. He holds his breath when he feels you start to get close- he doesn’t allow himself to breathe until you cum all over him- he’d rather let his lungs completely burn out before he leaves you unsatisfied. He holds his breath when he cums too, it intensifies his high.

Edging: that being said, you also have to work for it. If he's in a more domming mood, he’ll bring you to the brink and rip it away for hours… sometimes even days. If he’s being really mean, he’ll fuck you until you’re practically sobbing, but he won’t let you cum. He’ll cum and just leave you there, and don’t you dare touch yourself or you’ll just add to your punishment later

Voyeurism: you love letting him listen to/ watch you shower. He thinks you don’t know he’s there, but you can faintly hear the way his breath shudders over the water hitting the tiled walls. You can only imagine what he’s thinking of doing to you, and it turns you both on.

𝕷 - 𝕷𝖔𝖈𝖆𝖙𝖎𝖔𝖓

If you think he’s going to do it anywhere but a space with a bed/something to sleep on after- you’re wrong. Sadly this limits you to the confines of your home or the occasional hotel. The baby just exhausts himself too easily and needs to recharge after you’re done.

𝕸 - 𝕸𝖔𝖙𝖎𝖛𝖆𝖙𝖎𝖔𝖓

He’s encouraged by you begging for him. Every time you moan out his name- every time you plead for him to let you cum- it makes him feel powerful. He’s not just a subby baby! He gets off on the power dynamic between you. He knows how apathetic he comes off at times and he uses that to his advantage- loving nothing more than for you to beg for him to touch you. He likes to ignore you on purpose to build up the tension.

𝕹 - 𝕹𝖔!

Ken loves to watch, but that’s it. That being said, he doesn’t like being watched. So he’s not much of an exhibitionist. You’re the only real exception to the rule.

𝕺 - 𝕺𝖗𝖆𝖑

He never lasts long when you do go down on him, so he prefers to wait it out until he’s close, or he’ll let you suck him off when he really needs to cum. He loves it but he can’t control himself, so he doesn’t ask super often, but he does like an occasional morning surprise bj- it’s made him a morning person

𝕻 - 𝕻𝖆𝖈𝖊

If he’s fucking you- its so slow its painful at first. Since he wants you to beg, he’ll coax it out of you slowly, building you up until you’re a hot mess, but he never goes faster until the last second. If he’s the one getting fucked, he’s all about you being even and setting a good pace for him. He prefers it when you start slow and gradually get faster, slowing down again once he gets close, and milking it out of him.

𝕼 - 𝕼𝖚𝖎𝖈𝖐𝖎𝖊

Absolutely not. He wants to be able to take his time. Like any gamer, he’s not going to be satisfied until he gets a perfect score. So that means he needs time. Its the same thing when you take control. He wants you to take your time exploring him, he wants you to take the time and care to make him fall apart slowly and meticulously. If you’re particularly needy, he’ll give in to hold you over- but expect it to be lazy and sloppy, and a bit unsatisfying. He’s going to leave you wanting more.

𝕽 - 𝕽𝖎𝖘𝖐

Again, not much to see here. He’s not vanilla in the slightest, but he knows what he likes, and he knows what works. Instead of trying a bunch of new things, he prefers to try different combinations of his tried-and-trues, with a sprinkle of something else here or there- that’s how he keeps you on your toes.

𝕾 - 𝕾𝖙𝖆𝖒𝖎𝖓𝖆

Prefers quality over quantity, so most of the time his rounds are one and done. But that one and done can last hours- he has a lot of control over himself and will hold off until he’s sure you’re spent. He’ll give in to a few more rounds of you ask him nicely- he can’t resist when you bat your pretty eyes his way… but he’ll probably get you off with toys or his hands instead.

𝕿 - 𝕿𝖔𝖞

Likes to use toys on you, especially when he’s tired or feeling particularly lazy that day. He likes the fact that you can still get off by his hand without him having to do much. He will use it to his advantage though, which means you need to be prepared to be edged for awhile most days...

𝖀 - 𝖀𝖓𝖋𝖆𝖎𝖗

He’s VERY easy to tease. Gets flustered by the smallest actions, no matter how innocent they are. Can’t really control his boners so you have to be careful with him. He hates being teased but lives to tease you.

𝖁 - 𝖁𝖔𝖑𝖚𝖒𝖊

Very breathy, very shaky. He’s not necessarily super quiet, but there’s a lot of deep breathing and exhaling as opposed to outright moans. When he does actually moan it’s so delicate and pretty. He does talk to you as well, he tells you how pretty you look in your lace, and how much he likes pretty things like you.

𝖂 - 𝖂𝖎𝖑𝖉𝖈𝖆𝖗𝖉

His favorite post fuck meal is mac n cheese. Kuroo fed it to him in celebration when Kenma lost his virginity and he has now been essentially pavloved to associate sex with the Kraft blue box.

𝖃 - 𝖃-𝕽𝖆𝖞

It's not like, pretty- it's cute- Under the mess of hair anyway. Very uwu cute. He’s not a shower but he has maybe 5-6 when he’s ready to go. It's pink all around and chubby. Honestly it looks like those adorable little smiling mushroom plushies- you know the ones.

𝖄 - 𝖄𝖊𝖆𝖗𝖓𝖎𝖓𝖌

His sex drive isn’t low, but instead its moderate. You’re a lot more needy than he is, so you tend to always be the one initiating- but he’ll also never be shy about asking you when he wants you.

𝖅 - 𝖅𝖟𝖟

He’s out before he even hits the pillow most times. He loves to fall asleep in your arms, resting his head on your chest to time his own breaths with your heartbeat. The only drawback of how cute this sight is is that kenma snores like a 70-year old man in dangerous need of a cpap.

Taglist Starseeds (link in nav to join): @honey-makki @acciobrooms @sen-brainrot @the-3d-sky-sister @minato-hoe @strawberrymakki @prettyforpapiiwa @dxddykeiji @arixtsukki @freyafolkvangr @ukaisgratefulwhore @tetsurolls @milanapolitana @notjasmin @velvesagi @keishinsuke @amanda0121gg @bluntkingkuroo @ellapurineko

If ur url is in bold- shoot me a dm ✨

#daisy’s red light district 🚨#haikyuu headcanons #haikyuu headcanon #haikyuu smut #haikyuu x reader #haikyuu hcs #kenma smut #kenma x reader #haikyuu drabble #hq x reader #hq smut #hq headcanons #hq headcanon

290 notes · View notes

theggning · 4 years ago

Text

Codsworth Is So Underrated, You Guys

ALTERNATE TITLE: Codsworth and the Totally Understated Mindbending Evolution of Artificial Consciousness

I find Codsworth is often the most underrated of the 16 companions in Fallout 4. Your faithful robot butler is among the very first you can recruit and an excellent early-game ally, but he has a few disadvantages in gameplay that mean he’s often sent back to Sanctuary before long. Codsworth is a mid-to-close range fighter only, cannot wear armor or be equipped with weapons. He cannot be healed by stimpak, which makes him a liability if you’re playing on Survival mode. He has no companion quest of his own, so unless you particularly enjoy him there’s not a compelling reason to keep him for a long time. He also becomes recruitable exactly 2 minutes after adorable puppy Best Boy Dogmeat, so he is often (understandably) replaced just as soon as he’s made available.

But there is this great, completely understated facet to Codsworth, so understated that the game does not draw attention to it in any way. And yet, it is a wonderful reflection of many of the themes of Fallout 4 and, I believe, a pretty strong indication of its thesis statement.

Now what in the hell am I talking about?

Like many sci-fi/fantasy universes, the Fallout series is home to many highly-advanced robots. Robots were commonplace before the Great War, and many have survived the bombs intact and in working order. Others have been built or modified by wastelanders to serve various tasks (Percy, Ada.) The most important thing to understand about robots, though, is though they may have vivid personalities programmed in, they are widely accepted to be objects. They are thought of the same way as an appliance, a machine built for a specific purpose and programmed to follow a strict set of protocols.

Many jokes revolve around the relatively rigid intelligence of robots. Pre-War, many were deployed in inappropriate jobs or designed haphazardly (Mister Handies acting as nurses in a hospital, “paramedic” Protectrons with massive deadly tasers for hands, military robots constantly going haywire and erupting in friendly fire.) Others continue to man businesses and play out daily tasks as they were programmed to do over 200 years ago. Most robots are incapable of understanding anything beyond their initial programming, and most pre-War robots are completely unaware that the Great War ever happened.

When the Sole Survivor reunites with Codsworth at the ruins of their home, it seems like he, too, doesn’t understand what’s going on. He talks about tending the (dead) garden, references the (ghoulified) neighbors, and generally acts like the chipper robot butler Sole left behind on their way to Vault 111.

But there is something slightly… off in Codsworth’s dialogue here. Though he acts like the war never happened, he also specifically mentions details that suggest it did:

Player Default: Codsworth! You're still... fully operational?

Codsworth: {Defiant} Well of course, mum. You can thank the fine engineers at General Atomics for that! At least, you could have. Had they not been... vaporized.

A bit over 210 actually, mum. Give or take a little for the Earth's rotation and some minor dings to the ole' chronometer. That means you're two centuries late for dinner! Ha ha ha. Perhaps I can whip you up a snack? You must be famished.

You've no idea the desperation for human contact one develops over 200 years. {Upset, recalling bad memories of encountering raiders and scavengers. / Disgust} And when you do encounter them? Oh the cruelty! You're either... target practice or... spare parts!

Even stranger, Codsworth mentions details that are plainly made-up (or some kind of delusion):

Codsworth: It's been ages since we've had a proper family activity. Checkers. Or perhaps charades. Shaun does so love that game. Is the lad... with you...?

Player Default: Codsworth... listen to me carefully... have you seen him? Have you seen Shaun?

Codsworth: Why, sir had him last, remember? Perhaps he's gone to the Parker residence to arrange a play-date?

(Shaun is an infant. He is too young to play charades or to go to the neighbors for a play-date.)

So at once, Codsworth does and does not acknowledge the war. He does and does not seem to understand what’s happened, and he does and does not seem to follow Sole’s urgency regarding their spouse’s death and Shaun’s kidnapping.

And then, after a speech check, Codsworth finally snaps and breaks down sobbing in despair. Not only does he understand that the war happened, he has developed the ability to get depressed about it. Longing for human contact and with nothing else to do, he’s even developed coping mechanisms to help him try to deal with his loneliness and despair—futilely trying to do his chores and deluding himself into pretending everything is completely normal.

Wait a minute. Sobbing? Despair? Depression? Coping mechanisms and delusions? This Is all pretty sophisticated stuff to be programmed into a robot, and if you spend more time with Codsworth, the reality of what’s happened to him becomes apparent:

Codsworth has evolved beyond his programming. In his 210 lonely years of existence, he has developed emotional reactions and self-awareness far beyond that of most other robots, and, indeed, has basically evolved an artificial consciousness.

“Emergent intelligence” is the theoretical ability of an AI to eventually develop something resembling human thought processes, and it seems that our dear Codsworth has undergone this. Traveling with him, he displays many sophisticated thoughts and behaviors far beyond what most robots are shown to be capable of. He has memories of pre-War time and places, and understands how various locations have changed. He is capable of learning new information and forming opinions on it, gaining his own understanding of the people and factions in the Commonwealth. He can feel happiness, sorrow, fear, disgust. He can anticipate things, predict danger and imagine how people might respond to your actions. The mere he fact he has opinions and a moral code that he applies to you shows he has free will, something even other robot companions don’t (Ada has a personality, but absolutely does not care about your actions.)

He’s also smart enough to make many wry observational jokes, and to lay one hell of a sick burn on you:

{Joking - Found an old bowling alley. / Amused} Fancy a game, mum? Something tells me the bumpers are no longer available.

Codsworth’s intelligence is even more sophisticated than that. He displays stunning self-awareness, frequently referencing the fact he is a robot and what that means. He is very proud of his background as General Atomics’ finest, and seems pleased with his robot nature and his lot in life. (Unlike Curie, I don’t think Codsworth would ever really want to gain a synth body. He seems quite happy as he is.)

Here he is making reference to still feeling the tug of his programming:

{Seeing an office with chairs arranged in a circle. / Neutral} I've the most incredible urge to rearrange those chairs in a more perfect circle.

Understanding when other robots are restricted by theirs:

A pity. It appears Deezer's programming is too severe to allow for normal conversation. Ah well.

And when they’re actually not:

Codsworth: Greetings, sir. Good to see another robot in town. That chef hat becomes you.

Takahashi: Nan-ni shimasho-ka?

Codsworth: Takahashi you say? I'm Codsworth, a pleasure to make your acquaintance.

Takahashi: Nan-ni shimasho-ka?

Codsworth: Is that so? Well, we both know RobCo is no General Atomics. It's not surprising it failed, shoddy work and all. {Friendly - trying to cheer up another robot. / Friendly} Chin up, though. Never know when parts may turn up.

And here’s Galaxy Brain Codsworth ruminating on his own state of being and contemplating his nature:

{Disappointed that he can't be 100% human sometimes. / Sad} It's unfortunate that I lack the proper design to consume liquids. Something about camaraderie over a few drinks is very inviting.

I suppose if I had the hardware, I'd have the software as well. I'd hate to see how that'd affect my honesty and manner settings.

{Reconsidering what he thought was a good idea. / Thinking} Indeed. Perhaps I should rethink my initial desire.

Hilariously, Codsworth does not seem fully aware of how remarkable his intelligence is. He occasionally says things like “if I had feelings” and “if I could feel things,” indicating that in some ways he still believes he is only a robot and defines himself by what a robot is and does.

But as we can see, our humble robot butler has essentially evolved to become the smartest, most emotionally intelligent and person-like robot in the Commonwealth*, and potentially in the series.

([SIDE NOTE: Other FO4 robots nearing Codsworth’s level of consciousness and developed personality include Captain Ironsides, KLE-O, Whitechapel Charlie, and perhaps Takahashi. Curie is close, but also receives the unfair advantage of being uploaded into a synth body with a human brain. Jezebel also functions off of a human brain. Nick is not a robot, he’s a synth (though he does jokingly refer to himself as one) and also has the advantage of a human brain encoded on his processor.])

Also hilariously, the game basically does not acknowledge Codsworth’s impressive evolution. At all. There is absolutely no direct mention of it in the script. It is all left to ambient dialogue and the player’s own observations. And because so many people overlook Codsworth as a companion, they may not even realize exactly how unique his expanded consciousness is.

Now, you might call this total lack of mention a mistake, an oversight on Bethesda’s part, or that old chestnut “bad writing.” I don’t think it is. I think it’s a deliciously subtle little detail to include in a story about humanity, machines, artificial intelligence, and what makes a person.

Many of the themes of FO4 revolve around synths—distinctly not robots, but androids, artificially created beings with fully organic human bodies. Most of the storyline factions have strong beliefs about synths and the relative humanity thereof. The Institute believes that synths are objects, tools, machines no different from a robot who are only simulating their personalities through programming. The Brotherhood believes synths are monstrous abominations, a danger to humanity itself, technology run amok which needs to be destroyed. The Railroad believes they are people. Not humans, but people, built instead of born, free-thinking beings that deserve to be treated with respect and given rights.

Through quests, dialogue, notes, worldbuilding and other venues, players explore these questions. What makes someone a person? If your personality and memories can be rewritten or programmed, then who are you, really? Where do we draw the line between humans and machines, and how do we decide who belongs where?

Meanwhile, as the player contemplates the nature of personhood and the definition of intelligence, their robot butler quietly evolves into a fully-conscious person on his own, right beside them.

Codsworth is unquestionably a machine, but also unquestionably beyond the appliance he was built to be. Which to some philosophies and players should really beg a few other questions. If a robot can be considered a person, then what makes synths so different? And how many excuses do we have to make to pretend otherwise?

Ya boy Codsworth may not be flashy, or powerful, or kissable. He may not be the most glamorous companion around. But he is a good friend, a beloved member of the family, and above all else, a loyal butler—content to serve, quietly and humbly doing his job where some may never even notice him-- or the fact that he’s casually become his own person and sent generations of roboticists and philosophers spinning in their graves.

#fallout 4 #fallout meta #codsworth #hey tumblr fuck you i win #i was forced to do an involuntary second draft #but i like it better now so hey

147 notes · View notes

madmaddoxfuryroad · 4 years ago

Text

HSMTMTS: Season 3 thoughts

So I’ve been ruminating a lot about this show today (like every other day) and I got to thinking about what they might do for season 3. Less so plot-wise (I mean season 2 is just over halfway through), but more about what musical they might do, what the cast might be, and how that could tie into the individual characters and their arcs (some more so than others, but c’est la vie).

In trying to figure out what musical they might do, I started first with the obvious: what does Disney own? I don’t think they would return to the HSM franchise (until the final season, but thoughts on that for another day), so anything related to that and other DCOMs I counted out. I also eliminated all Disney animated/princess films. I love them, don’t get me wrong, but seeing as this season they are doing BATB, I don’t think they would immediately go into another animated-film-adapted-for-broadway right after that. So at that point I wasn’t quite sure where to go. Mary Poppins was really the only other thing that came to mind and while I love the film and broadway show I just don’t think it fits the cast well slash even has enough parts to really showcase them. You have Mary and Bert. And then I guess Mr. and Mrs. Banks? Then the kids are a whole other issue. It just felt messy. So I just started thinking about broadway shows that I like, I mean if they wanted to, Disney has the money and could pay for the rights to use most shows. Then everything fell into place.

Into the Woods. I am 100% positive I am letting my bias for this show cloud my judgement, but if you stick with me, I think I can persuade you (or not, your mind is your own and I respect that). First off, Disney owns it. At least I think they do. They made the movie (RIP), so I am going to safely assume they have the rights at this point. Next, yes it contains fairytale elements, which might make you feel it’s a little too close to BATB, but it is such a deconstruction of fairytales and their tropes that I almost feel like it is an amazing follow up to a more traditional fairytale. It introduces conflict and the real world into these fantasy scenarios, which I feel goes really well with high school in general and growing up, expectations being shattered, and learning to alter your world view (I really love this play). Plus, I think it would be exciting to see this cast do a more broadway-type show. Obviously BATB is a broadway show, but I think there is a lot of reliance on knowing the film and less on the play itself. And not going to lie after Julia Lester’s rendition of “Home” last week (which I have not STOPPED listening to) it would be amazing to hear these teens tackle more broadway-style music. Which, takes me to my final point: the cast. What I love so much about Into the Woods is how it is very much an ensemble cast. Yes some roles are bigger than others, but if you have a named character, odds are it’s a fairly good role. And the whole HSMTMTS cast is so talented, I like the idea of them picking a show where it does not feel like anyone is sidelined with their part. Now the only thing left to do is cast it…

FULL disclosure. I ran into an issue early on that I ended up thinking Ashlyn was perfect for every female role and Seb was perfect for every male role. But I was eventually able to push through and cast it (in my humble opinion) pretty well. So I am just going to go off in the order that I cast them, because I think it will help explain my thought process.

THE CAST

Cinderella - Nini. Once I got over my need to hear Julia/Ashlyn sing “No One Is Alone” (loophole to this coming later), this felt like a pretty natural fit and was one of the easiest to cast. For one, I just think Olivia’s vocal range pairs very well with Cinderella’s and she could do beautifully with her songs like “On the Steps Of The Palace”. But what really got me was the way she parallels the character so perfectly. Cinderella is a character who always dreams of more but isn’t quite sure what that “more” is. And because she isn’t *quite* sure what she wants, the character is often seen grappling with indecision (see: “On The Steps Of The Palace”). Most of Act I is her being stagnant and letting the Prince take the active role. Finally in Act II she starts to get a better sense of who she is, who she wants to be, and what she doesn’t want. So this felt like it tied in really nicely with Nini’s journey and would be a great role for her, especially when…

Cinderella’s Prince - Ricky. Yes, yes I know. Ricky and Nini playing love interests? Groundbreaking. But stay with me. For one, I just like the idea of Ricky not getting the lead male role, and this part is perfect for him, regardless. The whole relationship between Cinderella and her Prince mirrors Nini and Ricky remarkably well. The way the Prince sees Cinderella as this perfect maiden who, if he could just be with her, would be the only thing he would ever want/need. But of course this isn’t realistic and isn’t how relationships work, which they both come to terms with by the end of Act II. Their break-up/parting ways scene might be my favorite in the entire play and I think it would be so great for Ricky and Nini to get to perform. In part because the conclusion of the scene is basically them both admitting that they will always love the idea of the other, even though they don’t actually work as a couple. (**I am operating on the assumption that they will have broken up in season 2 and are still broken up, but never really dealt with it). Honestly I recommend just watching the scene I will link it here (it goes from about 2:12:35-2:15:00). Plus, I could totally see there being an episode where they are trying to rehearse this scene, but it just isn’t working so Miss Jenn has both of them improv it or rewrite the lines to something that might feel more comfortable or personal. And I just see that being a really beautiful moment for the two and a chance for growth and closure. I could go on about this dynamic, but I will move on to my final point: “Agony”. First, while it is mostly a comedic song, you can take just the first verse of the song and recontextualize it really nicely as a Ricky pining kind of song, which I absolutely dig (not quitting on my Rina endgame, and you can’t make me) I mean: “If I should lose her, how shall I regain the heart she has won from me? Agony, beyond power of speech, when the one thing you want is the only thing out of your reach”. And BONUS I think we could also get a full-on version of “Agony” in all its absurdist glory with…

Rapunzel’s Prince - EJ. Well, sort of. Technically, no. BUT for the purposes of “Agony”, yes. At this point EJ will have graduated, but I don’t think he will be written out of the show, so it remains to be seen exactly what his place will be. I just think these two 100% need a song together and this is 100% that song. I could see it being something as simple as EJ is helping out with the show, the unnamed kid playing Rapunzel’s Prince is out, so they have EJ fill in. Or they have to have him go on for that kid last minute during the performance. It’s a quick, easily explainable thing that would have SUCH a great payoff.

Jack - Big Red. This was certainly one of the easier ones to cast, but my first thought was of course Seb. Jack is just a boy whose best friend is his cow and Seb radiates that energy. But I needed him for something else. Enter Big Red, the perfect Jack. For one, Big Red has a lot of that starry eyed wonderment that Jack has, that none of the other characters do. There is a purity and innocence to the way Jack sees a lot of things. That pairs nicely with Big Red. And it also opens the door for him to grow and mature more as a character. By the end of the show, Jack is in a place where is needs to transition more to adulthood and with Big Red being a senior by season 3, I think there is a lot of potential here. Also, with Big Red as Jack, I really like the character he is often paired with in scenes, but I will hold back until I get to them.

Witch - Kourtney. Yes. It is her time. One can debate over which character is the “main character” of Into the Woods, but for me it’s the Witch. And Kourtney deserves this. Did I heavily consider Ashlyn for this as well? You know I did. But I grow more and more confident in the casting of Kourtney the more I think about it. First thing’s first: the Witch belts, and I mean BELTS. Dara is such a powerhouse vocally that she would crush every moment of that; I have total faith. But the Witch also has such quiet and tender moments that people don’t think about as much, but are so necessary for the character to be effective and I think she also has that on lock. We have not seen a ton of it (so I would be eager to get more) but when she did her version of “Beauty and the Beast” she was able to find soft but strong moments in the song, and it was so lovely. Then, from a more thematic POV, the Witch is characterized as “the voice of reason”. While everyone else is running around in their fairytale dream world, she is always the one there dolling out the reality checks. And if that ain’t Kourtney. Basically, I think it is her time to get the lead and she would be amazing in this role.

Baker - Seb. Finally settled on a role for him. But really, how could it be anything else? I have felt since the first time we heard him sing (in Truth, Justice, and Songs in our Key, I think) that he was severely underused. The Baker is essentially the male lead, and he has earned it. I don’t think there’s much more that needs to be said here.

Baker’s Wife - Ashlyn. Here’s the thing: could someone else be cast as Baker’s Wife? Yes. And I am sure they would do a fine job. But the thing about this role is that you often don’t realize how fantastic it is until you see someone really great playing it. There’s heart, humor, tragedy, and so much more all wrapped into this character and I would far and away trust Julia/Ashlyn with this above all others. And Baker’s Wife gets to sing a short reprise of “No One Is Alone” so I get to win both ways. No matter how I try to cast it or rearrange characters, I keep coming back to the fact that Ashlyn is just hands down the correct choice. Plus she is one of the better options when it comes to having chemistry with Seb. And I’m not even talking about romantic chemistry, just more about the camaraderie of it, and being able to really see them as a team worth rooting for. They both have an inherent sweetness that makes you care for them, which is crucial for the show. AND this would be another opportunity for Julia Lester to flex her acting after playing VERY different roles in HSM and BATB. Basically, I don’t know when it happened, but I think I am a Julia Lester stan and I only want what is best for her and I think this is it.

Little Red - Gina. “Didn’t see that one coming did you?” -Pietro Maximoff. And honestly same. There’s always that tough moment in casting when you’ve done the more obvious ones and then you feel sort of stuck with cast choices that weren’t really your choice. But this one really grew on me. Hopefully, I can do it justice. And I will be the first to admit Gina deserves her time to shine because I do think she is amazing. It just isn’t her time yet. It also doesn’t help that Into the Woods is one of the LEAST dance-centered shows and dance it where she really puts all others to shame. So this is where we landed. But it works. I promise. Little Red as a character is pretty naïve, but covers it up with over the top confidence. That feels pretty Gina. I love where her character has gone and all the growth she is displayed in trying to be more vulnerable. But there is still a part of me that does miss mean girl Gina and I think Little Red is a great way to get that energy without backtracking the character development. I don’t think she would be the stereotypical “bratty” Little Red, but I think she could still do something great with it. Also very similar to Jack, Little Red is one of the more innocent characters that has to grow up and face a lot of harsh realities over the course of the play. And I have no doubt Gina would nail that aspect of it, too. And speaking of Jack, Little Red has a number of scenes interacting with him and you know what that means: Gina and Big Red bonding time! I really like the idea of these roles bringing the two closer as friends. And I already head-canon that they would have a ton of fun playing with the fact that they are now Big Red and Little Red (especially since he is on the shorter side and she is on the taller side). Basically I see this as a way for them to build up a really good rapport. I am also pretty convinced that Big Red is a secret Rina shipper, and this would only add to that. And finally even though this is not a dance-heavy show at all, one place where they could add a dance is during “Hello Little Girl”. Now I will be the first to admit that this song is dicey at best, particularly for Disney. But even a scene working on the dance with just the instrumental, no lyrics, could be great. I see it as a partner dance with the wolf (I don’t know dance terms, so maybe this is super vague). And oh, wouldn’t you know it? Cinderella’s Prince is often double-cast as the wolf! (WHAT ARE THE CHANCES) Meaning the Wolf would also be good ol’ Richard Bowen. And I like the idea of getting Rina scenes of them trying to work on the dance, but Ricky is super bad a leading, and they just have fun trying to figure it out. It’s also nice that it is absolutely not a romantic dance so the two wouldn’t feel any added pressure and could just have fun with one another, and that really is when Rina is at its best (not that I would say no to a scene where Gina has to teach Ricky the BATB waltz, but I digress).

Narrator/Mysterious Man - Carlos. By process of elimination, you probably could have guessed who was next. And I know this one also feels like a weird choice but I do kind of love it. First you have the narrator, which is another one of those roles that is only as memorable as the actor playing it, which I think is right up Carlos’ alley. He is always trying to put his unique stamp on things and be memorable and he would take the narrator in a very enjoyable direction. There’s also the matter that I see Carlos as something of an assistant director with Miss Jenn, which makes him a third-party observer of the shows inherently, so it is almost a little meta that he would also end up being the narrator. Then there’s is the mysterious man. I love the idea of Carlos getting to play two very different characters, but I love it even more because the mysterious man is the father of the baker which makes for a lot of sweet moments between the two of them. Yes it might be a little weird for Seblos to be playing father and son, but there is such a vulnerability and tenderness in the moments between the two characters, particularly during “No More” that I can get over it. Because I think they are one of the few pairings on this show that could really pull that off. I just think this character would be a great way to exhibit the range of Carlos.

**BONUS ALTERNATE CASTING**

I really, really love this idea and could not fault them if this was the direction they went, but I ultimately decided against it, mostly because I felt too strongly about another character having the role BUT:

Baker’s Husband - Carlos. I just really love the idea of Seblos getting to be front and center, with their dynamic as the focal point of the show. And honestly Carlos would also do an amazing job as this character. I mean, Seb and Carlos singing “It Takes Two”? How sweet is that? This would also be a great way for the development of their relationship to get a little bit more attention, instead of a side story here and there. There is a lot that could be done with this from a story perspective and I would be here for it.

Unfortunately, then that leaves me unsure of where to put Ashlyn. She could be Jack’s mother, but that feels like such a waste of her. I mean, she would do well and she does have the lead this year, so it’s not SO terrible her having a more minor character, but it just doesn’t feel right. And I really just feel so strongly that she would be the best option for Baker’s Wife out of everyone. And it opens the door to develop the Seb and Ashlyn friendship more, which I am always here for.

Anyway. Those are my thoughts. If you made it this far: wow and thank you!

#hsmtmts #rina #hsmtmts season 3

11 notes · View notes

loseeverythingloose · 4 years ago

Text

Hi. I made this challenge myself, and I'm challenging myself bc that's what happens when you are fucking alone and have no friends.

Warning: It contains no workout since I'm so fucking busy with online classes that I can't go out or workout at home.

OK, so, yeah, this is officially the simplest shit to ever exist, but DON'T ever think it will be that easy to apply it to your life.

30 DAY CUSTOM WEIGHT LOSS CHALLENGE

I will only write what I'm not supposed to do. Drink water, sleep enough if not well, and shit like that don't even need to be written down.

Rules:

No packaged and/or prepared food and drinks. I have realized it's literally impossible for people of my financial level to buy organic food. If this rule was no PROCESSED food, I'd literally need to stop eating very essential stuff like cheese. Fucking cheese. I'm not even talking about tea. Wtf am I gonna eat and drink then? So, I will stop eating packaged and prepared food, including all the sweets, candies, chocolate, fast food, no escape. I'm only allowed to eat what is cooked at home, also fruits and such. No sugar coffee, green or white tea, etc., are also allowed. You get the idea: As long as it doesn't exceed my calorie and carbs limit, everything that is not packaged and/or HIGHLY processed is free real estate.

No more than 1500 calories and 100 g carbs. Look, I'm the max 500 cal and 20 g carb type of gal, and I lost so much weight doing it, but then I plateaued for so fucking long I had to stop and eat like a pig to shock my body. Then, of course, I couldn't bring myself to restart. Thank whatever big guy resides upstairs, I didn't gain much, but this pig phase has been going on for like 3 months. Yeah, I fucking binged for 3 fucking months straight. Now that my body is used to high calories and carbs, 1500 calories and 100 g carbs WILL be pretty effective to lose weight. There is absolutely NO REASON to start with extreme restricting because your body will adapt to that too in time. You won't be PHYSICALLY able to restrict more. When you also consider that it's harder to lose weight the more you lose weight, why start with 100% when you can start with 50% and leave the 100% performance for lower weights to lose even more? I'm not even gonna get into the "it's more healthy" shit and lecture you. You already know it. I can, of course, eat a lot less than this too. It's just the max.

No eating before 12 pm and after 8 pm, and in between. It's gonna be strictly two meals. When I was doing the 500 cal, 20 g carb thing, I wouldn't eat anything after 6 pm, but because of my new schedule, that seems impossible. Finishing to eat early or eating a bit later while still leaving AT LEAST 6 hours between my two meals is completely fine. I'll also note down everything I eat and drink. It helps me with self-control.

No big portions. Now that I'm living with my family because of the pandemic, I trust my mom on this. No second plates, no adding on; my meal size is whatever she makes it. Eating less is welcome.

No scale. I admit this is the hardest rule. I'm used to weighing myself every day. I first thought I would at least go on the scale once a week to motivate myself, but I decided to trust the process. I know I'm not doing workouts or something. Still, I just came out of a huge binge and am also using a pill that's supposed to help me lose weight (it's not its primary purpose but its positive side effect, and I'm using it for a very different reason under medical supervision, so if anyone that's not me sees this, don't ask me the name of the pill). For these reasons, I genuinely believe I WILL lose weight, and that's why I'm not gonna do it hardcore. Persistence and continuity are more important than weekly motivation and stressful waiting until the scale day. I will weigh myself on the first day of the challenge and after the challenge ends (not the 30th day). I hope my body will slim down visibly, and I, and most importantly, my family, will notice it.

I will start the challenge tomorrow on April 5.

It's the perfect date because it's Monday (the official international diet starting date), the day I first started restricting last year (so I will also see how much weight I've lost in one year on the first day of the challenge and I hope that'll be the greatest motivation to start and keep going), and a family member of mine was born on May 5 (which is exactly 30 days later). My family cares a lot about birthdays, holidays and stuff, so on that day I have to eat cake or my family won't forgive me lol. So I thought, why not make it a celebration for myself too, for losing weight, controlling myself for a whole month WHILE ACING MY EXAMS and completing the challenge?

As I said, I will be weighing myself and taking measurements in the morning of the first day, and after the challenge is completed. I will decide my goal weight for the end of this challenge tomorrow, depending on my current weight.

I will be posting daily (as much as possible). I also don't want this shit to be only about losing weight. I will be doing 5 different challenges simultaneously: Meditation, thinspo, writing, gratitude, and song challenges.

Wish me luck! (yea, I'm asking for luck from myself bc no one's gonna see this, lmao. Who am I supposed to trust other than me anyway.)

13 notes · View notes

jewishconvertthings · 5 years ago

Text

Something I’ve noticed come up again and again in conversion-focused/prospective convert spaces is a fascination with orthodoxy. I think a lot of what drives this is the desire for universal recognition and to do things the “right” way. And, since Jews both inside and outside of orthodoxy tend to hold up orthodoxy as the gold standard for halacha and for conversion in particular, people who would never otherwise consider converting orthodox still end up seriously investigating the possibility and/or even attempting it. This becomes especially painful to watch when, for one reason or another (or several) the individual in question simply cannot convert orthodox without making life changes that are, frankly, not worth it or even impossible.

I say this as someone who absolutely, 100% went on this ride.

(This is a Very Long Post, so I’ve put it under a cut)

I am a queer non-binary person in a relationship with another queer non-binary person who is not Jewish and has no plans on converting. Now, at this point in my life, I present in a traditionally feminine way 98% of the time (and was assigned female at birth), the aspects of physical transition that I have accessed are not visible or are easily able to be masked, and for a number of extremely personal reasons I won’t get into here, I have also reached a point in my life where my ability to be attracted to cis men is not something that I automatically reject.

So on a pragmatic level, if I wanted to be orthodox I had two choices: (1) Stay with my partner who I love and have built a life and a home with, who supports my Jewish journey and observance 100%, who loves me no matter how I present myself gender-wise, and whose life experiences as a fellow queer non-binary person allow us to have a profound understanding of each other; or, (2) Leave my partner, and also most likely also make an effort to stamp out or at least conceal the queer and non-binary facets of myself.

I think it’s pretty clear that I opted to not take path #2, which left me with the decision to either pursue a Conservative conversion or accept being a Noachide. Fortunately, I happened to already have a Conservative community that I really loved and three Conservative rabbis for my beit din, each of whom I tremendously respect. Therefore moving forward with a Conservative conversion did not cause me all that much cognitive dissonance. To be perfectly honest, all told, I think my theological framework fits better within Conservative halacha anyway and there is plenty of space for me to exist and be respected as a queer non-binary person with a non-Jewish spouse.

But despite what I feel is an overall very good outcome to this problem, I still went through a whole grieving process for letting go of the idea of ever converting orthodox, and looking back I felt it was really important to interrogate why. I could of course take the easy way out and say that it was because I was sad to lose this particular shul as my primary community, but that’s not completely true. I still go there sometimes and enjoy it when I do, and also by the time it became clear to me that this was not a community I could convert through, it was no longer my primary shul. I’d already switched.

I could also say that it was because I deeply desired living and sharing community with a congregation where the majority of members took halacha very seriously and lived by those convictions. While I have deep love and appreciation for my Conservative community, the reality is that I am in the minority as someone who keeps a strictly kosher kitchen and one of a handful of people who make much of an effort to be shomer Shabbos. At the same time, I have found and built friendships with those who do take a more traditional approach to observance who also share other values of mine as well. So I have ultimately ended up in the exact kind of community I desired, even if it isn’t the numeric majority of the congregation as a whole.

There was also a very real period where I needed to sort out my understanding of what I believed about what Torah even is, and how I wanted to build my Jewish observance from that understanding. (Namely, that even though I can never say that I believed with perfect faith that the Torah was given directly to Moshe by G-d on Mt. Sinai in its entirety and in fact believe that most of the evidence points away from that understanding, I also felt it was important to essentially accept it as an underlying assumption for interpretive and halachic purposes. I have . . . evolved a bit since then, but honestly haven’t moved too far from that position.)

The point is that there were actual, real reasons other than just for the validity.

But if I’m being extremely honest with myself, while it was far from being the only reason or the “real” reason, it was nevertheless a not-insignificant reason for why I was disappointed and felt a loss. I understand the other pieces pretty well at this point, and so with the benefit of time and some emotional distance, I decided to examine this a bit more deeply.

I think the problem is two-fold. First, I think that the same intense beliefs and emotions that drive someone to do something as drastic as converting to Judaism to begin with also create a desire to do so in the most intensive way possible. Amongst myself and the many other conversion students and converts I’ve met, irrespective of our many differences, our passion for Judaism and our enthusiasm in Jewish engagement are near-universals. For better or worse, that tends to manifest as a desire for a high level of observance and for a community that shares that commitment.

Second, I think that converts of whatever background, but especially those of us who are marginalized in other ways, tend to be under a great deal of scrutiny from the rest of the Jewish community as to our motives and our processes for becoming Jewish. While I don’t doubt that this is painful for anyone, this can hit especially hard if you have experienced some other kind of serious invalidation, erasure, and/or rejection in other areas of your life.

So I think, after having sat with this a bit, part of that feeling of hurt and loss comes as a sort of echo trauma from having been erased and rejected as a queer non-binary person. The invalidation I’ve received both outside and inside the queer/trans community has been significant enough that the idea of stomaching more rejection, more invalidation, and more treatment as an interloper was a tough pill to swallow. Combine that with my genuine passion for Judaism and desire for an observant Jewish life and community, and you had a perfect storm of me reaching for a community that was, all told, not a good fit.

I eventually moved past that stage, and ended up quite happy in my Conservative community. So what’s the problem? Why am I bringing up such a painful topic if it turned out fine?

Here’s the thing: I’d seen other people ride this emotional rodeo before and so while I anticipated these feelings of rejection, I was afraid of experiencing them and tried to avoid doing so by being hyper-aware of the possibility. It didn’t work. Unfortunately, this was just something I had to figure out on my own. However, there was another effect I’d seen as well, namely that once people had processed the immediate sadness, there was usually a bit of backlash afterwards. I saw this especially with a particular friend who regularly expressed not just legitimate criticisms of orthodoxy, but lashed out angrily towards anyone who expressed an interest in orthodoxy or who happened to be orthodox and talk positively about their experiences. This was serious enough that it almost ruined our friendship.

I did manage to mostly avoid this latter effect because I actively built relationships within my orthodox community and maintained them even afterwards, and because I refused to make that rejection a personal thing. I also gave myself ample space from that community and have only engaged to the extent that I can do so in a healthy, comfortable way. But it’s worth noting that despite controlling my outer reaction, I definitely had to process and work my way through that same anger internally.

I raise all of this for the following reason:

I haven’t seen anyone talking about this much, and what I have seen has not been constructive or compassionate. While I don’t think reading about my seemingly typical (even cliché) experiences as someone who was not a good fit for orthodoxy trying to shoehorn myself into it for understandable (but ultimately futile) reasons will spare anyone the emotional ride of having that experience, nor do I think it will likely help anyone avoid having to experience it themselves to be sure, I do think that it may help with a couple issues. First, I think it may help outsiders who have observed this trope have a bit more compassion for those going through it and be able to offer some better responses than derision or telling folks to just get over it. Basically, realize that these are growing pains, and try to be kind and mature about it.

Second, I think it may help people who are on the verge of going through that experience and/or who are in the middle of it to understand that it is A Thing, that it is not an inherently bad thing, that they are not bad people for having to go on this emotional journey, that it is reasonable for them to have hard feelings about it, and that the only thing they really do need to be careful of is how they treat the people in their communities and not take this out on them. Ultimately, if you are unable to convert orthodox for reasons outside your control (or even just realize that you inherently don’t have the right worldview for orthodoxy/have an actual desire to live an orthodox lifestyle) there are usually other ways of meeting your community and observance-related needs and it is best to start exploring them sooner rather than later.

Collectively, I think I would challenge conversion students and liberal converts who are considering an orthodox conversion to seriously consider if there are other ways to meet your spiritual and community needs. If so, why pursue orthodoxy? You really do need an honest answer to that question, even if it takes a bit of soul-searching to get there. If it’s about universal recognition, you need to stop immediately and reconsider. (Understand that there basically is no such thing. Then understand that this means that you will have to build an internal Jewish identity that is unrelated to how random people without community decision-making power view you.) Finally, I’d ask that you try really hard to separate the larger trends and systems within orthodoxy from individual Orthodox Jews you happen to encounter.

And of course, I would challenge folks to leave passing judgment on any given conversion student’s process and motivations up to their sponsoring rabbi.

244 notes · View notes

thebibliomancer · 4 years ago

Text

Essential Avengers: Avengers #223: of Robin Hoods and Roustabouts

September, 1982

Apparently a “roustabout” is an unskilled or casual labor.

And lets admit the obvious that if Hawkeye is either of the two things, he’s a robin hood. And its not inaccurate but be nicer to Scott Lang.

Even if he manages to be even more hapless in this issue then in modern takes that leans into him being a fuck-up.

As for the cover? Pretty striking cover. I’ve been waiting for Hawkeye to shoot Ant-Man at someone. Its apparently an Iconic Avengers moment and to think it first happens in a filler.

Because I’m pretty sure this is a filler. Its written by David Michelinie alone instead of Jim Shooter getting a plotter or co-writer credit. It doesn’t really have anything from the dangling plot threads of Hank Pym or the Masters of Evil.

Between this and and the filler with the immortal child who badly wanted to die and all of the plotter or co-writer credits, you just really get a sense that Jim Shooter did not have time to devote to Avengers anymore.

So what kind of filler will this be? Weird? Impactless? Good Actually? Let’s see!

Well, apparently Hawkeye is going to the carnival so at this point, it could go either way.

I like that Hawkeye has a H belt buckle because that’s the kind of thing that he would do and that I can make fun of him for.

I know that it’s been a while since he’s mentioned kewpie dolls but Hawkeye came from the circus. He and his brother ran away to one when they were little and the Swordsman taught Hawkeye archery. The point being, “he’s come home.”

As in, this is specifically the carnival he used to work before he became very briefly a superhero, and then for slightly longer a supervillain, and then for much much longer a superhero for real.

Point is, he’s been away for a while. But he received a flyer in the mail and decided he just had to come.

Because someone wrote HELP! on the back.

Hawkeye figures that the previous owner’s daughter and current owner Marcy Carson sent it as a goof but heck if she’s going to go to that trouble, he’ll be happy to visit.

So he breezes past the workers outside the owner’s trailer and-

Actually they beat the shit out of him for trying to breeze past them. Goes to show.

When Hawkeye threatens to beat them up for this rude treatment, they get ruder and call him a rube. Can you believe! Him, a former employee himself being called a rube! Also they pull a fancy sci-fi gun on him.

So Hawkeye does buzz off. So he can change into his hawking eye duds and buzz right back on.

Roustabouts carrying laser pistols is very suspicious. And I guess Ant-Man isn’t the roustabout of the title. He’s moving up in the world.

MEANWHILE, Perfectly Ordinary electronics technician, ex-con, and Ant-Man Scott Lang is having a night out with his daughter Cassie. And they’re having a bit of a disagreement.

See, Cassie, future superhero, wants to ride the really cool roller coaster the Spin-’n-Heave. Scott Lang, dad with dumb views on gender apparently, insists that a roller coaster just isn’t ladylike enough and she should ride something more refined like the pony ride or ring toss.

Also, Scott is carrying the Ant-Man suit with him, loose in his pocket. And the helmet just drops out of his pocket and the damn fool would have lost it if Cassie hadn’t spotted it and mistaken it for a marble.

Geez, Scott! I stood up for you!

Scott’s attempts to dad by restricting what his daughter can and can’t do based on his own views on what is ladylike get dropped when he spots Hawkeye hauling ass across the carnival and decides that This Cannot Stand!

Scott Lang Ant-Man may not be an Avenger but dangit he can’t leave a fellow hero in the lurch! He must offer unsolicited aid!

So he caves on the Spin-’n-Heave issue because its a way to keep Cassie occupied for the length of exactly this issue.

Scott gives the operator a bunch of money and tells the operator to let Cassie ride until it runs out and then takes off.

Cassie is thrilled.

Meanwhile, Hawkeye has returned to the owner’s trailer but Marcy is gone and so are the two goons that were guarding the door. But he spots them marching Marcy through the crowd.

The goons are complimenting Marcy on being so cooperative but also say that if she’s not cooperative, her star acts are gonna get fed to the lions. And that might happen anyway once everything is said and done because their boss be like that.

Anyway, that’s when the two get hit by a KRAK THUBB arrow. Punch arrow? It looks nerf-y.

Hawkeye grabs Marcy and runs off with her into a tent so she can explain it all.

But first: he has to notice that she is beautiful. He has been gone a while so, y’know. People grow up or whatever.

Hawkeye: “There, that’s better! Now maybe I can get to the bottom of -- hey! You’re beautiful!”

Marcy: “I’ve waited a long time for you to notice that, ol’ buddy.”

Hawkeye: “Yeah, well, it’s hard noticin’ anything when you’re bein’ tripped into a pile of elephant dirt -- which, as I recall, used to be your favorite pastime!”

Marcy: “People change, Clint.”

Young Marcy sounds like a really interesting person. She certainly gave Hawkeye the business.

Anyway, she explains that it was pure luck that she was able to sneak that message out to him. And that the carnival has been taken over by some freak with powers.

Marcy: “Why, if he even suspected I was in touch with you he’d kill me deader than a Monday night in Des Moines!”

Off-screen Villain: “Nicely put, dumplin’! Should make you a dandy little epitaph!”

SCENE CHANGE TO PRESERVE SUSPENSE

Scott Lang has ducked behind some circus carts to change into Ant-Man.

Except he still has the whole shrunken costume piecemeal in his pockets so the process is one of slapstick. Scott goes digging in his pockets for the suit and accidentally drops it all in the straw.

Then he has to go digging around for the incredibly teeny pieces of gear while realizing that this was a stupid plan.

Maybe he should keep the suit in a tin. Like a mint tin or something.

But he finally gets all the pieces together and uses a safety pin to trigger the enlarging gas to full-size the outfit so he can put it on.

Huh! Enlarging gas! Early days in Avengers, they were all about the logistics of the shrinking and growing for Ant-Giant and the Wasp but it hasn’t been talked about in a long while. Wasp just changes size without the how being discussed.

But if it is Pym Particles, then I guess Scott isn’t at the point yet where his body naturally produces them so he has to use the gas canisters on the belt.

Scott does get dressed in his ant duds and uses the helmet to command some ants to find Hawkeye. And this is a carnival with a lot of dropped funnel cake and cotton candy so you know that there’s plenty of ants available.

SCENE CHANGE because we can only preserve suspense so far.

The mysterious off-screen villain hits the lights in the tent that Hawkeye and Marcy were talking in. Which reveals a bunch of gym and training equipment. It’d be nice if carnivals could provide such robust gym benefits to their workers but I feel that this is actually suspicious, finding this here.

Especially the combat flight simulator.

Hawkeye: “This place looks like a training ground for World War III!”

Off-screen villain, about to be onscreen: “And what better setting for the world’s greatest trainer? Namely... the TASKMASTER!”

Heyyy its the Taskmaster!

I forgot that he was a loose thread. He got away after the THREE-PARTER that introduced him. Then again, I guess since he’s the explanation for where villains get their armies of mooks, he didn’t really need to be tied up because that would defeat the purpose.

Anyway, Hawkeye wasn’t on the team for that three-parter but thankfully, the Avengers take thorough records.

Hawkeye: “Yeah, I remember readin’ about you in the Avengers’ files! You’re some sorta goon peddler!”

Taskmaster: “Watch yer mouth, bow-bender! What I am is a teacher!”

And then he recaps his goon, mook, henchman training business for the audience. He even clarifies that his series of secret academies are going great, thanks, but he’s trying to branch out with a mobile recruiting center.

Aka, this circus. And heck, according to Taskmaster, carnies already come off unscrupulous so having a bunch of goons hanging around won’t stand out.

THE PERFECT CRIME.

Actually. I don’t know if this is a crime? It’s not illegal to do combat training or learn how to fly a plane, probably. Then again, when 100% of your alumni wind up arrested for helping steal the Statue of Liberty, a legal goon school would get a lot of unwanted scrutiny. So best keep it secret.

And of course, extorting the owner and workers of a circus is definitely a crime. Pretty sure.

Anyway, the mobile recruiting center scheme is helped by Marcy telling anyone who asks that the new people hanging around are a new act that isn’t ready to open yet.

Hawkeye is sick of Taskmaster’s smarmy smarm and tries to shoot a grabber arrow? at Taskmaster.

Who just blocks it with his shield.

And takes the opportunity to brag about his photographic reflexes, where he only needs to see a sweet move once and he can do it perfectly.

He shows off by doing some Cap moves and then doing a Spider-Man move. Which he seems to do just to do.

And by Spider-Man move I mean hanging upside down from a line. Which, yes, Spider-Man does do that but it doesn’t really seem that necessary or helpful here and you’re totally doing it just to show off but really you look a little ridiculous.

Taskmaster even shows off some Tigra moves by kicking Hawkeye in the face. Its fun to me that he shows off Tigra specifically. Its for some acrobatics like flippy kick but there’s gotta be other acrobatic heroes. Like Spider-Man.

But Tigra was on the Avengers recently and briefly and dammit, he’s gonna show off what he learned!

Anyway, Taskmaster beats up Hawkeye until he gets bored of it and then just takes Marcy hostage to get Hawkeye to surrender.

He just really wanted to show off some of his sweet moves. And as soon as he ran through five different hero movesets (Cap, Spider-Man, Tigra, Daredevil, and Iron Fist) he’s just like ‘k I’m done’.

Meanwhile, back to Ant-Man ant-again.

He’s lurking around a corner trying to be inconspicuous while children are pointing and asking if he’s a clown. Perhaps realizing that he didn’t need to put on the full costume to use the helmet and that he’s just made himself look foolish.

But some of his ants report in that they’ve found Hawkeye so Ant-Man shrinks down to ride an ant into action.

Wait. Yeah. You could have just shrunken down and perched somewhere to wait for ant reports. You’ve made yourself look a fool and you fully had the power to avoid that in so many ways.

Meanwhile back to Hawkeye yet again, Taskmaster knows that killing an Avenger would attract notice so he’s going to make it look like an accident.

So he’s locked Hawkeye in an electrified cage with a lion, a normal situation that can accidentally happen to anyone. So now when Hawkeye gets mauled to death by the lion, nobody will suspect it was anything but an accident.

Taskmaster walks away because its villain tradition that you don’t watch the heroes you lock in the death traps. That’d just be gauche.

The lion sizes up Hawkeye and decides that he’s food and leaps for the kill!

And Ant-Man grows out from under the lion and throws it into the electrified bars, knocking him out.

Pretty good timing Scott! And that poor attempted man-eater lion! That poor five hundred pound lion! WOW SCOTT, do you work out?

I also feel that Republic Serial has aged poorly for more than just lion tossing.

Ant-Man and Hawkeye get each other on the same page. As it happens, Ant-Man actually has more experience with Taskmaster since he was actually in that three-parter. That’ll give them a tiny, tiny, tiny edge.

They’re still stuck in a locked cage and Hawkeye is like ‘gee whiz shrinking hero guy how can we possibly get out?’

Would you be surprised that Ant-Man just shrinks Hawkeye? Scott does muse that he could probably have picked the lock if he had the tools for it but shrinking just saves time.

Hawkeye does not care for it though.

I don’t know what he’s complaining about. Big sleepy cat even bigger now. You could live in the mane at that size.

You could be a tiny man living in a lion’s mane. Imagine.

Anyway.

Over in Taskmaster’s private tent, he’s telling Marcy she done fucked up calling for Hawkeye and she’s going to wish she was getting mauled to death by a lion in an electrified cage like Hawkeye was.

And Hawkeye does the equivalent of clearing his throat and saying ‘hey dingus, not dead’

Taskmaster reaches for a magnesium flare like he used against the Avengers but Ant-Man’s expert knowledge of meeting Taskmaster one time lets him warn Hawkeye who shoots it out of Taskmaster’s hand.

Taskmaster just questions why they didn’t go for a killshot when they had him surprised and then calls a goon squad on the heroes.

Of course, goon squads being called on heroes is just a setup to make heroes look really cool showing their stuff on some expendable targets.

“While the Taskmaster’s troops have been well-trained for normal combat, they fare woefully poor against these super-normal foes!”

And show their stuff they do. Like Hawkeye leaping around firing net and bola arrows!

And Ant-Man... shrinking down really small to punch a guy’s earlobe.

Look. He’s trying.

Also, Marcy is braining people with a juggling pin like some manner of alien clown because she is exceptionally irate at Taskmaster and his goons.

While the three beat up this crowd of goons, Taskmaster runs off to set up his “escape insurance.”

Ant-Man and Hawkeye chase him into the big top where there’s already a crowd watching the show. And waiting for the human cannonball act.

BUT! Taskmaster is apparently a cartoon villain because he’s replaced the human cannonball with a dummy full of explosives and he’s going to shoot it and blow up the grandstand, killing a couple hundred innocent lives.

Taskmaster tells them they can capture him or they can stop his ridiculous scheme.

Taskmaster: “Have fun decidin’, chumps!”

And then presumably he runs off giggling.

Hawkeye wants to go after Taskmaster and have Ant-Man take care of the nothuman cannonball bomb.

Ant-Man: “No, Hawkeye! There are too many lives at stake! And it may take both of us to stop that cannon!”

Hawkeye: “But we can’t just let that psycho walk! We can’t -- .”

Ant-Man: “Hawkeye! Think about it! Think! Please... !”

Hawkeye: “Yeah, I guess you’re right... blast it.”

Scott Lang has his heart in the right place to be a hero even if he is a bit of a goofus about it. I like you, Scott Lang.

Hawkeye runs back into the tent and shoots the goon manning the cannon with a bola arrow. he gets the goon but the goon falls on the button.

Fortunately, its the elevation control, not the fire button.

Unfortunately, there is no firing button, so the firing cycle is automatic.

Fortunately, hitting the elevation control accidentally made the cannon point up instead of at the grandstand. So the bomb is still going to fall and blow everything up but they have time and Ant-Man has an idea.

He has Hawkeye nock his fastest arrow and jumps on it.

Hawkeye shoots the arrow and hits the explosive filled mannequin in the neck right as it reached the top of its trajectory and hung very briefly in the air.

As the bomb starts to plummet, Ant-Man crawls up the arrow onto the bomb-man and to the detonator.

All too soon the bomb hits the ring

but doesn’t detonate.

Ant-Man managed to defuse the bomb!

And he also managed to survive the fall because of course! He’s not destined to die for a long while and only then in a really dumb way.

Thanks to Scott’s experience of watching Raiders of the Lost Ark twenty-seven times he’s a real expert on jumping from one speeding object to another.

Aka, from the falling bomb to a flying ant. Sure.

The heroes see that Taskmaster has escaped while all this was going on but Hawkeye decides he’ll get him next time.

Also? The audience has thought that this was part of the show the whole time so they’ve loved every second of this.

Soon the other Avengers arrive, too late to take part in the plot but in time to help clean up the goon operation.

Also, She-Hulk is in her tattered white dress outfit again. I really think there was some miscommunication here. Like with having her dressed like that on the previous cover and having her dressed like that here in this filler issue.

She doesn’t wear that anymore but its the Iconic outfit for her so if an artist needs a ref to draw her, they’re probably looking at a picture from her Savage She-Hulk series.

And Scott Lang gets the last page because whoops, he left his daughter on a roller coaster the whole time and forgot her in the heat of the adventure. DAD OF THE YEAR!

Scott runs to find her sitting outside the Spin-’n-Heave looking down, head in hands. Scott is worried that something is wrong with her but

Cassie Lang: “I’m a little tired right now, daddy *yawn* but can we come back an’ ride the ‘Spin-’n-Heave’ again t’morrow?”

Scott Lang: “Tomorrow? Again? *sigh* Kids.”

Hah, she tuckered herself out riding the roller coast over and over again but is game to keep doing it again tomorrow. That’s the Cassie Lang that will grow up to join the Young Avengers!

So, Avengers filler but it wasn’t weird or inconsequential. It doesn’t do anything with the ongoing plots but it feels like it does since Scott Lang has come back into the books recently because of the Hank Pym plot. And it follows up on Taskmaster who has gone unaddressed since his introductory stories.

Its just a nice story and by focusing on a guest star and one of the Avengers doing an impromptu team-up it has some fun energy.

Good times.

Hey. Follow @essential-avengers maybe? Its better than the Spin-’n-Heave! ... I can’t actually prove that. But also like and reblog this post because I’m a cool person. ... I can’t actually prove that either...

#Avengers #Taskmaster #Hawkeye #Ant Man #Scott Lang #some roustabouts #some robin hoods #essential avengers #essential marvel liveblogging #some avengers in a one panel cameo in their own book #ant man and hawkeye make a good team weirdly #i'm weirdly fascinated by the Spin 'n Heave #it has a waterfall

22 notes · View notes

nicklloydnow · 4 years ago

Text

“Absent a perfect harmony of all interests, conflicts regarding scarce resources can only be avoided if all scarce resources are assigned as private, exclusive property to some specified individual. Only then can I act independently, with my own things, from you, with your own things, without you and me coming into conflict.

But who owns what scarce resource as his private property and who does not? First: Each person owns his physical body that only he and no one else controls directly (I can control your body only in-directly, by first directly controlling my body, and vice versa) and that only he directly controls also in particular when discussing and arguing the question at hand. Otherwise, if body-ownership were assigned to some indirect body-controller, conflict would become unavoidable as the direct body-controller cannot give up his direct control over his body as long as he is alive; and in particular, otherwise it would be impossible that any two persons, as the contenders in any property dispute, could ever argue and debate the question whose will is to prevail, since arguing and debating presupposes that both, the proponent and the opponent, have exclusive control over their respective bodies and so come to the correct judgment on their own, without a fight (in a conflict-free form of interaction).

And second, as for scarce resources that can be controlled only indirectly (that must be appropriated with our own nature-given, i.e., un-appropriated, body): Exclusive control (property) is acquired by and assigned to that person, who appropriated the resource in question first or who acquired it through voluntary (conflict-free) exchange from its previous owner. For only the first appropriator of a resource (and all later owners connected to him through a chain of voluntary exchanges) can possibly acquire and gain control over it without conflict, i.e., peacefully. Otherwise, if exclusive control is assigned instead to latecomers, conflict is not avoided but contrary to the very purpose of norms made unavoidable and permanent.

Let me emphasize that I consider this theory as essentially irrefutable, as a priori true. In my estimation this theory represents one of the greatest – if not the greatest – achievement of social thought. It formulates and codifies the immutable ground rules for all people, everywhere, who wish to live together in peace.

(...)

The difference between the Right and the Left, as Paul Gottfried has often noted, is a fundamental disagreement concerning an empirical question. The Right recognizes, as a matter of fact, the existence of individual human differences and diversities and accepts them as natural, whereas the Left denies the existence of such differences and diversities or tries to explain them away and in any case regards them as something unnatural that must be rectified to establish a natural state of human equality.

The Right recognizes the existence of individual human differences not just with regard to the physical location and make-up of the human environment and of the individual human body (its height, strength, weight, age, gender, skin- hair- or eye-color, facial features, etc., etc.). More importantly, the Right also recognizes the existence of differences in the mental make-up of people, i.e., in their cognitive abilities, talents, psychological dispositions, and motivations. It recognizes the existence of bright and dull, smart and dumb, short- and far-sighted, busy and lazy, aggressive and peaceful, docile and inventive, impulsive and patient, scrupulous and careless people, etc., etc.. The Right recognizes that these mental differences, resulting from the interaction of the physical environment and the physical human body, are the results of both environmental and physiological and biological factors. The Right further recognizes that people are tied together (or separated) both physically in geographical space and emotionally by blood (biological commonalities and relationships), by language and religion, as well as by customs and traditions. Moreover, the Right not merely recognizes the existence of these differences and diversities. It realizes also that the outcome of input-differences will again be different and result in people with much or little property, in rich and poor, and in people of high or low social status, rank, influence or authority. And it accepts these different outcomes of different inputs as normal and natural.

The Left on the other hand is convinced of the fundamental equality of man, that all men are “created equal.” It does not deny the patently obvious, of course: that there are environmental and physiological differences, i.e., that some people live in the mountains and others on the seaside, or that some men are tall and others short, some white and others black, some male and others female, etc.. But the Left does deny the existence of mental differences or, insofar as these are too apparent to be entirely denied, it tries to explain them away as “accidental.” That is, the Left either explains such differences as solely environmentally determined, such that a change in environmental circumstances (moving a person from the mountains to the seaside and vice versa, for instance, or giving each person identical pre- and post-natal attention) would produce an equal outcome, and it denies that these differences are caused (also) by some – comparatively intractable – biological factors. Or else, in those cases where it cannot be denied that biological factors play a causal role in determining success or failure in life (money and fame), such as when a 5 foot tall man cannot win an Olympic gold medal in the 100 meter dash or a fat and ugly girl cannot become Miss Universe, the Left considers these differences as pure luck and the resulting outcome of individual success or failure as undeserved. In any case, whether caused by advantageous or disadvantageous environmental circumstances or biological attributes, all observable individual human differences are to be equalized. And where this cannot be done literally, as we cannot move mountains and seas or make a tall man short or a black man white, the Left insists that the undeservedly “lucky” must compensate the “unlucky” so that every person will be accorded an “equal station in life,” in correspondence with the natural equality of all men.

As for the Right, the answer is an emphatic “yes.” Every libertarian only vaguely familiar with social reality will have no difficulty acknowledging the fundamental truth of the Rightist world-view. He can, and in light of the empirical evidence indeed must agree with the Right’s empirical claim regarding the fundamental not only physical but also mental in-equality of man; and he can in particular also agree with the Right’s normative claim of “laissez faire,” i.e., that this natural human inequality will inevitably result also in un-equal outcomes and that nothing can or should be done about this.

There is only one important caveat, however. While the Right may accept all human inequalities, whether of starting-points or of outcomes, as natural, the libertarian would insist that only those inequalities are natural and should not be interfered with that have come into existence by following the ground-rules of peaceful human interaction mentioned at the beginning. Inequalities that are the result of violations of these rules, however, do require corrective action and should be eliminated. And moreover, the libertarian would insist that, as a matter of empirical fact, there exist quite a few among the innumerable observable human inequalities that are the result of such rule-violations, such as rich men who owe their fortune not to hard work, foresight, entrepreneurial talent or else a voluntary gift or inheritance, but to robbery, fraud or state-granted monopolistic privilege. The corrective action required in such cases, however, is not motivated by egalitarianism but by a desire for restitution: he (and only he), who can show that he has been robbed, defrauded or legally disadvantaged should be made whole again by those (and only those) who have committed these crimes against him and his property, including also cases where restitution would result in an even greater inequality (as when a poor man had defrauded and owed restitution to a rich one).

On the other hand: As for the Left, the answer is an equally emphatic “no.” The empirical claim of the Left, that there exist no significant mental differences between individuals and, by implication, between various groups of people, and that what appear to be such differences are due solely to environmental factors and would disappear if only the environment were equalized is contradicted by all everyday-life experience and mountains of empirical social research. Men are not and cannot be made equal, and whatever one tries in this regard, inequalities will always re-emerge. However, it is in particular the implied normative claim and activist agenda of the Left that makes it incompatible with libertarianism. The leftist goal of equalizing everyone or equalizing everyone’s “station in life” is incompatible with private property, whether in one’s body or in external things. Instead of peaceful cooperation, it brings about unending conflict and leads to the decidedly un-egalitarian establishment of a permanent ruling-class lording it over the rest of the people as their “material” to be equalized. “Since,” as Murray Rothbard has formulated it, “no two people are uniform or ‘equal’ in any sense in nature, or in the outcomes of a voluntary society, to bring about and maintain such equality necessarily requires the permanent imposition of a power elite armed with devastating coercive power.”

(...)

First off: Why should anyone be particularly nice to anyone else – apart from respecting ones’ respective private property rights in certain specified physical means (goods)? To be nice is a deliberate action and takes an effort, like all actions do. There are opportunity costs. The same effort could also be put to other effects. Indeed, many if not most of our activities are conducted alone and in silence, without any direct interaction with others, as when we prepare our meal, drive our car, or read and write. Time devoted to ‘niceness to others’ is time lost to do other, possibly more worthwhile things. Moreover, niceness must be warranted. Why should I be nice to people who are nasty to me? Niceness must be deserved. Indiscriminating niceness diminishes and ultimately extinguishes the distinction between meritorious and faulty conduct. Too much niceness will be given to undeserving people and too little to deserving ones and the overall level of nastiness will consequently rise and public life become increasingly unpleasant.

Moreover, there are also genuinely evil people doing real evil things to real private property owners, most importantly the ruling elites in charge of the State-apparatus, as every libertarian would have to admit. One surely has no obligation to be nice to them! And yet, in rewarding the vast majority of ‘victims’ with extra love, care and attention, one accomplishes precisely this: less time and effort is devoted to exhibiting nasty behavior toward those actually most deserving of it. The power of the State will not be weakened by universal ‘niceness,’ then, but strengthened.

(...)

In order to reach total control over each individual person, the State must pursue a divide et impera policy. It must weaken, undermine and ultimately destroy all other, rival centers of social authority. Most importantly, it must weaken the traditional, patriarchic family household, and especially the independently wealthy family household, as autonomous decision-making centers by sowing and legislating conflicts between wives and husbands, children and parents, women and men, rich and poor. As well, all hierarchical orders and ranks of social authority, all exclusive associations, and all personal loyalties and attachments – be it to a particular family, community, ethnicity, tribe, nation, race, language, religion, custom or tradition – except the attachment to a given State qua citizen-subject and passport holder, must be weakened and ultimately destroyed.

(...)

You cannot be a consistent left-libertarian, because the left-libertarian doctrine, even if unintended, promotes Statist, i.e., un-libertarian, ends. From this, many libertarians have drawn the conclusion that libertarianism is neither Left nor Right. That it is just “thin” libertarianism. I do not accept this conclusion. Nor, apparently, did Murray Rothbard, when he ended the initially presented quote saying: “but psychologically, sociologically, and in practice, it simply doesn’t work that way.” Indeed, I consider myself a right-libertarian – or, if that may sound more appealing, a realistic or commonsensical libertarian – and a consistent one at that.

True enough, the libertarian doctrine is a purely aprioristic and deductive theory and as such does not say or imply anything about the rival claims of the Right and the Left regarding the existence, the extent and the causes of human inequalities. That is an empirical question. But on this question the Left happens to be largely unrealistic, wrong and devoid of any common sense, whereas the Right is realistic and essentially correct and sensible. There can be consequently nothing wrong with applying a correct aprioristic theory of how peaceful human cooperation is possible to a realistic, i.e., fundamentally rightist, description of the world. For only based on correct empirical assumptions about man is it possible to arrive at a correct assessment as regards the practical implementation and the sustainability of a libertarian social order.

Realistically, then, a right-libertarian does not only recognize that physical and mental abilities are unequally distributed among the various individuals within each society and that accordingly each society will be characterized by countless inequalities, by social stratification and a multitude of rank orders of achievement and authority. He also recognizes that such abilities are unequally distributed among the many different societies coexisting on the globe and that consequently also the world-as-a-whole will be characterized by regional and local inequalities, disparities, stratification and rank orders. As for individuals, so are also not all societies equal and on a par with each other. He notices further that among these unequally distributed abilities, both within any given society and between different societies, is also the mental ability of recognizing the requirements and the benefits of peaceful cooperation. And he notices that the conduct of the various regional or local States and their respective power elites that have emerged from different societies can serve as a good indicator for the various degrees of deviation from the recognition of libertarian principles in such societies.”

#hans hermann hoppe #hoppe #libertarianism #libertarian #liberty #property #right #left #rothbard #konkin #agorism #conservatism #conservative

3 notes · View notes

acourseinmiracles-us · 4 years ago

Text

The Metaphysics of a Course in Miracles

A Course in Miracles by David Hoffmeister communicates that everybody is God's holy child. We are all equal. Even Jesus is our equal. A course in miracles message is that the physical world we seem to be in was not created by God, but is a delusion of our own making.

The Metaphysics of a Course in Miracles:

The metaphysics of a course in miracles isn’t something that somebody made up, it isn’t an interpretation, it isn’t themed to anyone's opinion, and there is no room for questioning it. It is not one of many possible definitions of the truth. It is the truth. Either you understand it as it is and accept it as logically true, or you are in denial and confusion.

Metaphysics is facts. The thought system of the Holy Spirit is completely logically consistent, as is the thought system of the ego. There is absolutely no room for interpretation. What is "true" can easily be determined by looking at the logical structure of what has happened and where things fit. If you master the metaphysics, you will be able to extrapolate the logical thought system to explain absolutely anything in its correct perspective.

What happens after the separation from God is completely 100% logical. Everything that happens after separation must happen, and it must happen in a very specific way. The results of separation are not diverse or one option amongst numerous. There is only one way to separate, there is only one scenario which comes about when separation seems to have happened, and there is only one outcome.

If you can learn the essential, totally rationally consistent metaphysical structure of the separation, it provides you with a framework in which the whole thing just fits into place. A Course in Miracles by David HHoffmeister is teaching this metaphysical structure, but it is not always very obvious. Its obscure nature tends to lead people to not even realize there is a solid "core" to the Course or that you can use this structure to perfectly explain everything the ego does, the meaning of death, and what must be true based on it.

For example, separation from God is not possible, because you cannot be somewhere that God is absent. God is everywhere. This immediately tells us that, logically, to believe that this is possible is insanity. It also must tell us that to believe in such a separation is to believe in a dream, a fiction, something which is false or not true and not real. This is already the beginning of some very solid metaphysics, and many people grasp this basic starting point.

As you study the metaphysics of a course in miracles, which is rather deeper than just "the words" of the Course, you will attain a kind of pattern or set of simple laws which you understand to make perfect sense. These can be rather abstract so it can entail some learning to generalize the learning and understand that it's all grounded on a simple set of logic. But when you then get the simple logic, you can now use that simple logic to observe undeniably any part of life, any activity or drive or way that something happens, and describe it in terms of what the metaphysics says about it, which will be the truth. Irrefutable truth. Provided your grasp of the metaphysics is clear and consistent and you're not making subtle logical errors, the metaphysics gives you vision to be able to see the truth of what's happening or where things fit together.

For instance, lately there have been debates about whether you can be at harmony with death. There were many opinions given. None of the opinions were relevant. The one fact is in what the metaphysics declares. In the metaphysical fact, the body is a device of separation, it is a deception, and it is within the mind of Christ. It blocks and hides what is behind it and its only function and purpose is to maintain the illusion of the mind being separate. The metaphysics also tells us that since God is life, and being opposite to God is the separation, separation must be death. It also must be a fiction of death - a dream of death. It has to be. It also tells us that therefore when the body is alive, the body is still inside a dream of death. This also tells us that the death which occurs at the end of life is just a symbol for death, because what happens before it is also death. This is why Jesus says "death is not an end, it is a continuation."

Since the metaphysics teaches that death is the opposite of life, and life and peace are one, and therefore death is not peace, we very simply can conclude that it is not possible for there to be death and harmony at the same time. This is irrefutable, perfect logic. This is the truth that the metaphysics tells us. It has no strings to do with someone's opinion, someone's inability of understanding, someone's story of what they believe is true based on their so-called experiences, or anything else. It cannot be true that death and peace are the same thing or that they truly can be hundred percent experienced at the same time. Yet many people have tried to justify that they are at peace with death or have come to accept it. They must be in denial. The metaphysics makes this clear.

The Most Commonly Asked Questions About A Course in Miracles

1) What is the nature of God?

To start with, it is imperative to distinguish that the true alive God articulated of in A Course in Miracles is a non-dualistic Being, in Whom undeniably no contraries reside. The Holy One is the Creator of all life, a Being of clean Love and the Foundation and First Cause of non-physical truth and totality, the flawless One Who is all-encompassing, outside of Whom is factually nothing, for He is Everything. Our Source's nature can’t be defined or really understood at all, as Jesus’s explanations in the workbook:

Oneness is simply the idea God is. And in His Being, He encompasses all things. No mind holds anything but Him. We say "God is," and then we cease to speak, for in that knowledge words are meaningless. There are no lips to speak them, and no part of mind sufficiently distinct to feel that it is now aware of something not itself. It has united with its Source. And like its Source Itself, it merely

2) What is the nature of reality?

Reality as well-defined by A Course in Miracles is not a physical empire, dimension, or knowledge, since truth is created by God and as God is unformed, unchanging, everlasting, endless love, and boundless and unified perfection -- a non-dualistic oneness. Reality in the Course is one and the same with Heaven and perceptibly cannot be connected in any method to the universe of form that the world calls reality. Being unchanging, true reality is everlasting and fixed, and therefore any assumption of separation -- which is change -- is not possible and therefore on no occasion was. As a non-dualistic state, reality is beyond insight, since perception presumes a subject-object dichotomy which is integrally dualistic and so can’t be real. In A Course in Miracles, reality is also synonymous with knowledge, the state of being that is Heaven.

3) What is the nature of life?

In A Course in Miracles, life as created by God has nothing to do with what we call or know of as life in the body. Life is soul: non-material, non-dualistic, and everlasting. Possibly the richest statement in the Course on the essence of life -- what it is and what it is not

4) Is the God in A Course in Miracles the same as the God in the Bible?

Jesus clearly states in the Course that God did not create this world, and thus on this basis unaccompanied He is definitely different from the Judaeo-Christian deity. The biblical God is a dualistic creator of a physical universe that he creates by the articulated word, as noted in Genesis' first account of creation: "And God said, let there be ...... Thus, this world and all creatures came into existence as separated entities, existing outside of him. In effect, therefore, the biblical God creates by projecting a thought or concept outside himself, where it becomes a physical "reality," as witnessed, again, in the creation story in the Book of Genesis.

But the differences among the two are even more philosophical. The biblical God is very much a person who sees sin as real, and must therefore respond to it, first by punishment, and then by the plan of the atonement wherein salvation and forgiveness are won through the suffering and sacrifice of his holy Servant (the Suffering Servant in Isaiah -- Old Testament) and his only begotten Son Jesus (New Testament). The God of a Course in Miracles, on the other hand, is not a person and therefore has none of the anthropomorphic qualities of homo sapiens. This God does not even know about the separation (the Course's equivalent of the biblical notion of original sin), and thus does not and cannot respond to it.

Therefore, the God of the Course is not the God of formal religion, and certainly not the God of the Bible. In truth, our Source is beyond all concepts and anthropomorphisms, and has nothing in common with the biblical God who has all the attributes of special love (a God who has a chosen people) and special hate (a God of punishment) that are associated with the ego thought system.

A Course in Miracles: The Message:

A Course in Miracles the message teaches us that there is a Voice for God in our minds that is always talking to us, telling us that we are: unlimited, one with all life, eternal, and literally invulnerable. That Voice is the Holy Spirit. There is another voice in our minds that we made up that lies to us and tells us we are: limited, separate, mortal, and vulnerable. That voice is the ego. A primary focus of a course in miracle’s message is to teach us how to tell these two voices apart. Once we do that we must choose to listen to the Holy Spirit and trust the Holy Spirit's counsel. We will always hear the voice of the ego while here in the dream but we should not accept its guidance or counsel about anything. In a course in miracle the message is not about the death of the ego, but how to properly relate to it.

#A Course In Miracles #ACIM Spiritual Community #Spirituality #Spiritual #Enlightenment

8 notes · View notes

davidhoffmeister · 4 years ago

Link

The Metaphysics of a Course in Miracles:

The Most Commonly Asked Questions About A Course in Miracles

1) What is the nature of God?

2) What is the nature of reality?

3) What is the nature of life?

4) Is the God in A Course in Miracles the same as the God in the Bible?

A Course in Miracles: The Message: A Course in Miracles the message teaches us that there is a Voice for God in our minds that is always talking to us, telling us that we are: unlimited, one with all life, eternal, and literally invulnerable. That Voice is the Holy Spirit. There is another voice in our minds that we made up that lies to us and tells us we are: limited, separate, mortal, and vulnerable. That voice is the ego. A primary focus of a course in miracle’s message is to teach us how to tell these two voices apart. Once we do that we must choose to listen to the Holy Spirit and trust the Holy Spirit's counsel. We will always hear the voice of the ego while here in the dream but we should not accept its guidance or counsel about anything. In a course in miracle the message is not about the death of the ego, but how to properly relate to it.

#a course in miracles

2 notes · View notes

mhenvs3000-20 · 4 years ago

Text

Not feeling well? Here, have a dose of nature.

Nature is a cure. A cure for what exactly? Well, that’s hard to say. Not because I have trouble finding an answer for what nature might be a cure for. Instead, it’s hard to say because I have trouble not saying “everything”.

Photo of an artistic representation of nature as a cure. The plants are cleverly placed in a standardized pharmaceutical pill container. Retrieved from here.

My personal guiding ethic as a nature interpreter is that nature is a cure. Richard Louv, based on our readings during the course, seems to agree. He invented the term “nature-deficit disorder” because of research he has performed that spans over a decade. He’s studied how there are physical, psychological, social, spiritual, and environmental consequences from having a “nature-deficit disorder” (Beck et al., 2018, p. 50). Louv’s work includes effects on children (2005), adults (2011), and entire communities (2016).

My beliefs are in line with Louv’s because I have witnessed the healing power of nature through my own experiences. Spending time in nature and learning about the details consistently reignites me and makes me feel at peace. The stresses of modern life melt away when I am engulfed in nature. It’s the best medicine I have, but I’m aware that’s my own subjective experience.

Photo of Hamilton Pool, USA. Seeing this in person blew me away and it was the moment that I began to see nature as magical. Being here for a brief moment healed me from poisonous psychological mind states that are an inevitable result of modern society. Retrieved from here.

In my opinion, experiencing things for yourself is much more valuable than scientific data proving something. This is because science is always behind. It takes years to perform a flawless experiment that has conclusive evidence. Additionally, science can only study a few variables at a time by definition, since scientific experiments rely on altering one variable at a time for the purpose of establishing cause and effect relationships. In real life, there are infinite variables. Therefore, science is powerful, but I always make the argument that our own experience is far more valuable because we can reach conclusions faster.

So, my opinion that nature is a cure is not founded on scientific principles. Of course, there are some scientific experiments that can demonstrate why nature helps with certain illnesses such as the ones Louv carried out (Beck et al., 2018, p. 50). But, when I say nature is a cure, I mean it is a cure that exceeds beyond what science can definitively confirm in the foreseeable future.

This is why I feel responsible for sharing nature with the world. I think our current society has a twisted perversion with science. Science is the modern God. As a scientist myself who has been studying biology for the last half decade, the problems with science are clear to me. I feel a personal responsibility to stop this perversion and make people realize that science should not be our primary guiding principle.

It’s a nuanced idea that I want to share with the world. That nuanced idea is not meant to take away from the power of science and its incredible utility, but to help differentiate the power of science versus the longevity of conclusive data. To put it simply, a real scientific finding that has practical application to our lives and is irrefutably correct usually takes a long time. A really long time.

Through nature interpretation, I can bring this idea to people. For example, I can show people the amazing scientific discoveries related to bees such as how they communicate through sophisticated dances that are similar in precision to a modern GPS. I can outline how honey is made, what constitutes it, and how honey can be synthetically made through chemistry. I can share discoveries related to global bee species decline as a result of several factors such as neonicotinoid pesticide usage and climate change. But, I can also be honest about the limitations of science. I can say that we don’t really know what the answer to bee decline is. I can even say we don’t know if we need an answer. Perhaps, the bees can decline and nature will smoothly go on because other species will take its place. Perhaps, some plants that heavily rely on pollination may go extinct and be replaced with other ones. Is every “problem” worth solving? Dinosaurs, mammoths, and countless other species have gone extinct, but Earth remains. Nature always has a way of balancing everything in a beautiful and harmonious way that humans have historically never managed to do properly. They stopped forest fires in British Columbia, only to now purposely have controlled fires because they realized the positive biodiversity effects of forest fires (British Columbia Wildfire Service, 2010).

Nature interpretation is a way for me to tie all these complex ideas together into presentations that can bring genuine peace to people. People can leave an interpretative session with me realizing the power of nature and its harmonious ways.

I’d place emphasis on explaining connection. How everything connects together in a seamless fashion that is infinitely perfect. How the tree produces a seed and wraps it up with a fruit. How an animal will enjoy the nutrition of that fruit, but how that indirectly helps the tree reproduce by dispersing that seed as a result of eating the fruit. How that seed will eventually thrive as its own tree and continue the cycle. The cycle of never ending perfection.

All we can do is relax and enjoy this perfection, if only for a brief moment. We can breathe in the oxygenated air and feel grateful for nature. We can bask in its power and energy just like we love to bask in the sun. Then we can get back to our busy lives of obligations and responsibilities, but recharged with a potent kind of energy that is capable of worldly success.

As Robert Frost wrote originally almost 100 years ago (2000),

The woods are lovely, dark, and deep. But I have promises to keep. And miles to go before I sleep, And miles to go before I sleep.

[References for entire post included by clicking below]

References

Beck, L., Cable, T., and Knudson, D. (2018). Interpreting Cultural and Natural Heritage for a Better World. Urbana, IL: Sagamore – Venture Publishing LLC.

British Columbia Wildfire Service. (2010). British Columbia Wildland Fire Management Strategy. Retrieved from https://www2.gov.bc.ca/assets/gov/public-safety-and-emergency-services/wildfire-status/governance/bcws_wildland_fire_mngmt_strategy.pdf

Frost, R. (2000). Stopping by woods on a snowy evening: For SATB choir and keyboard. London, Ont: Jaymar Music.

Louv, R. (2005). Last child in the woods: Saving our children from nature-deficit disorder. Chapel Hill, NC: Alqonquin Books of Chapel Hill.

Louv, R. (2011). The nature principle: Human restoration and the end of nature-deficit disorder. Chapel Hill, NC: Alqonquin Books of Chapel Hill.

Louv, R. (2016). Vitamin N: The essential guide to a nature-rich life. Chapel Hill, NC: Alqonquin Books of Chapel Hill.

4 notes · View notes

peachdoxie · 4 years ago

Text

I didn’t get around to posting last week’s liveblog of Rhythm of War, so I’m going to post both chapters 14 and 15 here. Let’s get to it!

Some of the Fused on Braize slumbered...

SLUMBERED?

Timbre pulsed a warning inside her, and Venli forcibly resisted those instincts. It was not easy. Perhaps as a Surgebinder, she should have been naturally selfless. Naturally noble. Like Eshonai.

Ah, identity/Identity stuff. Fun.

fannahn-im, the Altered Ones

Cool, another type of Fused.

In that light, these tombs were a flagrant, wasteful act—the ultimate price for this show was paid not by the Nine, but by the poor singers they had killed to give them bodies.

Something something Marxism and the labor of the proletariat

She was both the very crust of the unimportant and the very dregs of the important.

I like this line.

Avendla was their name for Alethkar; Venli’s powers instantly knew the meaning of the word. Land of the Second Advance. Her abilities stopped there, however, and she couldn’t answer the more interesting question. Why was it called that?

Yeah, why DO they call Alethkar “Land of the Second Advance”? Hmm...

“You think I could be defeated by a common human?” the Pursuer demanded. “This Windrunner must be of the Fourth Ideal—something I was led to believe had not yet happened. Perhaps our reconnaissance teams have lost their edge, during the long time spent between Returns.”

HAHA GET FUCKED YOU GOT REKT BY KALADIN “ONLY SWORN THE THIRD IDEAL” STORMBLESSED

Each new wave of attacks had involved what was called a Return, when the Fused would descend to Roshar.

Yeah uh anyone else suspicious of the word “Return” bc that’s really similar to the Returned in Warbreaker.

None of them realize she’s trying to protect that Windrunner, Venli thought. Maybe she doesn’t realize it herself.

Leshwi has officially joined the Kaladin Protection Squad.

“There are few among them of the Fourth Ideal—perhaps only one individual—and they do not have full access to the tower, now that the Sibling is dead.”

Okay, first: who’s the one who might have sworn the Fourth Ideal? Is she referring to Kaladin or someone else??? No one we’ve seen has sworn the Fourth Ideal...

ALSO. S I B L I N G L O R E.

“You have nearly perfected the suppression fabrials,” Raboniel said. “Do not forget, it is technology I discovered from the tower itself thousands of years ago. I have a plan to use it in a more dramatic way. As the Sibling is essentially a deadeye, I should be able to turn the tower’s defenses against its owners.”

The Sibling is “essentially a deadeye.” But not an actual deadeye. But just a moment ago she said that the Sibling is dead. WHAT THE FUCK. GIVE ME LORE.

“We will need to lure the Elsecaller and the Bondsmith away. Their oaths may be advanced enough to push through the suppression, much as the Unmade have done at the tower in the past.”

First. What the fuck. Second, what the fuck???

“During the last Return, she developed a disease intended to kill all humans on the planet. Near the end, it was discovered that the disease would likely kill many singers as well. She released it anyway…only to find, to all of our fortunes, that it did not work as expected. Fewer than one in ten humans were killed, and one in a hundred singers.”

That’s a yikes but also how have we not heard of this illness yet?

“If you forget why you are fighting, then victory itself becomes the goal.”

Something something Journey before destination

“In addition, this endeavor will give me the opportunity to test some… theories I have developed while slumbering these last millennia.”

SLUMBERING

“Last time, her recklessness nearly cost us everything.”

GIVE. ME. THE. LORE.

***

Kaladin announced that Sigzil—with whom he’d conferred earlier in the day—would take over daily administration of the Windrunners, overseeing things like supplies and recruitment.

I am not surprised that Sigzil is now in charge.

“I know you are, sir. But I have no interest in taking ‘what I can get.’ And I don’t think you should force a spren into a bond. It will make for a bad precedent, sir.” He hummed a different rhythm. “You all name me a squire, but I can’t draw Stormlight like the rest. There’s a wedge between me and the Stormfather, I think. Strange. I expected prejudice from humans, but not from him… Anyway, I will wait for a spren who will bond me for who I am—and the honor I represent.”

Literally not at all surprised that Rlain is turning Yunfah down. I expected as much. That still means Yunfah is without a bond. Also, I wonder if Rlain will bond with a spren that’s not an honorspren. Rlain for Nightwatcher Bondsmith 2k20

Or maybe, another part of him thought, you could do what you promised him—and listen for once.

Yeah, Kaladin, you should listen to Rlain. Take a lesson from Lift in that.

“But you couldn’t give up the sword,” Kaladin said.

“Oh, I gave it up. I let go. Best mistake I ever made.”

Lmao I’m betting Zahel is referring to one veeeery specific sword.

100% not surprised that Zahel is doing stuff with cloth. That’s like Awakening 101.

Honestly this scene with Kaladin fighting Zahel in the clotheslines is wonderful. It’s cinematic, actually.

“I’m not confident anyone knows the answers. I figure I’ll let the people who care argue about it, and I’ll keep my head down and focus on my life right now.”

Agnostic Kaladin. I didn’t know I could love this man more but I do.

“I don’t have to believe,” the voice drifted back. “I know gods exist. I simply hate them.”

Lmao since on Nalthis he was considered a god.

“You want to know what I am? Well, I’m a lot of things. Tired, mostly.”

God what a mood

“That’s because Wit is an asshole.”

BEST FUCKING MOMENT OF RHYTHM OF WAR SO FAR

“Happened to your friend too. Up in the prison? The one with… that sword.”

Well, that answers two questions. One, what happened to Szeth after Oathbringer? Two, does Zahel know Szeth has Nightblood? Also, it seems that Szeth still has possession of Nightblood. Wonder how he managed to do that.

“She’s what I now call a Type One Invested entity. I decided that had to be the proper way to refer to them. Power that came alive on its own.”

“Type Two Invested entity. Dead man walking.”

Interesting. It seems based on Vasher’s BioChromatic entity scale, but not the same.

Kaladin frowned, trying to figure out why Zahel was telling him this.

Good question. Why IS Zahel telling him this?

“The longer one of us exists, the more like a spren we become. Consumed by a singular purpose, our minds bound and chained by our Intent. We’re spren masquerading as men. That’s why she takes our memories. She knows we aren’t the actual people who died, but something else given a corpse to inhabit…”

Sure, Zahel. Just drop us some fucking lore right here. We kinda already knew it but to have it laid out here is something else. But it’s still interesting, especially with the part about capital-I Intent, and Endowment taking memories.

***

Anyway, that’s chapters 14 and 15! Some interesting stuff going on, including what will probably be one of my favorite scenes in Rhythm of War.

#stormlight archive #stormlight spoilers #rhythm of war #anecdotes by peachdoxie #peachdoxie liveblogs stormlight

3 notes · View notes

theholycovenantrpg · 4 years ago

Photo

CONGRATULATIONS, TARYN! YOU’VE BEEN ACCEPTED FOR THE ROLE OF CASSIEL.

Admin Jen: You entranced me with your vision of Cassiel from the first moment, Taryn. The way you introduced the themes of beauty and power, explored the entanglement of the two, and linked it all to Cassiel was so compelling, and I loved the way you expanded on it later on and tied it into your future plots. There is such tangible power to your portrayal, and every single portion of the app burns with it -- not just in a manifestation of Cassiel’s hunger, but in a captivating expression of its intensity and prowess, the way it bleeds into every aspect of who she is. I can’t wait to see her wreak absolute havoc on the dash! Please create and send in your account, review the information on our CHECKLIST, and follow everyone on the FOLLOW LIST. Welcome to the Holy Land!

OUT OF CHARACTER

ALIAS

Taryn

AGE

21+

PERSONAL PRONOUNS

She/Her

TIMEZONE

PST

TRIGGERS

REMOVED

HOW DID YOU FIND THE GROUP?

Admin referral.

IN CHARACTER

CHARACTER

Cassiel

WHAT DREW YOU TO THIS CHARACTER?

Beauty fascinates me, and it has in a various number of ways for several years. I’ve written about it in plenty of variations, but never seen a character that investigates so deeply the query of what happens when beauty is not only undeniable, but perfect and absolute to the point of literal personification. I see Cassiel and her beauty as the cup that fills to the point of surface tension: she exists in the incorporeal space above limit, law, natural reason, always on the edge of overflowing. When you talk about her beauty, it’s no longer about the simplicity of being beautiful, but of the concept itself, the embodiment. What I kept coming back to when thinking about Cass was the adage Absolute power corrupts absolutely, and stems that flowered from it: could one replace the word power with beauty in that statement and have it be wholly, undeniably true? Why or why not? Where do we rank beauty among the concepts that we agree, in society and heart and literature, reign above all others: power, love, hate, goodness, evil. What is its place, or does it have one at all? Which of the others are its twins, which are its enemies? Is it merely symptomatic of one of the others; if so, can it be corrupted? Literally, what is beauty?

Even moreso, what is it to exist in a state that embodies any of these notions so completely? How does it grow or gnarl the soul, what are the effects and blessings and curses of living in this strange way?

I know that’s a lot of questions rather than answers, but I think that’s almost my point: Cassiel is not just a character I already feel I know intimately and love for what I see, but a vessel through which I get to explore things I can’t (and don’t yet want to) answer. That’s super exciting to me — a character I not only adore now, but gives me the license to question.

WHAT FUTURE PLOTS DO YOU HAVE IN MIND FOR THIS CHARACTER?

It makes sense to me that on the whole, Cassiel’s plot points should be very interaction- or dynamic-driven. That certainly isn’t to say that Cassiel isn’t self-motivating or responsible for her own actions — because she certainly is — but that in the narrative defined of her character so far, the crux of what drives, propels, and motivates her always seems to be something external. Where she once craved adoration and veneration, now her appetites have swelled to power and worship — a goal that, while perhaps somewhat singular and inward, is still defined by its far outer reach.

So on that note! The plots I’ve expounded on below largely hinge on varying relationships and interactions with other characters because I’d love to explore that thematically: that as selfish as she is, Cassiel needs others.

HUNGER THAT DOES NOT DISCRIMINATE. I don’t particularly care for ascents that are made without meeting a loose-fitting rock, or grasping a serpent tail when you think you’ve reached a vine. Though I can imagine an end where Cassiel takes her seat upon the throne she now paws at, I’m almost more interested in the steps taken to reach that conclusion.

( A ) In the same way that Cassiel named the Cherubim without anticipating all outcomes and consequences, I feel that her current pursuit of power is half-abstract and in some way not fully formed. She eyes Caelum’s throne because it is the most readily available sight, but I don’t believe Cassiel has considered strategy for what might be done after ascending a throne (whether that be in the seat itself or directly at its side), nor even if Caelum’s rulership is the most viable for her position/wants/needs. She is clever, ambitious, ruthless in many regards; she has the hunger and shrewdness to potentially make her way to the highest seat, and has proven her resourcefulness via her renewed place among the Virtues. But what does she know of rulership? Of queendom, of subjects? Nothing. She knows undeserved and total veneration, which is another thing entirely. I want to see this reflected in her initial actions as the roleplay opens: half-blind movements and machinations, a kind of elegant stumbling towards an ill-defined end.

( B ) I think Viktoria is right in some way to await a misstep, to judge her as over-eager and insatiable. Much like my view of Cassiel’s beauty as the lifted bit of water that rests above the edge of a cup, I think that same surface tension is an apt way to describe her ambition currently: overfull and ready to spill over for the first tremor. An appetite so large and desperate will consume the other things around it, in this case Cassiel’s tact: she is going to pitch herself into the first opportunity that opens itself wide enough, potentially at detriment to her overall plan (or reputation), though not necessarily. The actual action of this plot is vague and undefined because it’s not really something I can craft (instead something that should come up naturally within the game/other characters), but I’m not so picky about what it is so long as it affords the space for Cass to leap without looking in her pilgrimage back to greatness.

ONE TASTE IS ENOUGH. Once you’ve fed a hungry woman, what does she grow into? Again to draw from my overfull cup metaphor, my thought is that once a measure of her starvation has been sated by the initial jump mentioned above (whether it has positive, negative, or neutral results), it is essentially poured from the chalice that is Cassiel’s soul. Having executed her first (in-game) move or scheme, there is now a space inside her no longer occupied by desperate, demanding hunger which once filled everything to the point of bursting — allowing a space that gives her the ability to think more clearly, with greater nuance. This is when her machinations begin to build in true.

( A ) She starts to examine what it is she is aiming for, both in what is required of Caelum’s rulership and if that specific seat is best suited for her and the final result she craves. Viktoria is a good candidate for this, should they be willing to mentor her further, but I think the better option is to have Cassiel observe others in positions of power — Zadkiel, Damien Ward, Michael. She excels at endearing herself to others, which would likely be the course she takes, though the roads with Zadkiel and Michael are perhaps more winding than Damien’s. Zadkiel is going to have his own plot/bullet point, so I’ll expand on that later. Michael is a convoluted and dangerous relationship, but one that I feel Cassiel will seek out when she comes into her violence: he, technically, is responsible for all that was taken from her. Though cozying up to the King may be arduous or out of the question to do perfectly, helping to fracture the trinity of Michael/Gabriel/Raphiel from the inside. If he will not love her, then no others shall love him.

( B ) Her action, even by way of inaction, becomes very purposeful: in essence, after a potential failure, Cass will begin to lay out the strings to the final nest she plans to take. I do want to see Cassiel forge her way onto a new pedestal, one raised even higher than the pillar she sat upon previously, and that is the overarching narrative I’d like to take her on as a character — but I can’t say I’m 100% sure that it will be Caelum’s throne or the right-hand of it. Though Cassiel is experienced in crafting and stoking veneration, and therefore the authority that comes with it, the ladder of power and the games one plays to climb it are new to her. As she makes this climb, I expect she’ll find rungs she did not anticipate before, possibilities and avenues she could not have realized previously. Perhaps her attention will shift to the Tridium, her envy taking her by the leash and leading her to overthrow Gabriel in order to debase Azazel and remove her as the Moon. Maybe she will band with Viktoria and the Horseman. Mayhap she’ll create a new allegiance and look to usher in an Age of the Lotus, where everything must be drowned in mud before it can emerge beautiful and petalled (and what is she, if not the pinnacle of these things?). In plain, my goal is to see her shoot for the stars — which burning sphere she lands upon is not the most important part.

A WINGED BEAST. I love, love, love her connection with Azazel, and I want to see it go absolutely nowhere good. Particularly, I want to use their dynamic to open up the dark spot her petals have closed over and kept concealed since she was created, the truth buried below all others: that she is an animal. That she could have only ever been an animal, nothing more or less graceful despite her wings, for the way she has lived as One Thing and One Thing alone, like mindless predatory beasts who know only bloodlust and the pursuit of satiating it. Cassiel has weaned on, lived, and hunted for that one thing — adoration above all else, above all others — and so Azazel stands as the highest adversary and natural enemy. Because of that, it is her alone that could drag out the latent and feral nature of Cassiel, and I want to see it arise in a way ugly, cruel, and wild. I see a kind of genuine savagery at her core, animalistic in the sense that it’s natural and arcane, esoteric and terrifying in the way we used to recall angels of the hundred-eyes and bright blaze. Let Azazel have another victory over her, be it immense or mild, and drag the carcass of Cassiel’s defeat in front of her to see how the frenzy starts. I want to see Cassiel lose all composure, both as a delightful creature and as an Angel of Virtue, and bare her teeth — perhaps even literally. She wields a sword well, but a weapon is too refined for the kind of rage — teeth and claws are better suited for something so furious. Aside from this manifesting in potentially a literal and physical attack on Azazel, I imagine this moment further alerts Cassiel into not what she is becoming, but what she has always been. Unlike Arianne, who I think shares a great deal thematically with Cassiel, I don’t believe Cass is quite as vindictively-natured as the human. If she is cruel, it is not usually for the direct purpose of watching another suffer; it is merely that the act of cruelty is natural to her in the same way that a predator sinks its teeth into a doe without remorse. To offer a quote to sum it up, Peter Beagle in The Last Unicorn: “‘Cruel?’ She asked. ‘How can I be cruel? That is for mortals.’ But then she did raise her eyes, and [...] with something very near to mockery [...] she said, ‘So is kindness.’ That is essentially what I mean when I say as an angel, Cassiel is animal and savage and cruel and immaculate all at once, but in a way entirely unlike the humans. I don’t even necessarily feel this contradicts or cannot cohabitate with her saccharine nature, that which remains iridescent and lovely. She exists in multitudes, some of them made of spun-sugar and full of wonder, others death-touched, and that is what I see Cassiel fully coming into as Azazel’s opposition drives her mad: I am wild, and wild things know no Kings. Let her eye turn to Michael with new understanding.

THE LITTLE DEATH, MANIFESTED. I see this as potentially contingent from the previous bullet, seeing as this kind of rage needs a catalyst, but as a fun little aside (maybe more of a headcanon??) I’d love to see Cassiel kill a mortal NPC in the middle of sex — unintentional, perhaps, though not necessarily. I don’t know if you’ve ever seen The Boys, and please do if you haven’t omg (and tiny spoiler ahead!), but there’s a scene where a superhero character has sex with a regular human while on a mind-altering substance. She ends up crushing his head in the middle of cunnilingus. That’s essentially the vibe here.

LAMB BLOOD ON THE ALTAR. Just like with Azazel, I adore Cassiel’s connection to Zadkiel.

RUN. Zadkiel exists, undeniably, as a keystone to Cassiel’s better nature. She has changed from who she was, certainly, and the shift has seized from her much of that which might be called goodness — still, ebbing portions or ghost-limbs of it remain. As does the loose thread of guilt, which Cass knows only Zadkiel’s hand can find and tug. To that end, and what I feel is most likely for the very start of game play, is Cass still trying to run from him and avoid any interaction.

TURN. The benefit of the sheep is that it can be sheared a hundred times, though slaughtered only once — so Cassiel must hope that this is one more coat she can shed before Justice, showing him a pink skin and claiming I am borne anew. I am remade. I have risen again, like God’s own son. Likely after realizing she is not yet ready to take on Michael’s throne and therefore needs aid, Cassiel may attempt to endear herself once more to Zadkiel, the angel once so dear to her.

HOLD. This is definitely equally up to how Zadkiel’s player feels and wants to portray their relationship, but I have a very strong feeling that Cass adores/adored Zadkiel to the point of — possession, maybe? Particularly if their relationship starts to repair in any shape (even through Cass’s falsehoods), I could see her teeth growing sharp over the relationship/bond he has with Isolde; a matter of jealousy, a repetition of what she is subjected to feel in Azazel’s presence: second place. Singular-minded as she can be, this could derail her overarching plans for the momentary sabotage of their relationship, or of the Priestess herself. Another aside: Cass shifting herself to match Isolde’s visage when speaking to Zad? Phew.

THE KNIFE YOU HAVE CHOSEN. It would be a mistake to assume that a thing you chase your whole life is not hunting you in turn — the man that goes into the jungle with a gun is not safe from the tiger it follows; the wielded blade does not blunt itself for the hand holding it. For all Cassiel devotes herself to the attainment of idolization — for all that cunning and guile — it has to be said that she, too, is in some capacity ruled by it. To that, I have a couple thoughts on how her obsession bites back:

Cassiel at the dais of another, sprawled at their knees, arms draped over their thighs, head in their lap. I love you as I never did God, she says. I worship you as I do myself and none other. Child, they purr. Angel, that’s blasphemy. Yes, she agrees. Give me my sin again. I’d like to see her have someone she wholly, thoroughly venerates in a way that surpasses her previous affections for God. They don’t, and perhaps could not, rival her love for herself — but it could be challenged. I love the idea of the duality within her: the capacity to put herself before all others, ever and always, and the flaw in her mechanism which sees Cassiel naturally inclined to offer herself as a devotee, made as she was as His creation, His pet. That isn’t to say such a thing comes about easily, that her soul yearns for someone to kneel before, nor even that God had her heart in such a manner — I lean to the idea that he never did, and her place as Cherubim was merely situational; that Cassiel would have had her seat aside any All-Knowing Being, no matter who it was. But to think that perhaps there is an individual who would ignite this impulse again after having laid dormant for so long, or perhaps never truly emerging, is delicious. I feel it would have to be a complicated, consuming relationship, something braided with romantic love and lust (or what angels can feel of these things). They would also have to be exceptionally wicked or brilliant, carrying attributes that Cassiel wishes for herself, and an individual who she wishes to make a proper mate and to rule beside or jointly. Then, ideally, I want to see them discard her. Perhaps they outgrow her, or never truly returned the affections she gives so endlessly, only using her for their own ascent — it doesn’t matter. But I think it would be a delicious parallel to have her worship at the altar of another, only to be ripped into nothingness the way she allowed the Cherubim to be.

(...) the mysterious thing you look for your whole life will eventually eat you alive. — Laurie Anderson explaining her attraction to Moby-Dick. Admittedly I’m running a little short on time now so please forgive the sloppy explanation, but essentially what I want to see here is another instance where her obsession with receiving ardour bites back. I don’t have a super specific instance for this to happen, though I’d think the best bet right now is through Cade — in the depths of despondency, how far would she go to feel idolized once more? What landmine would Cassiel, in her mania, step upon when running to a false dais? Let’s see, pretty please.

ARE YOU COMFORTABLE WITH KILLING OFF YOUR CHARACTER?

It depends on how I’ve managed to grow Cassiel, and what I see for their arc going forward. I find it a little hard to say from the far-off place at the starting line, but at the moment I would say if there’s a point where Cassiel dies, it would be far in the future -- and most likely, after she has attained a new title or power.

IN DEPTH

DRIVING CHARACTER MOTIVATION.

I feel like I ruminated on some of this in the Plots section (SORRY), but to say it plainly, there’s a marked severance to Cassiel’s motivations before Michael’s mutiny and after, one as clearly demonstrated as the differentiation she has in favour and position between then and now. Prior to Michael’s usurping and the culling of God and his Cherubim, in the early centuries of her existence, Cassiel was likely an angel most lacking in motivation, plan, or plot — and perhaps that’s why even the angels fell for her, even virtuous and zealous Zadkiel. She knew no want, and therefore could not ask for anything, even within herself: all that she might have required or lusted after was delivered to her, any ache balmed before it could bloom, every cut mended before it could be administered. But as it is with all creatures, even those beloved above all but Him, there is a thing in the center of a soul like a hard pit in a stone-fruit — and if borne empty, it will fill in time. One cannot exist without want. So, naturally, she grew to crave what she was being fed: veneration, adoration, love. But to say that that was all young Cassiel desired would not be true, because she had those things, and one does not covet the treasures already held safe in your chest. She was given mere reverence and devotion, so the want could only be something worse: to be the best of them all, second to only God himself in the reception of affection (and where God was cold, she was all sweet-passion warmth; there could be no comparison). She had to be the most revered, the pinnacle of adoration. And for a time, she was that too. So her motivation, than, was preservation: to retain what was had, to bask in glory. To only ever see beauty, and to live as the embodiment of it. Which is exactly what makes the fall so bone-deep in its lashing: her singular driving force was taken in hand and cracked over the knee.

After Michael and the Angels mutiny against God, preservation became synonymous with survival. Now, what motivates Cassiel is what drives any losing dog in a fight: fear, envy, spite, desperation. To hope to preserve what was once had is not only futile in her current state, but foolish; clever and terrifyingly lovely as she is, the Angels know what treason she committed against her own brethren. In the eyes of her winged brothers and sisters, she has lost that intangible loveliness which saw her reign above the rest: she, too, could commit sins. Cassiel, too, could be ugly as the rest of them. The mortals, though more easily swayed, can also be duly influenced by the masses around them: they have turned from her too. She cannot preserve what has been smashed: but the pieces of that driving force take a new shape, like a beautiful mirror shattered into a thousand sharp blades. And though her aim, like the red circle on a target or the heart of a stag, is power (currently and most specifically, Michael’s) that does not make it the force that sends the arrow. The lust for power, for those not settled with merely a beautiful existence, is for the desperate. It is for those who have known failure and will refuse to meet it again; it is for the ones you have glimpsed the way down, and fear the impact should they topple entirely. It is for the girls who know what it is to rule a heart, but are no longer satisfied with just one organ. In order to feel safe, they need it all. Cassiel can no longer be second to any: not God, not Michael. To be secondary is to be fallible. And beauty, she will prove, stands above all.

CHARACTER TRAITS.

( + ) ADAPTABLE, INTUITIVE, CHARMING ( - ) DELUSIVE, SELF-SERVING, COVETOUS

IN-CHARACTER PARA SAMPLE.

( A NOTE: I’m not entirely sure this is 100% how this scenario would go down — like maybe Zadkiel would have known about Cassiel’s involvement prior to this — but it was felt like a good way to get her voice across! )

When she stands in the banquet hall, it is with the silent quality that befits the scorned and the betrayers (how lucky, then, that she meets at the crux of both, like the brass hinge of a door). Heads do not turn as she takes leave from the great hall as they once did, keeping instead to their new King and celebratory revelry as once-loved Cassiel exits alone into the torch-lit hallways. For all the noises they once made in my honour, she thinks, now they will not even look up with enough haste to track my shadow. Cassiel passes slowly through the corridors of the Archangel Castle, stretches of cold, white marble bearing no life upon it: all that exists in Caelum tonight does so in Michael’s celebration. Even the former Cherubim — what remained after Michael’s tedious, torrid culling — sat in the great hall, miserable as they looked excepting Cassiel. Better to be witnessed in their anguish than found missing, assumed scheming in absence, it seemed. Yet for all their ugly despair, the grim-set mouths and brows so creased with concern they appeared grimy, the new King nor his audience had not once admired Cassiel for her smile, not for the delight she had sent out, like a winged messenger to the field of wounded soldiers: Do not worry, I am here. I am alright. I am still, despite it all, yours. Beautiful. Eternal. She, who had smiled and smiled like endless payment from a bottomless purse, having been charged for a crime that was not her own, and found herself offering restitution nonetheless. As charitable as she is lovely, they should have said. As virtuous as she is a delight.

But they say nothing. They do not even speak it with their eyes. So Cassiel wanders through the palace, disoriented by the lonesome way she must walk, without the arm of another to warm her or cling to. It is not with intent that she finds her way to the throne room; though intent means little in the world of the divine. And none knew this better than Cassiel: righteous acts, ritual acts, and acts of hostility all left the same signature. The fire lit in repeated offering will eventually devastate the brush around it in the same way a single act of malicious arson will. Intent pales in comparison to the impact, mortal or divine. And so all that matters is this: Cassiel arrives. She is there. And soon, she has a hand upon the gilt seat of a God, now a king. A gentle, single caress. It sighs with emptiness.

Down below, music begins. The sound, though muffled by stone, is light and deceptive with a beat kept by tambourine and wound through with panpipes. It crashes and crawls as a serpent through brush, dragging its body across the span of angelic shoulders and up the marble spires until it reaches the slender ankles of high Cassiel above. O, that that song had teeth. It would sink them pit-deep into that lovely ankle. She feels it wind around her as vine to hot rock, seeking, imploring. One palm flattens against the arm of Dead-God-Now-Michael’s golden throne, shivering at its smooth, near-wet chill. Her free hand raises slowly, slim fingers gliding over her collarbone until the full palm rests against the soft skin of her chest. They feel so alike, she and that lonesome, beautiful thing — slick, silken — chilled, lonely, without flaw. Cassiel tightens one hand to the cold edge of the arm, the other slipping deftly beneath the crease of her collar to the smoother skin of her breast. Was is the same there? Did they feel alike everywhere? How gorgeous, how frightening, to touch —

“Cassiel.”

She turns, straightens, sharp as a flower breaking its neck in a stern wind.

It is Zadkiel. Dark, tall, great-winged Zadkiel, usurping the whole of the entrance in his breadth. Her fear of being caught abates. In the glow of the great fires, they are bronze – no – gold. His skin alights in the way the great blessed tools do, a warning; she is radiance to the point of glow, shining that a beautiful thing might find her in the dark. Like calls to like.

Zadkiel, she thinks, has not forgotten me. He has followed.

“Zadkiel,” she says his name and is as raw as the meat newly cleaved from the animal, uncooked, bleeding on the plate. Cassiel makes her way to him, fists clamping as shells into his tunic, making the fabric into cotton pearls within her palm, held tightly and with a reverence that says I believe something good will come of this. He always wanted goodness. It was all he could stand.

Around her, her aura shifts; perhaps not the look of her, but what she knows Ever-wholesome Zadkiel requires. His emotions and entire self countenance was a barrage of full, pure colours: red as the poppy, blue as the sea, yellow as wheat. He moved from start to end with sureness, a bullheadedness and a potency that saw the earth moved on either side of him, as an ox yoked in the plowing fields — one could see the line he left in the dirt, straight and true. In what he felt he felt fully and tangibly, and to call that simplicity would have been a mistake. So she gave him, simply, what he requires: a reminder of the divinity they once served. Shine, goodness, a visage not innocent but one above reproach.

“Zadkiel, isn’t it awful — I couldn’t stand to be in the same room — we had to leave, you and I, didn’t we? For us,” She repeats it again, stuffing their existences into the same velvet satchel, her wings closing around them to craft one white-feather world of intimacy. The bottom petal of her lip juts, a flower blooming in the depths of winter. “Today is so hard for us.”

How sweet she could have seemed, stuck to him then as all beautiful things that last so little, like early mornings and mortal life. How dearly she wanted him to pull her head down upon his shoulder and vow to protect her here and evermore, to remind her she was no less dear to him now than before.

But Zadkiel, dark, tall, great-winged Zadkiel, who usurps the light with his breadth, has not moved. His arms do not move to hold her.

“I know of what you did.” He burns like the darkness, his eyes unblinking, and Cassiel feels the jaws of something open up wide within her, beastial teeth scraping against the lining of her stomach, dark feathers brushing her ribs. “I know you betrayed us.”

Run, the feathers say. Fight, the teeth implore.

Her pout recedes as she pulls away, the gleam around her dimming into something less blinding, more reminiscent of the light on the water than the ray directly from the sun. Her eyes narrow back from their peeled, opened stance, returning from the look stolen from does and maidens.

“Ah.” Her hands clasp at her stomach, wings receding from their huddle to position behind her, her eyes a torch in the dim — she looked as though she touted an oil lamp within her stomach, with the bowl kept still and fire burning above. “So you and I,” she says, shrewd and slender. “Will have the most difficult evening of all.”

EXTRAS

WRITTEN AESTHETIC: Swans locked at the neck in violence, the iridescent guts of an oyster shucked for its pearl, the fall of fabric to the floor; the nude body left standing, a gentle finger extending to break a shimmering bubble, the bleat of a lamb as it is laid down for sacrifice.

HEADCANONS:

She has a large collection of beauty products collected from across the lands, but has become particularly fond of the wares that prove deadly to mortals — polishes infused with venom, powders crafted from ground belladonna. While perhaps she does not need these goods, immortal and ever-capable as she is in becoming one’s ideal, she still enjoys the applications.

Though she is more satisfied wielding her looks before her sword, she is still prideful of her skill with the latter. Zadkiel himself instructed her in its use long ago, and she does not shirk her practice.

In days gone by, Cassiel had mortals engage in an unofficial competition to bring her the most startling, beautiful, or rare animal to be made her companion, always done shortly after the death of her last. I think it’s particularly fitting that the creatures she bonded with weren’t found through a natural interaction but rather through gifting, given that all things in her existence were handed to her without work. Since the revolt and her subsequent fall from the highest pedestal, these “competitions” have not happened in as organized a capacity, instead with her remaining devoted admirers seeking out gifts and Cassiel herself whenever.

Her current companion is a white lion named Oren. He, like others, was a gift from a devotee — and an exceptional one at that. When he was brought to her, the beast’s keeper tremors at the hands, distanced from the great leonine animal who sat with blood on his maw. A thousand apologies, mistress. The beast, he’s — he mauled a doe. The carcass is grotesque — it lays outside — shall I take him away? And Cassiel knows the insinuation, what the mortal means: He has killed. He has ruined himself. Surely, you cannot want him. But Cassiel merely crouches, pouting her lips as her hands slip below his pale chin, fisting into the thick mane. Her palms grow heavy, sticky with blood. He’s beautiful.

( As an aside, I love the juxtaposition that it creates when Cassiel meets with Azazel: the demoness’ sleek, dark gaggle of hellhounds, and the angel’s singular bright, mammoth lion. The image of the animals agitated in one another's presence, the hellhounds as mischievous smoke-hyenas that nip at Oren’s flanks while he swipes with one large paw. )

Her last companion was another male, this one a white and grey Arabian stallion specifically bred for and provided to her by an admirer.

I ran into this image and loved the idea that Cassiel has her own crest, designed some time ago by a particularly ardent worshipper (now long deceased) who worked in the arts. She still has every location where it has been inscribed or inlaid memorized.

If there’s a non-deified individual from history that was Cass hiding her wings (not possible? oh well), its Phryne: the Grecian prostitute and renowned beauty who, accused of a capital crime (blasphemy), stripped before the all-male judges to show her body -- the argument being that beauty was a sign of godly favour in Ancient Greece, and with it came a certain innate Goodness. Therefore, she couldn’t be blasphemous. Or, as a text post said: If the tits are legit, you must acquit.

#accepted #accepted: cassiel

1 note · View note

kylerenpenning · 4 years ago

Text

Audience Studies (3P18) Blog #1

Week 2

Our first-week material involved a lot of a general analysis of audiences for us to gain a better understanding of just how much control social media platforms and other online social networking sites have on the way our brains process different things. We developed a definition for what exactly an audience is which we described as a group of people who are hearing or are paying attention to someone proving verbal information. What I found interesting about this content was that it made me realize the large extent to which many people’s happiness, beliefs, morals, and friends are formed from a digital platform. We discussed how things were not always this way and that audiences before were commonly found at live events because social networking had yet to exist. As time has gone on people have developed ways to build an opportunity for an audience to participate in places that may have never seemed possible before until we were met with the introduction of social networking and media. When considering my own experiences as being part of an audience throughout my life, I agree that the number of opportunities to take part in an audience has increased over the years. For example, during the COVID-19 pandemic, I found myself using many new social networking platforms that were established before the pandemic but were not used nearly as much.

With the pandemic forcing everyone into their homes for almost a full two months the benefits of having digital audiences are obvious. Multiple times a week I use platforms like Zoom, Microsoft Teams, and Lifesize to join lectures and seminars which is a prime example of a way that I take part in the audience every day now. Compared to life before the pandemic when most of my audience experiences happened in person such as going out to moose on Wednesday every week and having a couple of drinks with my peers and enjoy a night out. I notice switching to a digital technique to host lectures increases the sizes of the audiences substantially because when the lectures took place in person, people are much more likely to be lazy and not show up to class. With lectures now being online, it makes participating in the audience much easier because there is no need for travel. You can see the total number of viewers in each class and there are consistently over 100 people from all over the world joining the cyberspace environment which I would estimate to be a huge increase in participation levels.

To compare my personal experiences with digital audiences during the COVID-19 pandemic to the material we discussed in class, I think of how in chapter 1, Sullivan spoke about how audiences are for the most part working-class people who have no title or place in society yet and are working to do so. (Sullivan, P. 13) I interpret this as students attending digital lectures are working towards their degrees to get the job they have a passion for because they do not have a label yet in society and once we get a career we get a sense of purpose in life because we mean something to a greater society. The benefits I gained from having to get up out of bed to go to class was that I would gain a sense of routine in my life and I got to meet many new people who I now consider my friends. So, although audience sizes have increased in quantity because it is easier for people to attend lectures when they do not have to go anywhere, however, the quality of the audience experience deteriorates. There are certain components you need to achieve satisfaction with your experience as an audience member and doing strictly digital audiences like we have been doing this year has not provided the physical interaction needed to get the full experience.

One of the final main points from the first week is the power of media and ability it must oppose destructive information into people's minds and shape their views on the world in a particular way. The mass, agent, and outcome are key terms that are an extremely important part of the process that is essentially capable of inducing detrimental norms in society that place some to advantage and others at a disadvantage. Using the same example as before about online lectures taking place at Brock this year, I will indicate which parties would be considered the mass, agent, and outcome. The agent is the audience member who is considered free to choose whatever content they want to consume online which is the students at Brock who are selecting the courses they want to study because it suits their interests. The mass is where we see the content being provided by professors at lectures and seminars and since students have no pre-existing knowledge of most of the topics we discuss in school it is their first time consuming such information, students must trust in the information hoping that it will benefit them in their future life. I think about this all the time when I go to class and why I am happy to be considered as an audience member of the Media Communications program. The outcome is the overall effect that the mass provided on media platforms have on its audience members. When I reflect on my audience experience, I firmly believe the outcome of me being a member of the media communications audience has been beneficial for me and has given me the skills to navigate through social media platforms with an awareness to the issues it contains which I would have never gotten if I didn’t trust the process and the information they were providing me to be correct.

Having the skill to be aware of the power of social media and the conflicts that can arise if you participate in audiences on their platforms I think will be extremely beneficial in the future because it is inevitable that new technologies and ways to interact on digital platforms rather than in person will begin to accelerate rapidly.

Week 3

This week’s content focuses on stories, primarily we were concerned with who the storyteller is because it influences the audience who is listening. If the storyteller or leader is well respected by the audience it is more likely that the information he is providing will stick with the audience and it will be carried on throughout the audience as they spread the information to their peers. There is a danger behind this however because if there is falsified information being provided and the audience receiving has trust in the storyteller that they are being given valid information it may cause false information to be spread. An example from my life when I trusted the information I was being given from a speaker is when I participate in sports betting, on sports that I am unfamiliar with. As an audience member with little knowledge of the sport of football, I ask my friends who are big fans to give me some advice on who they think is the better team in hopes that I will obtain new knowledge that will give me an edge in my bets. However, sometimes I mistake the person I ask for information as someone who has good knowledge of the game of football and I take their advice without hesitation because I discredit my ability to make an intelligent decision on my own. This causes me to place money on a team that I may not have picked had I not been told information from a third party and I end up losing the bet and my money.

We can see this process happen on a much larger scale of audiences like in politics where people who are labeled “leaders” have a job to lead an entire country, one of the biggest and challenging audiences to handle. Governments have access to media platforms that hold substantial amounts of power because they can simply send out messages that will circulate through various media platforms. Government parties utilize this chain reaction to create social norms in society and try and push people to think a certain way because they know the information they put on social media spreads like wildfire! Week 3’s reading by William Brown supports the claim we examined in class as the study conducted concluded that “the rise of celebrity culture in the late 20th century has given media personae a privileged position of social influence that can shape, reinforce, and inculcate values and beliefs and promote specific social practices within diverse audiences across socioeconomic, geographic, and national boundaries” (J. B, Williams. P, 259).

Where do I even start?! The number of experiences I have had where the stars and celebrities I see on the digital networking sites I use like verified Instagram and Twitter accounts, popular Netflix actors. The most influential social media influencers in my life are on Twitch and YouTube because these two platforms allow me and the millions of others who watch to build a relationship with the star. This creates a feeling for the audience member that can seem like there is an actual relationship between the audience member and the celebrity. Twitch is a prime example of how a celebrity can have a direct influence on their audience because the influencer is live streaming and directly interacting with their fans. This creates a connection that a video was taken days/weeks in the past and edited cannot do for an audience like on YouTube which often the biggest stars are people who make ‘vlogs’ covering the activities they do in their daily lives but there is no live interaction with the individual the audience is viewing. This still has a large impact on the audience members because it gives them an idea of what the perfect life ‘should’ look like based on what they are watching a privileged celebrity vlog. The large influence that vloggers and streamers have validates Williams claims that the rise of celebrity culture in the late 20th century has given social media influencers a privileged position of social influence that can shape, reinforce, and skew values and beliefs on diverse audiences in any given society.

We also covered the Dependency Theory which explained some other factors which would affect peoples’ need for social media to hear about the stories they see every day, provide them with entertainment, and connecting them with their friends without location/distance being a factor. Dependency theory explains that all societies vary in structural stability so poor and underdeveloped countries will be less dependant on technology because there is less available to it and they have to learn to live and entertain themselves in other ways. Developed countries with plenty of wealth will have more ways to access technology that provides us with the entertainment and feeling of comfort that our phones give us every day of our lives. As a person who grew up extremely lucky growing up in Oakville, Ontario I always had the privilege to get my hands on the newest technology. When I graduated elementary school is when I got my first phone which looking back on it seems absurd but within the very first week of having the new phone I had signed up for Instagram, Facebook, and Snapchat. The cognitive effects that the exposure to these apps at such a young age must have had on me is scary to think about. Dependency theory explains that there are several behavioral and cognitive effects social media has on a person including an increased likelihood of depression and anxiety. I can see in some people I have been around where they always seem worried about something that someone is saying or doing online. Eventually, it makes them get so anxious just not knowing certain things and a lot of the time can create the feeling that things are being said or done behind your back online where what’s being said can easily be deleted.

Week 3 also looked at Mass media and further breaks down how persuasion through the media occurs which creates subgroups of people in society who share common beliefs, lifestyles, humor, etc. In the lecture, we learned that there are two components to mass media which are the opinion leader who consumes large quantities of mass media, and then there are people who do not consume as much media. However, since they do not consume enough media in their own time, they come into contact with the opinion leaders they get persuaded by them.

Week 4

The evolution of public opinion was a major topic of discussion during this week as we learned that it was not always easy like it currently is to freely express yourself because there are so many platforms you can do so on. With the introduction, people are constantly allowed to express their opinion, verbally reject opposing opinions, and interact with one another to share opinions until we form what is known as social norms. Over time, audiences start to catch on to certain ideologies that are widely accepted by society, and people’s opinions can switch because of the pressure they face going against what society has deemed the dominant ideology. Multiple situations come to mind when I think about my audience's experiences and how the dominant ideology changed the way either myself or someone else was acting.

Going out to the bars on the weekend last year at school is an audience experience where I have seen this process happen multiple times. The vast majority (over 90%) of people who are at the bars are from Brock University and I like to think of me as being a member of an audience because everyone there usually had the same goal in mind, to have a fun night out with friends and have a few drinks. Referring to the idea of public opinion, there was a public opinion in terms of how people should act and what ‘normal behavior’ looked like at the bar. Drinking, dancing, singing along to the songs being played were all things that the majority of people were doing as someone who doesn’t enjoy dancing too much I can say you feel like an outsider when your not performing the activities that you see in most of the people who go to your school are doing. This proves that a public opinion is formed when there is an ideology that is more preferred by the public. My small-scale example at the bar can be amplified to see the same pattern happening in any given society as when people see on social media platforms that certain opinions are respected in society while others are silenced. This creates a barrier and can make it very difficult for people who do not follow the norms to express their opinions and be active members of society. At the same time, it benefits the majority of people because they agree with what society has chosen to be the dominant ideologies.

Another topic of focus this week was how did we get to how things are the way they are in terms of creating a public opinion. The evolution of popular opinion is the key factor that formed ‘public opinion’ because logically the popular opinion is what is preferred by the majority of the public and is likely to have some sort of role in society. Plato the Athenian philosopher believed the power should be placed in the people to make their own decision, but he was skeptical that the ordinary person would not be able to make a rational decision. By mapping out the contrast between the two types of thinking, we were able to grasp the idea of why Plato believed that ordinary people’s opinions are sometimes disregarded by society. The contrast between Doxa and episteme helps us grasp the concept of how the public has the power to express their knowledge. Doxa is explained to be the popular belief in a society that does not have the warrants needed to validate their claims being made so that they could be mediated and turned into laws or social norms in society. Episteme is the knowledge that is validated by scientific principles and is cemented in society due to the unchanging nature of the world. In the real world, we see these two concepts surface all the time. For example, people who show up to protest in large groups would be considered Doxa knowledge because it is an opinion being expressed by the general public and for the most part comes from a suppressed group looking to create change that will benefit their lives. We often see protestors gathering outside government institutions because government officials are the ones with episteme knowledge who can take the ideologies they hear from the general public and create an official change in society.

Week 5

Week 5’s material analyzes audiences as active users of media and examines people’s use of media to give them the gratification they need to be satisfied with oneself, as well as what motivates the users to pay attention to live blogs/vlogs. It was addressed that people follow live blogs to fill their need for entertainment, to learn new information, hear other opinions, and express freely express their own opinion. The factors I just listed are considered the agents that motivate users to actively participate in these sorts of activities like streaming platforms that provide entertainment. With the restrictions in place currently to deal with the COVID-19 pandemic most people have been stuck in their homes and unable to do the things they would normally do to keep entertained like hanging out with friends, going out on weekends and socializing with new people, or attending concerts and other festivals that occur annually. The streaming industry has come out and said their platforms have benefitted greatly from this pandemic because the more people are stuck in their homes bored, the more people end up using streaming platforms to occupy their time. In my life, I have used streaming websites like Twitch and Mixer for years before the pandemic was happening and I have noticed a big difference in viewership numbers since the pandemic began. The games I watch mostly are Fortnite and Call of Duty and before the pandemic, there were roughly 50-70 thousand people watching streamers who are playing these games. Since quarantine started viewership numbers have increased to well over 100 thousand people concurrently watching Fortnite and Call of Duty streamers which validates the claim that the streaming industry has benefitted tremendously from the global pandemic.

Operationalizing audiences was also a major focus during the lecture which essentially explains why society has to invade people's privacy to figure out what their interests are so that they can keep producing commodities that they know will be successful in the market for the future. Quantifying an audience and analyzing the data is super necessary for theories to be created because there needs to be hard evidence to make a theory about people’s online interests and to find patterns about what people engage with. In the lecture we talked about how “quantitative data from the systems that track people’s online activities can help streamline audience diversity, can be exchanged for money, and have an air of objectivity.” (Good, Jennifer. 19 Oct 2020). Right now, there is an ongoing controversy in the United States involving the social media site TikTok because it is a Chinese owned website. America's government wants to ban TikTok in the United States, removing it from the millions of users in the country who use the app every day which would also mean the entire community that had been developed on a virtual platform would be removed in an instant. Why would they do this you may ask? Well, it is warranted in my opinion, the reason being that China has supposedly been able to freely access confidential information on all the American users who have an account on the app. This means financial information, personal information like date of birth, even access to a location in some cases are invaded by Chinese ownership of TikTok. America’s government is scared of what China is using the data for and so they want it banned completely in the States.

Quantitative data also allows producers to see data so that they can have more control over what is being produced as well as how much needs to be produced which helps prevent a case of overproduction. Small companies often fail because they overproduce and spend too much money on production to the point where they cannot end up making a profit. If producers can see how many people are engaging in a product or business, they will produce the correct product needed to support customers.

Have you ever walked into a fast-food place and seen the screens that prompt a survey on their service while you were ordering at the restaurant? Or seen a survey on Twitter from Wendy’s or McDonald’s about what people would like to see on their menu? This is the kind of data that digital technology has allowed companies to collect to change their style of business to attract the greatest number of customers. Thus, quantitative data is important for companies to be aware of because it allows them to be one step ahead of their audience members and provide them with the commodities that will make them the most profit. Sometimes problems can arise from this because they may start to lose sight of what is in the best interest of their loyal audience. I’ve seen many companies or brands that started beloved by their audiences change because of their obsession over making maximum profit and they start producing commodities that are cheaper in quality for the customers but benefits the company because their profits will increase.

Nike is a good example of this when the information came out that they use slave workers to mass-produce their products because it means saving a lot more money on good quality work that meets basic human rights and needs. Because of Nike’s incredible ability to brand itself, it had the whole world thinking that if you buy their products it makes you superior to someone without Nike. The reality is it is extremely disappointing what media platforms have been able to do for Nike by covering up the sickening backstory of their products with commercials of people’s favorite athletes and celebrities wearing their brand which makes ordinary people fall in love with the company.

1 note · View note