#by people who think they are some kind of art purists

[linklethehistorian]

Okay, I was determined that I was not gonna make this…until a certain post just appeared on my dash for a second time by a second well-meaning individual who just wanted to share writing advice with followers.

I was originally going to just ignore it the first time, but at this point it is very clear that it needs to be said. I will be making this as a separate post rather than a reblog, because I typically don’t believe in writing argumentative things on other people’s original posts, but seriously.

I am utterly sick and tired of posts that are like “all I’m saying is if you do [x thing that actually, plenty of both normal hobbyists and professional writers do alike], I’m clicking out.” You must really have your head pretty damn far up your ass if you think that what you as a singular reader will personally do if you stumble upon a fic should genuinely discourage a writer from writing the way they want to and how they enjoy, for thinking that they should take your personal preference and your opinions into account in their creations — much less to actually make a post that’s clearly meant to intimidate new writers into conforming to your “one true way to write” bullshit.

No. You’re being fucking entitled over something completely free made out of the love and passion and goodness of someone’s heart, and which you’re lucky even exists in the first place; you don’t, in fact, have a right to see people “learn” a “better way” to do things because there are more people out there doing things the so-called “wrong” way than you’d like there to be.

If you don’t like someone doing a given thing, then go ahead and click out — it’s obviously not for you and that’s valid and you’re free to dislike it on a personal level — but it doesn’t make anyone a bad writer for doing it, or less of a writer, or less skilled; even if it were some kind of rule that was once put in in place to do things the way you’re saying — which it’s not — plenty of famous great authors have broken, are currently breaking, and will continue to break these so-called rules and still go on to be famous and beloved because of it, and be considered great and iconic for those choices.

Also, as far as that one I’ve seen which concerns the supposed “error” of describing a person instead of just using their name or pronouns all the fucking time? Tell me you’ve never written a slash fic without telling me you’ve never written a slash fic — or even one where two characters of the same gender are in the same scene for more than a few exchanges, much less interacting.

And if you have written one of those fics, then guess what? It’s time to turn the tables on you and see how the shoe fits: because, as far as I’m concerned, if you take this advice of yours when writing such things, then your fic is actually the bad one, and I’m going to click out of it without finishing, because it sucks.

…Stupid and rude thing to say when it’s directed at you and what you think is good writing, isn’t it? But it’s true: different people have different tastes. I don’t genuinely think you’re a bad writer or that you should change your ways if you write like this, but I also am serious when I say I would never willingly and knowingly read a fic like that, much less would I enjoy it or think it’s ‘good’ insofar as my own personal tastes and interests.

I think your writing style sucks to read. You think my writing style sucks to read. Neither of us are objectively right, because art isn’t about following a certain set of rules decided by someone else — unless that’s what you personally want your own art to be.

It’s one thing to give advice that you personally think is great and give tips on what you’ve learned in your own writing journey, but rudely and arrogantly proclaiming that if someone doesn’t conform to your hyper specific writing rules, they’re a bad writer and what they’re doing is a bad thing is entirely another.

Learn to be a respectful adult that can behave as such: just say “it’s not for me”, and move on until you find a fic that is, in fact, for you and to your tastes, because that’s all it actually is: it’s not for you. And that’s okay.

Grow the fuck up and realize that the world doesn’t revolve around you, and neither does anyone’s fic.

Conversely, if you want to vent about your personal frustration with the commonality of something you personally don’t like in writing, then do so, but don’t act like you’re just trying to teach people the “right” way to make art, and for the love of all that’s holy, don’t ever fucking tag it as writing “advice” when it it’s no such fucking thing.

‘Advice’ isn’t “do this or you suck and [at least impliedly] no one will read your shit”. That’s an ultimatum. That’s an order with set consequences for disobedience. ‘Advice’ is saying, “personally I think you should do this, because it’s what I would do/personally think is the best way of doing it, but, you can take it or leave it depending on how you feel it should be done; the decision is yours to make.”

I hate that people keep reblogging this shit thinking that it is anything other than this or any better than a person who tries to dictate what pairings or stories or characters you write — because it isn’t. It’s rude and narrow-minded and helps no one. All it does is try to fit art into a box, making writing and other forms of art just about checking things off a list of “do”s and “don’t”s to make sure you do it the “right” way, rather than a way of self-expression and actual freedom of creativity.

“But I really won’t read a fic if — ”

Then don’t. No one wants you to, least of all the OP. It obviously wasn’t made for you. Keep scrolling, leave it for the people whom it actually was made for, and find something you actually enjoy and won’t go on Tumblr to bite the hands that feed you by whining about how unskilled your fellow writers are like a little bitch.

[iamnmbr3]

Cursed Child rant? as a treat? 👉👈

Oh god. Where to even start. Listen, I know some people enjoy CC and I say more power to you. I'm not here to be the fun police and say what people can and can't like or write fic about or derive meaning from or whatever. But for me, personally, Cursed Child is an absolute mess of the worst kind that irritates me on a profound level.

First off, it's completely inconsistent with the canon characterizations and established rules of world building (and JKR didn't even do that much world building so there wasn't that much to keep track of and yet, they couldn't even bother to do that). I mean, Cedric, who tried to give the Triwizard Cup to Harry doesn't win and that somehow causes him to become a Death Eater??? Huh? It's not just ooc. It's bad storytelling. I mean, even if he was a hugely sore loser why would losing a tournament cause him to join an extremist blood purist paramilitary group? That has nothing to do with him losing. It's stupid and childish and nonsensical and SO bad.

And really? That's the best you can come up with? If the point of that whole thing was the tired trope of 'time travel goes wrong and makes things worse' they could've just had the gang expose Crouch earlier but instead of Voldemort not returning he just ends up returning but not using Harry's blood which allows him to do his original plan of growing his power in secret. And idk. Maybe then he takes over and he kills Harry and Harry doesn't come back. I didn't even put any effort into that. It's a bit dumb and inelegant but it gets the job done without wild character assassination and a lack of logic so profound it would insult the reasoning abilities of a fungus.

But ok, let's judge it as its own vaguely Harry Potter inspired thing rather than as an actual sequel to the canon series. You know what the result is? IT'S STILL BAD. It's just. SO BAD. I don't understand how it's a real thing.

It's like a parody of a bad play. It can't possibly be real. Harry suddenly has a phobia of pigeons? Why??? It's so...stupid. And I'm supposed to take that seriously? What? And the dialogue. The dialogue. "Bad" doesn't even cover it. The fact that "Wow. Squeak. My geekness is a-quivering" is a real actual line in the actual play causes me physical pain. WHO WRITES THAT?! AND THEN LEAVES IT IN THE FINAL DRAFT?!?!?

And Delphi. WHAT EVEN?! She's literally like a parody of a bad fanfic Mary Sue. Down to the blue streak in her hair. But we're supposed to take her seriously? As a villain? Tf? She's like a bad Ebony Dark'ness Dementia Raven Way knockoff. The whole play is like an unfunny parody of bad writing. But it's not supposed to be. It actually pretends to be a genuine drama. Which is so much worse. I truly think My Immortal is better. And way funnier.

No effort at all went into the story construction. Characters act incredibly childishly and unrealistically and simplistically. The story doesn't feel like it was written by adults. There's no feeling or depth or emotion. It's all plot contrivances and nauseatingly simplistic writing. It isn't a story. It's just some stuff that happens. Because the writers were just like 'eh it's Harry Potter it'll sell.' And that's not art. That's just churned out content. And it bothers me on such a profound level that they did it and got away with it.

I would be embarrassed to write that for myself, let alone to turn that in as a professional writer. It's so inconsistent with the original story that I legitimately think the 2 guys who wrote it didn't even read the books. They just glanced at the wiki and decided they were good to go. Despite being PAID to do this. How sloppy is that? Not to mention Harry Potter meant so much to so many people who were ecstatic to get more content yet the two clowns who wrote this just skimmed the wiki and then vomited out some of the worst lines ever penned in history and called it a day.

[okaystoptellingmetomakeanaccount]

Unpopular DT opinion: I don’t care for Don Rosa’s work. None of it ever resonated with me. I dunno if that makes me a heathen, but whatever, DuckTales in the early days bores me to tears. Guess you can put me at the stake. 🔥

I do get it. Rosa’s work is not for everyone. It certainly has a very fanfic-y taste to it, and arguably isn’t very Disney-comic-like at all. Or it at least isn’t Barksian. Rosa more writes like it’s a Hollywood movie. For some that’s exactly its appeal, but for others it’s a turn-off. Both are fair.

Also his art is probably a problem as well. I know it is for many. It’s very stiff. Me being a big Rosa fan doesn’t notice it while reading, but the moment you go and look at the art of some professionals it does start to stand out in a negative way. Rosa’s difference is also that he puts 10 times the amount of time in drawing compared to other artists, partly because he’s technically an amateur, and because he wants the very best possible, but it does end up in often overcrowded drawings. Some might really love all that extra effort and the details, some would say, like I quote my mother: “It hurts my eyes”.

There are a lot of people who dislike Rosa’s stories, so it’s really not the unpopular opinion you might think it is. You might just haven’t encountered the Barks purists yet. Or even those who prefer the cleaner drawing and writing styles of… pretty much everyone else.

I have seen very little of the original Ducktales and it kind of bored me as well. I don’t think that’s an unpopular opinion at all actually. I see lots of people say that Ducktales 87 hasn’t aged well compared to like, Darkwing Duck. I would even say it was never that great in the first place. I find it a very childish adaptation of the duckverse that looked at Barks’ stories and misunderstood everything that was good about them. Gotta say though, that the animation and staging was beautiful. Especially for that time! That was some movie-level of budget they had or something, because it still looks great, and maybe even better than some modern animation we see in the industry today.

[possumcollege]

CW: Twitter 😑

It's only "different" because it's been pathologized by a culture that wants it to be so that something very specific can be enshrined as "normal."

That isn't inseparable. It's an imposition.

There's nothing queer people do or experience in relationships that cis/het people don't as well. We just got saddled with the baggage of not passing muster in the eyes of a culture that prefers to transmit generational wealth and power via birthrates, bloodlines, racial purity, laws of inheritance, and commodifying its marriageable children.

Straight people are just as kinky, promiscuous, slutty, or flamboyant as queer people are said to be. They get relationship anxiety, jealousy, confusion,  have crises of identity, indecision, and trust. Queer people can be just as reserved, religious, driven to settle down, become parents, nest as conservatives pretend all straight people are. We all age and change, connect and drift apart.

Are some of those things "more prevalent" among queer people specifically, or is that also true of members of marginalized groups? That doesn't make it OK. Or are straight people just better at passing? Is the normal normal because it reduces your profile, attracts less attention, because it makes an exceptional camouflage?

Queer families are just families too. Only about 15% of US families fit the nuclear, man+woman on their first marriage w/ 2.whatev kids. Most American families rely on relatives, friends, neighbors to care for their kids. Found family is not actually, objectively, functionally different than biological family. Children of divorced people often end up with 2 moms and/or dads. Sometimes more with multiple divorces. Why is a polyamorous family so different?

Love is kindness and generosity and care and community. Sometimes it's attraction, romance, sex, or platonic friendship. People date, marry, pal around, collaborate, support, protect, encourage, comfort, and mourn eachother because humans are loving social animals. Love is vague.

Love isn't math. There's no specific order of operations if yer doin' a queer one

The difference is wedding vs birthday cake. They're both cake. A wedding cake can be huge and extravagant as all hell, or small and informal. A birthday cake can be a bespoke work of art, or cost $4. All are cake. Nothing to debate.

'Cept I seen a few made of donuts.

That's cake too though. The "difference" is that people get to treat you like shit with more or less impunity in some places because of it. It's like kicking a party out of a venue because the owner thinks their donut cake is disrespectful, perverted, or wrong.

Donut cake ain't hurting anyone in a way that matters. Its "difference" is that it makes some people angry or uncomfortable. That discomfort builds a sense of solidarity, community, and discrete subcultures among "traditional" cake purists. It also builds solidarity, community, and subcultures among donut cake consumers, providers, and allies. It's different but it isn't. It's a cake. Made of donuts. If that angers you, your anger is not the donut cake's fault.

I see and acknowledge that OP almost tried to clarify stunting about cultural acceptability but then it became, "that's just being a minority! 🤷‍♂️"

Minorities in America are still supposed to be people.

What matters is how that difference gets used against people who are only very technically doing something wrong in the minds of others. That outrage isn't harm. It isn't even a threat of harm because the average donut cake supporter does not give a damn if others don't want one at their own party. Queer people don't want to criminalize cis/het people. There are however, straight people who sincerely want to forcibly convert or execute all queer people, and think we should have done it yesterday. They'd be happy to start tomorrow.

The reality of queer love being the same but fucked-with is worth debating. It's something more people support than don't. That's why the debate has led to us having any status as real people. We advocate for ourselves because there aren't enough of us willing to kill/die to force the state to knock it off. Living takes priory over revenge and punishment.

The problem is that sincere conversation with the possibility of conservative representatives actually lending material support to validating the lived experience of millions of people feels impossible right now. Part of what makes that such a generations-long struggle is the persistence that queer people are inherently different and serving their interests diverts resources from "normal" people.

It's the entrenched idea of difference that isn't my fault that allows employers, corporations, schools, doctors, insurers, representatives, government to say, "I don't have to do anything for you," or "I'll do it, but it'll cost you more because it's more work than only serving normal people."

It's all just love, but the way we experience and practice love renders us ineligible for rights and protections that are only really conferred to legally married people, and those rights and protections are effectively social safety nets, serving functions our state otherwise refuses to provide. It's the Nationalist myth of the homogenous ethnostate where the right kind of citizens are rewarded for making more of the right kind of citizens with the treat of maybe not being sick and poor and ignored beyond your value as labor forever.

Love is love. Expanding our understanding of it doesn't dilute or contaminate it, it just de-stigmatizes a lot of ultimately harmless behavior, and deprives behavior that is demonstrably harmful and predatory of its "normal" camouflage.

[navree]

I saw your post and got super worried because I assumed it was the artist I've loved since they started here on tumblr. So, I went on the dreaded 🐦 app and low & behold, stan culture ruins things once again! Kinda glad I wasn't around during the heyday of GOT because it must've been absolutely insufferable! 😖😖😖

Fandom during GOT's prime must have been insane already, but I do think it's gotten worse in recent years. There used to be the unspoken rule of "if you've got nothing nice to say don't say anything at all" that appears to have completely vanished from fandom spaces. Cuz if I see a post with an opinion I don't like/agree with, or fanart of a character I don't care for, or fic of a ship that I dislike, I'm not gonna leap down OP's throat about it. I'm just gonna scroll, maybe vague post about it on another app (I've vague posted about some dumb Twitter opinions on here on occasion), and then move on. But this idea that, if someone doesn't like the same things you like, they're not only morally reprehensible but personally committing some kind of wrong against you specifically is insane. It's more than that trend I've mentioned about trying to equate fandom with morality, it is, as I said in the tags of that post, something that reeks of insecurity. There's a bunch of people in varying fandom spaces that feel that their own opinions simply must be validated, because their opinions are correct, but it's not enough for them to think it, other people need to think it too.

And it's an issue that has dominated Team Black in HOTD specifically. Cuz I'm not seeing it from Rhaenicents, from Greens, even from show casuals. It's diehard Team Black and primarily TB book purists at that who find Rhaenicent fanart (especially ones that take Emma D'Arcy's actual appearance into account), or Team Green posts, or even regular posts expressing any sort of appreciation for Team Green actors or sympathy for some of the characters (especially Alicent or Helaena) and just lose their minds. Insult the poster or the artist, deride actor's appearances, weaponize actual political language to support their point despite no real tangible thread of connection ('killing Lucerys is basically femicide' omegas aren't a real thing and killing that boring ass boy is not, in fact, femicide, there are actual femicides happening in the real world right now, focus on those), and get hopping mad at the fact that these varied posts exist. It's greed to an almost biblical proportion tbf, it's not enough that most show casuals agree with their opinions, that most people with both book and show knowledge are on their side, that the narrative of the show supports their views (in the Jaehaera art thing specifically, that canon dictates she's gonna die and that Daenaera and Aegon are gonna be married and have a reasonably happy married life). Everyone needs to be on their side, nobody had better dare have opposing views to their's. And if those opposing views exist, well then those people have earned all the nastiness that's gonna get thrown their way for having those opposing views.

Like, you're that insecure? You need everyone to agree with you in order to hold fandom opinions? You can't just like something for your own reasons and ignore people who don't agree? Other people, people who don't even know you exist, hold that much power over you? Team Black, are you guys really so pathetically weak?

Anyway, fuck people who tag butch Rhaenicent art with snippy "Daemicent!!!" quote tweets, fuck people running TG fanartists off of social media because you can't handle drawings, fuck people going up to actors and saying vile shit to them based on their characters, fuck everyone who tries to be an asshole about Olivia's looks or TGC's looks or Phia's looks, and fuck stan culture. Everyone's who's so deranged about their fictional opinions that they act nasty to real human beings should simply find the nearest noose and hang themselves by the neck until dead, the world will be an infinitely better place and no one will miss them.

[maddiviner]

So, @ceruab13 was asking about books focused on Enochian magic and the Angelical language.

I scrolled a bit, and it turns out that the interest stems from the popular television drama, Supernatural! I actually think it’s kind of neat that Supernatural incorporated the Enochian language into the show. I watched an episode or two back in the day, but have trouble keeping with long shows, so it’s not my fandom.

If people are interested in learning more because of it, though, so be it. I could try to write my own summary of Enochian magic, but other people have done that, and much better than I could, so I’m providing a list of books instead. Some are published and available in ebooks and print; a few are freely available online, either out of copyright or just free to distribute.

This is a short reading list featuring books I’ve read focused on Enochian magic, the history of it, and the concepts involved. It is not a recommended reading list, exactly. It’s just a list of everything I’ve read that might be relevant, with a little bit about each book.

Some are books written by magical practitioners to help others learn the art; others are focused on the history surrounding John Dee and Edward Kelley. I hope you find something worth reading here. Again, these aren’t limited to recommended favorites - it’s just a list of everything that might be, in some way, helpful.

First, before I start listing the secondary sources, I’ll suggest reading some of Dee’s diaries.

They’re actual diaries, and you should keep them handy in a tab if you’re reading more about this. Also check out A True and Faithful Relation, which is a later account of their workings. That link includes (typed) excerpts, but you can find scanned copies through Cornell’s digital library, too. You can keep these handy while reading any of the following works, and it’ll be helpful. Don’t feel discouraged if the Elizabethan grammar and such seems obtuse, and if secondary sources help provide context, let them!

The Essential Enochian Grimoire, by Aaron Leitch.

This one’s really comprehensive, and covers both purist interpretations of the tradition and Neo-Enochiana. On top of that, there’s a lot of good historical context here, too. A lot of the strictly historical authors ignore the existing occult traditions that influenced Dee and Kelley, or just don’t talk about them enough, whereas here there’s entire sections devoted to them.

I really liked the chapter that attempts to outline the worldview present in Dee’s diaries. I recommend this for the willworker who hasn’t got any experience with Enochian, but not for someone just starting out with magic. If you’re used to working in a spartan fashion, you might find the calls for equipment daunting, but the workings in this book are very adaptable.

John Dee and the Empire of Angels, by Jason Louv.

Not a book of practical magic, but a biography of Dee and Kelley. Louv himself is an occultist, and therefore willing to entertain explanations for the incidents that other history researchers might not. He also keeps grounded and admits that none of this can be strictly proven, and that Kelley, of course, could’ve been a charlatan. I tend to see a critical approach to Dee and Kelley (rather than treating them both as sages) as the mark of a decent book on Enochian magic.

Here, the author speculates a lot on what was actually going on, and doesn’t shy away from mentioning the paranormal aspects that are hard to explain. Louv’s tone and pacing are excellent, and the conversational tone of the book will no doubt maintain your attention to the very end. A lot of it feels like juicy Elizabethan gossip (except with citations!), and will give you a feel for Dee and Kelley’s complicated world.

The Angelical Language, by Aaron Leitch.

Whereas The Essential Enochian Grimoire covered the working of Enochian magic in practice, Leitch’s The Angelical Language gives us a narrative of the system’s reception and development, with special attention to the language itself. There’s plenty of practical bits woven in there, and the blending of history and magical technique enriches the experience of both. Also, while I did like this book, I had a tonic clonic seizure while reading it. I liked how the author included pronunciation notes for the Enochian letters, even though I doubt I vocalized them properly.

Primarily focused on the language itself, the book doesn’t include as much practical advice as The Essential Enochian Grimoire. The practical parts he does give look like they’d be easy to adapt to different scenarios, though. There’s not an overt focus on having a lot of tools. I lost consciousness and seized for a good three or so minutes while reading this book on break at work and woke up in the emergency room. I’ll probably get the second volume and read it soon. Leitch himself suggested not reading the Angelical words out loud next time? 😆

Enochian Vision Magick, by Lon Milo DuQuette

Lon really isn’t my cup of tea, particularly since I’ve ditched Thelema and don’t plan on ever going back. This book is notable, though, because he uses really archaic techniques for his scrying operations, making them quite different in energetic texture than the more common Golden Dawn methods. His methods require a lot of “stuff,” so to speak: ritual tools and accoutrement.

DuQuette’s attitude of treating ritual tools as training wheels to be internalized and eventually rendered unnecessary as skills develop isn’t exactly unsound. It’s certainly one method of doing it, but it’s not very accessible. It’s certainly not how most people (who tend to pick up magic in their early years, and may not have a ton of resources) are doing things. I didn’t. I’m mentioning this one for completeness, mostly. Read it to see what Thelemites are doing Enochian-wise, and how Crowley’s influence survives to this day in Enochian magic.

The Vision and the Voice, by Aleister Crowley

Crowley was an abusive piece of shit. Now that we’ve got that out of the way, you can check out The Vision and the Voice. It’s available here online. It’s Crowley’s journal of his experience scrying the Enochian aethyrs with his student and service top, Victor Neuberg. They had decided that the Algerian desert was the perfect place for a month-long scrying operation facilitated by a sex magic ritual wherein Crowley took the passive role. In the desert. Let that sink in. 😝

Following this experience, Crowley considered himself to have reached a state of enlightenment. The experiences therein and the visions were, in fact, fairly intense. Oddly, I hadn’t read this when I did my (first) Enochian workings, and didn’t pick it up until much later, and then only for completeness sake. I don’t recommend actually listening to Crowley’s advice on hardly anything, but it’s good to read this to understand his influence and history. You probably shouldn’t listen to one iota of his actual “teachings,” but there’s plenty to be learned from the guy. You can learn a lot about aerodynamics from watching a fiery plane crash.

The Queen’s Conjuror, by Benjamin Woollet

This is more of a straight-up history book detailing the remarkable lives and work of John Dee and Edward Kelley. Woollet provides enough background material to give an ample window into Elizabethan life, occult and beyond. This book gives no practical (or other) instructions and, as far as I’ve been able to tell, was written by a non-magical historian. I consider The Queen’s Conjuror a necessary read for that reason.

Sometimes we forget how magic can intersect with things like politics and science. This biography of John Dee reminds us that it’s all always already connected, and that Dee’s primary impetus was a (highly political) “immanentization of the Eschaton”. This book entertains various theories about the situation at Mortlake, fully admits Kelley may have been a charlatan in some capacity, and features other refreshing takes from an academic perspective.

The Black Lodge of Santa Cruz, by Satyr

Magic, much like fire, can be a useful tool. It can also reduce precious things to embers. This is the memoir of a magician who, in the late 1980s, was part of a small and controversial Enochian studies group in California. Read it here.

Satyr, working with his wife and their easily-possessed mentor, begins a series of experimental Enochian workings. Things rapidly spiral out of control amid already tense occult political situations. The context for this (the Caliphate OTO’s squabble over succession, etc) may feel irrelevant to modern practitioners (it is to me, for all intents and purposes). Nevertheless, we can all recognize the egos, personality clashes, ambition and other factors that contributed to the unique situation in Santa Cruz. In terms of magic itself, this memoir documents a period of great innovation, both inside Enochian circles and in other areas.

Heartbreaking in places and illuminating in others, The Black Lodge of Santa Cruz gives the story of one of the most infamous cases of the notorious “Enochian breakdown” phenomenon people talk about, where someone starts doing intense Enochian workings only to have their lives driven into pure chaos. Recommended reading before you attempt any so-called hell-rides (those month-long scrying operations people keep doing), at very least.

I hope something here interests someone!

[taldigi]

What's so wrong with me suggesting that maybe the Toei PV was animated based on a different concept/design than the version shown in the art book? The non-cane one could be an older concept, and the cane was developed later? Toei's data hasn't been leaked yet. I'm fine with either version. I don't get what you're trying to say. Are you saying there should be more fans who make Felix with a cane, or are you saying that people making Felix without the cane are wrong?

cherry picking pre/canon is tradition. There is lots I hate about pre/canon, including how they handled Felix' disability.

But this fandom loves to use ideas from precanon and fanon in PV fan media. Under your train of thought, explain the ring curse. Explain "Bridgette", explain why people still write or depict richard/gabriel/papillon as his father. Explain why people put the QK in as the friend group? cause those things sure as hell aren't "toei's version" but they have become quintessential to the PV experience. (as much as i severely dislike some of these fandom ideas)

And you know what, yeah, fuck it. yeah! I think people who are open to adapting those ideas to their headcanon are kind of boring for disregarding his disability. Because.. why NOT? It adds a layer to him that makes him more interesting then "Rich White Blonde Tsundere" and the thinly veiled "I hate my wife" humor that comes with the Pucca/SonicAmy-esque dynamic

But PV wasn't a full grasp on the world. It was an animation test with exaggerated dynamics.

The PV alone is BORING.

Fanon around it THRIVES on headcanon and adaptions from other precanon and canon media. We didn't even have Alya make an appearance, and she's been in the precanon since some of the earliest versions- HELL, outside of the main 2 and the villain, she's one of the most important characters. (We didn't see Null either!)

If you want to be a "PV/Toei purist", fine. But don't claim "Toei's Version" as an excuse to disregard that aspect of his character and still use shit like Bridgette or the QK. Just say you don't feel comfortable or versed enough to be depicting a disabled character (Zag sure as hell wasn't!) cause guess what?? thats ok!!

He wasn't disabled in all versions of himself- and he probably wasn't disabled in PV- just around the same time as the PV. But, making "Toei's Version" arguments as a "reason", makes it sound less like you're trying to make a point, and more like you are trying to justify a reason to not depict Felix as disabled.

[museenkuss]

I hope you don't mind me asking...but do I feel less guilt/judgement about liking things in media that are 'dark' or not 'morally correct'. I want to let go and just have fun and not worry so much, but it feels really hard these days (especially with fandom). People who are very hardcore about morals or "purists" scare me a lot. There are people out there who will ruin other people's lives (doxxing people!) because they don't like the way they engage with works or famdom, and especially with darker material. This rise of moral police have me afraid of engaging with fandom at all these days (especially the constant war between the pros and antis. Why are there even labels for this...). I hate being labeled an awful or corrupt person simply because I like 'wrong' or 'gross' things that aren't even real. I know who I actually am and hearing people who don't know me decide that I'm scumbag who is on par with actually evil people hurts...

Its not real guys, its fiction. Why all this hostility?

I suppose what I am asking is how to let go and let live? I miss engaging with fandom. I miss the fun of messing around with fiction in any way. I want to be ok with the judgement and still have fun. I want to enjoy fandom again with worrying if I am being 'morally' enough for these people. Any advice?

Darling, I know exactly what you mean. I used to have a lot more fun with fandom and writing in general before coming in contact with those types of people, too. It’s really sad imo, but I've also decided to actively work against internalising the hateful atmosphere those groups cultivate

Firstly, what might help is making a sideblog. Separate it from your main, don't link it on main etc and just treat it as your personal corner. It helps with the fear of being attacked - especially if you get personal on main and fear that random weirdos will get nasty on there. It also helps because if you're active, you WILL find likeminded people and they will find you, so you can build your community and have fun in this secluded and safe environment.

Apart from that, what I try to keep in mind is that, as you said, it's fiction. You're not an immoral person for being intrigued by thoughts and concepts - that's the most important part. You said it yourself: You know yourself, they don't know you. Them attacking you has very little weight if all they base it on is "you enjoy trope x, therefore you're bad". In fact, it's plain laughable at times. The puritanism of it all. Of course there are very interesting and nuanced conversations to be had ("Can you enjoy Balthus art?" being a non-fandom example that intrigues me, for one), but I find it very difficult to have this kind of conversation with people who say that liking Hannigram is problematic because they have an age gap. And frankly, I don't see the point of trying to constantly have nuanced discussions about what I do and don't find intriguing about "problematic ships" with people who've made their mind up that fiction = reality = morality.

- But I also have to say that to me personally, aggressively taking the counter stance is draining as well. There are people that get very vicious and venemous towards the purity people (making fun of them, belittling them, writing essays in their bios about fiction and reality etc), but I distance myself from those as well. "Why all this hostility?" extends to this side as well, I think. I'd rather just ignore that whole mess and do my own thing in my corner.

So, in short, I get where you're coming from and I'm afraid as well, which sucks. So my recipe for enjoying ~problematic content~ is: I keep to myself, I create and interact for and with people who enjoy the same things I enjoy and I don't take myself or the counter side too seriously.

I really hope this helped in some way and I hope you can find your joy in engaging in a fun hobby again, unafraid of weird bullies on the internet 🌹

[gigslist]

Salvator Mundi $450,000,000 Performance Art?

Is The Salvator Mundi ITSO Leonardo Da Vinci Performance Art?

I think the nay sayers know nothing about the art market at that level. “Art is in the eye of the beholder!” It’s a sport to billionaires, numbers are just a computer game.

They pay the same price for graffiti artists if the painting is famous. Or a bet on a race horse. They keep the artwork and the race horse if they like them, then put them back in the game. The team for this Salvator Mundi made the painting famous among academics first. A brilliant strategy! 

Fine art market sports players do an amazing community service for artists. With massive amounts of money out of their own pockets they promote artists of all kinds. Past and present and future. 

Art market sports players remind the world there is art. And that there is great art, even cover versions. And that great people of today’s world hang it on their walls. Art sports players also build amazing museums for art out of their own pockets. True art for art’s sake! Thank You Thank You Thank You!!! I can’t Thank You enough!!!

If the Salvator Muni in question is real or not, it’s famous and the scandal is a bonus. We’re still talking about it! Conceptually the whole finding-and-proving story is very interesting. And the restoration on restoration on restoration until no technical person can tell. A conceptual artist would do the same thing for a piece of paper. Great effort, I love the intricacy, well done!!! 

I think the pro sayers know nothing of Leonardo Da Vinci and his beliefs. Nor his content strategies or his drawing. I studied classical drawing in London, Da Vinci style. One of my drawings gat exhibited at the Royal Academy. I’m a content art historian of 10 years. I specialized in symbolism and stories within stories. It’s Leonardo’s specialty and what he got given residencies and commissions for. 

Leonardo wasn’t the only artist to practice this form of story within story telling. Rubens, Botticelli, Crivelli and others had their slant on it. It’s why they were famous in the first place “for those who have eyes to see.” The real Da Vinci Code. So when I don’t see it I scratched my head. I’ve been studying this Salvator Mundi, off and on, for 5 years or so to find something. Some paintings take two years, but that’s at most.

While the crystal ball is a statement symbol, there is no displacement in the cloth behind it. Crystal balls don’t do that. Everybody into Da Vinci knows he’s a purist. Especially for a statement piece in the foreground.

Content wise his up pointing fingers should point to something in the background. The background behind this Salvator Mundi is blacked out. His code in the folds of the cloth is unclear or. nonexistent. Those would give the crystal ball some context and his other story. Is there anything underneath the blacked background? What were the fabric folds before restoration?

I made a small documentary/workshop on how Da Vinci codes his paintings and stories within stories. With his Annunciation for an example….

Summary Findings

What is this famous Salvator Mundi painting?

Scraps from around that era, glued and painted together?

An unfinished ITSO by one of Leonardo da Vinci's students?

An old forgery that got lost in translation?

A concept art performance?

My bet, from what I geek out, on is No 1. But it doesn’t diminish the $ value of the painting as art for art sake. If you were a billionaire and buying a painting for your grandmother’s 70th birthday gift, would you give her Da Vinci or Renoir?

Deborah 

Coded History

My new book

OOPART Art And the Holy Grail Bloodline

[lookwhatilost]

They definitely leaned into the showboating with the marketing for the next two movies, too. “Actually, this movie is very diverse, and it’s queer, and it’s feminist, and you’re one of the chuds if you don’t like it, and you have to like it, and if you don’t, you don’t want women to have fun. You don’t want women to enjoy Star Wars.”

It’s crazy how effective this was as a marketing tool for a while. I feel like the efficacy of that may be waning now – maybe – but it worked for a few years. People have caught onto it, I think, but it drove me mental because I knew right away it was that shit. It was so obvious to me, and seeing other people buy into it kind of drove me insane. And it was hard to talk about it, because if you dude, people would be like “there’s another purist who’s just mad that they put a woman in a star war”. This was an era of people just responding to the threat of an ideological straw man. The whole thesis of the essay I linked earlier was Kylo Ren as a surrogate for the kind of people who were really pissed off that this movie was led by a woman and two men of color and being like “this is SJW propaganda”. It’s, like, you’re so caught up in that discourse and dialogue, it never occurs to you to take a step back and consider the business side and capitalist implications of Disney acquiring the Star Wars franchise and this was all a business and being run for profit. Why this stuff is there is purely to get people to go buy the product.

I had some mutuals that were really into the fandom for the new trilogy, and I’m not trying to pick on them. They’re smart, thoughtful people. But they would find all this symbolism and all this setup, and conduct this kind of hermeneutic exegesis. I don’t think there was nothing to it, but they made all these predictions and like… I kept thinking “this is a product. The next movie will be however they think it needs to be to make money. Even if they are setting something up, they will completely 180 on it – which they did in The Last Jedi – if they suddenly decide that it’s not lucrative enough to do it. You can’t get invested in any of this.” And you can’t. You can’t read it as a definite work of art with things to say or indicate because it’s not committed to anything it’s doing.

It’s the same thing for me with the Marvel stuff and the high budget cinematic universe stuff, people still interpret it like it’s art being made by people at least halfway, and never ever look at it as a product like you would a Ford pickup truck. We need to get better about this as a whole: looking at these things first and foremost as industrial product. Iron Man was a turning point for the blockbuster movie landscape that got us where we are now, just as important, if not more fateful to where we are now, is Disney’s acquisition of Lucasfilm. We live under the Mouse Monopoly and it sucks. It’s brutal. The people who were pissed off and worried when Disney bought the Star Wars franchise were completely justified and vindicated in the wake of the completion of the sequel trilogy.

I think part of the reason why The Force Awakens and the sequels in general did so well is because people hated and still hate the prequels. When this came around, people were happy to see actual puppets, and people walking on actual sets, not smooth yoda or hating Hayden Christensen’s insane, really cringey dialogue, or bad CGI. It felt like Star Wars had already reached the lowest form of itself that it could be, so it’s like, “well, Disney is in charge of all these Marvel movies, and they’re looking pretty successful. Disney is going to take this shoddy old Star Wars franchise and give it a face lift.” Hiring JJ Abrams was a smart idea from a business standpoint, but when you rewatch anything he’s attached to, whatever spell it had over you just disappeared.

[redwineconversation]

Writing Stuff

This post is brought to you by me postponing a work project I think is mind numbingly boring.

One of the best advice I ever got for writing came from one of my Lit professors in college: "write about what you know." Her argument was basically that you can get away with writing whatever you want until you land on a topic someone else knows about. They're the ones you have to be able to convince: the ones who know what you're talking about. You have to be able to get them to admit that you're right.

The second piece of advice was, you have to know how to write when you're bored. I think that's something people overlook, or don't quite grasp, or whatever: when you want to be really, really good at something, you have to be able to do it when you ... don't want to do it.

I'm a good writer. I know I am. It's not me being narcissistic - though I will admit that I crave approval and validation in life - but more so realistic. I write well. I like writing. It's something I'm good at.

It's also something that I'm good at because I can write very well when I'm bored.

Take this morning for example. Rocking my chair back and forth, munching on a chocolate croissant (pain au chocolat for the purist, I hate the bastardized name it has taken on), sipping on the Earl grey, my broody playlist playing softly on Spotify ... I didn't want to be in the office. I wanted to be outside. I wanted to be at my apartment, I wanted to be doing my dumb art project, I wanted to be watching the Teen Wolf movie.

I didn't want to be writing the appellate brief, is what I'm saying.

But what I am saying is that I submitted it to my boss and she gave it back to me with barely any corrections because that's the thing - I know how to write when I'm bored.

And that's actually a skill in itself. I do believe you have to be able to teach yourself how to do something well when you're bored. It has to become muscle memory, in some ways. But I also believe that creativity is set free when you're bored. It becomes less about what is but more about what isn't. When I'm writing when I'm bored, I'm almost more focused - I want to get this done so I get to what I want to do.

So yeah. A good writer knows how to write when they're bored.

But I want to go back to the first point. Write about what you know because eventually you will land on a reader who knows the subject. I think that's kind of important. Sometimes I am reading something and the disconnect with reality takes me right out of it. They lose me completely. I become argumentative, confrontational as a reader. "That's wrong, that's not what it's like," sort of thing.

One of those things when it comes to fiction: divorce.

When your parents get divorced when you are young, it shapes you, molds your world view in ways that children whose parents didn't get divorced don't understand. It messes you up, I guess, but good things come of it too: I do maintain that children whose parents got divorced read people faster, have better intuition, than children whose parents haven't gotten divorced. It just changes how you view people.

You can do all the research you want on a subject - and you should! - but there's still an element of, well, being called on your bluff. As I said, eventually you will land on someone who knows the subject.

Grief, too, is something that is so individual but also if you haven’t experienced it - I think a reader can tell that, too. There’s other things as well - I can tell pretty quickly when a writer has been in a healthy relationship versus someone who is writing what they think a healthy relationship looks like. Sex, too.

There was another piece of lit advice that stood out for me - I already know what pain feels like. So describe the feelings that follow. Stubbing your toe hurts. Getting your fingers caught in the door hurts. Heartbreak hurts. I already know all that.

So tell me about the after.

But most importantly - tell me about all this when you’re bored.

[deancasforcutie]

#spn is an objectively good show#i've literally never subscribed to the fandom idea that it sucks or whatever lol#i think its lame to not just fully embrace your interests#if you like the show you like the show and that's all good#but if you're embarrassed about it even on tumblr dot com then just log off lol#stop spreading your misery or projecting it onto other fans#the show is GOOD#it wouldn't have 15 seasons otherwise#it wouldn't have had the audience it had and still has if it wasn't good#now get up and have some fruits (@jhnwinchester)

#prev holding hand in Frankfurt School traumatized hand dskhdgkhd #also same with the Celluloid Closet bc even though I had a gender studies minor there's still so much out there to analyze and learn about #and also even without all the depth that's found in Supernatural. if it moves you on a personal level no matter if it's enjoyment or silly #or sad and tragic or makes you question things - it's good. #like yeah I know where Adorno and etc come from but I have the feeling we now move towards being so overly critical that it becomes purist #and defining what art is and what not and what quality art has turns it full circle into policing people what they enjoy and what narrative #they are allowed to consume. and then you come back toward exactly that what the Frankfurter Schule feared #also just I hate the classism in it all? Like why are you better because you go to the opera. Why is the opera automatically the 'better' #form of art. Oh right. It's because going there is connected to status etiquette and money. #like don't get me wrong we need to fund small artists and art should not have to be this capitalist/neoliberal hellscape #but the framework we consume in and present art as is so impactful. why are we connecting Supernatural to shame. Is it because it's enjoyed #by the average consumer as opposed to some snobby policymakers. By the one not in power? #mhm. is it maybe that calling mass media low art is actually reistablishing systems of power like of course mass media is a tool #but a tool is also to tell who is allowed to enjoy what form of art and aquire what kind of knowledge you know #also yes agreeing with you the SPN writers knew their shit. except maybe Buckleming aksdhkjsdhfkgfd (via @deancrowleycas)

Supernatural is queer and I am queer and it impacted me greatly man I love art man I love to relate and to laugh and to cry and to learn and I love that Supernatural is good

[srbachchan]

DAY 5290

Jalsa, Mumbai                      Aug 6/7,  2022                  Sat/Sun 10:05 AM

🧡 , Aug 7 .. birthday wishes to Ef Krishna Kumar and Ef One Narges .. Ef Sameer Khare from Nashik .. happy birthday to you for Aug 5 .. Love and happiness to all .. 🏵️🏵️🏵️🌿 ✨ love and greetings to all and the care and safety .. from the Ef ..

and to begin with a small correction , that has been pointed out to me ..  

.. the picture .. actually .. isn't shown in a “hair dressing salon” 🙈 .. it's shown in the LOUVRE MUSEUM OF PARIS .. World's largest Museum .. and the Home of some of the best-known works of art .. including the Mona Lisa .. .. the picture is displayed on the wall of portraits by Harcourt Studio .. one of the renowned and luxurious studios of photography in France .. situated at the Carrousel du Louvre in Paris .. Harcourt Studio has launched a Photo Booth there at the entry of the Louvre Museum .. The portrait shown on the board .. was shot by Harcourt in the year 2009 .. when I was invited for the opening of one of the events at the newly opened structure , which has all its pipes running outside the building .. forget its name .. for purists a most damaging architectural deed, especially in the city of Paris, renowned for its architectural glory and magnificence .. but then trust the French to do things differently .. the reaction to the glass pyramid build in the open courtyard of the LOUVRE, had equal amount of dislike by the purists and it took a while before it was finally accepted .. as an element of modern art or modern expression ..  

... ahhh , got the name of the structure .. its 

Centre Pompidou , Paris, France .. An "inside out" building in the historical centre of Paris, featuring Europe’s largest modern art museum. 

punch in the name on the Goog and find some amazing pictures of the modern art museum .. and this was where the pic of moi was put up .. 

.. and it has been a few days of emotional and amazing collects from the Social Media when Ef have put up pictures of letters written by Babuji to friends .. one of them informing the friend of Babuji’s decision to get married to Ma .. and later on written to announce my birth .. its dated 1942 .. !! 

And there is so much the desire to get the originals .. working on it ..

... but there is so much to work on and do , and ne’er the time or the dedicated time to attend to them .. in particular the work to be done on Babuji .. and am at a loss of how to go about it .. 

.. his poetry to be recited to be put to music to be put to film and video ..

his thesis on WB Yeats for the literary world .. to be read out and put in audio form ..

his translations of various poets and poetries of other countries ..

his own translated works of the tragedies of Shakespeare in the graph and style of the bard but in Hindi, the first of its kind ..

his rendering of the Bhagwad Gita in the translate language of the Tulsidas Ramayan , called JanGita .. and the desire to put it to music .. another first of its kind  ..

and then to be able to do justice to this .. to find the dedicated time people and venue for its compiling and documenting .. a final finality for posterity , for the World of the written word , for the people who have read remembered and admired his works ..

it has been painful each day to think of this and have no answers .. 

answers to birthday reminders wedding reminders anniversary reminders, autograph hunters, selfie insisters .. and many more in acknowledge demands 

but Babuji .. ??

Alright no more laments .. 

just prayers .. for all .. for peace and calm ..

Amitabh Bachchan 🌷

[mk-wizard]

Not Hiring Fans == Bad Idea

Hi, guys.

I refuse to be silent about Disney/Marvel’s latest bad idea which is how they actively refuse to hire fans of comics to write or have any professional hand in films or shows based on comics. Their exact words are that it is a “red flag” for someone to be a fan of the media. Now... I can understand not wanting to hire inflexible purists and looking at skill first, but actively refusing to hire people who love and respect the medium you want to work with is such a bad idea on so many levels. In fact, I have four counter arguments as to why you should hire fans.

1- Issue #___ may have been done, but NOT in film or TV. - And even if it has been, so what? How many times has Cinderella, been adapted multiple times just by Disney alone? Disney keeps re-adapting it with two sequels to the classic, a live action remake, a few films which re-imagine the premise completely and cartoon shorts which adapt the tale in some way or the other all the time. Great stories are worth telling again and again by anyone who is happy to do so and in the medium of their choosing. It is a part creative freedom.

2- Not everyone has read issue #___ . - People forget that a lot of these comic books have been around for decades, so not everyone has read every single one because they didn’t know about them, or they weren’t born yet. Just look at the Lord of the Rings trilogy. A lot of people didn’t even know the books existed until the movies came out and they have been around for a long time. After the films aired, people everywhere were getting their hands on the books. The same thing can and often does happen with Marvel movies. In a way, a superhero movie is just an elaborate comic book commercial, so when done right, it can be the reason comic sales skyrocketed.

3- A fan will reinvent the story right. - I understand that times change, and some heroes have not aged well, so you need to give things a face lift. However, you also need to know where and how to make those changes without breaking the character or the story. And I am not talking about little changes like updating the year, swapping rotary phones for cellphones, updating wardrobes and such. You need to know and accept what is and isn’t, as the Sorcerer Supreme would call it, a “constant point” as in something cannot be changed. This isn’t to say you cannot experiment with reinvention or pass on mantles, but even that has to be done right. You cannot turn Aunt May into a teenager while raising Peter. You cannot create a G-rated Punisher. You cannot turn Black Widow into a spoiled incompetent rich girl. You cannot change Captain America’s nationality. Some reinventions just don’t work no matter how funny, progressive or clever they sound on paper. A fan can differentiate between what changes are ok and may even make a story better while also knowing when to say no in order to avoid failure or worse, controversy.

4- Making art with love is more likely to be fantastic. - I admit not every fan can create good art, but amazing art has always been made by people who put their hearts into it. Just look at the original Star Wars trilogy. You can see, feel and even hear the love put into that, and that is why we are still talking about it to this day. Films and shows that are just made to pass a buck will be kind of fun, but they will not be memorable. If you are going to invest time, money and work into something, why not have people who want to do it? Who want to be there? Who want to make sure this project turns out great? Yes, it isn’t easy to work with people who get emotionally attached and argue about ideas, but when a project means something to the people working with it, they are more likely to be committed to it and really do their best instead of just doing things half-baked because their only concern is getting paid.

As for Disney, it has been clear for a long time that they stand by their choice, but I also think it has been coming back to bite them in the butt for a while now and it is only going to get worse before it gets better, I’m afraid. Then again, maybe it is the only way they’ll learn.

Thank you for reading and as always, stay safe.

-Mary

[shepherds-of-haven]

i swear i read somewhere that blade doesn’t really like using guns bc it goes against some ket principles. would you mind like… going into those a little more, for curiosity’s sake?

Hi there, this is sort of an obscure or complex thing to explain, but I'll do my best to do it succinctly!

Among the Ket, there are generally two categories of weapons/schools of thought. Megil-aith is the category consisting of "traditional" weapons, weapons and tools passed down through the ancient art of warfare like blades, bows, spears, and etc. Galvorn-aith are more "modern" weapons like guns, black powder, explosives, and etc.

It's kind of hard to explain, but in Ket culture, this division isn't simply the distinction between different types of weapons: the whole idea of megil-aith vs galvorn-aith is in itself a larger philosophy, school of thought, ideology, or guiding concept beyond just the weaponry. It's not a spiritualism, exactly: more like a code of principles, morals, and propriety that govern some Ket's way of life. In certain circles, some schools of thought consider megil-aith to be the only "honorable" or right way to engage in combat and warfare. To these proponents, modern weaponry is considered anathema; to touch them is to dirty oneself, and combat utilizing them is antithetical to the Ket's principles and the "proper" way to wage war. Some purists even believe that crossbows do not fall under megil-aith. The proponents of this philosophy tend to be old-school traditionalists and conservatives who find it shameful for a Ket to just pick up a gun and mow people down with it; they place a lot of stock in skill, honor, and risk, and think that those who use galvorn-aith either cut corners or are cowards who aren't engaging in "honorable" combat.

Those who believe in galvorn-aith, on the other hand, claim that change is neither morally good nor bad: it simply is, and a Ket must adapt constantly if he wishes for the success of himself and his city-state, since the rest of the world won't stop for him. Proponents of galvorn-aith believe that failure to adapt and stubbornly clinging to the old ways is foolish and small-minded, and that a dedicated warrior uses all of the tools available to him rather than turning up his nose on the basis of arbitrary snobbery. This is sometimes interpreted by opponents as equating to loose morals, as "anything" under the galvorn-aith philosophy should theoretically be subject to change, including (hypothetically) one's deepest convictions and beliefs.

In short, proponents of galvorn-aith push open-mindedness and progress, while naysayers believe it promotes subjectivism, relativism, and nihilism.

Blade himself doesn't hold any strong personal beliefs about this dichotomy either way: he will still pick up a gun if he has to, and he knows how to use one. He's not really interested in the whole debate. However, his training took place under Ket masters who believed in megil-aith, and Ygrath itself has a strong megil-aith culture, so he's just not as naturally comfortable with it as he is with a traditional weapon like a sword or a knife (or even a bow). It's not his go-to weapon of choice, but it's not anathema to him, either!

I hope that makes sense!

[richmond-rex]

maybe it's just me, but it's always so strange that wrt Elizabeth of York, there's so much emphasis put on Richard III (and Anne Neville by extension) in terms of how they affected her life and her worldview and her figure queenship. It's obviously understandable to an extent, as those few years of Richard III's reign were obviously a huge turning point in her life. But I rarely see that same emphasis put on Edward IV and Elizabeth Woodville, who were literally her parents, raised her for 17 years (17+ in EW's case) and were by all accounts deeply close and nurturing towards her and all their other children. And it's especially weird considering E4's reign was far longer and just if not more dramatic than R3's. I dont know if the reason is shipping or R3 worship or something else, but whatever it is, it's just frustrating, because her parents' reign seems to have been so important and cherished to EoY. Your blog is probably one of the only I've seen that explored how EW's queenship deeply inspired her daughters, and it was lovely to read. Or maybe there is more research done on this and I haven't seen it, idk

Hi, anon! Sorry, this ask got buried in my inbox. I completely agree with you, it bothers me as well to see that the ways Elizabeth of York's parents would have shaped so much of her life go uncommented. Instead there's some weird emphasis on Elizabeth's (really short) time at Richard III's court. If I remember correctly it was Kendall who said Elizabeth had never known real kindness until she was welcomed at Richard III's court...... then you remember he also called Elizabeth Woodville mean, stupid and cruel. Sometimes it's not even about shipping, it's simply about putting Elizabeth Woodville and even Edward IV down.

Equally problematic I think is when people make Elizabeth of York's relationship with her parents all about her paternal ancestry, in a weird genetic way: 'Elizabeth's father was sensual and loved food, so Elizabeth must have been sensual and have loved food as well (Alison Weir actually said something along those lines), after all it was in her pLaNtAgEnEt blood'. Please, stop talking about her Plantagenet blood, why do people need to turn into blood purists to speculate about minor things. Why do they put so much emphasis on her 'red-gold pLaNtAgEnEt hair' (we don't know her hair colour for sure) and need to make this about Edward IV being a 'golden prince in a golden crown', instead of simply allowing him to have his brown hair (there's an actual extant lock of hair!) which in any case, was the ideal of masculine beauty at his time.

I'm also really tired of seeing Elizabeth's love of the arts ascribed to her father only and never to her mother or her Woodville relatives who loved literature and were involved with the printing press, for example, not to mention were also real tournament stars and responsible for the first 'disguisings' in England. Thankfully, some historians have pointed out Elizabeth Woodville's and her family's influence on Elizabeth of York: Arlene Okerlund, Joanna Laynesmith, and Michelle Beer are some big names that come to mind. I'm currently reading a MA thesis that discusses mother and daughter's queenship, I'm excited to see what I'll find. We are big fans of that concept in this blog too, of course, as you've seen ;)