#as for rehashes of classic literature

[aconstantstateofbladerunner]

Okay legit question: what is up with all the romance books that are just retellings of fairytales or classic myths?  Why is this specific trend so prominent?  It’s not inherently bad or anything I just don’t see enough of the appeal for it to be as popular as it is.

[tiodolma]

MerGana and How Their Extremism May Follow Vulgate/Robert de Boron's Good vs. Evil Story

I think making bbcMorgana's first acts in S3 and S4 of saying that it was good that women and children of camelot will die was a fascinating and deliberate choice of making sure she was ireedemable and "evil" in the eyes of the audience.

The framing of bbcMorgana as killer of innocents (even when she was just following bbcMorgause's orders) in juxtaposition of bbcMerlin as vigilante executioner of treasonous criminals makes the audience lean more favorably towards bbcMerlin's extremism.

Writing bbcMorgana as one who takes pleasure in the suffering of others also enabled the producers to makes sure that the audience can forgive bbcMerlin's own crimes because he does it with obvious anguish.

............

Points to consider though:

BbcMorgana was educated for one year that what she was doing was right and justified. Based on her intimate knowledge if the peopleof Camelot, they are all complicit in the deaths of millions of the magic race and their allies. Her extremist training under bbcMorgause amplified that drive to punish all and then rejoice in their downfall. The bbcMorgana who cared for the wellbeing of Camelot already died when she was executed without trial and due cause (basically assassinated) for the sake of the Kingdom. (Remember, hemlock has no antidote)

BbcMerlin's extremism allowed him to bypass laws that even Camelot held dear. But since he does this with anguish, sorrow and burden of destiny/god's will then, he is forgiven and justified by the watchers of his acts even though he usually held the metaphorical gun at point blank range and then called it "self-defense"

............

I would say the merlinbbc show matches with the way The Story of Merlin was written in Robert de Boron tradition and the Vulgate. The clear distinction between good and evil in these classic literature was always "light and dark", "hatred and love."

Commiting heinous acts in "wrath, bitterness and revenge" "and taking pleasure in suffering" was the "work of the devil" "letting the devil into one's heart" (as the case of vulgate!merlin's conception)

And committing heinous acts while in anguish is technically acceptable in the eyes of destiny and the christian god. (As was the case of robertdeboron!merlin assisting in arthur's and ector de maris's conception)

...........

Then there is an argument that the show followed the heavily christian vulgate philosophy of good and evil all along?

That other philosophies and ideas which revolve around good/evil, light/dark, hatred/love being in constant balance should not be applied to the show because classic arthuriana doesnt use them?

..................

Redemption, also leans on the idea of bbcMerlin spreading the "good word" to the others. That the unbelievers will be saved if they join him in backing the One and Only Savior and King. If they don't and if they fight against it then there will be a judgement. It is never the other way around despite the unbelievers also having valid justification. As expected this reflects the highly christian messaging of the classic source material too.

Then if other watchers lean/sympathise more towards the motivations and actions of the "antagonists," "the unbelievers," "members of the old religion that fight against the prophecy" then they are "letting evil prevail" and "you dont understand the objective of the story"

Would it also mean that such antagonist-sympathetic fandom wank are technically not worth rehashing because it would be too rooted in actual historicity/real life instead of the classic arthurian mythology and christian influences that the show was based on?

.............

Anyhow the next time you hear people saying that the merlin bbc writers were stupid and didnt know what they were doing, please reconsider.

[bellshazes]

getting real ready to rehash my tweet from 2016 about the fact that """""canon"""" is a fake concept co-opted by victorians to undermine the history of collective storytelling as a response to the industrial revolution creating an increase in mass-market publishing capability for lower classes eventually leading to the rise of modernism as a literary movement resting on references to classical, """canonical"" literature in which the old literary traditions were forcefully subjugated to twentieth century inventions of intellectual property laws which demanded individual control over stories for the preservation of capital. but i've really lost the fucking point now

[aliensupersyn]

Where is the Climax in Gojo vs Sukuna?

This page announces the oncoming climax, and at the very least, the editor uses this word strangely. At most, the use of the word climax reveals that the editor, or Gege, sees Hollow Purple and chapter 235 as the highest point of action; this makes sense, though I'd personally say otherwise.

This post will be an exercise to explore how Gege organizes Gojo vs Sukuna according to classic literature and narrative theory.

Exposition: Characters and setting are established and the conflict, or problem, is introduced.

Rising action: The conflict begins to affect the characters, complicating their lives.

Climax: The conflict is faced during the main, most dramatic event of the story.

Falling action: The story begins to slow down, showing results of the climax.

Resolution: The story is tied up and concluded.

This post will act as a framework for a similar analysis on the second half of the Shinjuku Showdown. For the analyses, I will rely on the definition provided by Raymond Malewitz that states that "the narratives of most stories will build towards what is called a climax—the moment of highest tension that leads to the resolution of the conflict and makes way for the conclusion."

Exposition

Chapter 221 introduced the important characters and the stakes. Gojo was freed, Sukuna met him, and the date was set for the battle. Gojo needs to free Megumi, and Sukuna needs Gojo out of his hair; conflict established.

Rising Action

Chapter 222-3 shows the character's stresses, and the beginning of the conflict. According to Gege or the editor, the rising action continues until 235 when Gojo performs his second Hollow Purple. Personally, I'd say the domain battle was the rising action, and the fight reaches its climax in 233, when Gojo wagers the battle's end on his second Hollow Purple in the page below. After that, Gojo fights Agito and Makora in a 2v1, Sukuna discovers the World Dismantle, and the both of them began setting up for their big attacks.

Climax

Though again, why Gege would consider Hollow Purple the climax makes sense as well. The fight, from 233, had been leading up to 235 and its huge explosion. Gojo readied both red and blue, and in the same chapter, released Hollow Purple, so 235 really did have a lot of action in it.

Falling Action and Conclusion

236 was loaded. Gege revealed both the falling action, and the conclusion. Gojo meets and talks with his friends in the airport as he gives his final thoughts on his last and most exciting battle. At the same time, Sukuna reveals his technique and Gege shows the results of the (offscreen) big attack. Finally, Sukuna announces the conclusion of their battle, and the narrative cycle repeats as Kashimo enters.

Gege seems to like placing the climax very close to the falling action and conclusion, which makes sense and happens pretty often. Gege quickly went through the exposition and rising action, and that also makes sense. The framework for Sukuna vs Gojo had been set up a long time ago anyway, so all Gege had to do was rehash some lines, establish more immediate stakes, and then he could get right to the conflict. The climax took a while, but the immediate falling action and resolution came and went within the same chapter.

From Lightning's Twitter:

“The climax of the Inhumane Shinjuku Showdown and 4th Popularity Poll breaking news announcement! Cover and Lead Color Page!!”

The editor says that the second half of Shinjuku Showdown will reach its climax in 262. The next narrative analysis will be a longer-form dissection of the ups and down of the narrative structure of the JJH forces vs Sukuna, and some predictions and theories about what the climax will entail!

[ibolyafagyi]

seeing a 3d printed gothic n renaissance architectural footwear on the dashboard (single color, the architecthural elements dont do anything to the shoes structure other than adorn it on the outside of a simple base that kinda looks like kanyes minimalist brand) -- i just got done w my 19th century art history exam and this was the exact example given for kitsch or bad taste, leftover ornaments from previous eras that lost their place or purpose w mass production, an aesthetic concern that led to art manufacturers and applied arts movements. it kinda feels like graduating from high school n seeing the "when will i ever need this" mathematics in use

cuz it IS bad taste, kitsch have been redefined into camp as a sustainable category, this would make sense in a ridiculous outfit, but in itself stuff like this is more of an example of playing around w technology than any noteworthy design. n as an aside i dont think the classic european forms can be ever used again in a tasteful manner cuz all that shit died w the age of pisces. changes in society (church n monarchy hierarchy -> industry, capital, democracy) and ways of living made it so that those forms are just seriously out of place and time, have no sense of homeliness or grace now. theyre literally dead and also no average modern person understands why even that stuff was constructed that way, whats the literature of it, what it calls to mind, who are the naked lady reliefs n why are they there etc. n even studying art history that shits mostly boring cuz its out of touch with the era i live in currently. every undergrad loves 19th-20th century art infinitely more cuz the forms start to make sense and appeal to MY emotions.

thats why wanting to bring back the practice of building big pretty buildings from old times is silly. it has been tired out and rehashed so many times, let it rest in peace n lets just museologically upkeep its corpse until we no longer sense its significance.

[escapedaudios]

I think I prefer that to bland modernized settings that take a couple of plot beats off of the original, but I'm not really down with that and I'll explain why. This might end up long, brace thyself.

They feel juvenile to me. Somehow more childish than the children's stories that they're trying to subvert. As though the writers are trying to grow out of their childhood stories but won't explore media outside of children's media, or develop original thoughts. Let the record show that I am a notorious disrespector of American McGee's Alice and every imitator that followed it. That style of subversion feels like it depends on shock value that rarely understands and never appreciates the source material that it depends on.

Making fairy tales dark and grim by giving them a violent or adult twist seems like a vain action anyhow. Their subject matter is usually associated with Disney and the writers of these subversions seem to look no further than the Disney animated versions of the tales. Fairy tales are very often morbid, frightening, and mysterious in their original un-Disneyfied forms. Taking a story that already has morbid and scary themes and trying to subvert it by making an edgy "twisted" version of a Disney cartoon falls flat every time.

Every writer of these subversions depends on the recognizability of the original tales to market themselves, while never understanding what made those stories endure in the first place. It's the magic, the raw imagination, and the mystery of crossing over from the mundane to the impossible. It's the darkly fascinating thought of the hidden danger lurking side by side with the enchantment and wonder. In-your-face violence and adult themes deflate all of this and throw it out the window. They just ruin it.

It's also tiresome and overdone, not just in movies, TV, and games, but especially in literature. Book stores are crowded with so many motherfucking "re-tellings" and "dark twists" on fairy tales that it's out of control. Even books that could stand on their own as original works but share a few plot beats with classic fairy tales are often marketed as adult-oriented retellings of fairytales. The tales in question, again, are almost always fairy tales associated with animated Disney adaptations. We've got to let them go.

Anyway, I'm a fairytale lover. A lot of my own work uses fairy tale themes. I've even indulged the power of true love's kiss before. Against the World and Der Wolfsjäger are both fairy tale-inspired. Not to retell a story that's been told, not to repackage a children's story for adults, and not to subvert a classic. I'm just inspired by stories that withstood the test of time and integrated some of their conventions. I don't understand or value the practice of making shock-value rehashes of fairytales.

"OK so here's my idea it's like Cinderella with a twist except it takes place in modern times and actually Prince Charming is an annoying jerk trust fund kid and the fairy god mother is an evil manager for social media stars and in the end Cinderella doesn't need a prince and-"

STOP IT! STOP! "Retelling of a fairy tale with an unexpected modern twist"? How about I unexpectedly twist your head off. Oh my god. If you're going to use fairytales as inspiration at the very least make sure you don't hold fairytale staples like whimsy and romance and magic in utter contempt. I am loathe to this entire trope.

Everyone who tries to put a subversive "twist" on a classic fairytale is a pompous and wretched hack. Every single one of those maligning frauds thinks themselves ground breaking and original, an originality that they express by retelling a story hundreds of years old with a style of subversion that's also old fucking news and barely even understands what it's critiquing in the first place.

"What if Alice in Wonderland was a demented serial killer in a mental hospital?". Stop it. Shut the fuck up. What if I was a demented serial killer and you were in immediate danger right now? From me? I'll slaughter you where you stand, coward.

[arsnovacadenza]

Can you talk more about Yoshitsune related media? Care to share resources? I was thinking about reading the Tale of the Heike. Is it interesting?

Oooo boy I'm mostly a beginner in this subject and I'm not sure if I'm of much help. I usually go ask @daeva-agas for more historical things but I do have some suggestions.

For starters, I suggest going around Japanese Corpus for Genpei War-related historical figures. It’s a Wiki edited by Japanese people who read untranslated resources. From there I found out that there are actually more works abt Genpei Literature than just the Tale of Heike. They are:

Azuma Kagami, mostly about the founding of the Shogunate and beyond, which means there will be Yoshi appearances here and there. Lately, people have been recognizing its flaws as well as its merit as an important historical document. So, take information from this text with a grain of salt.

The Tale of Hogen, detailing the Hogen rebellion (July 28 – August 16, 1156). A prelude to the The Tale of Heiji.

The Tale of Heiji, recording the Heiji rebellion (1159–1160) in the form of an emaki or painted narrative handscroll. This, my friend, is the point where daddy Minamoto no Yoshitomo was defeated by the Taira while they spared his sons Yoritomo, Yoshitsune, and Noriyori.

Genpei Seisuiki (The Rise and Decline of the Minamoto and Taira Clans). Not sure if there’s any info in English about this text.

Gikeiki, a military book mainly focused on legends about Yoshitsune and his retainers. This is the one that provided a lot of inspiration for kabuki and noh plays about Yoshitsune. Translated in English under the title of Yoshitsune: A Fifteenth-Century Japanese Chronicle

And about Heike Monogatari/Tale of Heike. To be fair, I haven't gotten around to reading that one because It's VERY hard to get a physical copy here in Indonesia. What you're most likely to find, however, is the modern translations by Eiji Yoshikawa by the same title. From what I understand, it's a sort of modern retranslation from previous translations.

AND OOH FUN FACT My dad used to have a copy of Minamoto no Yoritomo and a big-ass hard-copy of Heike lying around in my old house. Dunno where it is right now since we moved like ten years ago. It's a shame I wasn't into Japanese history as I am now :')).

Now, for fictional media that should at least walk you through important events in the Genpei War:

Historical Jdramas Taira no Kiyomori and Yoshitsune. Note that Yoshitsune and Yoritomo’s first meeting doesn’t happen in Kiyomori until Ep. 47 or so.

The Shanaou Yoshitsune manga. From what I read, it tries to be faithful to historical records regarding the events in Yoshitsune’s life (training with monks, going to Oushuu Hiraizumi to gain Fujiwara no Hidehira’s support), but instead of the actual Ushiwakamaru/Yoshi, the protagonist is a young street urchin named Hyouta who looks identical to Ushiwaka. Basically, it’s a switcheroo with Hyouta replacing Ushiwaka as the heir of the Genji while Ushiwaka gets to live free from the Heike/Taira.

The ongoing The Heike Story anime by Science Saru. It’s told from the perspective of a blind lute player named Biwa who can see the future and tells her predictions to Taira no Shigemori (Taira no Kiyomori’s son) regarding the Taira’s future. Totally on my watching list.

The Men Who Tread on the Tiger's Tail, a 1945 film by Akira Kurosawa. It was based on a kabuki play about Yoshitsune and Benkei’s escape from Yoritomo. Not sure if it’s up your aisle, but worth watching if you love Benkei and Yoshitsune’s relationship.

Then, here are some of the more batshit-insane fictionalized depictions of the Genpei Wars:

My personal favorite, ride-or-die Takashi Miike film Sukiyaki Western Django. As its name suggests, it’s a tale of the Heike and Genji IN THE WILD WEST. The plot is a rehash of the Spaghetti Western classic A Fistful of Dollars but with Heike Monogatari characters. Here you’ll be introduced to Yoshitune, Benkei, Shizuka Gozen, Nasu no Yoichi, Taira no Shigemori and even Taira no Kiyomori.

Kurozuka, a horror manga and anime series about Kurou/Yoshitsune and Benkei escaping from Yoritomo’s pursuit. They meet a girl named Kuromitsu who’s a vampire of some sort. Then Yoshi gets yeeted into the distant post-apocalyptic future.

The playstation games Genji: Dawn of the Samurai and Genji: Days of Blade where you control Yoshitsune and Benkei (and Shizuka in the second game) as they face the Taira clan using stones that can slow down time during battle. You’d probably know Days of Blade from that E3 meme with the Giant Enemy Crab. 

The otome/dating sim for girls game Birushana Senki on Switch. From what I can tell, it follows girl!Yoshitsune from her first encounter with Benkei up to the naval battles. You get to romance Taira no Tomomori or his brother Noritsune, Benkei, and uh, Yoritomo.

Otome game Ikemen Genjiden where you get to romance Yoshitsune instead. It’s a what-if scenario in which Yoshitsune is revived from his suicide attempt after fleeing from Yoritomo. There are yokai involved. 

Gojoe, which I just discovered today on TvTropes. So, apparently it’s about Benkei who’s now a repentant monk and Yoshitsune who’s now a power hungry mystic warrior after his death.

The old Namco game series  Genpei Touma Den in which you’re a resurrected Taira no Kagekiyo who’s out for Minamoto blood including Yoshinaka, Yoritomo, and Yoshitsune himself. Everybody wears creepy kabuki and noh-inspired face paint and it’s awesome.

There’s probably a lot more I haven’t covered. So if you guys happen to know better resources about Yoshitsune, feel free to message me. Also, don’t hesitate to correct me if I got any information wrong.

I hope this helps, anon! 

[paperbackrevolution]

“Book People”: a response

I have been thinking about an essay I read on Jezebel for the last while. It fit in so nicely with something I have been mulling over for months: readers. I mean serious readers. The kind of people that track their reading, that keep up with the publishing industry, that can relate to bookish memes, that overthink how their bookshelf is organized, and that seek out like-minded readers to interact with on social media. This essay, by Joanna Mang, uses a phrase for these kinds of readers: ‘Book People’. Mang uses it in a derogatory manner, and I have heard it used as such before though in those cases I believe the phrase Book Snob would have been more fitting. For Mang, Book People, are not the good sort of reader, but I want to unpack that in a bit.

Mang’s article is titled “We Have to Save Books from the Book People”. I actually only found it through a response written at Book Riot by Tika Viteri (“Back-Talking the Tone Police: Book People are Not Your Enemy”). Essentially, after rereading Mang’s essay a half dozen times (to try and follow the meandering argument and to seek what the point was) I think Mang is arguing a few things: that classics should still be taught in high school and not argued about on twitter, that English teachers bear no responsibility to encourage reading, and that Book People are bad for liking books a whole lot and have a Secret Plot to keep the publishing industry running. What any of this has to do with the title of her article remains unclear.

Mang opens her essay by complaining about people complaining on twitter. Specifically, people that are complaining about the classics they had to read in high school. The Great Gatsby, The Scarlet Letter, and Catcher in the Rye are all mentioned. Even more specifically Mang is upset at the redundancy of these arguments, that they come up again and again. I mean she is definitely correct, because once someone talks about something no one else is allowed to talk about that thing ever again. Ever. Right? I doubt it is the same person rehashing this conversation daily, more likely Mang has stumbled across or perhaps actively searched out these conversations as they are being had by different people. I mean as far as I know there are more than a handful of people using twitter, right? And if it is the same person dredging up this conversation daily, I have a suggestion: unfollow them. Problem solved. But then if that had happened, we would not have this essay to unpack.

Mang seems upset that people on twitter say that they felt forced into reading books that they did not enjoy. According to Mang anyone that disliked these books did so because these books are classics that they just failed to understand. Mang mentions that with a good lesson plan anyone can like classics, but perhaps they did not have a good teacher with a good lesson plan or maybe it is because they just did not connect with the book. Not everyone must like classics simply because they are part of the canon. A book’s inclusion within the canon does not mean that it is necessarily enjoyable to read or study for every single person. It simply means that it was influential in some way. I can recognize and value the significance of a classic novel and still also dislike the reading experience.

I did find it ironic that these conversations on twitter are doing exactly what Mang says she encourages her students to do: “When I teach literature, my goal is to give students the tools and confidence they need to attack and write about texts, to “talk to” the text rather than receive it passively” (Mang 2021). On these twitter threads we have people reflecting back on books that they were required to read in school. But because they are engaging with these texts on twitter it cannot count as the same thing? I have come across some fascinating analysis on classic books on social media that would have made my English professors proud. I fail to see the problem here.

Mang then goes on to speak about the notion of whether certain books should or shouldn’t be taught in school to avoid “turning kids off” reading, since this is often an extension of those twitter conversations. This is something that people in education have been honing for years. A quick google search reveals many theories, pedagogies and lesson plans that can help encourage reading. Teachers and other education experts are out there exploring options to encourage reading in their students. Why though? Why do we want turn children in to readers? Mang suggests that Book People have an odious plot to save the book-as-object which I will unpack in a moment. But maybe it is actually because it increases empathy? Or because it builds vocabulary? Because it prevents cognitive decline as we age? Because it is a stress reducer? Might even make you live longer? Improves general knowledge? Improves writing skills? Aids sleep? Could even help prevent alzheimers? I think it could be at least one of those reasons, especially since most of these studies explain that these benefits do not come from reading those three books back in high school but as a sustained habit over a lifetime. Though Mang, an educator, also states in her article “It’s not an English teacher’s job to make students love reading; an English teacher’s job is to equip students to read and communicate” (Mang 2021). Which I think is certainly true, but (thankfully) many other educators are attempting to go beyond the pressure to yield good test results and are still trying to help their students become readers. Of course, as Mang does mention, the formation of a sustained reading habit is based on more than a single factor (Mang mentions “parental attitudes, family wealth, the student’s disposition and other sources of stimulation”). Why this should excuse English teachers from even trying to encourage reading is lost on me. Further I also wonder what the point there is in teaching students how to actively engage with books if they are not continuing to read outside of school? Why bother with English class at all if this is the case?

I am not here to say that schools should not teach classic literature or should not encourage students to engage with the canon, I am here, however, to say that we can also all go on to complain about it on the internet afterward. If someone does not find value in these conversations, then they are free to tune them out.

After talking about education and American schools’ reading lists, Mang finally gets to the part about Book People. Mang differentiates between readers and Book People stating:

“A reader is someone who is in the habit of reading. A Book Person has turned reading into an identity. A Book Person participates in book culture. Book People refer to themselves as “bookworms” and post Bookstagrams of their “stacks.” They tend towards language like “I love this so hard” or “this gave me all the feels” and enjoy gentle memes about buying more books than they can read and the travesty of dog-eared pages. They build Christmas trees out of books. They write reviews on Goodreads and read book blogs and use the hashtag #amreading when they are reading. They have TBR (to be read) lists and admit to DNFing (did not finish). They watch BookTube and BookTok. They love a stuffed shelf but don’t reject audiobooks and e-readers; to a Book Person, reading is reading is reading” (Mang 2021).

Let’s dig into this before we get to the conspiracy. Just because I am baffled by the snobby tone of this paragraph, and I do not understand what is wrong with any of this.

A Book Person has turned reading into an identity: Just as many people do with any hobby, they tend to entrench themselves within it. People who hike seriously can and have turned that into an identity, they’re hikers. But just about everyone can walk so hikers should then not make their hobby part of their identity? Sometimes people really, really enjoy something and it becomes a big part of their daily life. What is wrong with that?

A Book Person participates in book culture: A culture can form around a social group. So, if we have a hobby group, which is a kind of social group, it is not hard to imagine that eventually a culture would build up around it. So then, yes, people would then also participate in that culture.

Book People refer to themselves as “bookworms”: What I am most puzzled by are the quotation marks, as if this nickname is something strange and new. The first known use of the phrase bookworm dates back to the 1590s and is defined as “a person unusually devoted to reading and study”. Yeah, it is a little dorky, but many hobbyists across various hobbies have silly names for the people of their hobby. Star Trek fans call themselves Trekkies or Trekkers and apparently train enthusiasts call themselves railfans. It’s a hobby thing.

and post Bookstagrams of their “stacks”: As for this, I think this is an example of a fascinating development among readers. Robert A. Stebbins, a scholar of leisure activity and hobbies, has long denied that reading could be considered a ‘serious’ hobby or what he refers to as a Serious Leisure Pursuit (SLP). He has maintained that reading is a prime example of a casual pastime, and even explores his stance in more depth in the book The Committed Reader: Reading for Utility, Pleasure and Fulfillment in the Twenty-First Century. He argues that reading cannot be a SLP due to the solitary nature of reading and the lack of a social world. To Stebbins a social world is a social network group made up of hobbyists and others connected to that hobby. Social media has changed that, however, allowing serious readers to form a social world and also find ways to make the act of reading more social itself. Book clubs have always been an attempt by readers to make reading more social. But social media allows these attempts to get closer to the mark. Readers on twitter host reading sprints to encourage people to read together at the same time. Others host read-a-longs on various platforms such as instagram to encourage a more engaging version of a book club that invites readers to read the same book section by section. And some booktubers (Book People on youtube), host live videos that invite their subscribers to grab a book and read with them. I will digress here for now, but this is something I plan on exploring more on this blog in the future. Put simply, what Mang is disparaging here is actually evidence of reading achieving SLP status under Stebbins’ hobby model. This is simply an active social world of readers.

They tend towards language like “I love this so hard” or “this gave me all the feels”: This is simply how people tend to talk on the internet? Especially amongst fandom communities, of which there is huge overlap in bookish communities. This is hardly exclusive to Book People.

and enjoy gentle memes about buying more books than they can read: memes are things people share on the internet. I am failing to see the issue with this. Again, not something exclusive to book people. What I am starting to see here is that Mang seems to take issue with internet culture in general, more so than with Book People.

and the travesty of dog-eared pages: Only Book Snobs care if other people dog-ear their own books. I am using the phrase Book Snob to distinguish between avid readers and people that find the book-as-object almost sacred. There can be overlap, certainly, but not all Book People see books this way.

They build Christmas trees out of books: No books were harmed in the making of those christmas trees. Oh, is this where the title comes in? Are we saving books from becoming christmas trees? I promise it doesn’t hurt the books.

They write reviews on Goodreads: I am confused by what is wrong with this. Mang stated earlier in her article that and I quote again, “when I teach literature, my goal is to give students the tools and confidence they need to attack and write about texts, to “talk to” the text rather than receive it passively.” How is reviewing a book not doing exactly that? Not all reviews are as aggressive as an essay can be perhaps, but it is still an act of engaging with a text rather than simply consuming it. Further, many Book People likely either have access to or want access to ARCs (advanced reader copies) from publishers and part of that deal is writing an honest review in exchange for the free copy of the book. So that would be them holding up their end of that deal. I am uncertain if Mang takes issue with goodreads in particular or with writing reviews in general.

and read book blogs: People that are active within a hobby often seek out other like-minded individuals. And beyond that most book bloggers are reviewers. Meaning people may be seeking reviews of a book to help them curate their reading selection.

and use the hashtag #amreading when they are reading: another example of Mang’s dislike of internet culture. People use hashtags to help get their media piece to others that may enjoy it or find commonality with it. They are using this form of metadata as it was intended.

They have TBR (to be read) lists: I think non-serious readers have TBR lists as well, but I think they tend to be more unconscious in nature. For example, a non-serious reader may vaguely know that there are some classics that they want to get to, or maybe the latest hyped general fiction novel. Book People are hobbyists, and if we used Stebbins’ model, they are serious hobbyists. They take their chosen leisure pursuit seriously and as such it is on their mind a lot because they intend to spend a significant amount of time pursuing that activity. So, it seems only natural that they may want to organize the content that they want to consume. It appears to me that Mang is more upset that this hobby group has formed in-group vocabularies. This means that only people residing within the group will understand some of the words or phrases used. This is a natural progression of language. You need words to succinctly capture the meaning of something. In this case, many readers have lists of books they want to read, rather than saying all of that it gets shortened down to TBR.  

and admit to DNFing (did not finish): Are we saving books from not being fully read? Many of the books that Book People are reading are for enjoyment. If you are not enjoying something, why would you continue it? Do you watch the entirety of a season of a tv show that you are hating? No. Finish a snack that is making you want to vomit it back up? No. Same logic for books. To suggest you must complete a book simply because it is a book is more like Book Snob behaviour. This seems so common sense that I am again inclined to point to this as evidence of Mang’s distaste for in-group vocabularies more than the idea of not reading a book.

They watch BookTube and BookTok: This is further example of the community and social world that readers are setting up on the internet. People typically like making connections and further, making connections over something you share in common is natural. The internet made this easier, and social media has made it easier still. This is just evidence of readers seeking connections with other readers.  

They love a stuffed shelf but don’t reject audiobooks and e-readers; to a Book Person, reading is reading is reading: This line is fascinating. Because following this, Mang’s article takes a turn toward a conspiracy about how Book People are trying to save the book-as-object since ereaders have threatened the physical book. And yet here, as part of her definition of Book People, she disparages Book People for finding value in ebooks and audiobooks. Mang herself becomes the Book Snob here, rejecting other book formats. Ebooks are convenient, you can have access to hundreds of books from your chosen device (I like to use my phone personally not an ereader). And audiobooks are great for when you are performing another task such as chores or driving. Both formats also allow people with disabilities better access to books. Audiobooks are perfect for people with visual impairments or who struggle to read. And with ebooks the size of the font can be changed to allow the book to be turned in to a large print book as needed and can even allow the font to be changed into a dyslexic-friendly font. To suggest that ebooks or audiobooks are not real books or don’t count as books is just blatantly ableist.

Let’s get to the conspiracy now. Mang claims that reading became an identity and a culture in response to the decline of interest in reading. She also continues on to say that not only is reading threatened by other media and diversions, but that ebooks and audiobooks distract from physical books. And so with the book-as-object threatened by television and alternate book formats, physical books became more precious. She even goes as far as to say books are fetishized. And then Mang says, “This could be why those arguing that classic books alienate young readers suggest 21st Century titles as substitutions: if we want to keep the book alive, we have to read, and more to the point buy, the books being produced now” (Mang 2021).

So let’s make this clear. According to Mang, Book People are people who have made reading an identity and revel in book culture. And Mang also already said that Book People “love a stuffed shelf but don’t reject audiobooks and e-readers; to a Book Person, reading is reading is reading”. But then Mang changes her argument and says that all of this is about the physical book. So, the people that complain about classics they read in high school on twitter, some of which are Book People, are all actually attacking classic literature because it may turn children off reading which would be bad because that would mean that less people are reading books regularly which is bad because then it means that less people are buying books which is bad because the book-as-object is precious and must be protected and perpetuated.

Riiiiight. I believe Mang conflated Book People with Book Snobs partway through this essay. They are not one in the same and by Mang’s own definition, Book People see any format of book as worthwhile. Meanwhile a Book Snob would uphold the physical book-as-object as the supreme format. So saying that Book People are behind this conspiracy simply does not hold up under scrutiny. Not that this conspiracy should carry much weight at any rate.

But then Mang wipes that argument away, saying that Book People are not that practical. That actually their purpose in complaining about classics books on twitter is solely to revolutionize American schools’ text selection policy. Further Mang seems to think that people ranting about their least favourite classic novel on social media is all about putting pressure on teachers and public education to shape their students into model human beings. When in reality, sometimes one simply needs to whine about a bad book, even if it’s a classic.

At the end of all of this, I am left simply confused about this essay. Firstly the title: “We Have to Save to Save Books from the Book People”. What books are we saving from Book People and how exactly do we go about doing it? Are we saving classics? Or are we saving the current school reading list books? Or physical books? Or ebooks? Perhaps it is that books are somehow being ruined by those that worship that book-as-object? I propose that Mang just thought it sounded good, especially seeing as how it does little to pertain to the wandering argument of this essay.

Secondly, I am also confused about what exactly is the point of this essay. The three main conclusions reached at the end of it seem to be that 1) arguing about classics on twitter does not impact text selection policy in schools, 2) teachers bear no responsibility in encouraging their students to make reading a habit, and 3) that books are not sacred objects. So what?

While I disagree with Mang’s essay, I do still find value in some of the points she brings up, and in her definition of Book People. I have been casually curious about the leisure studies, and where committed readers fit within leisure studies, for the last couple of years. Mang may not understand what she sees before her, but she did see something. It is that insight that has finally spurred me to dig into the social world of committed readers, or as Mang calls them, Book People.

[theparanormalperiodical]

The Real Story Behind Suspiria (2018) And The 5 Other Paranormal Places You Need To Know About

It’s the classic Hollywood story:

Girl moves to a different country to pursue her dreams of stardom.

Girl auditions for dance academy.

Girl is selected as the new host for the head witch of a coven.

Oh and there’s some Nazis in there as well!

Okay, so maybe it doesn’t fit in the Netflix Rom-Com section…

But regardless - it is all based on a series of true stories. 

It was only last year that a remake of the 1977 art classic - Suspiria (2018) - hit Amazon Prime and a handful of theatres. And joined at its hip was a flurry of top-rated reviews that swooned over its artistic rehashing of the horror genre.

Well, I say top-rated...

For a horror movie it faced a standing ovation, but it was still on the receiving end of many a ‘meh’. 

Nevertheless, fit with an intricate plot and fleshed out with garish gore, this is undoubtedly one of the best horror films of this decade. 

(It it here that I realise that we are about to enter a new decade and I feel like lying face down on the floor and having an existential crisis.)

And it turns out that it’s twisted plot is actually set against a very real backdrop.

Yet despite the intricate set of stories providing the foundation to this tale, Suspiria rarely wears the ‘based on a true story’ label.

Sure, one of the writer’s own stories is often discussed when it comes to this film, but the reality actually goes much deeper and much further than this.

For the last week I’ve been attempting to keep us with the winding story, but it is little discussed, well, anywhere. 

Nevertheless, I’ve brought together everything I could uncover, and present to you this complete guide to the real story behind Suspiria!

Today’s post will cover the essay that served as the main inspiration, the tale it is directly based on, and the paranormal phenomena of magic triangles that support it, too.

Let’s get spooky.

First, Let’s Recap The Plot Of Suspiria

It’s the 1970s. We are in Germany, near the tripoint-border of Switzerland and France.

The main chick from 50 Shades of Grey rocks up to, like, the hottest dance academy to try her hand at being America’s next drag superstar the next big thing. 

Problem is, the academy is run by 3 matrons who worship the Three Mothers - a group of witches determined to bring tears, sighs and darkness to the world!

(mwahahaha)

When someone does call them out for being witches, they get tortured and killed.

Oh, and it all happens through the medium of dance!

No, seriously. 

All the big moments of the plot coincide with dance numbers.

It’s like the prom scene in films about high schools, or maybe the big game!

Anyway - this new kid gets voted as the host for the freshly elected head witch of the coven. And accurately, the other witch who wanted to be elected isn’t happy.

When one of the dancers gets kidnapped, a fellow student investigates, and finds clues in her journal which leads her to the witches’ inner sanctum.

This is where the witchy stuff goes down.

They #roadtrip it to the inner sanctum, and find the kidnapped student who is being used in a ritual.

And this all happens at the same time as the prom big dance! 

The ritual ends up being done incorrectly, and the new kid is possessed by the Jeremy Hunt of the witches.

The possessed new kid then avenges anyone who didn't vote for them. 

This witchy-posessy-death-fest ensues and features as a part of the big dance. 

Witchy control of the dance academy ensues. 

TL;DR - just watch an episode of Dance Moms.

Suspiria Is Originally Based Off The Essay Suspiria De Profundis

The film might be traced back to many paranormal phenomena, but the basis for the film starts here in 1845.

Thomas De Quincey, the author behind Suspiria De Profundis, wrote a collection of short essays which centre on psychological fantasy. 

It is even believed that he wrote these essays based on his own visual experience of Opium; this clearly births the artsy-fartsy nature of the film.

However, it was a screenwriter’s use of these essays to create the original 1970s Suspiria which tied all the strings this post will talk about together.

The inspiration from the essay centres on the three witches known as The Three Mothers. 

And even though this seems a small literature-based link to the film, Argento expands the focus on the Three Mothers to other paranormal phenomena that mirror this.

And this paranormal phenomena includes The Magical Triangle - a region in Europe where occult communities come together and paranormal events are amplified.

However, it turns out that there is not just one magic triangle.

There are five. 

But before we take a roadtrip round all these triangles, we have to discuss the story that directly influenced the film.

Nicologidi’s True Story That Inspired Suspiria

So, we know that Argento’s knowledge of paranormal phenomena directly influenced the film...

But it’s the other screenwriter - Nicolodi - which has a story which directly mirrors the events of the film.

Well, to an extent, that is. 

Nicolodi’s Grandmother went to a Piano school in the area Argento is so obsessed with, and the Grandmother claimed that at this school they practiced black magic.

Clearly this is a simple tale not dissimilar to the other films toting ‘based on a true story’.

However, it’s how Argento expanded this to include other paranormal phenomenon that rightly bestows upon it this classic - and often misused - tagline. 

Argento’s Magical Triangle

“There’s very little to joke about. It’s something that exists…”

Argento clearly based Suspiria on real paranormal phenomenon. 

And it starts here, with The Magical Triangle

It is claimed that the area where France, Germany and Switzerland meet has a history closely linked to the occult.

Whether it’s cursed cathedrals or the collection of occult communities, this triangle was one of the core pieces of inspiration for the flick.

And one of the factors contributing to the occult-focus of this triangle is the teachings of Rudolph Steiner.

(note - this is not steiner in this gif)

Steiner - a social reformer and occultist - created a anthrosophic community in this area. This includes the Waldorf School which was rumoured to have practiced both paganism and satanism, mirroring Nicolodi’s story and the film itself.

Unfortunately, I can find very little information on this triangle itself.

But the other magic triangles I have discovered have received their own fair share of attention.

The 4 Other Magical Triangles You Need To Know About

There are 2 other magic triangles in Europe, alone.

And both actually come together and meet in Turin - a city which is considered a hub of supernatural activity.

The first triangle of these triangles is the Black Magic Triangle:

This includes San Francisco, London, and Turin, and its history dates back to the Roman Era.

Said magic is believed to come from the energetic currents that flow through the cities, with Turin staking its claim as the most magical - and this is because Turin is supposedly suspended between good and evil.

The white magic triangle involves Turin, Lyon and Prague - and all I can find on it is this:

It is claimed that ‘those who know’ go to this area to pay homage to the ‘grand old man’ - make of that what you will..

This magical and mysterious area is further inferred by Turin’s position on the 45th parallel.

“Turin is the place where my nightmares are best.” - Argento.

Yes - that quote is from Argento, confirming the influence of multiple magical triangles in the creation of Suspiria!

And why wouldn’t his nightmares be best here?

This Italian city has witnessed its own history of paranormal events and phenomena, and is even believed to house the hidden gate to hell.

Take the Piazzo Statuto:

Not only has it seen a bloody battle back in the 18th century, it’s angel statue represents the dichotomy between the good and evil Turin allegedly contains.

The angel can also look like the devil, and even bears the mark of a 5 pointed star.

Turin also is claimed to have once housed alchemical labs underground with rumours of metal being converted to gold, a myth relating to the legend of the Philosopher’s stone which has its own paranormal associations.

Ghosts have also been said to roam the streets, such as that of Christine Marie who pushed past lovers into the river to drown.

#brutal

The final paranormal phenomena of Turin I want to discuss is that of Palazzo Trucchi di Levaldigi.

Fit with a hell-inspired door-knocker, this is yet another reminder on the mish mash of magic triangles spread across the world.

Indeed this building is the city’s tarot manufacturer. And the building number? It’s 15.

The tarot card with the no. 15 is the card of the Devil.

The 40,000 satanists rumoured to be lurking the streets of Turin and performing rituals in basements confirms its mysterious existence further.

Our next magical triangle is probably the most famous mystery in existence:

The Bermuda Triangle.

This triangle deserves it’s own post given the sheer volume of evidence, debunking and discussion given to its name. Nevertheless, it further reinforces the reality behind Suspiria.

Also known as the Devil’s Triangle, this is an area from which travellers who sail or fly through often go missing.

The recorded occurrences began in 1950 with the loss of Flight 19.

Whether it’s the claims of UFOs, or the lost city of Atlantis’ technology, this triangle be a spooky one. 

Our final triangle is a little less international, and resides in the state of Massachusetts in the US of A:

It’s the Bridgewater Triangle.

Named by paranormal investigator Loren Coleman, this 200 square mile triangle has been a home to many a creature in its time.

From a huge black dog back in 1976, to tall, winged creatures, and even Bigfoot, this is a hub for paranormal sightings.

Weirder occurrences such as mutilated cattle have also been discovered, confirming that Suspiria’s story goes much deeper - and further - than we would like…

The True Story Behind The Three Witches

The last piece of paranormal phenomena we have to discuss is that of the Three Witches. And no, Suspiria isn’t the first piece of pop culture to make note of witches coming in threes.

Sure, Shakespeare beat Thomas to the chase with the Weird Sisters in Macbeth, but three is actually a very spiritual number. 

Clearly the most obvious claim to this is the Holy Trinity: God, Jesus and the Holy Ghost. 

But mirroring this is the stages of the moon; the concept of Mind, Body and Spirit; and Mother, Maiden, and Crone.

The last trinity points to pagan beliefs regarding the seasons, but also relies closely on their perspective of witches, particularly in British folk religions. Witches were often believed to come in threes, and contained a mother, a maiden, and a crone.

And thus, as triangles have 3 corners and 3 sides, we see how a link is forged between the 3 witches in Suspiria, and the magical triangles already explained in this post.

This is especially true given the importance of a triangle as a symbol in paganism.

Whether its derived from paranormal theory, or sought from the tales of terror lurking around the world, Suspiria isn’t just based on 19th century literature. 

Indeed, it has pointed us to a paranormal phenomenon - that of magic triangles - little discussed among us mere mortals.

So - what’s your verdict?

Do you think Turin is haunted by the clash between good and evil?

And who else wants to roadtrip round the triangles with me?

[aishissaart]

Quarantine made me read this book- GONE WITH THE WIND BY Margaret Mitchell.

And here's my review

(which clearly nobody asked for but eh)~

It takes guts to make your main character spoiled, selfish, and stupid, someone without any redeeming qualities, and write an epic novel about her. But it works for two reasons. First of all you wait for justice to fall its merciless blow with one of the most recognized lines in cinema ("frankly my dear, I don't give a damn"), but you end with a broken and somewhat repentant character and you can't be pitiless. Secondly, if you were going to parallel the beautiful, affluent, lazy, spirited South being conquered by the intellectual, industrious North, what better way to do that than with characters who embody those characteristics? You come to feel a level of sadness that the South and Scarlett lost their war and hope that they will rebuild.

I enjoyed the picture of pre-war South outside of what you learn in history class approved by the nation that won the war. If the South had won, we would have an entirely different picture painted. A story of lush lands and prosperity abounding with chivalry and gentility by a (too) passionate people. If you visit the South today, you can see that all these generations later the wounds of the war and the regret at losing the way of life are still fresh. But if it had not been the civil war, it would have been by other means that the lazy sprawled out way of life would have been conquered by our efficient, compact, modern lives.

I enjoyed the picture of plantations that did not abuse slaves to the extent that you read about in many memoirs. There was still a disrespect in that they viewed "darkies" as ignorant and childish and worthy of being owned, but there were those who cared for those in their trust. And the North who came down riling up the lowest of the slaves to flip the oppression did not want any contact with a race they feared. Prejudice takes many faces. Slavery is such an important part of American history, but I don't know that I agree with the format in which it is taught (at least the way it was taught to me). We take young, tolerant children and feed them stories of racism and abuse and then tell them the world is naturally prejudice (that they are prejudice) so don't be. White children start feeling awkward and aware and black children start feeling mistreated and aware. We manage to teach children about Indian and Holocaust history without the same enthusiasm to end racism by breeding racism. There has to be a better way. But I digress.

I also enjoyed Mitchell showing the volatile formula in which the KKK was aroused, that it wasn't just a disdain for free darkies but a need to protect their women and children from the rash anger now imposed on them through this new regime. Not that there are any redeeming qualities in the KKK, or even the Southern rash justice by pistol shot to curb wounded pride, but it was interesting to learn the wider circumstances in which it arose. The entire picture of the Southern perspective from the hierarchy of slaves to the disdain of the reconstruction was enlightening. The post-war difficulties, that sometimes it's harder to survive than die, were some of my favorite epiphanies of the story. What everyone in the South went through, both white and black, after everything was deconstructed and they didn't know how to rebuild. It wasn't just about freeing slaves but about rebuilding an entire way of life and sometimes change, even good change, can be this scary and destructive.

My one complaint about the book was at times the description was lengthy. I'd get a grasp for the emotions of Scarlett that are supposed to describe the emotions of all Southerners or the description of the land at Tara as a representation of the rich red soil all Southerners love and then Mitchell would go on for paragraphs or pages rehashing that feeling to pull the most emotion out of you. It worked, but sometimes I think she could have done so in fewer words.

I view Scarlett as a representation of the South in which she loved. She did not care from whence the wealth came or believed that it would ever end. Because she was rich and important, she would conquer. As the Yankees attempted to rebuild the South, fresh in their embitterment at a war they did not want to fight, you can both see their reasoning and feel for the Southerners who were licked and then stomped on in their attempts to gain back of their life. You see that in Scarlett. On one hand you don't pity her and think she needs a lesson in poverty and on the other hand you want her to survive. Either she can lie down and cling to her old ways or she can debase herself and rebuild. Survival, not morality, is her strongest drive.

Oh Scarlett. We all know people like her. People who unscrupulously use their womanly charms to get ahead and carry a deep disdain for those bound by concepts of kindness, morals, or intelligence and most especially for those who see them for what they are instead of being manipulated. People who care for nobody but themselves and who find enjoyment in life not in what they have, but in conquering the unattainable that is only desirable because it is out of reach. I loved how Mitchell showed Scarlett's decline from a religious albeit not believing girl who allowed her rationalization and avoidance to carry her from one sin to the next of intensifying degree. An excellent portrait of the degradation of character.

Initially I thought she was the only character who wasn't growing, actually digressing. But by the end she does grow up. In no regard is this greater than in her eventual desire to be a mother. Turning from her ravenous post-war desire to survive to her acceptance of life and the people around her as the way they are, eventually Scarlett grows into the person she was meant to be. As did the South. Prideful and resentful, eventually they had to accept that they lost the war and take what was given them and try to make it work.

Scarlett realizes that Melanie is not the weak, cowardly girl she always assumed but the most courageous character in the book and one who gets her means by influence and persuasion instead of Scarlett's uncivil ways. It is Melly, not Scarlett, who could get anything she desires and her heart is not her weakness but her greatest strength. Finally Scarlett values the importance of love and sees that it does not make one weak but deep to possess it. OK, I won't go that far. She's not intelligent enough to analyze love, but she grows up enough to fall for it anyway, to realize she needs people.

She sees Ashley not as the strong, honorable character she had always esteemed but the weakest and least honorable character in the book. Anyone who would tease another woman with confessions of love just so he could keep her heart and devotion at arm's length is not truly honoring his marriage vows. The greatest gift he could give his wife was the knowledge that he loved her. And we all know that like any pretty toy, once Scarlett had taken him, she would have discarded him. The debasing knowledge that he is not fit for a rougher way of life doesn't endear him. For all his intelligence, he could have picked himself up by the bootstraps and made something of himself if he wanted to survive. He is a representation of the Old South that had to die but many couldn't let go of, even today. That's the sadness of the loss of the Southern way, still longing for the past instead of moving forward.

Then we come to Rhett, the only character with the ability to conquer Scarlett, who was quite the devil. Just like the ladies in old Atlanta I found myself at times entranced by his charms, but often I did not like or trust him. I was often torn about the way he constantly encouraged Scarlett to fall another wrung on her morality ladder and mocked her emotions, mocked all of Southern civility. What annoyed me most about him was that he showed love by coddling his wife and child until they were spoiled, dependent, but not grateful, and this was his idea of being a good father and husband. And yet I sympathized with him and was often amused by him. More than anything I enjoyed his intelligence as a way for Mitchell to introduce the Yankee viewpoint, using his sarcasm as satire. I loved the whole discussion of his not being a gentleman and her no lady.

More than anything I saw his slow conquering of Scarlett's heart as a parallel to the slow enveloping of the South by the North until they realized they were dependent on their conquerors but could still maintain their fierce spirit, a marriage of North and South. The fact that she could never fully understand him shows the divide between to two philosophies. But does the South lose in this blending? Can't they adopt the intellectual ways of the North and still maintain their civility? Just like Ashley, they would rather have dreamt and remembered than changed.

The characters in the book are so vivid that like or dislike you cannot get them out of your head. There are no more vibrant characters in the history of literature that Scarlett O'Hara and Rhett Butler. There is a reason this book is a classic. Everyone should read it at least once in their life to appreciate the civil war and understand the sadness and loss that enveloped the country.

[a-shakespearean-in-paris]

11 qs

well 22 here, because I was asked by both @galadrieljones and @lechatrouge673! thank you both!  

Rules: answer 11 questions, make up 11 of your own for others, then tag people :D

gala’s qs:

What is your favorite character from a video game and why?

I have many! So much do that I don’t think I can pick one. for this though, I’ll go with cullen from Dragon Age, for the very simple reason that his character inspired me to write fiction in a more serious away again. 

When you look back at your middle/junior high school years, what is the first album, band, or musical act that comes to mind?

Going to say Green Day, because American Idiot was THE album of my sixth grade year. Good bangers on that album as well! I was/am a fan. 

What makes you nostalgic?

Disney movies, YA literature, unicorns, the smell of “Lovely” perfume (because my mom used to wear it, and one whiff of it makes me remember our talks in the car before school. It’s a great scent but I can’t wear it now, because I associate it with my mom too much, lol.)

What is your biggest pet peeve when it comes to tumblr, fandom, and/or publishing at AO3?

I’m not going to knock anyone for their preferences, and I wouldn’t say this is a pet peeve, but I just don’t understand why character/reader fics are that popular. Give me a good OC over that any day, or a canon/canon pairing. 

upon reflection...this is much more of a pet peeve. I wish fandom would stop nitpicking every little detail, stop focusing on the negative, and start celebrating what we love again. Like I realize I went on giant diatribes about how bad GOT season 8 was, because I understand sometimes you gotta let it out. But when that’s all there is...it gets tiring, I’d just rather work on my fic now and read others than continue with the diatribes. And yet I still diatribes on a daily basis. (Same goes for you DA fandom. let’s be positive here and not rehash the same arguments.)

Describe the place where you are from in three sentences.

I can do it in three words: Remember the Alamo. 

Which fandom(s) are you most active in right now? What is your current favorite ship from that fandom?

Game of Thrones, for sure...Jaime and Brienne, no other pairing tops them in the series IMO, book or show, (but especially the book, even if I have a soft spot for their show counterparts and why I find the need to fix it via fic.) 

Where/to whom do you turn when you seek wisdom?

My Mom!

Do you like sports? If you do, what’s your favorite sport to watch and/or play?

I like to play petanque, and the only sport I enjoy watching is basketball, but only when my team is playing. :3

Have you ever been to Las Vegas?

Twice. I have family there, and last October we had a family reunion there. For some reason, Hawaiians love Las Vegas. (that’s why there are a bunch of Hawaiian restaurants there.)

What is your guilty pleasure TV show and why?

ironically it’s on right now. CHARMED. I’m not immune to the allure of witches, it has lots of great 2000s nostalgia, it’s so absurd at some moments but the absurdity is precisely why I usually have it on when I want something on to pass the time. I didn’t watch it when it was on though...I binged it later in life.

Do you believe in ghosts?

......yes.

lechat’s qs:

. Favorite season and why:

Summer. Swimming!

2. Favorite scents:

Tocca’s new scent cleopatra and Chanel mademoiselle. Jasmine. garlic. Baking bread.

3. Favorite non-DA video game:

The Witcher 3 is the perfect video game in my opinion

4. Last song you listened to:

Andante andante by ABBA

5. Last movie you watched:

I think it was Bridesmaids, it came on TV the other day. A favorite for sure.

6. Favorite book:

I’ll let you know when it’s written

7. Best pizza toppings:

cheese and Italian sausage. also mushrooms and red onions really add something. Parmesean cheeser

8. Do you enjoy karaoke?

YES. when I have liquid courage

9. Current celebrity crush:

Both Nikolaj Coster Waldau and Gwendoline Christie in equal measures, though Vivien Leigh is always and forever my celebrity crush. so is Laurence Olivier. 

10. Favorite breakfast food:

Croissants

11. Favorite DA quest:

The whole urn of sacred ashes questline in origins. 

MY  QUESTIONS FOR @muse-of-nightmares @out-of-the-embers @skyholdherbalist @deviantramblings @moirindeclermont @agentkatie @schoute @scharoux to answer: (only if you want of course.)

What’s your favorite piece of classical art or favorite artist? (Like Starry night, The Last Supper, etc.)

Who or what would you consider your “muse?”

Favorite Historical Era?

Did you ever read YA? What was your favorite book if so?

Which fictional character do you relate to most? Not necessarily your favorite, but one you relate to the most?

Lake, Beach, or mountains? 

Favorite lipstick color? 

Describe your favorite pair of shoes

You’re give 1,000 dollars, but you must spend it on yourself and you have to spend it all on one store. Where do you go and what do you buy?

Favorite disney film? 

Do you have any interest in seeing Cats 2019?

[notesonleaves]

The Fall of Language in the Age of English

The title of this book is somewhat misleading, as in the original it was more like “The Fall of the Japanese Language...” rather than just language generically, and the real meaning is really more about the fall of Japanese literature (the novel) rather than how the health of a language is nowadays determined in the eyes of linguists (which is dependent on how many speakers it has and what role it plays socially, not on whether people write good novels in it). As the author, Mizumura Minae explains in the English language preface, one thing omitted from the English version was a passage in which she addressed the book to readers mourning the decline of Japanese literature, and having done that, she felt little need to justify this claim (because it is so widely shared, apparently; although when the book was published in Japan it was both highly popular and incredibly controversial). But this really makes the last part of the book confusing, because if that’s what the title means, it would seem important to explain why the current Japanese novel is so bad. I have this book in Japanese (I didn’t realize it was actually the same book and thought it was a continuation) so maybe when I read that version there will be more information, as Mizumura says she rewrote the last chapter for the English version. 

The book is structured as follows:  it starts with the author going to the International Writing Program at the University of Iowa, where writers from all over the world are paid to attend. This part reads like a novel and is probably the most entertaining, with Mizumura reflecting on the midwest and her impressions of the other writers, some of whom are quite prominent. This experience serves as part of the inspiration for her book, because the fact that most of these writers are writing in their own language is a historical anomaly. In the past, most writing was done in a “universal language” such as Latin or Classical Chinese. At the end of this segment, Mizumura describes her unhappiness at the current state of Japanese literature:  “Unsuited even for a poetic description like ‘bleak wasteland,’ it was more like a playground where everything was small and clamorous -- just juvenile.” 

The second segment is about the fall of the French language from being a lingua franca, including a talk she gave about modern Japanese literature and time/temporality, although it really seems as though time is language here(?), as it’s about how those who live in the “universal time” can communicate with the rest of the world, creating a vast spiritual community. She also reflects that Japanese is fortunate to be considered a “major literature,” unlike many other non-Western countries, in the sense that Japanese literature is widely translated and respected. (She recounts a meeting with a writer who read Sasameyuki by Tanizaki Junichiro and was outraged by the way it ended, for example). 

The third, fourth, and fifth chapters:  These explain the idea of a “national language” and its relationship to national identity, the novel/vernacular literature, first in Europe, and then in Japan. The part about Europe is fairly long, and I’m not sure that amount of background was necessary. The part about Japan is much more interesting to read, especially the story of Fukuzawa Yukichi. The is also a discussion “miracle” of Japanese literature during the Meiji-Showa eras, with reference to Soseki’s Sanshiro, especially the various political, social, and economic reasons for it (which is why it is ‘miraculous’ rather than being inevitable). 

Finally, about 80% the way through the book, we get into the part I was waiting for, the “fall” of language. This seems to be a result of globalization, competition by other forms of art/entertainment, and contemporary Japanese authors writing “rehashes of American literature” which fail to reveal the current society. So now we get into what was probably the controversial part:  what the author thinks needs to be done about this. According to Mizumura, the Japanese educational system fails to teach the literary canon adequately, not even requiring students to read any novel other than their textbook, which she blames on the phonetic kana reform, because that makes it harder to read pre-war literature. Is the old kana really that huge of a barrier against people reading Meiji/Taisho/early Showa literature? It’s this part I found a bit strange, and maybe it doesn’t really come through in English. Also, she think the education system should abandon the goal of universal bilingualism in favor of only teaching reading in English and having a small part of the population go on to advanced English study (...this seems easier said that done? and arguably currently reading is what the current system best teaches anyway). I guess I’m somewhat cynical about how much compulsory courses can impact literature and literacy, although it does seem like the Japanese educational system has a comparatively low emphasis on literature. 

Note:  I became interested in reading this book because of this article:  https://lithub.com/the-murakami-effect/ , which has more background information on the author and her other books. 

[illithidjamison]

Okay okay okay you asked for it so Here We Go Dark Souls 2 is not a bad game, and I agree with your homoerotic MGS Counterpart in saying that it’s quite a good game, with some glaring flaws. However, I would argue that the flaws make it a better game in some respects, just a worse dark souls game. For example, healing items separate from your estus flask can be carried. They’re called Lifegems, and they’re your bread and butter for the harder parts of the game. Combat is slower paced, and to a certain extent easier because of it, though the speed at which you consume items, roll, and execute certain other animations is tied to your Adaptability stat. However, ADP is not really necessary if you know what you’re doing, due to the aforementioned slowness of the combat system. I think DS2 is worth playing, and while Scholar changes enemy placements, adds NPC invaders, and a few other annoying changes (Particularly in the lava section and the Shrine of Amana), it is still a beautiful piece of software that is most certainly worth playing. Your followers and mine are welcome to hunt me for sport for this take, but I think Dark Souls 3 is the one least worth playing. It tries too hard to shy away from the unpopular things that Dark Souls 2 did, but in doing so it kinda crawled back inside the warm comforting embrace of dark souls 1 to the point that it’s almost a rehash of the same game. Better visuals, more fluid combat, for sure, but the plot and stuff is. The same lmao. Demon’s Souls is a very unpopular and frustrating game, but it’s one I recommend emulating and playing for the sake of having played it, much like reading a piece of classical literature. It’s not a great game, but it is important to show the way the series changed throughout the years. The combat is worse, the areas are more frustrating, the magic system is more imbalanced, but if you get past all that the core of the dark souls game is combat and bosses, and DeS has some excellent bosses. Few things remind me of the good in life like the intricate and punishing dances with Old King Allant in that game.

Elden Ring is the only souls game I’ve never personally finished. I’ve put a decent hundred hours or so in the game only to get about halfway through it because I’m just too goddamn ADHD for a game of that scope as an open world game. I have litcherally spent ten hours grinding mats for a boss when I only needed like. A tenth of the mats I collected. All that being said, I think Elden Ring is the best in the series. Because of that, I would recommend playing the other souls games first, so that you have “gotten gud” by the time you make your way around to Elden Ring, so you can appreciate the story of Elden Ring more--having better baseline skills at combat, knowing where to look for hidden items, and so forth. In summary, I think that playing DS2 or DeS next will be the most fulfilling experience, but of course your method may vary. I don’t recommend playing Bloodborne on PC. I’ve tried. It’s...not great. Besides, who needs to go to Britain anyway?

After I finish dark souls 1 (I stopped at Seath bc the walk back was too long after I died and I just. Didn't log back in LMAO) should I play one of the other dark souls or elden ring. I can't play bloodborne and sekiro makes me a scaredgirl

[wondereads]

Personal Review (10/31/22)

Shades of Rust and Ruin by A. G. Howard

Summary

After her twin sister, Lark, died on Halloween night, Nix has been terrified of the holiday. She finds solace in her drawings of the Mystiquiel, a magical place where faerie lore and steampunk come to life. Years later, her fears manifest as her uncle is stolen away to the land of her drawings, leaving her and her best friend to save him and escape Mystiquiel, all before the clock strikes midnight.

Plot 1  2  3  4  5  6  7  8  9  10

I enjoyed this plot, but I have one major gripe with it. As someone who is a huge A. G. Howard fan, this book is shockingly similar to one of my favorites, Splintered. They're both about a teenage girl with a morbidly artistic touch who ends up in another world (alongside a childhood friend she has feelings for) because of a curse stemming from a classic piece of literature passed down through the family. Now, does that mean this story was unenjoyable? Absolutely not, I eat this up every time. Does it mean it's unoriginal? Unfortunately, yes. I can appreciate this story for the entertainment it brought me, but the similarities are a little too obvious to ignore.

On the bright side, I did love the worldbuilding. This book takes traditional faerie folklore and mashes it together with machinery and an industrial style, and it's really interesting to think about. I loved that it played off things the reader will be familiar with without rehashing the same characters again and again that would have made it a bit more dull. Also, Nix's powers of creation as an artist were very cool, and I hope to see more of how they work in the next book. This book is inspired by The Goblin Market by Christina Rosetti; the influences are clear beyond just Nix's obsession with the piece. As a side effect, other works inspired by it echo in this book, particularly the cult classic movie Labyrinth—there's even a ballroom scene. I love the callbacks to both the poem and the movie. Finally, as a forewarning, this book does end on a cliffhanger!

Characters 1  2  3  4  5  6  7  8  9  10

Nix was a very interesting character. She is very apparently flawed, and the narrative preys off of that. I do wish she weren't so aware of those flaws, but seeing things like jealousy, a thirst for control, and extreme guilt in a character makes them a lot more compelling. It also opens her up to manipulation, so it's easier for the different forces in Mystiquiel to get their claws into her. However, I wish she'd been a bit more aware; she wrote some of these characters and yet she doesn't seem to notice the inconsistencies in their motivations.

Clarey is Nix's best friend, and he's also the love interest. In terms of how love interests are represented in YA, Clarey is pretty unique. He's a bit more delicate and feminine than male love interests tend to be, which is a breath of fresh air. His relationship to Nix is quite interesting considering he's also Lark's ex-boyfriend (the dead twin). It's been a while since Lark's death, but it's hard for either of them to move past it. It adds a layer of tension; neither of them want to endanger their friendship, and they also don't want to disrespect Lark's memory.

The Goblin King, who is sort of the antagonist but also kind of not, doesn't really get much attention this time around. I am hoping to see more of him in the second book, especially to see how Nix and him will interact. Finally, even though she's dead, Lark is a pretty major character through flashbacks and such. And I hate her guts. It's a good kind of hate, the kind that will make me care and root for Nix, but I just cannot find any sort of sympathy within me for her.

Writing Style 1  2  3  4  5  6  7  8  9  10

This is the third book by Howard I've reviewed, and the writing is as good as ever! As always, it isn't for everyone. It's quite flowery and detailed, which some people don't enjoy, but I do! The descriptions are absolutely gorgeous, which plays into the atmosphere of the book. It's so easy to get an amazing picture of what the creatures and the world look like, and it truly feels like the story is being told through the eyes of an artist.

However, I have to bring up the pacing. It takes over 100 pages before Nix is even in the Mystiquiel, so the ending feels rushed while the beginning drags. Establishing Nix's normal life and her state of mind is important, but it just took way too long.

Overall 1  2  3  4  5  6  7  8  9  10

I am so excited to get more A. G. Howard retellings! Although this book has its flaws, the writing is amazing, as usual, and I love the characters. It's a great Halloween read, and I'll most definitely be reading the second book when it comes out. This book has quite a few similarities to Howard's previous books; I found it pretty noticeable, but it doesn't directly detract from the reader's enjoyment, especially if you've never read the others. While I don't think it tops anything else by this author, it was still a fun, holiday-appropriate read!

The Author

A. G. Howard: American, 51, also wrote Stain, Splintered, and Roseblood

Check out my review of Stain here

Check out my review of Splintered here

The Reviewer

My name is Wonderose; I try to post a review every week, and I do themed recommendations every once in a while. I take suggestions! Check out my about me post for more!

[workingnahas]

Rob zombie hellbilly deluxe 2 tracklist

Naming his new album Hellbilly Deluxe 2 was an ambitious move on Zombie’s part, and the title definitely created some buzz. So in 2009, three years after creating the pinnacle of mediocrity, it seemed Rob Zombie was ready to release something great once more. I’m serious, that album could be used in literature, or even in textbooks for school, as a description for something overly average. It's not bad, it's not good, it's nothing but average really. For those who are unfamiliar with the album, Educated Horses is a contender for the most mediocre record in the world. Things were seemingly looking good after that, but then Educated Horses happened. The Sinister Urge didn’t have such huge songs like the aforementioned "Dragula" and "Superbeast", but as an album which flows well from start to finish, Zombie is yet to match it. Not that good of a score, aye? After the disappointing, yet critically acclaimed Hellbilly Deluxe, Zombie released The Sinister Urge, his best work to date. The good tracks on Hellbilly Deluxe include "Dragula", "Superbeast", "Demonoid Phenomenon" and maybe even "Living Dead Girl", but that’s about it - the rest sounds like filler. I just can’t understand how it’s regarded as a shock rock classic by some. I never got the appeal of Rob Zombie’s infamous debut album, Hellbilly Deluxe. Review Summary: Hellbilly Deluxe 2 is most definitely better than the snoozefest that was Educated Horses, but is that really saying much? Robert VerBruggen is an associate editor at National Review. But anyone who doesn't mind losing a few IQ points to the man's pointless-but-catchy music will feel right at home in the grisly grooves on offer here. If you haven't been in the Zombie camp since the first Hellbilly, Hellbilly 2 probably won't draw you in. "Burn" features guttural nu-metal vocals that went out of style years ago. And while there's nothing wrong with "Virgin Witch" or "Dream Factory," per se, they're not great songs and bring absolutely nothing to the table stylistically. The acoustic intro to "Mars Needs Women" is promising, but the mind-numbingly stupid chorus sinks the whole track. Zombie still hasn't completely shaken his tendency toward filler, however. "The Man Who Laughs" is ten minutes of synthesized strings, guitar, and even a lengthy drum solo, but it works surprisingly well. "Werewolf Women of the SS" is a lot of fun in that classic Rob Zombie kind of way. The vocal effects on "Cease to Exist" are a bit much, but the song adds a psychedelic feel to the record. "Werewolf, Baby" is a pleasant surprise with its slide-guitar riffs and almost classic-rock feel. "What?" has a creepy circus feel, and it could almost fit on Marilyn Manson's Portrait of an American Family. Then comes "Sick Bubblegum," which is equally catchy but feels too much like a rehash of countless other songs. The record starts out with "Jesus Frankenstein," a slow, catchy metal track with some killer guitar riffs. This isn't an album-of-the-year contender by any means-too many of the songs are just paint-by-numbers Zombie tracks, with throbbing power chords, audio clips from old horror movies, and growled vocals-but for those who've been along for the ride so far, it's not a bad buy at all. The industrial touches of the first Hellbilly are still dead and gone, and he's still exploring some new musical territory once in a while. Contrary to what the title would suggest, this is not a return to Zombie's older days. Over the course of his next two releases, The Sinister Urge and Educated Horses, Zombie became more consistent and ambitious, but his best songs never again quite equaled the megahits on Hellbilly Deluxe. His first record, Hellbilly Deluxe, featured simplistic musicianship and a lot of filler, but it had a few tracks-"Dragula," "Superbeast," and especially "Living Dead Girl"-that were so infectious they more than made up for the album's flaws. Since departing the inimitable White Zombie, Rob Zombie has had a spotty music career.

[sociologyontherock]

My Experience Teaching Introductory Crimininology

By Chris William Martin

Teaching at a large publicly funded college in Canada’s capital city has unique challenges and opportunities. One challenge comes from the fact that I am likely to be relegated to teaching Introductory This And That throughout my career. Somewhat surprisingly, although colleges are ramping up four-year Bachelor degrees, their bread and butter for the foreseeable future will remain two-year diplomas and one-year certificates. 

Certain burdens come with teaching introductory courses. Beyond the pressure of making certain to do the disciplines justice by covering the classical literature – while also striking a critical stance towards the literature – there is real pressure to manage the first impressions of the hundreds of students who take the course so that they leave excited about the disciplines. I usually feel competent about my ability to teach introductory sociology courses, having regularly done this for the past five years, and relatively confident and excited each week to carry the disciplinary torch in my own little way.

When I began teaching introduction to criminology in the winter 2020 semester for the first time I found myself more ambivalent than I had anticipated. Armed with some of the typical textbooks chosen for introductory courses in criminology, I launched forth to prepare the class. Personally, to protest the outrageous prices publishers demand from students I would not assign most introductory textbooks in any academic discipline.

I have found that students generally do not have a wealth of expectations for an introductory sociology course. This works to my advantage. Many arrive having few preconceptions about the discipline of sociology. With the element of surprise, it can be exciting in the first few weeks of class to see eyes begin to widen at the prospect of learning about topics like culture, identity and meaning, deviance, gender, sexuality, youth, ethnicity, and so much more!

On the other hand, with criminology I found another set of expectations to manage. Societal obsessions with crime, punishment, and recreational deviance have left criminology with an almost unhealthy image. The first task is really to dispel common myths and pop the fantasy of young people thinking crime is exciting and that the course will teach them the reasons for this and how to fight it.

Herein lies an uncomfortable discovery. It is not just new students who are confused about the identity of criminology. This confusion flows through the discipline itself. Introductory textbooks do offer critical perspectives, but they first offer a wealth of information about the 19th century Italian, Cesare Lombroso, credited with popularizing the word criminology. Lombroso also “pioneered” brain and head measurements as a way of explaining so-called criminal atavism. It’s total quackery. His discussion of “savages” and our relation to the apes is one step away from endlessly idiotic academic theories of “race science.” I felt compelled to give Lombroso the ax from the course. Time can better be spent on new and critical perspectives than in rehashing old versions of racism just for the sake of history. 

Adam Rutherford’s A Brief History of Everyone who ever Lived: The Human Story retold through our Genes is one of the best books I have read recently. With a title as ambitious as this – and a review by The New York Times that claimed he actually lived up to the title – I had to give it a chance. What makes the book brilliant is Rutherford’s ability to condense genetics and biology down to a level where readers can truly extract a broad-stroke understanding of the history of all of us, not to mention how he expertly demonstrates that you and I are closely related. Only about a thousand years or so separates us. For my purposes here, it is important to consider how Rutherford contends with the troublesome history of his own field of genetics, which draws its origins from Francis Galton, the first cousin of Charles Darwin. Galton pioneered the field of genetics while also strongly pushing eugenics in the early 20th century, which of course would tragically become the story of that century. (Other scholars like Yuval Noah Harari even worry that eugenics could be a deeply troubling theme of this century in his book Homo Deus: A Brief History of Tomorrow.) Rutherford, who is an Honourary Senior Research Associate at University College London, was educated at and taught at the very institution and laboratories that were, up until 2020, named after Francis Galton and his field of eugenics. In his critical stance toward the history of genetics, Rutherford uniquely applies sociological thinking to describe how cultural mores of the past have had as much say in theories and scientific reasoning as the scientific method ever did. This troubling past means that ideas often need to be decoupled from the people behind them and scrutinized for their value beyond their troubled origins. 

In an interview for the British television program Channel 4 News about the genetics of skin colour, Rutherford who identifies as of mixed-race, candidly claimed when asked a question about what he wished he could do to change history, said that he wished genetics had advanced before anthropology. Genetics is the great equalizer of peoples while early anthropology made its fame by categorizing us and imagining differences on the basis of race. These differences informed fields like genetics (and eugenics), biology, and importantly criminology. Before criminologists had the industry to imagine a prison industrial complex, we were tainted by academic fields built on racist ideologies. Other institutions and modern nation states have done the same thing. 

It might seem that I have meandered from my topic of introductory criminology courses, but the divide between a historical approach to criminology and a more critical one appears to be alive and well. Disciplinary boundaries are superficial creations that steer students into fields that seem to be unconnected in meaningful ways. One of the principle claims of criminology departments is that in their pursuits they break the traditional boundaries separating academic disciplines and combine biological, psychological, and sociological perspectives. 

For one of my classes a colleague arranged a guest speaker who lectured about their own criminological research into a condition called “excited delirium.” Armed with peer-reviewed publications, this speaker claimed that “excited delirium” was a condition that combines psychology, biology, and criminology because it depicts suspects being taken into police custody experiencing an episode of heightened biological response causing almost superhuman strength, panic, and fight or flight. 

During the presentation, though I was the host, I was critical of how the topic was presented. Some cursory research shows that this troublesome condition does not hold up to critical muster. A 2020 article in The Washington Post (“Police Keep Using ‘Excited Delirium’ To Justify Brutality. It’s Junk Science”) shows this highly contentious term was even used by Derek Chauvin in the defence of his murder of George Floyd. The term reeks of the same history of “Othering” non-white peoples because of so-called different biological, psychological, or social baselines between them. Today, fiction and myth still exist on the fringes of academia or, sadly, they are disguised more subtly as “race science.” Rutherford claims his goal, in his latest book How to Argue with a Racist: What our Genes Do (and Don’t) Say About Human Difference, is to undermine arguments like these that disguise themselves as science. 

Introductory criminology need not waste time on racist skeletons of the past when so much new and critical research is published all the time. However, this can be an unpopular opinion and, in the case of criminology, can be exceptionally complicated to argue because the field itself claims such an interdisciplinary basis that sociologists who transition to criminology may find themselves pushing critical perspectives while colleagues teaching around them are not. It is an interesting time to be alive and to be shepherding knowledge to younger generations.