#as we all know fantasy exists primarily to be used as an excuse for writing more conlangs

[paragonrobits]

Hobbes, from Calvin And Hobbes, has always been one of my all time favorite characters. Including Kirby and Yoshi, he's one of the earliest characters I hyper-fixated on that I am AWARE of having done that. There's probably a lot of interpretations to be made from that. Along with Vivi (Final Fantasy 9) and Knuckles (Sonic the Hedgehog), he's a character that lives in my brain so long and so ferociously that most of my online persona used Hobbes-Vivi-Knuckles as an acronym just because i liked them so much

so, naturally, when i eventually went to fanfic ideas, Hobbes poses a few unique challenges as a character to focus on.

Most specifically is that Hobbes' ambiguous nature makes it difficult to really figure out how he interacts with others. He does do it, in his own strange way. Part of his source material's dynamic, however, is that we see everything through Calvin's lens of perspective. When Hobbes does stuff, its done filtered through Calvin's perspective.

(This also makes C&H a fantastic training for the concept of the unreliable narrator, not as a negative concept or villifying the viewpoint character, but simply stating that their POV is not necessarily what Really Happened, in an objective sense, or that there is even a concept of objective-ness at all, but that's besides the point.)

So how exactly do you write a character who specifically is always interacting with one viewpoint character, who has thoughts and feelings and independent action, and has his own perspective, but is always specifically linked to another person? We know what he SAYS, and what he DOES, and how those infer character and perspective, but because he almost never really does things unrelated to Calvin himself, it makes it hard to figure out additional aspects of his character that would be simply in other stories.

One obvious way to change things up is to drop the differing reality perspective gimmick and make Hobbes just a tiger-thing that lives there. I think, back in the day, this was a pretty common fanfic approach, and perhaps not coincidentally also leaned very hard to giving them an explicitly brotherly relationship, or outright had Hobbes adopted by Calvin's parents. This opens up some things, but the central problem remains:

how exactly do you write new aspects of his character, or find innovative elements WITHIN his canonical character, when a lot about him is simply inferred by what he says and does with Calvin, and not always in a way that communicates character in an explicitly true way?

This, funnily enough, makes him not dissimilar to Homestuck's characters. One of Homestuck's particular quirks is that the story is communicated primarily through conversation logs between characters, and brief narration from a viewpoint character OR an omniscient narrator. A key point here is that we, again, hear what they say and do, but we do not see things directly from their perspective. This means that just about EVERY SINGLE CHARACTER is an unreliable narrator. We can infer things, but it can be very difficult to work out what they think and feel based on WHAT they say but you can't always take it at face value.

You must, instead, analyze what they say and do and determine how much of it is their own persona vs it being authentic in some way. This is harder for some characters than others; for instance, when Terezi plays with a mock trial that ends in her hanging a plush toy, is this just another example of the brutality of her culture that even her imagination is violent? Is she a brutal, draconian pseudo-lawyer that looks for opportunitiess to indulge her bloodlust with the flimsiest of excuses?

Or, as I think, is the fact that she is doing this to a senator (an assuredly high position, presuming it even exists in her world), over embezzlement (a crime that, given her world's brutal nature, probably isn't seen as a crime at all), a hidden sign that she is more genuinely Good than she believes herself to be, as this is about making someone face punishment for an abuse of power? Her being more noble at heart than her self-doubt lets her believe?

Hobbes works in a similar way. Through his interactions with Calvin, we can infer a few things about him. He's very philosophical, much like Calvin. Unlike Calvin, if things are bad, he simply accepts them and tries to deal with it as best they can rather than raging against it. He's mischievous, playful, has a vindictive streak that flares up before it cools down, he's a LOT more openly whimsical than Calvin ("WHAT'S THE POINT OF BEING COOL IF YOU CAN'T WEAR A SOMBRERO" says Hobbes). He is not nearly as pessimistic about the nature of people as his real life inspiration, but he clearly sees humans as colletively taking the world to Hell in a handbasket but in a melancholy 'I suppose this is how the world is' sort of way.

Part of all this is that, at his core, he IS a tiger. His nature informs his character in a way not exactly common to comic strip characters that are talking animals or animal-like beings; he's fierce, food-motivated and doesn't really sweat the small stuff. He's not disinterested in the tragedy of the world, and indeed in some way he functions as a moral compass of sorts, but he doesn't really agonize about it. This even informs his character design; his very long body, proportionately short legs and long arms make him look charmingly odd, but when he moves on all fours its surprisingly realistic, and his proportions look the way they do because its basically what a tiger WOULD look like if they could stand up without any other alterations.

[bumblewarden]

[from the ttrpg book]

arlathvhen is listed as an elven word still in use by city elves, but the only known usage for it only make sense for the dalish

conclusion? among city elves, arlathvhen is a swear of exasperation in the same vein as the english "for the love of god"

makes for interesting cross-cultural communications if nothing else

[night-unfurls-its-splendour]

Bridgerton & Selective Justification: A Rant

With a Particular Aside in Which This Author Questions if There Isn't a Double Standard at Play in Televised Historical Fiction.

Ok so the other day i posted complaining about how ludicrous the "Will Daphne marry Prince Friedrich?!" Plotline is to me and i referred to Daphne as a "commoner". I got two comments on that post of people saying Daphne *isn't* a commoner because she's a Viscount's daughter. I did respond but I'd like to go a little more in depth into it my thoughts on why this plotline verges on abject silliness to me, based on my (i will freely admit) *limited* knowledge of British aristocracy and the source material itself.

So if anyone reading this has a more detailed knowledge of the Peerage and how it relates to Bridgerton please correct me I'm eager to know more.

So to start out my understanding of the pecking order goes like this:

DUKE/DUCHESS = Highest ranking title in the peerage. Often bestowed on important members of the Royal family not in direct line for the throne. Worth noting is the fact that a Duke in British peerage is different than a Continental Duke. On the European Continent title Duke/Grand Duke can be associated with sovereign rule of an independent state, which has never been the case in England. Dukes and Duchesses are addressed as "Your Grace"

MARQUESS/MARCHIONESS = English equivalent of Marquis/Marquise. Very high ranking in the peerage, closely related to Earldom, but more important  since it has it's roots as the title of border (marcher) lords instrumental in a country's defense.  

EARL/COUNTESS = Referred to as a "count" everywhere else. The difference is the heavy germano-scandinavian influence on early medieval England. "Earl" is derived from the Nordic term for what could be considered a chieftan. Earls being only slightly lower in rank than a Marquess could be very rich and very important. The Earldom of Northumberland was one of the richest in 16th century England.

Now at this point we start to get into the lower peerage.

VISCOUNT/VISCOUNTESS = Addressed as "The Right Honourable". Viscountsies in England tend to almost exclusively be secondary titles held by Marequesses and Earls and passed down to their sons. Any son of a Marquess or Earl is a Viscount. The oldest son inherits the title of Earl plus all subsequent lands estates and incomes. The younger sons could also be viscounts wherever there are titles enough.

BARON/BARONESS = lowest rank of the peerage.

BARONET/BARONETESS = The only British title that doesn't land you in the peerage, the rank of baronet is (as I have heard it described) the barnacle on the bottom of the British aristocracy. It's basically a weird limbo between a Lord and a Knight that was invented by King James I in 1611 primarily as a way to jack up taxes so tbh its kind of a joke.

So Daphne's brother Anthony is a Viscount. He inherited this title from his father which likely means that their father was a second son. As you can see from this ranking list I just did, in marrying Simon, Daph married up. Way up. Not unsusual, given that her family has money and is well regarded.

Now clearly Bridgerton works differently than ACTUAL Regency England. Here, APPARENTLY if you just make a good impression on the Queen she takes a VERY PERSONAL interest in your life and she will marry you off to whatever Foreign prince she's related to who happens to be visiting. But here's where it's a bit wooly for me because there are two different contexts for the term "commoner" in England.  I think we all pretty well know how the European Royal marriage market  worked up through the 19th century, since we all like to make fun of them being inbred. Because there's a bit of a hang up not just about "Royal blood" but also Diplomatic marriage.

In the context of people with titles or peerages being nobles/aristocrats and any one without being a commoner then of course, Daphne is a noble. HOWEVER the context in which I used it in my previous post was ROYALS vs NOT ROYALS. It's perfectly acceptable to refer to someone not of Royal Blood as a commoner. In my replies I used Elizabeth Woodville as an example of a commoner. Now she DID marry a royal (Edward IV) and of course this was a few hundred years before Bridgerton would be BUT EVERYONE thought Edward was crazy for marrying her and she was not well liked because she was seen as at worst a gold-digger and at best an upstart. It was not only an uneven match but a purely domestic one which cut of England from potentially politically critical strategic foreign marriages. This is how royalty worked.

Naturally the strategic aspect of marriages was *slightly* diminished in the nineteenth century, but not really and it was still considered extremely important. Usually a young royal looking to get married was doing so at their family's behest and had a pre-determined pool they more or less HAD to choose from. Marriage to commoners of course  DID happen. It was called "Morganatic Marriage". Prince Augustus of Prussia had a morganatic marriage to a Polish aristocrat. One of Charlotte's own sons, Augustus Fredrick, had TWO morganatic marriages which kept him away from court because his wife could not be recognised due to their having married in defiance of the Royal Marriages Act of 1772, which requires all members of the  British Royal family to obtain the monarch's consent before marrying.

So I posed the very realistic question of "how would this choice to marry Daphne affect the Prince?" I don't know how morganatic marriages were looked on based on Prussian law but it seems likely, especially since Prince Friedrich is the direct heir that this marriage would have caused problems and i find it doubtful that Daphne would ever find herself addressed as "Princess".

I know that Bridgerton is fiction and that in being fiction it is pardoned  for not following courses that would be realistic in actual history. But at what point does "it's fiction" become an excuse for sloppy execution of world building?

The show takes the time to explain to the viewer (in one of the precious few moments of actual exposition) why there are black aristocrats [because the king married a black woman and things changed - which JUST IN CASE anyone is wondering, no Charlotte of Mecklenburg-Strelitz was not in any meaningful way "bi-racial" irl, based on the research I've done.] With this kind of deviation from history in a Drama that does, without any official caveats in the marketing, claim to be set in England in 1813, the writers recognised that this needed to be qualified. And in qualifying it, they justify it. They take it beyond fiction into fantasy, but it is justified.

The reason they recognised it had to be justified is because they know that most of the viewers know this is not how it went in history and would hold them to account. So why isn't more care taken to qualify the Liberties taken with the REST of Recency Society?

They talk repeatedly about "Coming Out" into society, particularly regarding Eloise. And Eloise wears her hair down and wears shorter skirts because she's still considered a child because she isn't out. But the IMPORTANT, PRACTICAL parts of not being "Out" are COMPLETELY IGNORED. She and her younger siblings are OUT at SOCIETY EVENTS. CONSTANTLY. Eloise speaks when not spoken to. She speaks DIRECTLY TO THE FOPPING QUEEN (TO WHOM SHE'S NEVER BEEN PRESENTED, BUT I GUESS IF YOU'RE DaPhNe BRiDgErToN's sister you can do whatever you want). There are BABIES at BALLS in this show. For a story that's trying to sell you on the Strrrrrrictures of RRRegency Societeh they're TOTALLY NOT INCLUDING MOST OF THOSE STRICTURES except when the plot demands it.

Why, I ask, is this? Perhaps it is pure ignorance on the writers part. They don't qualify it because they don't know rules like this existed. In which case its just bad, sloppy writing.

OR

They do know about it and ignore it and don't bother to qualify it with a "Oh Daphne a match with Prince Friedrich is so advantageous how marvellous Prussia has recently accepted Morganatic Marriage ahahaha" because they think we a) don't know or b) don't care and ITS STILL SLOPPY WRITING. Which hey, most Bridgerton fans who swallow any swill where hot people catch feelings probably don't care, but that doesn't mean its not careless writing and it doesn't make it NOT condescending. Never write DOWN to your audience.

This show approaches (but by a hair's breadth doesn't reach) REIGN levels of bad in terms of historicity. And the writers of Reign, like the writers of Bridgerton never claimed to be making an authentic representation of history. But perhaps it's because BTon only has 2 actual historical figures (one of whom is SO UNRECOGNIZABLE from her historical counterpart in countenance and personality that they might as well have just made a composite character - "How much can you change a thing before it isn't that thing anymore?") Or perhaps it's the inclusivity shield  but it seems like Bridgerton is getting a lot more leniency than Reign did.

The pass I see given to Bridgerton is "its frothy fun" (and yeah okay these costumes are worlds more realistic to the claimed period than Reign was even with the jacked up, flat bustlines) BUT. SO. WAS. REIGN.

I don't even like Reign but I do think there's a double standard here and I would like to know why.

[nightwingmyboi]

I'll always remember Devin Grayson as the woman who wrote Nightwing getting raped by a supervillain and then tried to pass it off as "wasn't rape, just nonconsensual"...which is LITERALLY THE DEFINITION OF RAPE, YOU HACK!

MSL: Male rape is a topic rarely touched on in comics. Why is it suited to bring it into Nightwing?

DEVIN GRAYSON: For the record, I’ve never used the word “rape,” I just said it was nonconsensual (I know, aren’t writers frustrating? *smiles*) [x] 

Yeah there is no other word for what happened in Nightwing #93 other than rape...I can’t imagine why she would say otherwise. She did technically apologize, but that was ten or so years later. So she eventually, finally did come out and just admit what everyone already knew, but she was still way too late to actually fix any of the damage she caused with how she completely mishandled things. I also don’t think her little apology begins to cover all the issues I have with her. 

Devin’s characterization of Dick is just so, so freaking twisted to me. Really, I don’t think there is a Nightwing writer I despise more than Devin Grayson. The interviews I’ve read from her give me the creeps:

DG: The way I think about him [Dick], he likes everyone, he’s sort of a contact junkie - just this incredibly physical (and attractive) person who lives wholly in the corporeal plane and responds with - processes things in - his body before his head or heart. I imagine that he can be hypnotized by a touch the way other people can be stopped dead in their tracks by the sight of money or the promise of true love. I think he likes kicking and kissing in almost equal measure - except kissing edges out ahead because you can do it for longer and it leads to nicer things. [x]

Yeah that’s fucking unsettling. This is Devin being gross and projecting her sexual fantasy’s onto Dick. And she very much invented this extreme view of Dick as obsessively physical. Pre-52 Dick was always written as a master strategist, an unparalleled leader, one of the best detectives in the world, outside of Devin’s writing. Her fantasy version of Dick doesn’t mesh with that...Dick wouldn’t be capable leader if he’s “thinking with his body” (whatever that means) all the time. He’s survived this long because he’s intelligent and logical. Frankly, Devin’s take on things doesn’t even make any freaking sense. But it gets worse: 

DDG: I’m writing a novel for WB right now that he’s in and I have one scene where Batman has to stop a fight before it gets out of control, and most of the people he can just yell or glare at, but with Dick, he just stands really close behind him and Dick freezes. That’s not supposed to be a sexual thing (though it is kinda hot! ::laughs::), it’s an understanding on Bruce’s part that his physical proximity will speak just as quickly and loudly to Dick as his voice, maybe even be processed faster.

What the actual fuck. You’ve probably guessed it based on how that little scenario played out. Devin ships Dick with Bruce. 

DG: And now think about being a very physical and naturally gregarious and loving person and growing up with someone like Bruce. Then add in the confusion about his status - a “ward” is something you stop being the minute you turn eighteen. Having already lost his parents and then hurling into adolescence at the speed he did...in my personal version of the story, he develops sexual desire and social anxiety about the future at the same time, and this leads to tremendous confusion, on his part, about his role in Bruce’s life. He can’t be a ward forever, in the back of his head he knows he won’t be Robin forever...what is he to this man who is at once his best friend and personal savior, personal god? “Son” is what they eventually settle on, but I think when Dick was in his late teens, the idea of “lover” must have run through his mind (which means, really, as we’ve already discussed, it ran through his body).

Wild that Dick is usually written as incredibly intelligent and emotionally cognizant (was able to puzzle out Damian’s complex motivations and needs when no one else in Damian’s life could for example) and yet Devin thinks he’s not able to sort out that he’s not supposed to make sexual advances towards his father. And by wild I mean stupid as fuck. And, just fyi, Devin goes with the version of events where Bruce took Dick in when he was eight years old! So he’s pretty fucking young when this is all happening! Just when you thought it couldn’t get more disgusting. 

Eventually, much later, Dick gets distracted by other relationships and is able to ease up enough on Bruce for Bruce to relax into his own comfort-level of kindness and affection again (once the threat of sexuality has been removed) and they carry on more or less unharmed. But the relationship remains incredibly powerful and intense for Dick, who ends up feeling apologetic, rejected, and confused on top of all the other issues we already know exist between the two of them. Dick responds to Bruce - or really I should say Batman, since that’s who his relationship is with - on every single level.

So, according to Devin, Dick views Bruce as his “personal god” and is incredibly submissive to and possessive of him. That’s why Devin’s writing is littered with scenes like this: 

Gotham Knights #17

Where Dick acts incredibly awkward and “apologetic” about dating Barbara, because of how he previously made sexual advances towards Bruce in Devin’s fantasy world. Also with Devin, Dick spends a lot of his time stuttering every time Bruce is in the room, even though he’s usually a smooth talker, very chatty, and that’s because of the supposed “intensity” of Bruce and Dick’s relationship. And then there are scenes like this: 

Gotham Knights #18

Where Dick uncharacteristically and disproportionately loses his cool at the slightest insinuation against Bruce and is reduced to an angry hot head. Dick has been noted to be incredibly level headed; he’s also famous for being a mediator among the hero community...this behavior is a complete departure from the way he would normally act under other writers. Dick’s also been one to level plenty of criticisms towards Bruce himself. This sudden personality change where Dick thinks Bruce can do no wrong, where no one can criticize Bruce in Dick’s presence without him absolutely blowing up, where he suddenly can’t control his emotions over the littlest things...it really exists primarily in Devin’s writing. It’s incredibly OOC behavior and it’s rooted in Devin’s sexual fantasies frankly. 

Devin’s writing is also where Dick, despite being incredibly dedicated and monogamous in all of his previous relationships, suddenly became a womanizer. Literally, everyone was written as wanting to get into Dick’s pants: Rose Wilson was reduced to a giddy teenager because of Dick, random women in the streets would comment on how cute Nightwing was, a mob boss’s daughter who was only 15 years old was obsessed with Dick and made advances, Dick had a one night stand with Huntress because she reminded him of Bruce, Bruce called Dick “Hunk Wonder,” Dick undressed in front of fucking Deathstroke (and there was a newspaper with “Richard Wilson” on it as a sly little wink towards the audience), psycho vigilante Tarantula is obsessed with Dick to the point of raping him, the list goes on. If you want more samplings of how freaking disgusting and sex-obsessed Devin was when it came to Dick, look no further than her gross Inheritance book, where she ships Dick with everyone from Green Arrow to Aquaman (here are some quotes if you’re a masochist). And since Dick “thinks with his body” or whatever, Devin’d write him as receptive (or very oblivious) when it comes to this attention. 

Gotham Knights #10

Nightwing (1996) #107

Another thing that made me extremely uncomfortable is how Devin would always have strangers and villains, especially older men--people who Dick very much did not know and wouldn’t appreciate being in his personal space--be all grabby with him. Please leave him alone. 

Nightwing and Huntress #2

There Dick is, “hypnotized” in place by Huntress’s touch. Kill me. It is also especially messed up that Devin suddenly turned Dick into some sexual, warm-blooded hot head at the same time as she decided to introduce him as Romani. 

Q: How could him being Romani be used to inform his characterization?

It reinforces his “otherness” where Bruce is concerned in what I think is a useful, interesting way...It also presents the opportunity for there to be a slight chip on his shoulder, which maybe speaks to his scrappiness. It also maybe gives him a slightly deeper way to relate to someone like Helena--someone who is white but other--and gives the people who love (or lust after) him a potential cultural excuse for feeling as bewitched as they sometimes do. I also just love the idea of Bruce occasionally calling him “hot blooded” just to mess with him, because Dick would of course deny being so in an extremely hot-blooded manner. [x]

Her feeding into the fetishizing of biracial individuals is just disgusting and wrong. If there’s a racist stereotype available Devin really goes out of her way to make sure she includes it in her writing huh. 

Gotham Knights #20

And Bruce being a racist jerk is not charming Devin, it’s terrible. Barbara used slurs also, and was very dismissive of Dick’s reaction to Bruce’s actions...that was also horrible. It’s awful that Dick’s own family would apparently treat him this way. Obviously, Dick isn’t the only one that Devin would write out of character. 

It’s all just so messed up to me, I can’t stand it. When I first read her comics, even when it wasn’t blatant like above, I would feel something subtly off...and once I read her interviews I can’t help but notice these horrible underlying insinuations in all of her work, in so many seemingly “innocent” scenes. There are a lot of big things she’s known for (her horrible treatment of Dick’s Romani heritage and his rape for example) but all these subtle, insidious little details that people don’t even really register...they are equally frustrating to me. Seeing sects of the fandom pick up these details (like, the idea that Dick doesn’t understand personal boundaries, the idea that he’s a hot head, the idea that he’s a womanizer, etc.) when I know a lot of it stems nearly solely from Devin’s crappy characterization and writing of Dick...it’s hard. 

Q: Further to that, if Dick is gay, what kind of guy is his type?

DG: ...Type isn’t as important as passion and opportunity. Because of his psycho-sexual makeup, the other key factor would be a sense that he means something to that other man, that his “surrender” is making that man happy, allowing him to bring pleasure to someone (as he was never allowed to do for Bruce). There’s also a sense, if I may be so bold, of needing to be “caught” and “held down” - this going back to the trauma of losing his parents...being strong and passionate and heroic and virile and loving with a woman is fantastic, he lives for that. But he lost both parents. There is also a part of him that longs to be pinned down and loved a little bit savagely and hurt just enough to reassure him that he’s alive. Man, I’m totally gonna get fired when this comes out....

Literally makes me want to barf. That is supposed to be a professional, official writer at DC. Could go on forever. 

[revchainsaw]

Nausicaa and the Valley of the Wind (1984)

Prayers and Salutations Cult Members! I am your mysterious minister Reverend Chainsaw and this is another nights revival service at the Cult Film Tent Revival. I bring you a special word tonight. Tonight's word is about a person who roamed the earth, in a time where people were backward and warlike. A leader emerged into a kingdom full of eschatological expectation. This leader came preaching peace, and was killed for the sins of the world, but was resurrected. In that resurrection a new hope was brought to the planet, and true healing through the power of love in the face of violence is made possible. I am talking of course about Princess Nausicaa from the Valley of the Wind.

The Message

Nausicaa and the Valley of the Wind is the film that put studio Ghibli and Hayoa Miyazaki on the map. No animated feature this grandiose and epic had been achieved by 1984, as much as Disney may beg to differ. The tale may be simple, and it may feel super 80s to us today, but Nausicaa is a masterpiece, and the fact that Howl's Moving Castle is brought up alongside Princess Mononoke and Spirited Away more often than Nausicaa is a farce and a tragedy.

The film takes place on a fantastic planet that seems to have suffered the ravages of an apocalyptic war. A war that involved gigantic warriors with powers so devastating they about made the entire planet inhospitable if not uninhabitable; save for a few areas. The fall out of this ancient war has left the earth in a state of repair, where the natural processes of a planet healing has creating giant toxic jungles.

Beyond these jungles lie two imperialistic factions, they seem almost to be city-states but it's not terribly clear. The Kingdom of Tolmekia, a militaristic proto-fascist society of almost Spartan sensibilities. Tolmekia is governed by the ambitious and cynical Princess Kushana, But I like to call her Furiosa. Just like Furiosa, Kushana is physically missing parts of herself, a visual metaphor for her metaphysical lacking and the parts of her humanity she has cut away. Kushana's world view is one of fear, a fear that can only be quelled by waging a genocidal campaign against her enemies.

Speaking of enemies, the Athens to Tolmekias Sparta would be the Pejite Kingdom. The Pejites might like to view themselves as simply responding to Tolmekian aggression, but the narrative of the film, and the story told quite visibly on the body of Kushana, is quite different. The Pejites are just as bloodthirsty if not more palettable in their approach, but like the Tolmekians, they believe only their own lives have any value. And thus, in this theatre of war, a Giant Warrior from the ages before is unearthed by the Pejite Kingdom, Stolen by the Tolmekians, before the forces of nature themselves, seem to conspire to drop the Giant Warriors "egg" right into the Valley of the Wind.

The Valley of the Wind is populated like the world of Avatar the Last Airbender, that is mostly of children and the elderly. The people of the Valley have been able to remain untouched by the ravages of war and the toxic jungles of the damaged world primarily due to geographic luck that's explained in minor exposition in the film. They are ruled by a King, and they are all deeply enamored by their beloved Princess Nausicaa.

Nausicaa is a gentle soul. She is kind to animals, she is empathetic, unreasonably patient, and bears pain and grief inflicted on her out of cruelty with a saintly understanding. She really is a thinly veiled Christ figure, scratch that. There is no veil. But she's also my favorite Christ figure. She does not preach a message, as much as she tries to save everyone from their own short sighted goals. She is not perfect, she does lash out and do some fantasy sword fight murder, but she regrets her actions so deeply that it seems to have played a part in motivating her to become even more compassionate and patient with the evils of the world.

Nausicaa discovers yet another plot by the Pejites, who are afraid of the possibility of the Tolmekians awakening the Giant Warrior, to use animal cruelty to enrage a group of almost invincible giant insects known as the Ohm. By luring the Ohm into the Valley of the Wind where the Tolmekians have become an occupying force, they hope to completely wipe out everything that threatens them. The Tolmekians DO awaken the Giant Warrior and pure pandemonium ensues. Nausicaa manages to save the Baby Ohm and calm the rage of the bloodthirsty Ohm swarm, and to defeat the warlike tendencies of both the Pejites and the Tolmekians. All the while fulfilling a prophecy fortold about a messianic savior figure called the Man in Blue.

Now that you have heard the Gospel of Nausicaa, please stand to receive The Benediction.

Best Character: Half a Person

Now that I've spent the better part of this review gushing about our Lord and savior Nausicaa. I have to admit, she's at times a bit too perfect, a bit too saccharin. Even her flaw, or her one weakness and her failing to be perfect, just adds to the perfection. I can't even say she never makes mistakes cuz she made one, and that's infuriating. It's even more infuriating that I still think she's a great character. Normally this kind of thing really kills a hero. Most Chosen Ones are the most boring and least likeable characters in their narratives. I don't know how Nausicaa avoids this trap, but she does. I'll have to do some meditating on that.

However, just like in your typical Chosen One fantasy narrative, the hero is a lot less fun than the villain. I'm going to say the best character in Nausicaa is Kushana. I want to be like Nausicaa, but I don't understand her. She's almost alien, even though we learn all about her. Kushana is mysterious, secretive, and enigmatic, yet I understand her. She barely has an arc, she doesn't really change. She's cold and cynical to the bone, but I don't need to see much of her situation to completely understand why she is the way she is. I usually hate totalitarian bad guys, but Kushana I like. Sue Me.

Also fun fact, did you that Nausicaa means 'Sinker of Ships'. That's kinda fun.

Best Scene: Spoiled for Choice

I'm going to be lazy and say take your pick. There is really not a bad seen in this movie. If the action isn't going, then there's intriguing dialogue. If there's no dialogue then you may be about to get hit with a forceful burst of whimsy. There's horror, there's swordfights and aerial dogfights. The only thing in Nausicaa I don't like to see, is the bloody tortured Ohm Baby. It's like a god damned Sarah Mclachlan commercial.

Best Creature: Foxy Shazam!

The Ohm are so simplistic yet so detailed. The number of eyes is alien, but the way they are used is expertly expressive. Who'd think you could get me to love what basically amounts to a silverfish with the intensity that I love a kitten. How did Miyazaki pull an Okja with a creature that should be haunting our dreams? I don't know.

And what about the Giant Warrior! If you are an Evangelion fan then you probably already know that Hideaki Anno designed and animated the melting goopy biomechanical beast. Surely a sight that would make both H.R. Giger and Clive Barker giddy with excitement. Just the image of the silhouettes marching amidst the desolation of the old world is burned into my brain.

So which of these is the best creature from Ghibli's first outing? It's fucking Teto. It was always gonna be Teto you idiot. Just look at Teto, he's adorable. He's too cute to exist. I'm so alone. I need a pet.

Best Character Design: Tolmekian Regalia

I originally included this category to talk some about Kushana, however, at that time I also thought I was going to say Nausicaa was the best character. I thought hard about deleting it, but I think it's a different category and you can't accuse me of playing favorites because my favorite character is clearly Teto. Just to keep it simple. It's the two costume shift from full military regalia in white and gold, to the one metal arm, warrior princess get up. It's a great costume and a great look. Get on this shit cosplay nerds. It's great for Cons in Canada, you have to think about layers, and you can't keep going as Mr. Plow. It's lazy.

Best Excuse to Talk About Patrick Stewart's Character: Lord Yupa

I just realized that I was about to write this whole review without talking about Lord Yupa. Lord Yupa is a sword saint and all around badass I think a lot of entertainment, especially in the west is lacking bad ass old men. Lord Yupa particularly shines in the early half of the film as a warrior and as a wise council to Nausicaa. If she's Jesus then Yupa is John the Baptist. He is also voiced by the elegant and eloquent Patrick Stewart. He also comes with 2 chocobos!

Worst Character: For Whom Asbel Tolls

This might also be the worst actor category as well. Actual Cannibal (haha meme) and actual monster (haha real life) Shia Labeouf doesn't so much act in the role as he read the lines and it was recorded. The good news it doesn't effect the film too much because Asbel is completely forgettable. He is a catalyst to some of the action, but besides that I don't really care for him.

Worst Aspect: To Be Fair ...

It would be unfair to completely ignore anything negative about Nausicaa. I have already mentioned in many places that there are some pretty corny, or pretty predictable tropes to this movie. But what I can't capture in words is exactly why it feels fresh when it's done in this movie. I suppose that's what makes it good. It's just so good that it's weak points are lifted up by it's strengths. Some people may bored of Nausicaa's unyielding goodness, or that she very rarely chooses to take action as much as she chases and pleads with her surroundings, but I mean, she does pay for that eventually. It's a fantasy story and it hits a lot of timeless themes that have been hit in stories for as long as human beings have been telling stories. Some people may feel that it doesn't do enough to stand out.

Summary

I have defined the S tier for myself as "near perfect and personal favorite" films. I like to think that Nausicaa and the Valley of the Wind is near perfect. Some may say that it looks like it might just be a personal favorite. In the case of Nausicaa, I'm having a very hard time telling the difference. I think it would be overly simple to claim that Nausicaa is just an ancient archetypal heroes journey with an 80s anime coat of paint. I think it's doing quite a few new and interesting things with that formula, those things are just playing out all around that narrative as opposed to being at it's center. For a first full length outing by the studio, you can really see Miyazaki's heart and the values he holds close to. I'll repeat myself so that we are completely clear on the matter. I think Nausicaa and the Valley of the Wind is a near perfect movie.

Overall Grade: S

[thatiranianphantom]

how differently people treat archie & betty in regards to the cheating really doesn’t sit right w me. a lot of people excuse archie as confused whereas betty gets a lot of the backlash w people wanting physical violence between her & v & wanting betty to have 0 friends lmao

2/2 they’re either equal to me on some days bc i tend to not think of rvd as of late (a win for me!) or i prefer betty bc really i always have bc i’m not the biggest archie fan, plus to me she tried to and wanted to stop it so it just gives her a tad of an edge but just my opinion

You know, I am with you on the double standard, anon. I tend to see the opposite on my dash - an insane amount of Archie hate and people excusing Betty. I have, however, seen both. I think it is really important to keep a few things in mind:

1. Actors are not their characters and they have no creative control. That means it really doesn’t matter what KJ or Lili ship, they get next to no input on their character’s decisions. 

2. The women in this show are, generally speaking, written by men. They exist, in so many ways, as a male fantasy. I got really annoyed during my rewatch roundabout the third episode, when they tried to do this whole “men treat us as objects and it’s wrong” plotline. Frankly, it’s a plotline Riverdale doesn’t have any right to do. Betty’s very first scene was her in a bra, and she’s canonically 15. If the show does do a cheating plotline, it will be ostensibly from Betty’s perspective, but written by a man. That makes a huge difference. 

3. The men on Riverdale are writer self-inserts. I can’t stress that enough. Ted has actually admitted this in as many words. Jughead is wronged because Ted feels wronged by women. Jughead is a handsome (eh), talented person with a large circle of friends and (the show is convinced) a talent for writing because that’s Ted’s self insert. His girl gets taken by the all-American, fit, handsome (god I hate this) guy because that’s something Ted views as what would happen to a guy like him. Betty’s behaviour has no complexity, because it’s written through the lens of an adult man. Whether or not a man wrote these specific scenes that are so anti-Betty, the show is entirely conceptualized as a male-gaze thirst trap, and all its characters act accordingly. 

4. The show cares very little about relationship complexities, and I am not just talking about the Bughead vs. Barchie. I am talking about the intricacies of friendship, too. Veronica was willing to drink poison for Betty. The show is great at big gestures like that, but absolutely useless in the small scenes that would act as narrative scaffolding for this. The fact that this would ruin the friendships of the main characters was treated as very much an afterthought, when the show wants us to believe these characters are important to each other. 

5. The show gave us no thoughts from Archie’s perspective. I have long thought of Archie as a character who acts before thinking. That’s carried him through four years. It is not inconceivable that Archie would impulsively act on his “feelings” for Betty with no regard for the consequences. But we have no background on what motivated Archie in this particular instance. They never took the time to give us this situation from his perspective, and it would have been SO easy to write more narrative scaffolding on this from Archie’s perspective. Veronica was busy this season. Perhaps her and Archie drifted a bit apart because of it. Maybe Archie finally began to realize how different he and Veronica are, and because Jughead was also holding a plotline mostly independent of Betty in the beginning of this season, it would have been easy to have them spend a bit more time together. That would have been narrative scaffolding if they were going the whole “nostalgia” route. But we never received any indication that Veronica and Archie were starting to drift. This entire plotline was the cheapest way to create end-of-season drama from writers who can’t properly create story structure. 

6. The Betty and Archie of 4x17 and 4x18 bear little to no resemblance to the Betty and Archie of the rest of the show. 

All this to say, despite the length of this, I really don’t spend much time on it, anon. We know the writers are terrible at their jobs. I’m going to close this off with this quote which I think sums it up perfectly:

“...where it concerns Riverdale, there is no evidence to suggest that the writers have ever been adept at their jobs. Riverdale has always been a show that makes sh*t up as it goes along, aborts arcs whenever it feels like it (where’s Betty’s brother and Chic?), and has no problem with disconnecting from reality when it writes itself into a corner. Riverdale is primarily a vehicle to serve KJ Apa’s abs and lingering close-ups on the thighs of the female cast members.”

[moriganstrongheart]

On Firefly, Mediocrity and Problematic Media

When I first set to writing this, I intended to write a review of Firefly. I had recently rewatched Firefly and its tie-in, semi-sequel movie Serenity with my fiancée, and I wanted to express my thoughts on it. But I put the original first draft aside after writing two sentences and did not revisit it until months later. By then, I found I was no longer interested in reviewing Firefly, opting to explore issues of underlying misogyny and mediocrity in media instead. I think that Joss Whedon’s work is a good case study for these problems, as he exists simultaneously as a folk hero of sorts when it comes to speculative fiction, and as the harbinger of the now divisive Marvel Cinematic Universe. And Firefly being so beloved by its fans, I think it's worth diving deep into its problems to illustrate my points.

Perhaps the best way to demonstrate Firefly’s problems is in how it appeals to its fans. While I find the character interactions the best aspect of the show, I’m sure that quite a few fans—primarily young, white males—are attracted to the space western setting of the show and all the trappings that come with it. The Verse is filled with guns, alcohol, rape, savages and prostitutes—everything a new frontier needs, or so I expect is the intent. I don’t think these are ever the focus of the show, nor are they something Whedon ever places on a pedestal as ideals to strive for. But they are a part of the worldbuilding, and so were included with intent. There has been a debate for several years among fans of speculative fiction on whether worlds inspired by historical periods or specific cultures should include these so-called “less favourable” aspects of that period or culture, or if the speculative nature of the fiction should allow for their exclusion. I want to make it clear that I am in the second camp; I don’t believe that just because a fantasy world is set in a medieval time period that women shouldn’t be allowed to be knights, or that aliens or people of colour have to necessarily be slaves in a colonial space opera. It is speculative fiction after all, and we are under no obligation to hold ourselves to any supposed cultural or historical accuracy.

This is, of course, ignoring the fact that the cultural and historical accuracies being strived for have flawed origins, having been decided by academics with their own bias, or even maybe their own agenda. I would make further arguments that historical fiction and literature are themselves often coloured by the author’s intent, and so certain aspects are accentuated while others are ignored or downplayed in order to tell a specific story—often to the detriment of minority groups. It’s impossible to divorce bias from one’s work, no matter how objective the work claims to be. This has been proven time and again, evidenced by the revision of textbooks throughout the years.

Regardless, counter arguments to the exclusion of “less favourable” elements are normally that doing so waters down the source material, diminishing its authenticity and, more interestingly, it represents a disagreeable emotional sensitivity on the part of the opposition. This point of view assumes that the opposition is averse to certain perceived realities in the world, and that the narrative they want to ascribe themselves to would be unrealistic and, as such, not entertaining. In reality, all parties are involved in some form of escapism. The outcry for realism is a smokescreen for the desire to keep a specific form of escapism, one which can only be described as a violent, misogynistic power fantasy. The source of this outcry—again, predominantly young white males—sees the inclusion of bigotry and sexual violence as essential to their viewing experience, as they take enjoyment out of them. That isn’t to say that having violence, sexual themes or social inequality don’t have a place in fiction; they just need to have a purpose. Without purpose, they are only there to service the twisted fantasies of the target audience.

For an example that brings us back to Firefly, it never really feels like Irana’s career as a courtesan serves any other purposes than as an excuse for partial nudity, sex scenes and for Malcolm to call her “whore” on the regular. There are times where her position as a high-ranking courtesan opens doors for the Firefly crew, but this is a contrivance of how courtesans work within the Verse, and not a part of the skillset she has accrued to become a courtesan. The only true exception to this—that I can remember—is her role in grooming the magistrate’s son in the episode Jaynestown, which directly affects the primary conflict. Apart from this instance, none of her meaningful contributions to the plot necessitate her being a courtesan. She could have just as easily been someone with social or political clout. However, this wouldn’t have allowed for her to be the ship’s prostitute, there only to drive Malcolm up the wall and have someone he could call “whore” without guilt. As such, it became necessary for Whedon to not only make her a sex worker, but to create an entire system around her which would give her importance to the plot. In essence, he wanted his cake and eat it too. It’s disappointing, as the idea of having a sex worker being an important member of the main cast is interesting enough as a concept to explore. Ideally, this person would be treated with respect by others for their work, and their value should come from them as a person, not from a fabricated social status.

As a side note, I acknowledge that most people in the show respect Inara, but it is because of her fabricated social status and not because of who she is as a person. The only people who respect her for who she is and what she does are women and the one person of colour on the crew.

There are a lot of other small decisions within Firefly that show Whedon’s intent, such as the characterizations of River’s mental illness and Jayne as a character. I can’t help but wonder if Firefly were produced today on HBO or Netflix, if the showrunners would have allowed the inclusion of far more sexual violence and bigotry in hopes of attracting a larger audience. Because while we have collectively become much more cognizant of issues like diversity and the portrayal of women in media, shows with portrayals of sexual violence and bigotry tend to perform better overall. Unfortunately, the vocal minority shouting their preferences on social media only helps to reinforce this trend.

However, I don’t want to make the wrong impression. Sexism, racism, violence and bigotry are not the focus during Firefly’s runtime. In fact, Whedon generally does a good job of representing healthy relationships, strong female characters and positive representation of people of colour. For example, Zoe and Wash’s relationship is very admirable, and Kaylee is perhaps the best character on the show. The problems exist beneath the surface, informing everything from story conflicts to character motivations. Whedon comes off as a guy just wanting to have some fun, someone who is cool and trendy, just rude enough to be interesting, but knowing where to draw the line. Really though, he’s just the best of a bad lot within the entertainment industry. A lot who are, unsurprisingly, white men catering to their younger selves.

As a white man myself, I am constantly checking myself and the works I create to ensure I am providing a compelling story while avoiding trappings indicative of a male power fantasy. Because of the environment I grew up in, it can be easy to rely on tired old tropes instead of thinking of meaningful and interesting things to write. Does that mean that catering to the needs of a diverse audience is too difficult, and as such, is detrimental to the creative process? I don’t believe so, despite what many may believe. If anything, it forces writers to think of novel, more captivating stories that don’t rely on tropes and power fantasies to work. I believe that the reason people have become so weary of the Marvel Cinematic Universe and similar works is because they all rely on a power fantasy to function. I myself have grown tired of seeing the same story over and over, and it is only in the last decade that I realized the reason for this is that most people behind the works I consume are—again—white males catering to their younger selves.

This has led me to question if it’s right for me to have my voice heard at all. Would I not just be another straight, white male entering a space already filled with the same? Perhaps, but I don’t think the intent of fostering diversity in media is to exclude white people. In fact, if people like Whedon were the worst in terms of what white males have to offer the entertainment industry, I think we’d be in a better place. The problem is that the majority of the media we consume today is problematic and doesn’t allow for any variance from what’s trending among a young white male audience. All I can do is hope that shows like Firefly can be used as a learning experience for creating more compelling and varied stories. Stories should rely on interesting characters, worlds and the interactions in between them to be entertaining, and not on fulfilling the twisted power fantasy of the audience under the guise of realism.

[sonicringbond]

Sonic Ring Bond: The Journey - Scene 16

And here we go, the second update since the schedule change! It’s really so weird only posting twice a week, but survey results implied that would be best for everyone.

Onto the scene itself, I’m really enjoying writing with a dual narrator approach. I need to be really careful with it in the future though as it’s very easy to over use it. But that’s for me to worry about. For everyone else I just ask that you enjoy...

     “OW! Is that really necessary!”

     Rosy held nothing back as she yelped in tune to the jingling of lost Rings. The black robed priest looked at her confused that she would ask, but still answered her all the same.

     “It is customary to strike free the Rings that we come into contact with on our travels.”

     “But you could just ask me!” Rosy huffed while puffing up her cheeks. “I don’t see the point but if you just asked, I would turn them over.”

     The priest sighed and pinched the bridge of his nose as he shook his head. “You do not understand child. The nature of the Rings… If we do not strike you the energies binding them to this world will not be released.”

     “Hrmm~!” Her cheeks growing redder and larger as she tried to keep in her anger, Rosy eventually let it all go with a sigh. “I still don’t see the point. Rings are helpful.”

     “They are an accursed thing child. Were you not taught this already?”

     “I’ve been taught plenty of times, but where I’m from Rings are just accepted as normal and used to keep everyone connected.”

     “It’s hard to fathom such a distant land exists,” the priest scoffed and again Rosy’s cheeks puffed up in frustration. It was unlikely she would get anywhere with the priest and soon headed off, though not without pulling down on an eyelid and sticking her tongue out at him when he was not looking.

     ~I know making faces at the priest wasn’t going to help me, but he was such a jerk I had to do something. He also wasn’t why I had traveled to Jutting Rock Village either. Though it wasn’t like I could just walk around town and stumble onto the source of the rumors. Not that I didn’t want to walk around town. Tee-hee~♫

     ~No one knew where the ancient ruin had come from, or even what it was built for. The town itself had been built on it sometime in the past and even past Ring Shifts had not dislodged it. That afforded the town a sort of fun atmosphere as no one was scared of losing their homes. Windmills adorned various streets and stairwells that threaded through the ruin and high up to it’s upper reaches. The stone slab road seemed kind of silly compared to the colorful pebbly roads of the town. Trees growing out of the side of the ruin were amazing to see to. And it wasn’t just the ruin either, everything had plants of some kind or another covering it. The moss and flowers were my favorites, though some of the vines looked like they could lead me to interesting places. It was the type of town I could get happily lost in so easily. Fortunately for me I was kind of famous in a way, tee-hee~!~

     “Excuse me miss.”

     “Hm?” Rosy tilted her head back as someone called from among the busy market stall lined street. Turning fully around to see if she could figure out who called her, a young human man with pasty skin tumbled out of the crowd holding a cloth to his sweaty brow. He was well dressed as though he worked for someone important but seemed terribly flustered and worn out. “Did you call me?”

     Walking to the man as he braced himself on his knees Rosy clasped her hands behind her back and began to sway absent mindedly.

     “Y-yes!” The man exclaimed between gasping breathes. He was obviously not in good shape and Rosy felt sorry for him.

     “I hope I didn’t upset you at all,” Rosy somewhat apologized as she looked him over curiously. He did not appear to be a threat, but alone as she was in a strange land Rosy could not afford to be too careful. She was sure though that it was more likely him that needed help rather than her and offered him such. “Maybe I could help you out?”

     “P-p-please! If you would be so kind miss.”

     Scratching her cheek Rosy laughed nervously. “Well, if it isn’t too much I guess.”

     ~I have a love of fortune telling and keep a deck of tarot cards with me, my oldest friends really, so I knew before I ever arrived that today would be fortunate. The silly man who called out to me was a servant of an old man who saw me from his bedroom window while I was wandering around town. His reason for wanting to see me was kind of sad though, even if it was fortunate for me.~

     “AH~! It’s really everyone! I can’t believe it!” Rosy eyes shimmered with joy at the framed picture of her and her friends on a bedside table in a plush and cozy room of a well-off sapient owl. In material wealth at least. Looking from the table to the venerable owl who lay in his bed watching her with eyes that had almost lost all sight to an unsightly white film, Rosy’s tail stopped wagging and she calmed herself down. “If you don’t mind me asking, where did you get it?”

     “It’s a funny story,” the owl breathed, smiling at Rosy. “My son came across it and thought you were perhaps performers. It has been some time since I’ve watched any and he thought it would cheer me up bound to bed as I am. Imagine my surprise when I saw you walking by garbed as you are. The way you carried yourself It was obvious that you were no performer, but rather a traveler. Such a curious outfit for that lifestyle.”

     “Well, it’s kind of multipurpose,” Rosy laughed embarrassed. “I can run, and tumble, and swim in it, and it’s so pretty too. Though I don’t remember how I got it anymore, just that I wear it when I travel…”

     A sad smile came to Rosy’s face and she kicked at the carpeted floor as she clasped her hands behind her back. She was not one to dwell on sorrows though and thought she would cheer up the old owl instead. “But, while I’m not a performer I tell fortunes as a hobby and could tell you yours if you’d like. Or maybe I could try to perform a little bit. I’m pretty acrobatic and good at tumbling and somersaults and twirling!”

     “Why that would be delightful! Yes, I would like that very much!”

     ~And so, I did my best to entertain the kindly old owl. He was so much nicer than the pirate owl who was chasing me and my friends. And maybe it was his age or health, but it was his son’s fortune he wanted to know and not his. I’m glad it was a good one too as it made him so happy.

     ~I ended up staying in town for another day or so trying to figure out how I could ask him for the picture. It would help so much in finding everyone, but it made him so happy to imagine us being traveling performers that I couldn’t just take it from him. But I didn’t need to.

     ~His house servant found me again while I let myself get lost in town. He was really sad too as the old owl had passed away. His last request of his house servant was to let me have the picture so I could find my friends. It was just like my cards had foretold. I would be very fortunate in Jutting Rock Village. But why did the old owl have to die?

     ~No matter how many times I’ve watched the sun rise and set I know I haven’t aged a day. Is it because I interact with the Rings in this strange land? It doesn’t make sense. I don’t know. But I do know I don’t want to waste the old owl’s gifts. He wanted me to find my friends and so I will. With the help of the picture he gave me.~

     “But I wonder who made it?” Rosy pondered aloud as she walked along the stone slab road that led from Jutting Rock Village. “I know we didn’t have time to make a picture after we took it, so how?”

     Pulling the folded photograph from one of the puffy shoulders of her leotard, Rosy finally noticed writing on the back.

     “This is–!”

     -If you’re reading this Rosy-lass, consider it a gift from your friend, Mach Frog Gill. Though really, just me tossing fortunes to the wind and hoping it’ll indebt you to me instead. I could always use help gathering more Rings.-

     “What do you even need Rings for Gill?” Rosy laughed and wiped away the tears welling in her eyes. “No one likes them to begin with that I’ve met. Ooh~! I guess I’ll just have to find you too so I can ask!”

     Her mind made up, and a clue to finding someone she knew in hand, Rosy picked up her pace and soon was speeding along at a pace that would take her to distant lands in hours. Her next adventure had begun, and she would chase it to the ends of the world.

Scene 16 · CLEARED Rosy the Traveler, End

-----

And there we are, the first episode of Rosy the Traveler. I hope everyone enjoyed this tinier and more intimate style of adventure with the dual narrator approach. And perhaps it’s a bit of a sad story, but I really hope everyone enjoyed it all the same and will look forward to the next episode.

Thank you everyone!

-----

Story Format by @cutegirlmayra​ Story by @JoshTarwater/SonicFanJ Illustration by Nella @NellaSanchz on Twitter Inspiring Song - Granblue Fantasy — Lumacie Archipelago Mysterious Forest

Fair Use Disclaimer

Sonic the Hedgehog and all affiliated characters and logos are the express property and Copyright© of SEGA SAMMY HOLDINGS used without permission under Title 17 U.S.C Section 107 of the Copyright Act 1976 in which allowance is made for “fair use” for purposes such as criticism, comment, news reporting, teaching, scholarship, and research. “Fair use” is use permitted by copyright statute that might otherwise be considered copyright infringement. The Sonic Ring Bond: The Journey alternate universe (AU) consumer written work of fiction is a non-profit transformative work primarily for personal use and can and will be taken down without warning or prior notice at the request of the copyright holder(s) should it not be recognized under “fair use”.

*Sonic Ring Bond logo created by DEE Art – twitter.com/daryliscute.

Sonic Ring Bond AU and Sonic Ring Bond: The Journey are the creation of Joshua David Tarwater/ynymbus/sonicfanj/@Joshtarwater and is to be, including all contents herein considered for all legal purposes the property of the Sonic the Hedgehog intellectual property (IP) and copyright owners, SEGA SAMMY HOLDINGS. All story contributors via prompt, suggestion, written scene, art, and all and every other contribution acknowledge that all contributed material is forfeit for legal purposes to SEGA SAMMY HOLDINGS upon official request from SEGA SAMMY HOLDINGS.

[simonjadis]

Anon I’m ASSUMING that these are from the same person; apologies if they are not

I would say that my feelings are similar to yours, but not quite identical ...

Disney’s handling has been imperfect, and some of the mistakes have been made the highest level (I know that people give Kathleen Kennedy a hard time, but if rumor is to be believed, some of the interference that made IX kind of weird came from higher than that)

for example, Kennedy said in an interview that she tries to find people who just make big, successful movies to make sure that these are also big, successful movies. I can understand that as being a safe bet from a business stand point, but that’s not the same thing as finding someone passionate about very specifically telling good, new Star Wars stories, which we did not really get in the Sequel Trilogy

(one of the most common theories that I saw from TLJ apologists was that people didn’t like that it was new/different than what they were expecting, which was really not the issue for me or my friends. Also it was just a speedrun of parts of Episodes V and VI)

I think that I’m “too close” to Star Wars to see it as a financial asset rather than a beloved universe full of characters and stories that I adore, but I don’t think that “literally just rehash the Original Trilogy for two movies and barely acknowledge any other part of Star Wars until IX” was a good idea

Rey deserved her own story. and Luke deserved to not be retroactively robbed of his

as for George Lucas, I do think that years of backlash over the Prequels sucked the fun out of it for him. Also, who doesn’t want four billion dollars? it was a sweetheart deal for Disney, of course

the sad thing is that this meant the end of Clone Wars, because Disney took one look at Lucasfilm’s budget and was like “OH NO YOU CANNOT SPEND THAT KIND OF MONEY ON A CARTOON” which is why Season 6 was paid for by Netflix and why Maul: Son of Dathomir was a comic

I love Star Wars Rebels and I’m not trying to knock the show at all, but the budgetary difference was palpable. Clone Wars did have it a little easier because of the Clone Troopers (all having the same face), but on Rebels, you notice that 90% of the Imperials are the same guy wearing a hat with his visor obscuring most of his face. market scenes show just a few people (but plenty of Storm Troopers)

the designs of the main characters -- Ezra, Hera, Sabine, Zeb, Kallus, Thrawn, Kanan, etc -- are great and loving and detailed and most of those change a little over time, but there’s a reason that we only see so many planets on Rebels. look at the huge armies and crowds in Rebels. my friend @drunkkenobi​ is the first who pointed out to me that in Clone Wars, you sometimes see lines of ships (Space Traffic) and each ship in line will be unique, distinct from the others

it’s not Rebels’ fault that they didn’t have that kind of budget. that’s also why their space battles (and space ships) never quite look right. meanwhile, for Clone Wars, if they wanted a particular scene or ship that went over their planned budget, all that they had to do was ask Uncle George

eccentric billionaires funding expensive media isn’t necessarily the most sustainable model for storytelling, but it sure worked out well for Clone Wars and for The Expanse

(Jeff Bezos personally called up the head of Amazon Prime programming, who had already been considering acquiring the extremely good but expensive show, and was like “hey the cast from this show is at a thing where I am, I’d love to just tell them that their show is saved, give me it?” and we saw as many new locations in Season 4 as we did in the first three seasons)

but streaming -- where you actually get money directly from customers who then, through their activity on your platform, show you exactly what they want to see aka what is keeping them on your platform -- offers a new opportunity for high quality genre media. remember, scifi and fantasy were EVERYWHERE in the ‘90s and the early aughts, and then because too expensive for regular TV unless they had huge audiences. only through streaming do we have these new Star Treks, The Witcher, and the real possibility of a new Stargate series

why do I bring up streaming? because

The Mandalorian goes to show that Disney can 100% do good Star Wars. Rebels was good, despite its budget, but can you imagine how much better it would have been if it had aired on Disney+

as with the DC movies (three of which are good and I’m also excited for Birds of Prey), the solution to the our-movies-made-a-lot-of-money-but-aren’t-strictly-speaking-good is literally just “let the people who do the cartoons make the movies”

and now we’re getting a final, seventh (half) season of Clone Wars! twelve episodes looking better than the show has ever looked!!

if you’re like me, you probably thought to yourself “gee, only 12?” and, cynically, you figured that it’s a trick -- announced at ComicCon in 2018 to build up the first wave of hype for Disney+

and it is ... but it 100% worked on me, I signed up for Disney+ and will pay anything for Clone War

my HOPE is that this is a test run to see if people really like high-quality animated Star Wars stories enough to continue with it. there’s only so much clone wars that one can cover (my suspicion is that we will see Ahsoka fake her death during Order 66 in these eps, so yep, that’s the end of the Clone Wars right there)

imagine a well-written series with everything that Clone Wars had in terms of content and visual quality, but it’s set after Episode IX. to my frustration, IX ends with effectively the same worldstate as VI which essentially means that nothing much happened in the Sequel Trilogy. but imagine a series set after IX. we could see a new set of (Force-wielding) characters. we could see Rey, Finn, Poe, and Rose during some episodes. Rose could finally get to do something that’s not an insulting fool’s errand (she deserves so much better!!!!!)

we don’t need a new Big Scary Empire/First Order thing, just organized crime and pirates and Hutts and bounty hunters and individual planet systems going to war as the characters try to assemble a NEW New Republic (gods I hate the unchanged worldstate)

now, I know that Star Wars Resistance is not ... reassuring. this is the only screencap that I have from it because I couldn’t get into it. it’s not the animation (I enjoyed Tron Uprising and Iron Man: Armored Adventures and this is the same kind of deal), but three things:

-I watch Star Wars for the Force primarily; other stuff can be cool but I need the Force

-I will never care about ships racing and really I don’t care about an individual ship flying; I’m a Command Ship kind of space nerd

-apparently the writing doesn’t improve much during the first season. people tell the main character to not do something, then he does it, and disaster ensues. that’s ... it’s fine, it’s fine to exist as a show, it’s just not for me

obviously, not all Star Wars media is for me, but when something -- like TLJ or the Sequel Series as a whole (even though VII and IX are enjoyable) or Resistance -- disappoints me, I would never accuse it of “ruining Star Wars”

Star Wars is a whole franchise. the breadth of canon isn’t all wiped away by some disappointments. was the MCU ruined by Age of Ultron? no. it was a bad movie but from the same franchise that gave us The Winter Soldier and Thor Ragnarok. hell, Dawn of Justice doesn’t “ruin” Wonder Woman or Aquaman or Shazam. bad movies aren’t contagious

for the past several years, the Entitled Dude crowd has felt empowered. they were radicalized in the altright/redpill/MGTOW/meninist/nazi/gamergate/comicsgate/etc spheres of the internet and now they just have a reflex where they see any sort of representation and decry it as “SJW,” which they also seem to think is a bad thing

in the same way that well-meaning people on tumblr can get radicalized into being antis/puriteens, people with certain vulnerabilities on reddit or youtube can get sucked into a world that tells them that they are the default and that other people existing is “political” in media and in real life, and that people being upset by outright cruelty towards them is both funny and means that the cruel person is the victor. they need therapy and studios need to not listen to them

unfortunately, sometimes there are movies that are bad despite having things like solid representation. Ghostbusters 2016 was a delight, but my friends and I with whom I saw TLJ (all of us queer feminists) left the theater angry. we’ve bitten our tongues a lot (even if it seems otherwise) because publicly criticizing the film too often leads some incel monster to chime in with agreement, and we’re just like

the redpillgate crowed et all is a natural ally of conservative white evangelicals, even though the former group is generally made up of New Atheists (the short version is atheists who hold socially conservative views because racism/misogyny/transphobia benefit them without using christianity as an excuse). it’s kind of like how terfs will side with conservative hate groups because, though they’re natural enemies, they both despite trans people just for existing

unfortunately, when you’re looking at who went to see a movie or who hated it, not everyone posts with an ID card saying exactly their demographic. which is only going to make studios like Disney even more nervous about including queer content in Star Wars and in the MCU (I mean real queer content with characters whose names don’t have to be searched on a wiki)

that was a bit of a tangent, but yeah. sorry if I missed anything

[buzzdixonwriter]

Sci-Fi And The Sincerest Form Of Flattery

I know many of you prefer “science fiction” or “science fantasy” or “speculative fiction” or “sf” or even “stf” for short, but I ain’t that guy…

I’m a sci-fi kinda guy.

I prefer sci-fi because to me it evokes the nerdy playfulness the genre should embrace at some level (and, no we’re not gonna debate geek vs nerd as a descriptor; “geeky” implies biting heads off chickens no matter how benign and respectable the root has become).

. . .

A brief history of sci-fi films -- a very brief history.

Georges Melies’ 1898 short A Trip to The Moon is one of the earliest examples of the genre, and it arrived full blown at the dawn of cinema via its literary predecessors in Verne and Wells.

There were a lot of bona fide sci-fi films before WWII -- the Danes made a surprisingly large number in the silent era, Fritz Lang gave us Metropolis and Frau Im Mond, we saw the goofiness of Just Imagine and the spectacle of Things To Come and the space opera appeal of Flash Gordon and Buck Rogers.

And that’s not counting hundreds of other productions -- comedies and contemporary thrillers and westerns -- where a super-science mcguffin played a key part.

That came to a screeching halt in WWII primarily due to budget considerations and real world science easily overtaking screen fantasy.  Still, there were a few bona fide sci-fi films and serials during the war and immediately thereafter, but it wasn’t until the flying saucer scare of the late forties that sci-fi became a popular movie genre again (and on TV as well).

Ground zero for 1950s sci-fi was George Pal’s Destination Moon, which was an attempt to show a plausible flight to the moon (it was actually beaten to the screens by a couple of other low budget movies that rushed into production to catch Pal’s PR wave for his film).

This led to the first 1950s sci-fi boom that lasted from 1949 to 1954, followed by a brief fallow period, then a larger but far less innovative second boom in the late 1950s to early 1960s.

BTW, let me heartily recommend the late Bill Warren’s magnificent overview of sci-fi films of that era, Keep Watching The Skies, a must have in any sci-fi film fan’s library.

Seriously, go get it.

Bill and I frequently discussed films of that and subsequent eras, and Bill agreed with my assessment of the difference between 1950s sci-fi and 1960s sci-fi:  1950s sci-fi most typically ends with the old order restored, while 1960s sci-fi typically ends with the realization things have changed irrevocably.

In other words, “What now, puny human?”

I judge the 1960s sci-fi boom to have started in 1963 (at least for the US and western Europe; behind the Iron Curtain they were already ahead of us) with the Outer Limits TV show, followed in 1964 by the films The Last Man On Earth (based on Richard Matheson’s I Am Legend), Robinson Crusoe On Mars, and The Time Travelers.

But what really triggered the 1960s sci-fi boom was Planet Of The Apes and 2001: A Space Odyssey.  The former was shopped around every major Hollywood studio starting in 1963 until it finally found a home at 20th Century Fox (whose market research indicated there was an audience for well-made serious sci-fi film and hence put Fantastic Voyage into production).  Kubrick, fresh off Lolita and Dr. Srangelove (another sci-fi film tho not presented as such), carried an enormous cache in Hollywood of that era, and if MGM was going to bankroll his big budget space movie, hey, maybe there was something to this genre after all.

From 1965 forward, the cinematic space race was on, with 1968 being a banner year for groundbreaking sci-fi movies:  2001: A Space Odyssey, Barbarella, Charly, Planet Of The Apes, The Power, Project X, and Wild In The Streets.  (Star Trek premiering on TV in 1967 didn’t hurt, either.)

And, yeah, there were a number of duds and more than a few old school throwbacks during this era, but the point is the most interesting films were the most innovative ones.

Here’s a partial list of the most innovative sci-fi films from 1969 to 1977, nine-year period with some of the most original ideas ever presented in sci-fi films.  Not all of these were box office successes, but damn, they got people’s attention in both the film making and sci-fi fandom communities.

=1969=

The Bed Sitting Room

Doppelganger (US title:  Journey To The Far Side Of The Sun)

The Gladiators

The Monitors 

Stereo 

=1970=

Beneath The Planet Of The Apes [a]

Colossus: The Forbin Project 

Crimes Of The Future 

Gas-s-s-s

The Mind Of Mr. Soames 

No Blade Of Grass 

=1971= 

The Andromeda Strain 

A Clockwork Orange 

Glen And Randa 

The Hellstrom Chronicle 

THX 1138 

=1972=

Silent Running 

Slaughterhouse Five 

Solaris [b] 

Z.P.G.

=1973=

Day Of The Dolphin

Fantastic Planet 

The Final Programme (US title: The Last Days Of Man On Earth)

Idaho Transfer 

=1974=

Dark Star 

Phase IV 

Space Is The Place 

Zardoz 

=1975= 

A Boy And His Dog 

Black Moon 

Death Race 2000

Rollerball

Shivers (a.k.a. They Came From Within and The Parasite Murders)  [c]

The Stepford Wives 

=1976= 

God Told Me To [a.k.a. Demon]

The Man Who Fell To Earth 

=1977=

Wizards

[a]  I include Beneath The Planet Of The Apes because it is the single most nihilistic major studio film released, a movie that posits Charlton Heston blowing up the entire planet is A Damn Good Idea; follow up films in the series took a far more conventional approach to the material.  While successful, neither the studio nor mainstream audiences knew what to make of this film, so 20th Century Fox re-released it in a double bill with another problematic production, Russ Meyer’s Beyond The Valley Of The Dolls, and holy cow, if ever there was a more bugfuck double feature from a major studio I challenge you to name it.

[b]  Other than Karel Zemen’s delightful animated films, Iron Curtain sci-fi films rarely screened in the US, with the exception of special effects stock shots strip mined to add production values to cheapjack American productions (looking at you, Roger Corman).  Solaris is the exception.

[c]  David Cronenberg made several other films in this time frame, but most of them were variations on the themes he used in Shivers, including his big break out, Scanners.  Realizing he was repeating himself, Cronenberg reevaluated his goals and started making films with greater variety of theme and subject matter.

. . .

The astute reader will notice I bring my list to an end in 1977, a mere nine-year span instead of a full decade.

That’s because 1977 also saw the release of Close Encounters Of The Third Kind and Star Wars.

The effect was immediate, with knock-off films being released the same year.

1978 saw Dawn Of The Dead, a sequel to 1968’s Night Of The Living Dead, and Superman, the first non-campy superhero movie aimed at non-juvenile audiences.  

1979 gave us Alien, Mad Max, and Star Trek: The Motion Picture.

These films were not just successful, they were blockbusters.

And none of them were original.

Close Encounters served as an excuse to do a Kubrick-style light show; plot and theme are about as deep as a Dixie cup, and of all the blockbusters of that era, it’s the one with no legs.

Alien’s pedigree can be traced back to It! Terror From Beyond Space (and It’s pedigree goes back to A.E. van Vogt’s “Black Destroyer” and “Discord In Scarlet” in the old Astounding Stories) and Demon Planet (US title: Planet Of The Vampires) by way of Dark Star (Dan O’Bannon writing the original screenplays for that film and Alien as well).

Mad Max, like 1981’s Escape From New York, differs from earlier post-apocalypse movies only insofar as their apocalypses of a social / cultural / political nature, not nuclear or biological weapons.  Mad Max, in fact, can trace its lineage back to No Blade Of Grass, which featured it own caravan of refugees attacked by modern day visigoths on motorcycles, and the original Death Race 2000, as well as an odd little Australian non-sci-fi film, The Cars That Ate Paris.

Not only was Dawn Of The Dead a sequel, but it kickstarted a worldwide tsunami of zombie movies that continues to this day (no surprise as zombie films are easy to produce compared to other films listed here, and while there are a few big budget examples of the genre, the typical zombie movie is just actors in ragged clothes and crappy make-up).

Superman was…well…Superman.  And Star Trek was Star Trek.

And the granddaddy of them all, Star Wars, was a cinematic throwback that threw so far back it made the old seem new again.

Not begrudging any of those films their success: They were well made and entertaining.

But while there had been plenty of sequels and remakes and plain ol’ knockoffs of successful sci-fi movies in the past, after these seven there was precious little room for anything really different or innovative.

1982’s E.T. was Spielberg’s unofficial follow-up to Close Encounters.

1984’s Terminator consciously harkened back to Harlan Elison’s Outer Limits episodes “Demon With A Glass Hand” and “Soldier” (not to mention 1966’s Cyborg 2087 which looks like a first draft of Cameron’s film)

All innovative movies are risky, and the mammoth success of the films cited above did little to encourage new ideas in sci-fi films but rather attempts to shoehorn material into one of several pre-existing genres.

Star Wars = space opera of the splashy Flash Gordon variety

Star Trek = crew on a mission (Star Trek: The Next Generation [+ 5 other series], Andromeda, Battlestar: Galactica [4 series], Buck Rogers In The 25th Century, Farscape, Firefly [+ movie], The Orville, Space Academy, Space Rangers, Space: Above And Beyond, plus more anime and syndicated shows than you can shake a stick at)

Superman = superheroes (nuff’ sed!)

Close Encounters / E.T. = cute aliens

Alien = not-so-cute aliens

Terminator = robots vs humans (and, yes, The Matrix movies fall into this category)

Escape From New York = urban post-apocalypse

Mad Max = vehicular post-apocalypse 

Dawn Of The Dead = zombies

Mix and match ‘em and you’ve got a nearly limitless number of variations you know are based on proven popular concepts, none of that risky original stuff.

Small wonder that despite the huge number of new sci-fi films and programs available, little of it is memorable.

. . .

It shouldn’t be like this.

With ultra-cheap film making tools (there are theatrically released films shot on iPhones so there’s literally no barrier to entry) and copious venues for ultra-low / no-budget film makers to show their work (YouTube, Vimeo, Amazon Prime, etc.), there’s no excuse for there not to be a near limitless number of innovative films in all genres.

But there isn’t.

I watch a lot of independent features and short films on various channels and streaming services.

They’re either direct knock-offs of current big budget blockbusters (because often the film makers are hoping to impress the big studios into giving them lots of money to make one of their movies), or worse still, deliberately “bad” imitations of 1950s B-movies (and I get why there’s an appeal to do a bad version of a B-movie; if you screw up you can always say you did it deliberately).

Look, I understand the appeal of fan fic, written or filmed.

And I get it that sometimes it’s easier to do a knock-off where the conventions of the genre help with the final execution.

But let’s not make deliberate crap, okay?

Oscar Wilde is quoted as saying “Imitation is the sincerest form of flattery” but he was quoting somebody else, and that wasn’t the whole original quote.

Wilde was quoting Charles Caleb Colton, a dissolute English clergyman with a passion for gambling and a talent for bon mots.

Colton’s full quote:   “Imitation is the sincerest form of flattery that mediocrity can pay to greatness.”

Don’t be mediocre.

Be great.

   © Buzz Dixon

[lightsandlostbells]

Hi! This was prompted by people excusing the Williams’s behavior as “realistic,” but I really hate when the remakes do problematic things and people excuse it as “realism.” It’s like when Nico said the n word and people said “it’s realistic to Italy and that’s what Skam it all about. Skam is supposed to show people being problematic because it’s realistic.” While that’s true, the characters usually learn from their problematic behavior (sometimes they don’t, but that’s another story). (1)

Skam is supposed to educate and help teenagers. Also, as you’ve pointed out before, Skam is very idealistic and it annoys me to no end when people excuse problematic aspects of the remakes by saying “it’s realistic.” I’m telling you this because you’re one of the main accounts I know who understands this. I’m just tired of constantly seeing this excuse whenever there’s some kind of discourse about a remake. (2)

Agreed completely. I feel like it’s especially transparent when people are quick to use “realism” as a defense for criticisms of the show, like characters being racist or sexist, but will similarly downplay or tell you to get over the less “realistic” aspects of various remakes - things like casting actors well into their twenties to play teenagers, or Italian Sana’s casting, or scenes that simply feel more out of a dramatic Hollywood fantasy of high school rather than something that would actually happen to real teenagers. It’s also telling to me that people talking about Skam’s “realism” are usually referring to the negative features of the characters or show, the clips that spotlight anger and misery, the dialogue that shows off casual bigotry, as if reality is constant ugliness. Happiness and empathy and kindness are rarely lauded as “realistic” even though they do have a place in the world. 

I have seen people genuinely say things like “Skam isn’t supposed to be educational, it’s supposed to be realistic” and I have no idea what show people watched, because Skam has been educational from the beginning. It has been since the series was conceived. It may not always be successful at it but the educational aspects are baked into the characters, the dialogue, the stories Julie chose to tell. And Skam’s idealism is very, very clear. I could list tons of examples. I mean … listen to Jonas’ speech in the finale. The last words of the show are Fear spreads, but fortunately, love does too. How do you hear that and think the intended message of the show was anything but idealism? It acknowledges that things suck, but encourages viewers to strive for the best parts of reality.

I feel like we have to recognize that Skam meant a hell of a lot to many fans, not just as a piece of entertainment with twists and drama and copious amounts of people walking in slow motion, but as something personal and touching, and much of that impact came from its educational nature and idealism. Is it fair to ask that from the remakes, too? Well, I certainly don’t think it’s unfair. They are borrowing the Skam brand name, the stories, the characters, the dialogue. Of course it’s totally fine for them to adapt the shows to the different settings and to make changes big and small - but I have to ask: if the remakes were not interested in helping teenagers of their own cultures the same way that the original show was (no matter Skam’s flaws - I don’t want to put it on a pedestal) - then what’s the point? Why recreate Skam instead of coming up with their own juicy teen drama? You can’t help but think they’ve missed the heart of the original show and are just producing a shallow copy. Or you end up with a more cynical interpretation, that a remake uninterested in educating or helping youth is being made primarily to profit from an existing success - and honestly, all of the remakes were probably hoping to score some of Skam’s popularity, but at least you can hope that the production teams do have more benevolent intentions. Is that naive? I don’t think so. I think Skam, whatever its flaws, did have more clearly altruistic motivations behind its creation than the majority of television series (which also affects how people engage with it, but that’s perhaps another topic), so it is possible, and I definitely think that on the whole, there are a lot of people involved with the remakes who listen to teenagers and want to reach them and help them. But it’s OK to speak out when you think there’s been a misstep.

And I do get that a lot of backlash comes from clashes in an international fandom consuming multiple versions of the same stories from different cultures with different standards for what is or isn’t problematic, and I get that a lot of people really just want to have a good time with a TV show they enjoy and not be made to feel guilty about it or to wade through 1000 angry posts about a throwaway line that offended other people. I don’t know about everyone, but Tumblr is most definitely a Fun Time thing for me. When a fandom ceases to be fun and is just all rage and bitterness, I tend to dip out, because I don’t need to fill my free time with those negative emotions. But at the same time, I recognize that people can be hurt or angered by media and that it’s not my place to tell people to suck it up and stop complaining.

(Also, just because something is realistic does not mean you need to like it, either? Skam Austin could have been set instead in a very white area of the US, with all the characters written as Trump supporters. That would be very realistic for parts of the US. That doesn’t mean I have to be OK with that choice.)

(And … it’s not a documentary. Despite whatever research the teams have done, these aren’t real people. These are characters who have writers, directors, and actors putting words in their mouths. The writing can be technically “realistic” but still playing into tired, offensive tropes - if Even had killed himself at the end of S3, that would have been “realistic.” Depressed people can commit suicide. But should we have just accepted that? Should we have been OK with the typical tragic Bury Your Gays ending with the mentally ill person whose life ends in suffering? Or maybe, just maybe, there was a point to Julie Andem deliberately subverting those expectations, and maybe the intent was not just to create a TV series that would make the audience cry but to uplift and heal them?)

Anyway. I feel like we need to move beyond just using “it’s realistic” as a shield for criticism. Like if a character uses a racist, misogynistic, or homophobic slur - is there a point to it in the scene? Is it being called out? Is it being used to critique a racist/misogynistic/homophobic environment? Do we see how the slur affects the marginalized characters it refers to, or is it just tossed around by the privileged characters who are unaffected? Does anyone react to it at all? If the slur is presented without objection or commentary, does it come across as if the show is normalizing the word rather than condemning it? Could the scene have functioned just as well without the slur? And so on. Just stopping at “it’s realistic so people shouldn’t have a problem with it” is lazy and simplistic. We can ask better from our media, especially a show like Skam that is intended to not just to depict its target audience accurately, but to demonstrate positive messages and solutions for tough situations.

[mild-lunacy]

Complaining (is a great hobby)

More random things I hate (or just really don't like) enough to complain here, even though no one cares. Or maybe it's *because* no one cares. But yeah, this is why I don't read most YA.

- YA plots that depend on really weirdly structured post-apocalyptic societies that somehow involve groups of teens fighting for their life in increasingly unlikely ways. Oh man, Katniss, you've created a monster. I haven't actually read the books, but the Hunger Games movies worked because they just kind had that combination of implicitly artificial reality TV and the excuse of a dictatorship ordering atrocities that don't need to make sense. But without that fake reality TV aspect, you're left with the fact that reality doesn't, you know, have teams. Yes, not even in high school. Maybe more to the point, after the first few times, it's no longer cool to say the whole world can be high school no matter what your specific plot is. It's just stupid.

- YA plots that depend on magical schools that-- once again-- exist and operate both autonomously and recklessly, in ways that have no obvious reason. Which is funny 'cause, of course, HP started it. In my opinion, HP worked primarily because it's so heavily on the satiric side in terms of world-building. Things in Hogwarts are so over-the-top because the entire world is. The HP world is consistently wacky and dangerous. When you take the 'dangerous magic school'  thing super seriously, suddenly, yeah-- it's just stupid.

- Maybe this doesn't need to be said, but I consider most love triangles to be tiresome and obvious rather than exciting. Usually the endgame is all too obvious, and is only delayed by unnecessary misunderstandings and angst. This doesn't mean you have to write unrealistically stable and mature teen romance. More books should try what Maggie Stiefvater did, and simply have interesting and helpful relationships that involve good character development and then simply end, particularly with the characters as friends. I know she hadn't written it for that purpose (probably), and I don't necessarily think YA needs to be didactic, but I think showing how to have temporary but respectful relationships would, you know, be useful to actual teenage readers more than yet another pointless triangle.

- I'm a huge fairy-tale retelling fan. So it means something when I say there's such a glut-- so very many-- that I have no idea what to read and so I read none. It's gotten beyond saturation to simple exhaustion.

- This goes beyond YA, but I definitely think the focus on large-scale plots revolving around whole organizations and huge casts is off-putting. It wouldn't bother me as much if their purpose didn't inevitably involve fighting bad guys. I've said this before, with fantasy and the idea of The One, but this applies just as well to YA-- human-scale plots matter more. Human stakes just mean more. And most of the time, evil is just an excuse to kill people you don't have to feel sorry for. The main reason the HP books' breadth worked for me is 'cause everything was focused through Harry and his friends. Voldemort wasn't really front and center until the last book, and even then, I wouldn't say it was about killing Voldemort, really. The story is about Harry and his friends growing up, and that's what I like. In the end, it's that narrow focus that works for me with The Raven Cycle and Six of Crows, too.

- This also goes beyond YA to many genres, but I consider endless series to the point of barely any stand-alone books to be pretty off-putting. I generally think twice and then again before making the commitment of a ten-book plus series. It's funny 'cause people used to complain about the preponderance of trilogies, but now I'd say a trilogy is nice and neat. 🙄 Anyway, I don't think it's a coincidence that HP, at seven books, is the longest YA I've read by far. And I only consider that remotely appropriate because it was a book per school year, rather than an exercise in 'let's see how long we can extend the plot'. Anyway, I don't think it's a coincidence that most book series I'm into are trilogies and under (thanks, Leigh Bardugo). There should be a lot more books like 'The Scorpio Races'.

[veridium]

You Want Writing Tips? You Got Writing Tips

Hello, lovelies. So, in light of my Q&A last night and receiving some asks about writing fanfic/in general, I wanted to make a text post paired with what I said -- mostly for accessibility reasons. I want to restate the fact that I am in no way an exceptional/professional-level/goddess of writing, I am simply someone who wants to encourage and provide some helpful advice to anyone who may be struggling or starting. My opinions and perspective are not sacrosanct by any means.

That being said my advice is mostly about existing as a writer, authoring fanfic, and building confidence as a creative. I am not interested in conscripting people to my personal style focus at all. This is meant to be an encouraging primer more than anything. Some of these will echo my Q&A as well.

1). Writing is first and foremost a practice to enjoy and be fulfilled by for your own creative needs and tastes. 

Yes, we post and promote our fanfictions on multiple platforms, clamor for likes and comments, the whole nine yards. That means it’s easy for all of us regardless of how long we’ve been at it to forget that writing fic is primarily for our own enjoyment and gratification. As creatives we can be told our work is frivolous unless it gathers some sort of outside aplomb, and that our labor is useless without attention. This is not true, and is a pernicious form of suppression. 

If you get a lot of feedback and reader response on your work, fabulous! I’m so happy for you. But I am also happy for you if you manage to finish and post a chapter or a ficlet in the first place. That is hard work, and it’s not something everyone does everyday. Be proud of yourself knowing you’re practicing an art form that not only brings you joy but provides an opportunity to connect with others. 

2). Tumblr is not the Gauntlet of Talent. 

I know it’s also easy to assume that Tumblr is the ultimate bastion of affirmation given the prolific presence of fandom and fanfic. But, let’s be real: we all know this site is a garbage fire. It has been, it is now, and it will be in the future. The way it hinders creative content and its creators is appalling. With that in mind, getting less-than-jubilant responses from the Tumblr-verse is not a sign that you lack talent, capability, or original ideas by default. Once again I wish to point out that writing should be something we all do for our own sakes, for our outlets and desires. Having Tumblr fandom attention is nice, and it feels supportive in my experience more often than not, but it’s also fraught and can get lost in the trivialities of popularity.

Fandom should be community, rather than fame oriented. We should be looking to each other for encouragement, helpful critique, and new, fresh perspectives. We should also respect those among us who do not wish to engage or attend to the attentions of others -- introverted creators matter too, and their points of view are valid. 

Tumblr fame does absolutely infer talent, and vice-versa. 

3. Writing is a Wonderful Opportunity to Build Good Habits. 

The culture of writing until you drop, of staving off your priorities and needs in order to dedicate “fully,” is toxic. It is also unfortunate that idea of “success” is so pervasive because writing can be a neat chance to instill some helpful habits into your routine. From my personal experience, writing is a wonderful thing to do to wind down at the end of my day: I settle in after a shower and dinner wearing my comfy pajamas and I write for a couple hours, water bottle nearby. I listen to music, watch movies if I need muse/inspiration, and enjoy my introvert time. 

Writing as a routine activity can be a conduit for good habits, like hydrating, exercise, other forms of art, and reading books. It can inspire you to change up some old regimens and think in new ways. Writing isn’t just the physical act of writing or typing words, it’s a process. Your productivity and balance is entangled with the rest of your goings-on, your responsibilities, and environment. You can use that to your advantage! 

Because of my writing I have had an excuse to hike/walk more, something I have not always had the time or ability to do whether it be for my chronic illness or demanding schedule. Now I find I am much more relaxed, my anxiety episodes are fewer and far in between, and I enjoy where I live more. Writing has helped me not only as a creative endeavor but as a life habit, and in return my stories have benefited. 

4). Care, Genuinely Care, About Your Non-CisHet White Characters. 

Please. Please care. I’m not just saying like them or craft them, I mean interrogate why and how you’re making them the way you are. If you’re letting them fall into a disempowering trope, ask yourself what the purpose of having a one-dimensional or stereotypical character is for you. If you’re constructing a cis woman character for example who is struggling with internalized standards for femininity or gender roles, that’s one thing and that can be a really interesting character development. 

But if your character is stagnant within that point of view, and their adversities/experiences are not engaging with them, you should ask yourself why. If you’re writing a perspective you do not personally have -- queerness, non-cisness, ability, etc. -- you REALLY need to be critical about what you’re writing. It may not intimately impact you, but it does impact readers who have those identities. If you’re white and you’re writing non-white characters it does not matter whether your universe is fantasy or not, you are and will be writing from a white gaze imbued with racism. You have to constantly monitor and check in with that.

As a Femslash writer one of the things that saddens me the most is when I read a cis woman character that feels one-dimensional, dependent on how other characters look at her rather than someone with their own sense of self, and like they can’t manage for themselves on some level. It’s one thing to grow from those traits and become confident or independent over time -- OR EVEN MORE DEPENDENT AND LESS CONFIDENT BECAUSE SHIT HAPPENS LIKE THAT TOO! -- but the heart of the matter is that there should be changes, fluxes, and impressions in a character’s sense of self. 

Try to think about how your own social conditioning has influenced the way you see these kinds of people in your every day. Think about how you could be infusing biases and unnecessary shortcomings into your characters based off of those misunderstandings. Female characters can be detestable, evil, malignant. They can be modest, or promiscuous, or both! They can be quick to anger, or struggle with depression. There are an infinite number of possibilities, so much so that writing a flat, meek caricature to be a waste of time. 

--

These are my main tips I would give to anyone wishing for my perspective. As I stated before, I am no sage expert on the craft of writing. Truly, I don’t think anyone is. The point is to have conversation, to engage thoughtfully for the betterment of our writing and each other’s. We’re a community and that is what we do. 

I hope this is helpful and constructively encouraging, because that is what we deserve from ourselves and each other. If you have any questions or concerns, feel free to inbox me or message me directly. Sending love and light to you all!

-Veri

[gaming-rabbot]

Salmon Run and Presentation

A (not so) brief dissertation on narrative framing in video games, featuring Splatoon 2

With the holidays in full swing, I took advantage of a deal one day when I went into town, and finally got my hands on Splatoon 2. Having loved the prior game as much as I did, waiting this long to get the sequel felt almost wrong. But like many another fellow meandering corpus of conscious flesh, I am made neither of time nor money.

Finally diving in, I figured I might take this excuse to remember that I write game reviews, sometimes. You know, when the tide is high, the moon blue, and the writer slightly less depressed. I ended up scrapping my first couple drafts, however. You see, a funny thing was happening; I kept veering back into talking about Salmon Run, the new optional game mode the sequel introduces.

Also I might look at the Octo Expansion later, on its own. After I get around to it…

Look, the base game already has a lot of content to explore, and as previously stated, I am sadly corporeal, and not strung together with the metaphysical concept of time itself.

My overall thoughts, however, proved brief, so I’ll try to keep this short.

(Mild spoilers coming along.)

Gameplay wise, I think the story mode is much improved upon by handing you different weapons for certain levels which were specifically built with them in mind. Whereas the prior game left you stuck with a variant of the starter splattershot all the way through. This keeps things interesting, pushes me outside of my comfort zone, and it’s a good way to make sure players will come from a well-informed place when deciding what weapon they want for multiplayer; which, let’s face it, is the real meat of these games and where most players are going to log the most time.

I also love the way bosses are introduced with the heavy drums and rhythmic chants and the dramatic light show. It endows the moment with a fantastic sense of gravitas, and manages to hype me up every time. Then the boss will have an aspect of their design which feels a bit silly or some how rather off, keeping the overall tone heavily grounded in the toony aesthetics the series already established for itself.

Narratively, I felt rather okay about the story aspect of Story Mode. The collectible pages in the levels still have a certain amount of world building, though this time it seems more skewed toward explaining what pop culture looks like in this world, such as, an allusion to this world’s equivalent to Instagram.

Cynical as it is…

That’s definitely still interesting in its own right, though perhaps it’s less of a revelatory gut-punch as slowly piecing it together that the game takes place in the post-apocalypse of Earth itself, and the inklings copied ancient human culture.

We still got some backstory for this game’s idol duo, though. And that, I appreciate. It means Pearl and Marina still feel like a part of this world, rather than seeming obligatory for the sake of familiarity, given the first game had an idol duo as well.

Meanwhile, perhaps it is a bit obvious that Marie’s cousin, Callie, has gone rogue, and that she is the mysterious entity cracking into the radio transmissions between her and Agent 4. If I recall correctly, that was a working theory that came about with the first trailer or two. That, or she had died.

As soon as Marie says aloud she wonders where Callie has gone, I knew right away. And that’s just in the introduction.

That said, on some level, after stomaching through certain other games and such that actively lie or withhold information to force an arbitrary plot twist for plot twist sake, it feels almost nice to go back to a narrative that actually bothers to foreshadow these things. Plus, having gotten already invested in Callie as a character from the first game, I still felt motivated to see the story through to find out why she went rogue. And, loving the Squid Sisters already, there was a hope in me that she could be redeemed, or at least understood. In terms of building off the prior game’s story, Splatoon 2 is moderately decent.

Also, I mean, c’mon. The big narrative drive might be a tad predictable, but hey, this game is for kids. It’s fine.

That, I think, is something I love the most about Splatoon. Despite feeling like you’re playing in a Saturday morning cartoon, and being aimed primarily at children, it doesn’t shy away from fairly heavy subjects. Such as the aforementioned fact that the humans are all long dead and you’re basically playing paintball in the ruins of their consumerist culture.

Which brings me to what fascinates me so much about Splatoon 2: the way in which Salmon Run is framed.

You see, on the surface, Salmon Run appears to be your typical horde mode; a cooperative team (typically comprised of randoms) fights off gaggles of foes as they take turns approaching their base in waves. Pretty standard for online shooters these days, as was modernly popularized by Gears of War 2, and Halo ODST.

I say “modernly,” as the notion of fighting enemies as they approach in waves is not exactly a new concept for mechanical goals within video games. Rather, the term itself, as applied to multiplayer shooters, “horde mode,” became a point of game discussion when Gears of War 2 introduced the new game mode by that same name back in… 2008?

No, no that can’t be right. I played Gears 2 back in high school (I had worse taste back then, okay?). Which, from my perspective, was basically yesterday. That game being ten years old would mean I myself am old now, and that just can’t be. I’m hip. I’m young.

I am, to stay on theme here, fresh.

But okay, existential crises and game talk terms aside, the writing team behind Splatoon 2 probably decided to absolutely flex when it came to the narrative surrounding Salmon Run. It is one of the most gleaming examples of the nontraditional things you can do with writing in video games, to really elevate the experience.

Let me explain.

You see, narrative in video games typically falls into one of two categories: either the story sits comfortably inside of the game, utilizing it like a vehicle to arrive at the destination that is its audience’s waiting eyes and ears. Or the narrative, on some level, exists rather nebulously, primarily to provide something resembling context for why the pixels look the way they do, and why the goals are what they are.

Not to say this is a binary state of existence for game writing; narrative will of course always provide context for characters, should there be any. It’s primarily older, or retro games that give you a pamphlet or brief intro with little in the way of worrying over character motivation, and the deeper philosophical implications of the plot, etc (though not for lack of trying). These would be your classic Mario Bros. and what have you, where the actual game part of the video game is nearly all there is to explore in the overall experience.

Then you have games like Hotline Miami that purposely sets up shop right in the middle to make a meta commentary about the state of game narrative, using the ideological endpoint of violent 80’s era action and revenge-fantasy genre film as inspiration and the starting point to draw comparison between the two. It’s bizarre, and I could drone on about this topic.

But I digress.

Despite falling into that latter category, that is to say having mainly just an introduction to the narrative context so you can get on with playing the game, Salmon Run is a stellar example of how you can make every bit of that context count (even if it does require the added context of the rest of the game, sort of, which I’ll explain, trust me).

First, a (very) brief explanation of how the game itself works, for the maybe three of you who haven’t played it yet.

A team of up to four inklings (and/or octolings) have a small island out in open waters. Salmonid enemies storm the beaches from various angles in waves. Each wave also comes with (at least) one of eight unique boss variants, who all drop three golden eggs upon defeat. Players are tasked with gathering a number of said golden eggs each round, for three rounds, after which their failure or success in doing so shows slow or fast progress towards in-game rewards.

And it’s all an allegory for the poor treatment of labor/workers, utilizing the fishing industry as both an example and a thematically appropriate analogue. Yes, I’m serious.

First, Salmon Run is not available through the main doors like the other multiplayer modes. Rather, it is off to the side, down a dingy looking alley. And when you’re shown its location, either because you finally entered the Inkopolis plaza for the first time, or because the mode has entered rotation again, Marina very expressly describes it as a job.

A job you should only do if you are absolutely, desperately hard strapped for cash. You know, the sort of job you turn to if, for one reason or another, you can’t find a better one.

An aside: technically, playing Salmon Run does not automatically net you in-game currency, with which to buy things, as regular multiplayer modes do. Rather, your “pay” is a gauge you fill by playing, which comes with reward drops at certain thresholds; some randomized gacha style capsules, and one specific piece of gear which gets advertised, to incentivize playing.

The capsules themselves drop actual paychecks in the form of aforementioned currency, or meal tickets to get temporary buffs that help you progress in the multiplayer faster via one way or another. Which, hey, you know, that helps you earn more money also. Working to get “paid,” so you can get things you want, though, still works perfectly for the metaphor it creates.

When I first saw it open up for rotation, I found out you had to be at least a level four to participate. Pretty par for the course, considering it’s the same deal with the gear shops. But, again, it’s all in the presentation; Mr. Grizz does not simply say something akin to the usual “you must be this tall to ride.” He says he cannot hire inexperienced inklings such as yourself, because it’s a legal liability.

After returning with three extra levels, I was handed off to basic, on-the-job training. Which is only offered after Mr. Grizz (not ever physically present, mind you, but communicating with you via radio), the head of Grizzco, uses fairly typical hard sell rhetoric when it comes to dangerous, or otherwise undesirable work: calls you kid, talks about shaping the future and making the world a better place, refers to new hires as “fresh young talent,” says you’ll be “a part of something bigger than yourself.” You know, the usual balancing act of flattery, with just the right amount of belittlement.

Whoa, hang on, sorry; just had a bad case of deja vu from when the recruiter that worked with the ROTC back in high school tried to get me to enlist… several times… Guess he saw the hippie glasses and long hair and figured I'd be a gratifying challenge.

The fisher imagery really kicks in when you play. Which, I figure a dev team working out of Japan might have a pretty decent frame of reference for that. A boat whisks you out to sea with your team, and everyone’s given a matching uniform involving a bright orange jumper, and rubber boots and gloves. If you've ever seen the viral video of the fisherman up to his waist in water telling you not to give up, you have a rough idea. Oh, and don't forget your official Grizzco trademark hats.

It’s on the job itself where a lot of what I'm talking about comes up the most; that is to say, despite buttering you up initially, Mr. Grizz shows his true colors pretty quickly. While playing, he seems to only be concerned with egg collecting, even when his employees are actively hurting. This is established and compounded by his dialogue prior to the intermediate training level, in which informs you about the various boss fish.

Before you can do anything remotely risky, even boss salmonid training, Mr. Grizz tells you he has to go over this 338 page workplace health and safety manual with you. But, oops, the new hire boat sounds the horn as you flip to page 1, so he sends you off unprepared. “Let’s just say you’ve read it,” he tells you, insisting that learning by doing is best.

This flagrant disregard employee safety, in the name of met quotas; the fact we never see Mr. Grizz face to face, making him this vague presence that presides over you, evaluating your stressed performance with condescension; that we are not simply given the rewards as we pass thresholds to earn them, having to instead speak with another, unknown npc for our pay… It all drives toward the point so well.

The icing on the cake for me is when a match ends. You, the player, are not asked if you’d like to go back into matchmaking for another fun round of playtime. Rather, you are asked if you would like to “work another shift.”

The pieces all fit so well together. I shouldn’t be surprised that, once a theme is chosen, Splatoon can stick to it like my hand to rubber cement that one time. It has already proven it can do that much for sure. But it’s just so… funny? It’s bitterly, cynically hilarious.

Bless the individual(s) who sat in front of their keyboard, staring at the early script drafts, and asked aloud if they were really about to turn Mr. Grizz into a projection of all the worst aspects of the awful bosses they’ve had to deal with in life. The answer to that question being “yes” has led to some of my favorite writing in a video game.

All of these thoughts, as they started forming in my skull, really began to bubble when I noticed Salmon Run shifts become available during my first Splatfest.

Splatfest is, to try and put it in realistic terms, basically a huge, celebratory sporting event. Participation nets you a free commemorative t-shirt and access to a pumping concert featuring some of the hottest artists currently gracing the Inkopolis charts.

The idea, the notion, that a hip young inkling (or octoling) might miss out on one of the biggest parties of the year because they need money more than they need fun? It’s downright depressing.

It got me thinking. I looked at my fellow egg collectors. In-universe, we were a bunch of teen-to-young-adult aged denizens missing out on all the fun because we desperately needed the cash. We became stressed together, overworked together, yelled at by our boss together. But in those sweetest victories, where we’d far surpassed our quota? We celebrated together.

Spam-crouching, and mashing the taunt, something changed. I felt a greater sense of comradery with these squids and octos than I did in nearly any other coop game. And it’s all thanks to the rhetorical framing of the game mode.

It accomplishes so many things. It’s world building which wholistically immerses you in the setting. But mainly, its dedication to highly specific word choice does exactly what I mentioned earlier: it elevates the experience to one I could really sit down and think about, rather than use to while away the hours, then move on to something else. So many games make horde modes that feel inconsequential like that; it’s just for fun.

There’s nothing wrong with fun being the only mission statement for a game, or an optional mode of play. But this is exactly what I mean when I say this is the nontraditional writing games can do so much more with. And Splatoon 2 saw that opportunity, and took it. And what a fantastic example of bittersweet, cold reality, in this, a bright, colorful game meant mainly for children…

Happy Holidays, everyone!

[tipsycad147]

A Parents Guide To Protecting Their Child With Craft Interests

ParentingIt's never easy raising children. You have a greater responsibility to the health, well being, and physical condition of your child than anyone else. Today, it's easier for parents to rely on others to help them monitor interests, than it is to sit down and talk with your children. But you also have a responsibility to their mental conditioning as well. There's nothing new about this concept. There are a huge number of books, magazines and even web sites offering advice for the best way to talk to your child. That isn't the purpose of this posting however. My purpose here is to merely give non-pagan parents an understanding or insight into how to handle, deal with and work with a child with interests in magik and/or witchcraft.

Mutual Respect

The first comment I feel a need to pass on to all parents is: if you want your children to respect you and your wishes; then you must start with respecting their thoughts and interests. You can't control what a person thinks. No matter how hard you try. That doesn't mean agreeing with their interests or condoning their actions, but it does mean having the ability to talk with them and LISTENING to what they say, how they say it and being open to their thoughts. The worst thing anyone can do to a child is not listen. All you will accomplish is creating a situation where the child will begin hiding their interests, and deceiving you. This is dangerous to both the child and to you! Without listening, you could easily miss an underlying message of pain or sadness which unchecked, could lead to some seriously dangerous behavior. With that said, and once again, this article focuses on spiritual beliefs and mystical interests. Nothing else. It's meant to give parents information about the path of Witchcraft, what it is and what it isn't. It's better to work with your child to help them research, so that they can find the most accurate and best information; instead of trying to control their thoughts and creating a situation where your child could become involved in a group that has no clue what they're talking about. Or worse, who only wish to control and abuse your child. These kinds of groups exist in ALL religions. The best way to provide safety for your child, is to help them research and steer clear of wannabe false priests/priestess. To do that, you need to know a little too.

How Did It Happen

As a spiritual leader and teacher, I'm often asked to talk with parents and teachers about the path of the craft. After many years of counseling, I can predict the questions I'm about to be asked. So here's a quick frequently asked questions - and some answers that will clear up much mis-information.

Why did my child get interested in this? There are as many answers for this as there are children on the planet.

How did my child find out about this? Again, friends and the media are often the sources of much information that influence our children. With movies like "The Craft", "Practical Magik" and TV shows like "Charmed" and "Sabrina Teenage Witch", there are bound to be children who see the "fantasy" and want to be special. The real side of Witchcraft is nothing like this Hollywood version however.

We're not evil, why do they want to do this? First of all Witchcraft and magik ARE NOT evil. We don't worship the devil or negative Gods. In fact, the religion of Witchcraft is very unfavorable about those who practice negative actions toward other living things. Mystical beliefs have existed throughout history. Have a curiosity isn't evil as long as it follows a real path of honest research and study.

What can we do to get them out of this cult stuff? By definition, even Christianity and Judaism are cults. Check the dictionary for cult and you'll see what I mean. There are just as many Christian or Hebrew 'brain washing' cults as there are, excuse the phrase, flaky cults. Witchcraft is not about 'brain washing', controlling or manipulating people. In fact, it is a religion based whole heartily in respect. Violating that concept is equivalent to a major sin. So it's something we really don't approve of. After you have talked with your child and learned a little about the craft path; perhaps your sincerity of respect in their interests will also encourage your children to respect your wishes as well. You're not going to be able to control your child's thoughts and beliefs. But who said you can't use their beliefs to help you through discipline and reciprocal respect.

What do we do now? Once again learn a little bit about what the religion of Witchcraft is, so you can speak with your child with some level of understanding. Your efforts might even impress them enough to listen to you. Imagine that. ;-) If you still feel the need to control their actions and interests, then this article has failed. But I'd ask for you to at least respect your child and calmly tell them you are uncomfortable with their interest in this religion. Out of respect or your wishes, would they please stop. Demanding to control their beliefs isn't going to work. Remember when you were a kid? Demands will only send your children underground into hiding their beliefs and actions. Where you can not protect them. If your child is still interested in the path of the craft, the best thing you can do is help them research for valid information. This will put your mind at ease by knowing what their doing, and with whom. But it will also help you both learn about the misconceptions, misinformation and even the propaganda that can be dangerous. Please remember that pagan paths are not where the dangers lie. Within ALL religions, there are fanatics and people who wish to control and manipulate others. By respecting the interests of your child, you will gain their trust and maybe even learn a little along the way yourself. Learning about other religions and cultures doesn't take anything away from your beliefs or way of life. It merely gives you an understanding and maybe even a little tolerance.

Rebellion of parents and authority.

Friends at school

Dissatisfaction with fundamental religions and ideals

A general curiosity that became a real interest

How about asking the child?

What Are The Dangers

As within any religion, there are people and organizations whose only interest is control, manipulation and greed. The religion of witchcraft is no different. But they're a little easier to spot. The biggest problem today are the many people who are newly interested in the craft path who think they've learned enough to be teachers. These people are often misinformed, or know just enough to be dangerous. Mostly because their concepts or understandings are only partially developed. They base their concepts on two or three books, movies or turn of the 19th century writings that are filled with misconceptions in themselves. The only real way to spot the dangers, is to learn the basics of what Witchcraft really is.

So what is Witchcraft?

Witchcraft is a religion of respect, and a way of life that focuses on the balance between nature and man, as well as, the physical and spiritual world. In order to achieve balance, one must first learn respect for all things; seen and unseen. We have many basic beliefs, but the long and short of them are:

These are the basics. If you'd like to learn more about these, visit our Metaphysics 101 section.

Witchcraft as religion has existed for thousands of years, under many labels and in many countries. The religion today is primarily based on Indo-European concepts and cultures. Witchcraft defines the basics of the belief, while the traditions (or denominations) put those beliefs into practice and sometimes further defines or adds details to those beliefs.

There are literally thousands of traditions within the religion. The most known today is Wicca. But as a tradition, Wicca is relatively new. It was founded in the 1950s by Gerald Gardner who was an initiated witch into other traditions. Gardnerarian Wicca is widely practiced here in the United States. But there is also, Faery Wicca, Dianic Wicca, Seax Wicca, Celtic Wicca and many more. In addition to formal traditions, there are family traditions, which are based in knowledge passed through each family generation to the next. There are more of these than you may realize. Finally there are also solitary paths, where a person will study many traditions, take those parts that feel right to him/her and create their own.

Within our religion a leader is called a priest, priestess, mage, wizard or shaman. Member groups are called coven's and clans. A leader/teacher has gone through many years of formal study and has been initiated into a particular tradition of the path. Or they have studied for many many years, decades even, through formal classes, personal research and community interactions to reach a point of significant wisdom and spiritual understanding. They are looked upon as a wise mage or shaman by their community, based on their actions, knowledge and daily exercise of that wisdom. I'll be honest here; there are few of these self taught shamans. In some traditions, a leader who takes on the title of Priest or Shaman without a formal test of knowledge and initiation is often frowned upon or somehow seen as not fully acknowledged in the role.

Formal traditions often require a dedication of faith, which is usually a self dedication before a person can be considered for a formal initiation. Initiations are invitations to join a coven or clan and are only given when a person has demonstrated a certain level of knowledge of that tradition. Many traditions contain varying levels of initiation as well. Such as student, apprentice, teacher and leader or priest/priestess. Each level requires a test or demonstration of knowledge before the title is granted. It's important to note here that just claiming the title of witch, priest or shaman, doesn't make it so. And rarely are self proclaiming initiations to claim a title acknowledge. Education, study, research and demonstration of knowledge is all hard work. But if your child is serious about this path, they must be serious about the effort involved to practice it.

We believe in the concept of a God. However, to us, God is not something outside of ourselves, but rather something we are part of. We see "God" as a divine entity that has masculine and feminine aspects. Many traditions will assign pantheons (a mythological God or Goddess) to these aspects in order to give form to their practices by which they can honor the Divine. This is similar to Christians who use the crucifix or images of Jesus to give their God form by which they can worship.

We do not worship, we honor. We honor the divine around us and within us. I alone am not a Goddess, you are not a god. But you and I and all things throughout the universe, seen and unseen make up the Divine.

We believe in reincarnation, karma and an after life. We believe in a soul and spirit.

http://www.paganspath.com/magik/parent.htm

[imaultrabossbruh]

Answer 10 questions and come up with 10 more

Thank you @terassaras for tagging me! Her post is a fantastic read by the way; go check her out. It has been 50+ days since I have been tagged and I did not even notice… Really, bruh? *facepalm* I will answer these questions to the best of my ability. If you do not find me interesting, intriguing, or inspiring, feel free to bounce and no hard feelings taken °˖✧◝(⁰▿⁰)◜✧˖°.

1. Favorite plant/flower?

I absolutely love the Lotus (nelumbo nucifera). I love that the Lotus symbolizes beauty, serenity, and purity. The soft petals settling on the surface of ponds put me at ease from my busy life. Not only is the Lotus my mother’s national flower but it can grow in the most muddiest areas and still bloom beautifully. You can also eat its seeds too; they are very delicious.  

2. Best thing to eat/drink on a hot day?

Oh, I will engulf myself in steamed rice cake with coconut and ice shaved che of any kind. These slightly sweeten desserts make you feel like you are in the midst of a winter storm. No fan/air conditioner required.

3. Tell me the weirdest color name you can find and show me! (Think: lemon curry, goblin blue, Caput mortuum, be creative!)

Flesh. It sounded so creepy that the Crayola producers had to change the name to peach. Worst of all, skin color primarily referred to the pale population.

4. Show me one object/merchandise you would shamelessly buy if money and shipping are not an issue.

I am sorry if I offend those who oppose animal cruelty and abuse; but I would collect animal furs, especially ones with their head, limbs, and tail intact. Being an animal lover myself, I do not want furs of endangered species, only species with large populations and roadkill.

5. If a fictional character can become real and do anything with/for you for one day, who would it be?

Damn it, only one? Better than nothing. Soft and cute, Piglet from Winnie the Pooh because we can paint together, make flower crowns for one another, write motivational phrases to each other, and play all day until it is time to go home. I just want to pick Piglet up and give him a fun piggy back ride on the shoulders. I hope that I do not scare him away with my height.

6. Time to explore a fantasy universe! Middle Earth? Steam punk nation? Desert dystopia where pirates roam? Describe a fantasy universe you want to explore!

A world full of marvelous gardens, of course! I have a deep passion for neat and tidy landscapes; I want to observe and record all kinds of species from birds, mammals, insects, fruits/vegetables, and flowers. Maybe a wild jungle or forest with gentle streams and lakes right behind the gardens to add a little bit of excitement in my explorations. I can even befriend an albino deer if I am lucky.

7. Time for serious questions. What is one thing you wish your parents know and understand about you?

Well, I have a fond and tight relationship with my mother; so, she already knows and understands me well. I do not recall any time that my mother has not cared for me and considered my wants and needs. In fact, we almost depend on each other to make good decisions; so, if either of us make a mistake, no heavy consequences would result. On the contrary, I hate my father to the point that I want him to go to the deepest depths of Hell and have Satan erase his existence after intense torment. Thus, I do not need his manipulating and deceiving ass to get to know me again. I do not even want to see his ugly, motherf*cking face.

8. One thing you wish your sibling(s) would do—or if no siblings, your best friend!

My siblings already do what I wish such as doing chores, completing my favors, studying hard, going to school, not hanging out with the wrong crowd, and expressing their beliefs with common sense. I only want them to do whatever they love and be the best they can be, my dear.  I know that one day, we will part ways and live separately; I want them to remain strong when life gets rough and relaxed when life gets light. However, I would not allow some jerks and idiots out there who degrade people out of jealously and envy to harm and hurt my siblings. If so, then they messed with the wrong family.

9. Tell me about the best teacher/mentor you’ve ever had. They don’t have to be from school. Or if all your teachers have been a-holes, tell me about what you think good teachers should be like.

I have so many but the best one in my book is my Honors Anatomy instructor, Mrs. Duncan. Even though she is in her 50’s-60’s, she is still in good shape. She made teaching look so easy, especially since her students had to know every body part of each system from its location to its function. Besides the fact that she has never scorned me, she wanted to know each and one of her students. She was not a counselor, but she was willing to listen to my life troubles while comforting me with her advice. Along with my mother, she was also supported my desire to go into the medical field. I doubted my potential to become a scientist/doctor, but after having her as my teacher, my confidence has gone through the ceiling until I realized that there are always going to be people who are smarter than me. So, I got to sit down and be humble, you know.

10. Death comes knocking on your door one day and after telling you that it’s not your time yet, magically grants you with the irresistible will to live for the rest of your life. What would you want to do with your life, if money/culture/expectations were not an issue? What feels ideal to do with your life?

I have not thought about my ideal life. Money, culture, and expectations are not big problems in my life because they are not hard to deal with. My income may be low, but I am still living luxurious life, my culture is so broad that there is enough time to know and practice all of it, and I am able to set expectations that I am comfortable with. I like to adapt to situations I normally would not in order to test my limits and my ability to learn more. I would complete my bucket list like scuba diving, skydiving, drawing an epic piece of art, traveling and touring, sleeping in for a month or two, saving lives from diseases, and watching a dying star explode.  Most of all, my life should be spent in peace and quiet; I do not want to leave the mortal world in a violent and depressing state. Not good thing.

Please excuse the length of the long post. Σ(ﾟдﾟ；)

Here are some silly questions for some of my tagged folk: @deafeningsandwichfun, @dil-a-to-ry, @hazyafter-glow, @aria-haru, @kaminugget, @sakwma, and @i-dedicate-this-kill-to-the-fans. Anyone looking at or reading this is automatically tagged.

1. If animals could talk, including your food and pets, which would be the rudest?

2. What was the weirdest thing you have seen, appropriate or not,  in someone else’s home?

3. What would be the worst thing for the government to make illegal? It could be extreme as Venezuela and North Korea.

4. I know we are supposed to love ourselves for who we are. But, which body part do you wish you could detach and why?

5. If you were held at gun point and told that if you didn’t impress them with your dance moves, then you would be killed, what dance moves would you bust out to save your life?

6. What would be the creepiest thing you could say or do while passing a stranger on the street in the middle of the night?

7. If you were transported 400 years into the past with no clothes, technology, or anything else, how would you prove that you were from the future?

8. If someone asked to be your apprentice and learn all that you know, what would you teach them?

9. Because life is such a huge video game, what would some of the cheat codes be?

10. What would be the worst and best “buy one, get one free” sale of all time?