#but i feel like grandmother Agatha would actually work with a lot of plot points i already have for this fic

[katyobsesses]

Uhg I need Bridgerton friends to bounce ideas off for my Modern AU 😭

Like? Agatha Danbury?? Would she and Violet's dad actually gotten together in a world where divorce isn't as frowned upon? Or would it have still been just an affair?

In other words do I make Agatha Danbury basically the Bridgerton's grandmother???

[han100894]

Spoilers for The Girl Genius Novel 4 –Mostly about Zeetha and Higgs

Okay I’m just going to start and say that so far I, in my obsession, mostly skimmed the book to find the parts with Higgs and Zeetha. So full disclosure there, I haven’t actually finished it yet. I got impatient with waiting for my physical copy and bought the ebook. I’ll read it properly with my physical copy arrives.

So I just have to say I’m really annoyed that the doubled down on the “Zeetha was being irresponsible and overconfident” bit—they even straight up admit that what happened was because of the plant and she was drugged, but still act like it was all her irresponsibility. That’s not how this works. When someone is drugged out of her mind—and to make it clear, yes so was everyone else, but they were aware they were drugged, Zeetha was clueless and so couldn’t fight it nearly as well—you can’t call them irresponsible and overconfident.

Not to mention, she didn’t even really do anything overconfident? She just briefly talks to Tarvek—that’s it. Also Higgs is the first one hit—he gets shoved back before Zeetha gets stabbed. He then also, while fighting very seriously—gets stabbed just like her? What exactly does he think would have gone differently had Zeetha not briefly talked to Tarvek?

And I get and understand that since this was his first wakeup call that he liked her (though I don’t think he actually realized truly realized until he’s on the clank—the way he words it makes it sound like he’s just figuring it out himself that he likes her, and wants her, and wants her to like him to) and so he’s not thinking straight and being overprotective—but I really wish the narrative would maybe point that out? Instead of acting like it’s a fact.

Like even if it’s just Mamma pointing out the he also got stabbed, after the fact, exactly like Zeetha did? Or Agatha tell Zeetha after her apology that no—you were unknowingly drugged—that’s not overconfidence, that’s not how that works?

Plus, honestly I feel that despite the fact he was trying to resolve her guilt when she first woke up, that Higgs focus on her “overconfidence” likely only worsened her guilt. She seems to take his opinion as fact as well…

Actually I think that a good chunk her trying to show off to Higgs is that she’s desperately trying to prove herself good enough after what happened. Both because she likes him and quite possible think all he sees in her is an idiot at this point, but also for her own sake… granted that second part is going into headcanon territory here.

(I have an headcanon/ fanon that Zeetha has a problem with “not being good enough” that comes from being a twin is Skifander, where her achievements were never good enough for a lot of people who saw her as a twin and nothing else, no matter how good they were or even if they were equivalent to those her age around her that got praised—so if that headcanon is true then well… Higgs words may have been a bit of a blow… Also in my fanon it’s her grandmother who is the worst of it too… so double blow?)

I should probably get over it, but it annoys me. I swear there was never anything major that indicated Zeetha had a problem with overconfidence until this subplot, so it still feels like it’s forced, and as the double down it feels even more so? Zeetha already gets to play worf whenever she’s fighting, it would be nice if she could at least not get called overconfident to. Especially in a world of Sparks—who are beyond overconfident and reckless—get to get away with it constantly?

(Yes, with the Horsie Beastie she gets a sprained ankle, but that’s the risk of fighting short ranged—and she was the only one of the group to work with someone else (Yeti) with a plan instead of just stumbling over everyone else. With Passholdt she’s very aware this is serious and they could die, and as she fought Lu in Agatha despite her boastings she was careful, both to test what Lu could do but also to not hurt Agatha to much (A wrong punch can kill someone after all).

Though I do like that it’s implied Zeetha did get Mamma’s blessing to join the fighting. And that other than her injury throbbing (as to be expected) she’s not shown once to actually be struggling with it. It’s not slowing her down, weakening her, or limiting her movements at all. She shows no sign of having trouble breathing, even after fighting or running, despite the fact her lungs had to have been punctured.

Though her injury… or rather her treatment… While it’s not confirmed here it is heavily implied she got the draught which, I mean yeah in canon it’s canon but still. I’m still not thrilled with the idea. Zeetha had been worfed so often that it just feels cheap—and kinda sad—that going forward she’ll likely win not through her own power (or even choice, she didn’t get to make the decision to take the draught after all) but through a mcguffin.

I would have also liked to see her power up come from either herself (Whether her keeping up as a badass normal, or some kind of war spark (I still hold onto the theory she had like, half the spark gene, and she had a psudo breakthrough when killing Bang’s fleet that maybe she’ll one day be able to control) or from something related to Skifander (since it is her character’s plot, and a huge part of her life.) Instead she once again kind feels like she getting overshadowed, whether by her connection it Agatha or her connection with Higgs. I like Ziggs, and it’s potential, a lot but I don’t want Zeetha downgraded to being basically Higgs girlfriends, which a lot of what has happened so far has felt like…

Well I’m just not thrilled.

I am hoping that her odd reaction (Two and half years in she’s neither mutated, or shown any enhanced ability in toughness or strength) to it is eventually going to mean that no—she didn’t react to the Jägerdraught in any normal way and isn’t becoming a Jäger. That her Skifandrian heritage (Which likely has something similar to the Dyne considering the connection of the Queens, and needing that power to become one…) basically neutralized it beyond taking the dyne water in its energy to heal her… or something. So she can get a proper power up through something else.

(I mean, I like the idea that Higgs won’t lose her to old age, but also kinda wish that a different method would be used to stop that… God Queen anyone XD. Though if all it did was make her un-ageing and that her power up comes from something else, I’m okay with that to.)

(…I still love the idea of God Queen Zeetha though… I mean, she almost more than Agatha has connections to that plot line thanks to Skifander.)

Also it’s confirmed she did die, briefly, which like… um, if she was that bad off maybe Higgs should have walked a little faster through the Castle, or let Agatha actually set her up on life support or something. They had set on Von Pinn rather quickly after all I mean… but whatever. They wanted her to die, for some reason. Probably to try and drive the overconfident point home… or something. (Or maybe to go God Queen you have to die, take the dyne water (or equivalent, it’s the energy that matters I think) and then get electrocuted… while the electrocution takes several years after the others that has all happened to Zeetha like it did Agatha…just saying…)

Also I’d like to say that Higgs stealing her swords was still a shitty thing to do. An understandably shitty thing to do, but a shitty thing to do regardless. While he may not know that, they are very important to her (they are the only thing she keeps in good condition before she meets Agatha, even her arm bands are grimy) and most importantly she’s an adult. Maybe take them away, still shitty but sure, but actually hiding them is infantilizing at best. Again him acting unreasonable because of sudden case of feeling, but I wish something had been made of it.

Also I want to make it clear, I’m not upset with Higgs actions. It’s great fodder for misunderstandings, a bit of angst, and grounds for them to have a good long talk that will end with their relationship growing stronger as well as character development. I’m just a bit annoyed with how the narrative as a whole is viewing them as well as… honestly… I no longer have much faith of the Fogilos when it comes to character three dimensionsness and development. So I’m… leery…

But enough of that, another thing to wonder

Who the heck is Omeetza that Zeetha briefly thinks is Higgs? IS this going to be a Time travel thing? Are the group going to end up in the past and become legends in Skifander? That would be hilarious. Makes me wonder what the “drive and burning singlemindedness” is about if it is/ will be him. 10 digibucks it has something to do with helping Zeetha. (Hopefully without overshadowing her though, please let the Skifander plot revolve around mostly her side of things, she’s been overshadowed so much.)

The other two options is that Higgs is just vaguely resembles a legendary figure, or that he’s been to Skifander in the past. The first one is boring, and also unlikely because why bring it up without fully explaining the legend then, and the last one I hope not, though, he does have an odd reaction when looking at the swords… so maybe he’s seen them before?

To be fair I understand him keeping that secret much more than him not telling Zeetha about the draught, he couldn’t answer that one as easily without letting his secrets go—plus knowing Zeetha he has no idea just how bad not knowing where Skifander is hurt even three years later. Though you would think that would have come up now that he’s confessed. And also I have a harder time think Zeetha would just let the fact he knew that go as easily. She might understand but I can’t help but feel it should hurt.

Alright back to a little salt though, I swear if it comes out that Zeetha wasn’t at least aware Higgs was a high ranking Jäger, if not a general or spymaster (though even those would be nice) then I’m gunna riot. The novels are even more clear how suspicions she is of him, and if Gil and Tarvek can figure it out—so can she. The Spark doesn’t help with noticing things like this (In fact I’d say generally it makes it harder) and Zeetha has just as much royal training as both of them. It would make no sense if she didn’t figure it out but let the secret lie until he told her. The only reason would be to make Gil and Tarvek more special in the main characterness, I swear…

[i-am-very-very-tired]

A few months ago, it might have been difficult to imagine a celebrity who’s been a household name since the ’80s—when supermarket tabloids drove so much discourse—arguing publicly for gossip’s value. But there in front of me earlier this week in the Crosby Street Hotel was national treasure and six-time Oscar nominee Glenn Close, talking about the lengthy statement she gave to the New York Times in October, in the wake of the initial reports about Harvey Weinstein’s pattern of predation and sexual misconduct. During this conversation, she explained how gossip about men like Weinstein and Kevin Spacey informed her of what would eventually become public knowledge that could possibly alter culture as we know it.

Close was promoting Crooked House, Gilles Paquet-Brenner’s new adaptation of Agatha Christie’s beloved (and ultimately audacious) 1949 mystery. Close plays Lady Edith, the de facto head of a wealthy household whose patriarch’s recent murder leads to an investigation that drives the story’s plot. It’s an ensemble piece, also featuring Christina Hendricks, Gillian Anderson, and Terrence Stamp, and in it Close rides the edge of madness, inching her way to the top without ever going over it. She told me hitting that frequency, which is just a dial or two down from camp, was “absolutely” intentional.

I interviewed her alongside Max Irons, who plays the man investigating the murder, Charles. Close has known Irons since he was a child—he’s the son of Jeremy Irons, with whom Close starred in 1990's Reversal of Fortune and 1993's The House of Spirits. Crooked House is one of two new movies Close is appearing in with the younger Irons—the film adaptation of Meg Wolitzer’s novel The Wife premiered earlier this year at the Toronto International Film Festival to raves and will be released in 2018. We talked about that, but mostly we spent our small amount of time in conversation about the current Hollywood climate. Irons respectfully took a back seat for the majority of our talk and let the woman do most of the speaking. An edited and condensed transcript of our conversation is below.

JEZEBEL: At age 70, you continue to work steadily. What do you think of the narrative that states it’s harder for women over 40 working in Hollywood?

GLENN CLOSE: I think it’s true, but I’ve never felt more in tune with myself or my craft and the power of what we do ever. I think I’m top of my game. My friend Annie Roth said I haven’t peaked yet, which I think is a nice thing to say. I’m still curious about the possibilities and I like to do different things. I love to surprise myself and go into different psychological and emotional territory. This [Crooked House role] was very much different from what I’ve done before. I wouldn’t have taken it [otherwise]. I wouldn’t know how to do it, I’d just be bored.

Do you think it’s a matter of shifting expectations in terms of what roles are offered as you get older?

GC: Well, you go through your phase where you’re a mother or a grandmother or the aunt or something. But I’m not getting that many offers [like that] anymore, it’s really kind of cool. I can only hope there’s more and more material available, because I think anyone my age would say, “You’re the best you’ve ever been.” That’s the way I feel.

I haven’t seen The Wife yet, but I hear you’re great.

GC: That was a journey.

MAX IRONS: Something I was struck by as a young actor was that every single minute of every single day, you were clawing away, searching for the truth of that character.

GC: Yeah, right.

MI: At no point did you seem to rest or seem content that you knew.

GC: I found her very tricky.

The book is widely regarded as feminist. Did you relate to that aspect?

GC: Yes, in fact that’s one of the tricky things. The book is much more black and white than the movie. If you read the book, any woman would say, “Why does she stay with him?” I had to answer that question for myself, and I think in finding that understanding and really working through with [screenwriter] Jane Anderson and [director] Björn Runge that emotional journey, still there were tricky scenes to shoot.

In the statement you gave to the New York Times regarding Harvey Weinstein, you called yourself “angry and darkly sad” in the wake of the allegations. Do you still feel that way two months later?

GC: I think I’ve moved away from that. As more and more people are being exposed and more and more women are being able to come up and say they were abused or preyed upon, I feel that it’s kind of in the male DNA, that if somebody walks in the room, your first thought is, “Do I want to fuck her?” Honestly speaking. Women maybe, but not to the same degree. If you expect that to change, I think it’s stupid. But I hope this is a tipping point and I hope it will represent a social revolution. Evolution. Evolution. Because the only way I think it won’t keep happening is if we evolve to a different place. It takes both and women. There are men who have acted on it, and men who don’t. To condemn all men is stupid and counterproductive, but just to say, “Okay, we’re biological creatures and this is a natural instinct, but we have a social contract.” And this can, hopefully, evolve into a new culture for us.

Civilization depends on the regulation of our base instincts.

GC: Absolutely.

Your statement spoke to such experience that I wondered if what you wrote was the result of years of thinking about this culture or if the Weinstein allegations induced an epiphany.

GC: Thinking back, I never was preyed upon. In the Harvey case, you’d be lying if you said you didn’t know that he had a terrible reputation. He was known to be a pig. [To Max] You heard that, too.

MI: Absolutely.

GC: There were times when I was made extremely uncomfortable in two [non-Weinstein] auditions. It was like, “What game is going on here? I don’t even know what the rules are, what the game is.” I go in very sincerely trying to do a scene, and all of a sudden, it has nothing to with a scene. Now I realize they’re set up, especially when it’s all men [although] in one of them there was women, where basically it’s like putting a dog in with a bitch in heat. They’re looking at sexual chemistry rather than anything else. If I’d been more kind of savvy, I’d have gone in and just tried to flirt or come onto this person so they’d say, “Oh yeah, there’s chemistry there.” I get that now. It’s fucked and it’s unfair.

MI: It’s such a complicated issue and it’s an issue that extends from Weinstein down to the factory line manager. It’s a social problem and to get to the heart of it we have to be honest with ourselves and look at ourselves as human beings with base instincts and the exchange of goods that goes on and how to manage that. My worry, personally, is whether we as a society using the forms of communication we’re seeing at play here, chiefly social media, whether it’ll be sabotaged by that.

GC: Turned on its ear. Like all of a sudden there will be a huge backlash and we’ll be back where we used to be?

MI: What we really need is focused, considered examination of this social problem as opposed to what we’re seeing quite a lot of and what makes headlines and what sells newspapers: emotionally led, impulsive statement, which is gobbled up by people with phones. And consequently, the issue that’s at the heart of it will be missed.

GC: I mentioned in my statement how important it is to have a dispassionate examination.

What’s it been like to see so many named that you have worked with or have been photographed with or know?

GC: Weinstein, that was his reputation. Kevin Spacey, that was his reputation. My brother said, “Did you know you were on Fox News?” Apparently they said, “She knew and she didn’t do anything.” I thought, “That’s where I think gossip is good.” Someone wrote about that: Gossip is what women do sometimes to keep themselves out of danger. I heard gossip, but I didn’t hear, you know... The gossip informed me. But I think what’s different is first of all you’d hope people would be brave enough to come out, who have actually had these situations, and then restitution. Something has to happen. It’s not behavior you want to condone.

When you called yourself angry and darkly sad in that statement, were you implying that you were at all angry at yourself?

GC: No. I was angry at the whole situation, that women were put in that situation again and again and again. ‘Cause I knew Harvey was just the tip of the iceberg. Big tip of the iceberg, but yeah. And I think that made me angry. I can put myself into the shoes of a young girl who has no defenses and I’ve learned that there’s fight, flight, and freeze. People say, “Why didn’t you just...” I can see where you’re in this room and you don’t know the rules. It’s terrifying. That made me angry. I think now we have to just support and we have to be articulate. [A pause] I think about my daughter.