#bandello

[italian-lit-tournament]

Italian literature tournament - First round.

Propaganda in support of the authors is accepted, you can write it both in the tag if reblog the poll (explaining maybe that is propaganda and you want to see posted) or in the comments. Every few days it will be recollected and posted here under the cut.

[betriii]

MC somehow too excited with the gangster life....like the youngsters say, we just LIT 🔥

Just my poor attempt redrawing the second slide picture

[norcester-archive]

birth of a daughter, misfortune of a wife

[seemehustle]

"It- it's either you get out alive and I don't, or we both die. Which of those is better? Look me in the eyes and tell me, which?" That scorching, determined gaze.

And I looked her in the eyes as I said it. "Both of us. It's always both of us."

Jamie Bandello

[fard-rock-blog]

Ayassot - Santimone - Corini - Bandello | Live in Lugano

Etichetta: Flying Robert Music Tracce: 8 – Durata: 63:11 Genere: Jazz Sito: Bandcamp  Voto: 8/10 Il sassofonista piemontese Andrea Ayassot nel 2020 si è unito al Eat The Worm Trio (compagine nata nell’ambiente dello storico collettivo El Gallo Rojo che vede Alfonso Santimone al piano, Giulio Corini al contrabbasso e Nelide Bandello alla batteria) per una serie di concerti di cui uno, tenuto in…

[yanderefairyangel]

i totally agree and if I had to understand why exactly

i think is just because Juliet is 13

thats’ it

that literaly the only reason

some people believe Romeo to be 17 because of the Zeffireli version which at least make sense but people who believe him to be older than 20 are in general people who are obsessed to an unealthy degree with Juliet’s age and rather than think that Romeo must be around her age, they instead picture him as having who knows why unrealistic age that just doesnt match how he is depicted in the play because « his age isnt specified »

there is no real Logic its just people being offended at a 13 year old being in a relationship with another teenager and wanting to diabolize said teenager

yes Romeo’s age isnt specified but … so is everyone else in the play Juliet is the only one whose age is mentioned and even if its not explicitely stated how old he is Romeo is clearly still in his teens as seen per how he behaves, the emphasis on his youth or the vocabulary of teachings being linked to him (when he leaves in the balcony scene he talks he compares love to a schoolboy)

ultimately this comes from the ridiculous desire to villanize Romeo because people dislike him, and might I add they dislike him for reason who are just as superflous being : 1) him falling in love twice in his lifetime (which somehow got people to think he was a palyboy) 2) him falling for 13 year old Juliet (again people’s obsession with her age is strange)

Seriously, where does this idea that Romeo is much older than Juliet come from?

I recently saw a post confidently stating, as if it was an established fact, that Romeo is 34 years old, and that drove me to ask this. I've loved R&J for decades, but I've only ever seen this idea on Tumblr and only in the last couple of years.

So where did this idea start, and why has it caught on?

The play never mentions his age, as opposed to how people keep going on about hers.

The movie versions have all cast them as being similar in age. Even the 1936 version had them both played by actors over 30.

If the idea is "that's how things were at the time," the whole point is that they weren't doing things in the established or accepted way.

I just don't get how anyone could read the play and assume he's supposed to be twice her age or more. And while there has probably been a production somewhere that cast them that way, that doesn't explain why the idea seems to have caught hold.

Is this just Romeo hate-dom in a weird disguise? Trying to make him sound creepy? But even if that's the case, I still don't understand how it got started.

[olderthannetfic]

I mean... I don't tend to count anything that isn't from the modern fandom traditions. But if we're stretching the point, then yes, it's based on an existing tale. I think almost all of Shakespeare's plays are.

From Wikipedia:

The plot is based on an Italian tale written by Matteo Bandello and translated into verse as The Tragical History of Romeus and Juliet by Arthur Brooke in 1562 and retold in prose in Palace of Pleasure by William Painter in 1567. Shakespeare borrowed heavily from both but expanded the plot by developing a number of supporting characters, in particular Mercutio and Paris.

[yanderefairyangel]

Defending the decisions regarding 0 emblem.... using Romeo and Juliet

That moment when you have a realization about two of your brainrots

As we all know 0 Emblem is the biggest unresolved mystery in Fire Emblem Engage

We know little about it except for the fact it was one of the emblems in Sombron's world, before being exiled to Elyos, Sombron took it with him and despite traveling to another world, the Emblem was powerful enough to stay with Sombron until he was found by villagers. The Emblem disappeared causing Sombron intense despair and in rage he destroyed the village that welcomed him and swore to find 0 Emblem again

So many take issues with this backstory notably the fact that we know nothing about 0 Emblem outside of that which is what this post is gonna discuss today

And you might be wondering "but Fairy what is the link between this and Romeo and Juliet ??"

Well that's what we are gonna see

Defining character in absentia

Character in absentia is a term defined by Rang Lieu to describe a character with little screentime but massive importance on the story

We can see this term can apply to both Lumera and Sombron, both have few screentime but they matter a lot in how their presence or absence impacts others notably Alear, and this makes sense for parental figures such as them to be mostly characterized through how their influence manifest in their child

That being said, I argue it can extend to 0 Emblem whom despite having no screentime (arguably that last scene in Engage) also has a major influence on the story and to showcase that I am gonna have to rely on a character from Romeo and Juliet the play who fufills the same role as 0 Emblem : Rosaline

In the 3 previous versions of the tale of Romeo and Juliet before Shakespeare, Romeo was in love with an unamed lady whom we knew next to naught but that she was rejecting him. In Da Porto's version, he goes to the party held by the Capulet in hope to catch a glimpse of her but in Bandello and later Brooke's version, he goes to parties in hope to forget about her and that's how he meets Juliet. Shakespeare expands on her character a bit by giving her a name, Rosaline, a personality (a cold fierce beauty who wishes to remain chaste) and a family (he made her cousin to the Capulet). Thus in the play, Romeo confesses to his cousin that she rejected him because she made vows of chastity leading Romeo to become all mopey and his cousin to want to console him, hence he told him to find another lady to love and forced him to go to the Capulet party.

Basically Rosaline plays the role of a catalyst for the plot of Romeo and Juliet as it's her rejection of Romeo that led him to meet with Juliet. This isn't exactly the same for 0 Emblem since the plot of Engage starts with Alear and not Sombron, the catalyst would have been Lumera however where Rosaline and 0 Emblem have similarities is in how they are relevant to their respective stories, that is to say, in how much they impacted characters.

Comparisons

Rosaline is, compared to 0 Emblem, much more relevant as she gets mentionned more. She is the subject of the end of scene 1 act 1, she is the main reason Romeo goes to this party, Mercutio makes recurrent jokes against Romeo('s virility) using his crush on her (and even she herself) as a punchline.

Meanwhile 0 Emblem is only mentionned in chapter 26 when Sombron reveals his motivations : he wants to conquer the different worlds so he might find the Emblem and return with it in his own world to enact revenge. This obviously comes from several factor such as Sombron not being the protagonist, being a character in absentia too and his motivation being a plot twist.

But despite that we can point to similarities in how their revelance isn't as characters but in their relationship and the effects it has

If we focus on the play for a bit, there was something that I always questionned and it was why was there so much focus on Juliet and her house. You see, despite the Capulet and Montagues being on equal footing, the play, much like the previous source of the story, focus on the Capulet, we know the name of both of Juliet's parents, we see a party being held there, the action mostly takes place there etc. Shakespeare goes even further by having the nurse muse about Juliet when she was younger. In contrast little is known about Romeo and the Montague, and even moreso in the play where Romeo's age is no longer mentionned (reduced to emphasis on his youth) and where his parent's relevance is so low that only Benvolio, his cousin, can be considered the most important Montague. Lord Montague has only 3 appeareances and Lady Montague has a total of 2 lines before dying off stage. Little is known about Romeo outside of lines implying that how he acts in the play is different from his usual demeanor : in act 1 scene 1 we are told he has been in his room, crying under sycomore trees, that is prone to melancholia, which worries his surroundings implying he normally doesn't do that. This is further supported by Mercutio's cues. When he and Romeo have a little game of wits, where instead of trying to evade like he does in act 1 scene 4, Romeo actually responds, he comments that he is being social again and thus that he is Romeo again, (this is mainly due to the fact that Juliet returning Romeo's feelings healed his broken heart) etc. The foggy past Romeo has that which is left unexplored in the play constrast compared to Juliet where are given a lot of elements about her including her birthdate.

To an extent, Romeo is partly a mystery despite being one of the character we follow

Comparing him to Sombron is a strange comparison for sure given how one is a protagonist and a complex layered character whereas the other is an antagonist not nearly as complexed, but there is a common point in both having rather undefined past and a change happening off screen : in Romeo's case, it's him going from a sociable young man to a more reserved melancholic one that which we see at the begining of the play before we see him revert to a more sociable persona. In Sombron's case, he went from a young weak scared child to becoming an absolute monster, an abuser, a destroyer, remorseless, cruel, an embodiement of hatred and ressentiment. This off screen evolution was what is essential for the story, it's the birth of the antagonist.

And these off screen evolutions were caused by these characters in absentia, Rosaline and 0 Emblem. That being said, 0 Emblem's impression on Sombron is obviously more important and drastic than Rosaline's on Romeo but both also have thematical relevance that justify their lack of presence and little focus given to them.

In Romeo's case, his relationship (or rather lack thereof) with Rosaline is studied as a contrasting point to his relationship with Juliet. One causes him to become completely different from how he usually is, going from social to recluse, melancholic and mopey. The other makes him break from this state and returns to his more usual behavior. But what scholars highlight is the feeble nature of Romeo's infatuation with Rosaline.

While previous versions tries to present his efforts to court the lady (notably Bandello talking about a courtship that lasted 2 years with no success), Shakespare highlights the idea of this infatuation being weaker; notably through characters commenting on how quickly Romeo ended up moving from this (and by characters i mean Friar Lawrence cause Benvolio and Mercutio have 0 idea Romeo fell in love with someone else) but what is the most important part in all of this is is the form used to describe her.

When Romeo is describing Rosaline he is using Petrachan sonnets. Thing is that scholars note that these sonnets were rather weak, it's described as amateurish, forced. In contrast, when he uses this form to woo Juliet his skills have improved. Some go as far as arguing that this change in Romeo's language is meant to reflect an evolution in Shakespeare's skill (Romeo talking about Rosaline = a younger Shakespeare describing Rosaline, and the more experienced describing Juliet.)

This place's Romeo's infatuation with Rosaline on a lack of experience and even the universe of childhood, something he must break from to grow, making his relationship with Juliet into what makes him grow. That being said, Rosaline's name, which has been decided by Shakespeare, is a name that is very current in Petrachan sonnets. Romeo's position has having a first love reflecting his inexperience causing him pain, the choice of the format, of the name and so on replicates a schema of poet with his muse making Romeo into a Petrachan poet and Rosaline into a Petrachan muse. Romeo's describing her as an embodiement of perfect beauty, unattanaible and unreachable, which makes her a perfect subject for this form. Moreover, Romeo describes her with few details : she is likened to Diane, mainly portrayed as being beautiful and that's it. He mainly talks about his feelings and not so much about her, this contrast a lot especially when Mercutio talks about her in a more cynical corporal way whereas Romeo is talking about her in a way where she is sublime, an object of worship but in doing so he presents Rosaline as an abstract concept rather than a human being. This contrast to how Juliet is presented later in the play, furthermore Romeo's imagery is very classic and unoriginal whereas with Juliet he puts more effort to be inventive. And finally, at the time Shakespeare writes, Petrachan sonnets and its imagery are considered to be dated so Romeo using these, especially to pours out his feelings make him sound kinda ridicule.

All that to say that Rosaline being portrayed as this Petrachan muse figure, in short a figure so sublimed that it's abstract, less of a real person and more of a concept. Romeo's portray of Rosaline tells enough about the nature of this love, he is more in love with the idea of her or the fact of being in love than Rosaline as a person. This is a contrast to his love for Juliet which is less abstract and more concrete. This can also be read as a jabb against Petrachan poetry for presenting a poet more in love with the pain of never being reciprocated than the actual women they talked about.

This makes the little focus on Rosaline and her lack of presence in the play at all despite being one of the most catalsyer makes sense, not knowing what Rosaline looks like or is like effectively helps reinforce the fogginess of pre-play Romeo and of Rosaline, making her fit with this idea of abstractness a lot more.

See it's a lot harder to make your audience associate a character to asbtraction and views them as such when they have a body and by that I mean when they appear on screen and talk, even a little. For Rosaline to never feel incarnated at any point, she needs to stay as foggy as possible, especially in contrast to Juliet who is a much more major character. So the main take away is that Rosaline is made a character in absentia because it helps the character comes off as abstract and unfamiliar to the audience

And you might think "well that's nice and all Fairy but what's the link between this and Engage " ?

Well, Emblem 0, much like Rosaline, matters less as a character and more what it brings to the plot but if Rosaline is charactezied by her abstractness to reflect Romeo's first ideas of love as an etheral concept and talking about it a lot for someone who doesn't really know what is, so is Emblem 0 characterized as being an abstract being more than a concrete one

We have to keep in mind that we know of 0 Emblem is limited to what Sombron's tell us and I wouldn't trust this guy on anything and so does Alear

When Sombron describes 0 Emblem as being unable to speak because he used the power of the fell dragon to summon it, this further the idea that nothing outside of Sombron and that it also comes from the fact Sombron didn't really knew a lot about 0 Emblem, it was just a presence reassuring to him because it reminded him of his home but Sombron's belief that Emblem 0 abandonned him because instead of seeking revenge he was connecting with new people doesn't feel right

By his own admission, Emblem 0 was under Fell dragon influence when he summoned him so it couldn't have leaved on its own, this give more weight to Alear speculating that Emblem 0 didnt wanted to abandon Sombron unlike what he believed

And thus in the same way that Romeo's description of Rosaline says more about him and his feelings for her than about she as a person, Sombron's way of viewing Emblem 0 speaks more about him than about the emblem

Sombron's belief that he was abandonned by the Emblem as punishement for connecting with the villagers seems more to be a manifestation of his guilt for trying to move on from the loss of his home

That Sombron's ultimate goal is to return there to enact revenge after all these years speaks volume : he is suffering from survivor guilt and unable to move on from having lost everything he had, and Emblem 0 was basically the only thing he retained from this lost world, thus Emblem 0 is more of a symbolic representation of Sombron's connection to his world

That's why I personally find the fact that Emblems cannot travel to others words because they have no physical form to be fascinating from a strictly thematical pov, you can make an argument it's because they represent ideals that are so closely linked to their world they cannot be separated from it

In this sense, Emblem 0 has to stay as abstract as possible to not interfere with Sombron's perception of it and helping to convey how it matters most as what it represents to Sombron (connection to his home) than as a character

Furthemore I'd like to argue... it's in the name

What's in a name

In Japanese, Emblem 0 is written 零番目の紋章. Sombron reads it "zerobanme no monshoshi" but the transcription reads "reibanme no monshoshi".

A more accurate translation would be "Emblem n 0" which could be implying an origin past the first Emblem which in our game is Marth (hajimari no Emblem/Emblem of beginings) hence why it's refered to as 礎の紋章/Emblem of foundations, but 0 also denotes an absence which is to be found within the kanji 零/rei for it can mean "nought" or refers to something being absent or missing. Thus it refers to the notion of nothingness, void. In many mythology, the foundation of the world was precisely at the heart of nothingness, for instance, the primary deity Khaos whose name in greek means "nought".

Furthermore, an emblem is originally supposed to be a symbol of something, but the definition notes its abstract nature

Thus it all points to the fact that Sombron is looking for something that is not only abstract but possibly not even longer for this world

It's lack of appearance or voice, much like for Rosaline, is more efficent at creating within us this notion of abstraction, Emblem 0 is something that much like Rosaline's character benefits from how little we know about it because it's meant to operate on this way and in turns it expands bits on Sombron's character

Notably the fact that Sombron projects on this emblem ideals of strengh, notably the ideal that strengh resided in power only and not in nurtring connection, in isolation etc. The fact that Sombron views the Emblem as nothing than the ideal it represents is ironically closer to what an Emblem is but also ties to how he views people throught what they can bring him, tool, unlike our casts or even us who don't view the Emblems solely throught what they represent but as characters but earily similar to how Rosaline is portrayed and in that sense, it makes more sense for both of them to be left in a certain fog of mystery in order to preserve this abstraction

To Sombron, Emblem 0 is mainly a representation of an ideal and thus a form of hope as he admits that it was the only thing in which he found consolation and it becomes his only motivation, before he even wanted to return to his world he had to reunite with it and even if he admits in chapter 24 that he knows this Emblem no longer exist

Sombron himself is aware of the vanity of his quest yet he still does it anyway because he can't bring himself to move on from his past since it's what he believes caused him to lost the last connection to his world in the first place, and I feel that's also why Sombron is mostly a character in absentia expressing little care in anything and feeling less interesting as a character and more as to what it represents : Sombron doesn't just let himself define by his past, he is incapable of letting anything else define him

Even if it doesn't make sense, even if he had severals times the opportunity to make new connections he just refused to because he refused to move on from his past and mature, because it brings the possible pain of losing another connection that's why Alear's arc with Lumera makes for a nice parallel as it shows Alear being able to move on from the loss of Lumera and later the Emblems, connecting with others and yet understand these do not remove the connections they made with Lumera and the Emblems

And thus, in the same way that Rosaline's abstraction highlighted Romeo's immaturity and the vain nature of his feelings for Rosaline, the abstract, non existent nature of 0 Emblem reinforces the utter vanity and futility of Sombron's quest for what 0 Emblem and thus of his philosophy of power above all and of hatred instead of moving on

It shows that Sombron is incapable to do anything else than just perpuate the cycle of abuse with putting his children, Lumera and many others through the same suffering he experienced, entrapped in his own despair

That being said, Sombron's desire to grow stronger does show that he believes that to reunite with his Emblem he has to be worthy of it which in a way parallelize with Alear and Veyle's struggles but instead of going about it in a healthier way, he shuts himself from others and only view them as mere pawns and in how they could benefit him nothing more, nothing else but he does live up to the ideal that Emblem 0 represented to him as a child, the hope he kept pursuing

And this idea of hope mainly comes from the fact that this Emblem's incantation spell is 焦がせ/kogase (burn) however the verb kogase is usually used to talk about a burning glow, 灯火/tomoshibi in japanese and not only is glow the translation of Alear's JP name but much earlier, before the final boss fight, Sombron calls Alear a weak glow

So Emblem 0 is like Rosaline supposed to express an ideal that is not materialized and thus that cannot be find within this world but if Rosaline is an idea of love and of the woman that is untrue, Emblem 0 is an ideal of Hope that is untrue as to Sombron, hope can be found within power for the sake of power

Sombron himself is meant to embody a concept of fear and despair because, in Alear's shoes, that is what it is, it's an inconcrete type of threat, an embodimenent of evil but Sombron is incarnated and this reading is mainly coming from one my friends who argued that the early perception of Lumera and Sombron was very similar to how children views their parents as invincible gods when they are little but as they grow they realize they were failable humans beings too

Given how we follow Alear's pov, this reading works like a glove but this also aligns with the fact that both Lumera and Sombron are character in absentia and that Alear's journey to grow up also involves discovering the truth about what happened to Elyos 1000 ago because everything is linked to Alear's condition as an abuse child, including Sombron's past as it is the reason Alear was born here and the reason why they had to even go through that, so it makes more sense to put these two character in a distant plane where one is seemingly the perfectly kind mother and the other the absolute incarnate of evil, this makes Sombron appears as what he is meant to be, an evil deity but also how it feels to someone who was one of his victim, as an absoluted undefyable god who could exerce absolute control over his progeny

Thus that we can only access to a more human side of Sombron as the end approaches and as Alear had to witness the darkness within Lumera makes more sense, now we are given a meaning as to why Sombron is the way it is, but I don't think (unlike many) that showing a more human him means he is being sympathized mainly because human doesnt equal to good, it merely shows that Sombron isn't naturally evil but that he choose to become this way and I would even argue it makes him also less sympathetic because his suffering makes him a direct foil to 3 characters who didn't let their pain get the better of them, Lumera, Alear and Veyle

But while this progression from an idealized in both positive and negative sense of Lumera and Sombron explained why they were mostly presented as characetr in absentia before we get a more in depth look at them to mimic the change in Alear's perception like a child who realizes their parents are absolute god of good (Lumera) or evil (Sombron), in the case of 0 Emblem such thing isn't because it is a concept and a concept is meant to feel abstract, which justify its link to the notion of nothingness through rei/0 and through the lacking informations about it

That's also why I think theorizing about their identity is a bit pointless because it's something that works a lot better in a narrative and thematical angle when you have no name, face, identity to put on it, much like Rosaline in the play

It helps reflects so many things about how Sombron feels about Emblem 0, the idealization of what it represents, what it symbolizes in the futility of looking for something that you lost, seeking revenge and power while sacrificing connection with anyone, the utter void of Sombron's quest, the abstract nature of what it represents as an emblem/symbol, something that can only work taking advantage of its invisibility, lack of corporability, character, name etc.

[zippocreed501]

Edward G Robinson as Caesar Enrico "Rico" Bandello 

Little Caesar (1931)

[italian-lit-tournament]

The participating authors for the Italian Lit(erature) Tournament: the general list + a google form to add other proposals

Podesti Francesco - Torquato Tasso reading Jerusalem Delivered to the Estensi court

The start of the Italian Lit(erature) Tournament (first edition) is getting closer, but first I want to post the general list of the authors partecipants.

The principal issue is that every literary canon is constantly changing, with more critical studies over the years. I've thought about it, read and searched, and the solution I found has two parts:

I will take the principal authors from this list, which in turn is based from the studies of Gianfranco Contini and Asor Rosa. The list is too long and many names are only chronicles and essayists, so I'll chose the principal ones, trying to balance between north/south Italy and male/female authors (taking into account that many authors that we study are men). As you will see below under the cut, the list is already pretty long, doing some math the challenge will be 2/3 months long.

Still, I recognise that this isn't 100% unbiased and fair, so I opened a free and quick google form when you can add a maximum of two authors that you don't see in the list. This considerable limit is to avoid having too many names - if in some answers I see more than 2 names, I'll take into account only the first 2 listed.

IMPORTANT! 👇

After much thoughts, I also chose to don't include living authors or authors death only recently (before January 2023). The reason is simply to avoid potential issues in the community, like bashing between fandom or admirers of some specific author, or going too far like offending some people near the author still alive or recently deceased. Maybe if this tournament will end well, a second edition could be made next year and maybe with the addition of living authors! (I'm already thinking to do an italian or european cinema tournament in the future but this is still in the draft).

Under the cut, you will find the list of the authors already part of the challenge, name-surname with the surname in alphabetical order. If you don't see a name that you want to see, use the form to add it!

edit: I added the ones from the surbey so far, all in italics. There are names that have been sent but already on the list.

Dante Alighieri

Sibilla Aleramo

Vittorio Alfieri

Cecco Angiolieri

Pietro Aretino

Ludovico Ariosto

Matteo Bandello

Anna Banti

Giambattista Basile

Giorgio Bassani

Cesare Beccaria

Maria Bellonci

Pietro Bembo

Matteo Maria Boiardo

Giovanni Boccaccio

Giordano Bruno

Dino Buzzati

Italo Calvino

Andrea Camilleri

Giosuè Carducci

Guido Cavalcanti

Carlo Collodi

Vittoria Colonna

Gabriele D'Annunzio

Giacomo da Lentini

Caterina da Siena

Alba de Céspedes

Cielo (Ciullo) d'Alcamo

Edoardo De Filippo

Federico de Roberto

Grazia Deledda

Umberto Eco

Beppe Fenoglio

Marsilio Ficino

Dario Fo

Ugo Foscolo

Veronica Franco

Carlo Emilio Gadda

Natalia Ginzburg

Carlo Goldoni

Antonio Gramsci

Francesco Guicciardini

Tommaso Landolfi

Giacomo Leopardi

Carlo Levi

Primo Levi

Carla Lonzi

Niccolò Machiavelli

Alessandro Manzoni

Giovanbattista Marino

Giovanni Meli

Pietro Metastasio

Eugenio Montale

Elsa Morante

Alberto Moravia

Anna Maria Ortese

Giuseppe Parini

Goffredo Parise

Giovanni Pascoli

Pier Paolo Pasolini

Cesare Pavese

Francesco Petrarca

Luigi Pirandello

Angelo Poliziano

Luigi Pulci

Salvator Quasimodo

Gianni Rodari

Lalla Romano

Amelia Rosselli

Umberto Saba

Emilio Salgari

Jacopo Sannazaro

Goliarda Sapienza

Leonardo Sciascia

Matilde Serao

Gaspara Stampa

Mario Rigoni Stern

Italo Svevo

Antonio Tabucchi

Torquato Tasso

Giuseppe Tomasi di Lampedusa

Pier Vittorio Tondelli

Giovanni Verga

Giambattista Vico

Renata Viganò

Elio Vittorini

Giuseppe Ungaretti

[cto10121]

Since you read Brooke’s Romeus and Juliet I wondered if you also read Bandello and Da Porto’s version ?

No, but I do know the general history behind these versions. Da Porto’s version is where we get the names Romeo and Giulietta, the meeting at the ball, and the characters of Mercutio, Tybalt, Friar Lawrence, and Paris. The story even comes with a bit of a framing device, with Da Porto hearing the R&J story from an old Veronian called Peregrino. An even earlier version of the story comes from Salernitano’s Mariotto e Ganozza, though the setting was not Verona, but Siena.

Why Da Porto changed the names and setting is curious, especially if he did work from the Salernitano. I did find this interesting article about Da Porto being inspired by his own doomed romance, as well as Verona itself. He also added an incel-y epilogue rant about how inconstant the women of his time were and wished they could be more like Juliet. Bandello took up the story 30 years later, Mercutio’s cold hands and all, which was then eventually translated by Arthur Brooke.

From what I can tell, Brooke’s negative Aesop of blaming the lovers for their tragedy is an addition of Brooke’s. Shakespeare did away with this, clearly, but also did not revert to the older versions of the story, such as the Salernitano, which had Mariotto get killed by guards and Ganozza die in a convent. He followed the Brooke and thus the Bandello versions closely.

So it seems clear to me that the story is rooted in some local history, some Italian true crime. I wouldn’t even be surprised if Salernitano and Da Porto were working on two similar but ultimately unrelated lovers who were doomed. But most importantly, all versions very clearly label the R&J story as one of love, misfortune, death, and ultimately tragedy. And despite his clownish Aesop, Brooke still titled his poem, “The Tragical History of Romeus and Juliet.” Shakespeare’s play would end up being marketed as “The Most Excellent and Lamentable Tragedy of Romeo and Juliet.” So the tradition of this story being a sad, tragic one is long.

[cantsayidont]

THE PENGUIN Season 1 (2024), Take 2: Contrary to my initial expectations, THE PENGUIN shies away from the overtly campy derangement of GOTHAM to remain squarely in the gritty crime drama arena. Whether this represents an improvement is harder to say. Above all, this show wants desperately to be taken seriously: It looks sort of like GOODFELLAS, and it's packed cheek-to-jowl with powerhouse acting (with Cristin Milioti the standout as Sofia Falcone) and Heavy Drama. However, it always remains far too artificial to be convincing.

The biggest problem is its central character, here called Oswald Cobb (canonically, the Penguin's last name is "Cobblepot"), a low-ranking mob lieutenant, mama's boy, and frustrated schlemiel trying to make his big play after years of hauling garbage. Colin Farrell tries hard, but it's impossible to overlook the fat suit and veritable mountain of prosthetics, and one can't help wondering how it made sense to transform a handsome middle-aged Irishman so extensively when New York is filled with real guys (and character actors) who look and sound exactly like this already. Even if you can suspend disbelief on his appearance, his character never gels: Just as JOKER ripped off MEAN STREETS and TAXI DRIVER, Ozz Cobb is cobbled together (if you'll pardon the expression) from bits and pieces of old gangster movies and old gangster movie actors — James Cagney's Cody Jarrett (from WHITE HEAT) and Edward G. Robinson as Rico Bandello (in LITTLE CAESAR) being the most obvious — and the scripts' ambivalence about how the audience should feel about him (culminating in a vicious "shock" ending for the show's only Black character, played by Rhenzy Feliz) comes across as muddled rather than compelling, since Farrell can't muster sufficient magnetism to pull all the jumbled pieces together.

Sofia Falcone is potentially more interesting because her challenges are more inherently compelling than Ozz's: Horribly betrayed by her own family to cover up some of her father's more unsavory crimes, publicly vilified, and medically tortured for years, Sofia decides she has little alternative but to lean into acting the crazy bitch people already assume her to be. However, the show constantly subordinates Sofia's story to Ozz's, leaving her plotlines (like her weird BDSM relationship with her former doctor/torturer Julian Marsh (Theo Rossi)) so underdeveloped that they're almost incoherent. What Sofia actually wants seems to change from scene to scene, so all Milioti can do is strut around in increasingly cunty outfits while visibly wondering what her motivation is supposed to be.

The heaviness of the material is not to the show's credit because the structure is just not solid enough to support it, even when the script doesn't pull you of the story with self-conscious metatextual jokes (like Ozz's dead brothers' names being "Jack" and "Benny") or comics Easter eggs (like one of Sofia's fellow Arkham patients being the Magpie, a very minor post-Crisis Batman villain), and the awareness that the show is really just a placeholder for the forthcoming theatrical sequel to THE BATMAN (2022) makes it feel like a fairly pointless exercise. Also, Clancy Brown and Shohreh Aghdashloo are completely wasted in secondary villain roles as Salvatore and Nadia Maroni, which is hard to forgive. CONTAINS LESBIANS? Not a one. VERDICT: Elaborate but hard to enjoy, and what was the point, again?

[norcester-archive]

i saw him at the mall last week. [ANDRI BANDELLO , SYM]

[seemehustle]

"I think I'd let her devour me. Why do we have such nice flesh if not to have it ruined by those who matter most? That's what intimacy is, isn't it- ruining a person? Why do I have enough meat for one person to thrive off of if I am not supposed to let them feed?

I think I'd let her if she cooked me into something nice. To show she cares. She is patient, she is willing. Maybe if she cut off my arm and let me watch as she cooked the cutlet and let my blood drip, drip, drip into a glass for her to drink, I'd let her. I think I'd let her. Let me be your life.

I think she could. I think I'd ask nicely. Be gentle, be gentle. Swallow me. Kill me. Be gentle. Live for me. From me. Let me be your life. I think you were right about this all along."

- Maybe It's Too Personal / Jamie Bandello

[fard-rock-blog]

Nelide Bandello/Bar Tritolo | Milagro

Etichetta: Flying Robert Music Tracce: 10 – Durata: 47:23 Genere: Nu Jazz Sito: Instagram, Facebook , FRM Voto: 8/10 Il batterista veneto Nelide Bandello accredita il suo nuovo disco al gruppo Bar Tritolo, mutuandolo dal titolo dell’album che, pressappoco con la stessa formazione aveva realizzato nel 2014. Alla compagine testata in quell’occasione (Enrico Terragnoli alla chitarra e Piero Bittolo…

[safehavenhqs]

Un nuevo habitante llega al pueblo con el nombre de ASTER BANDELLO. Sus datos confirman que su profesión es EMPLEADO EN LA CARNICERÍA Y PESCADERÍA LAND & SEA, tiene 31 AÑOS y es originario de NEVADA, ESTADOS UNIDOS. Algunas personas lo confunden con DREW STARKEY.

¡Bienvenido a Safe Haven, KITTY! Tienes 48 horas para enviar la cuenta de tu personaje. Esperamos que tu estadía en el pueblo sea de tu agrado.

información del usuario:

apodo: kitty

pronombres: ella/suya

país/zona horaria: gmt-3

trigger warnings: abuso, acoso, incesto, trabajo sexual

rostro reservado: drew starkey

cupo reservado: 15.2

información del personaje:

nombre: aster bandello

pronombres: él/suyo

fecha de nacimiento: 12/06/1993 + (31 años).

lugar de nacimiento: nevada, estados unidos.

grupo al que pertenece: forastero.

profesión: empleado en carnicería y pescadería land & sea

perfil

habilidades: siempre fue un fanático de los deportes, de verlos y de jugarlos. practicó basket durante varios años, cuando llegó la adultez lo reemplazó por el gimnasio. tuvo algún que otro trabajo pesado.

enfermedades: no.

puntos de habilidad:

velocidad: 3

agilidad: 0

resistencia: 2

ingenio: 0

sigilo: 1

ataque: 3

defensa: 2

fuerza: 4

residencia:

nació en el estado de nevada y allí vivió toda su vida, llega a safe haven para la fecha de inauguración pactada por el proyecto así que recién está amigandose con este nuevo pueblo que ahora tendrá que llamar hogar.

curiosidades:

tw: fallecimiento. la vida nunca parece transcurrir con delicadeza para ASTER BANDELLO que experimenta su primer tragedia al año de edad cuando mamá fallece y pasa a quedar a cargo de su tía. habían sido desde siempre una familia humilde pero un sólo adulto al cuidado de cuatro niños era tarea casi imposible, aún así su tía se encargó de que amor y risas no faltasen. junto a sus primos, todos varones, aster se forma como un intento de buen hombre — o hace lo posible por aquello demostrarle a su tía, fallando siempre. picardía corre por las venas y protagoniza bromas, altercados, travesuras. aún así no se siente un hombre con buena suerte.

hubieron momentos en que la vida pareció querer demostrarle que sí lo era y recuerda haberse sentido el tipo más suertudo del mundo dos o tres veces desde que nació. ésta última era la más importante de todas, el amor toca su puerta y algo que concebía impensado y hasta lejano lo transforma por completo. a los veintiocho años se casa con YOLANDA y no tiene recuerdo de haber sentido felicidad tan enorme antes. corría el dos mil veinte y el matrimonio se muda a un pequeño apartamento en el mismo estado que los vio crecer y aunque él finalmente se esfuerza y se dedica a algo en su vida, no es suficiente para que ésto perdure. la convivencia es intensa y el dinero no alcanza así que ella un día arma sus valijas y se borra de su vida. unos días más tarde le explica la situación por mensaje y no la ve más.

la intención siempre fue abandonar nevada lo antes posible y dejar esa vida atrás pero economía lo imposibilita, el proyecto phoenix se le presenta recién un año más tarde y decide que aplicar es lo correcto, sin creerselo realmente cuando le devuelven positiva del otro lado.

personas de interés

1: nico bandello, 33 años, primo. con quien creció y forjó relación más cercana de los tres. lucas es quien le muestra sobre el proyecto y quien lo impulsa a postularse porque él mismo también lo hace, y aunque no compartirán vivienda, la idea de comenzar su nueva vida con primo como vecino le alivia un poco los nervios.

2: jayden bandello, 11 años, ahijado. lucas fue el primero de los cuatro jóvenes en convertirse en padre y como separación con la madre sucedió antes del embarazo, los bandello vieron crecer a jaden desde su nacimiento porque en ese mismo hogar dormía los días que a lucas le tocaba hacerse cargo del niño, dos o tres por semana. su cercanía con primo lo convierte en padrino del pequeño y aunque al principio temía, forjar relación con el bebé terminó siendo bastante fácil. hoy lo ama con locura, por eso adora que haya aceptado mudarse a safe haven con su padre y así, continuar teniéndolo cerca.

[✔] al enviar este formulario doy permiso a la administración de utilizar a mi personaje de la forma que consideren adecuada en el desarrollo de la historia grupal. para más información al respecto leer la normativa.