#flatland 1884

[spudcatwo]

they are so fruity

[chatdae]

I find Flatland's portrayal of sexism fascinating, so I thought I'd post my thoughts here instead of in the tags (Sorry to ramble, OP)

The author of Flatland, Edwin Abbott Abbott, wrote the narrator as bigoted to satirize his contemporary English society. So, the book contains terrible bigotry and is from 1884, but it doesn't support these beliefs.

Abbott has the Square interpret everything through a bigoted lens, while also including details that make it clear to the reader that the Square is interpreting things incorrectly. For example, the Square criticizes his wife as overly emotional and irrational. Yet, his description of his country tells the reader that the laws of Flatland rob women of education to prevent them from exercising their autonomy and challenging the social order. The above quote demonstrates the Flatland belief that angle size is equal to intelligence, which Abbott intends his reader to identify as propaganda made up to prevent people from saying, "hey, maybe women and Isosceles only seem 'unintelligent' because we dont let them go to school."

In the second edition of Flatland, the introduction responds to readers calling the Square sexist and classist. So, yes, the Square's bigotry is distasteful to present-day and Victorian readers alike! I'll include this section of the introduction:

I gather that in the course of an imprisonment of seven years [the Square] has himself modified his own personal views, both as regards Women and as regards the Isosceles or Lower Classes...writing as a Historian, he has identified himself (perhaps too closely) with the views generally adopted by Flatland, and (as he has been informed) even by Spaceland, Historians; in whose pages (until very recent times) the destinies of Women and of the masses of mankind have seldom been deemed worthy of mention and never of careful consideration.

Basically, Abbot is saying:

1) the Square's bigotry is excessive, yes, but it's similar to the bigotry demonstrated in our real-life history books. The narration of this satirical book is extreme only so that we might recognize the flaws in the non-satirical books around us.

2) the Square has done personal reflection while in jail and has changed some of his views. This is a way of saying, "Even someone as bigoted as the Square would, hopefully, come to see that their sexist and classist beliefs are baseless and wrong."

Fun fact: Charles Dickens published a book ten years later, called Hard Times, that makes similar criticisms. The book, funnily enough, begins with an English schoolmaster---that's the job Abbott had!

okay flatland, what the fuck

it was published in 1884 but STILL WHAT THE FUCK

[quotation--marks]

Hence I am absolutely destitute of converts, and, for aught that I can see, the millennial Revelation has been made to me for nothing. Prometheus up in Spaceland was bound for bringing down fire for mortals, nothing to my countrymen. Yet I exist in the hope that these memoirs, in some manner, I know not how, may find their way to the minds of humanity in Some Dimension, and may stir up a race of rebels who shall refuse to be confined to limited Dimensionality.

Edwin A. Abbott, Flatland

[rjalker]

being in the Flatland fandom like

[ID: The meme of the artist from the movie Iron Giant shouting, "Art", now edited so he is shouting, "Math". He is standing in a junkyard, wearing a black turtleneck, gesturing emphatically as he stares at something above him and offscreen. End ID.]

[anistarrose]

It's so nice to get a reminder in 2023 that Bill Cipher was/is THE villain of all time. He's the worst thing that ever happened to a random town in Oregon. He's a triangle. His backstory is basically the novel "Flatland" from 1884 but with more arson. He projects his family issues onto a 12-year old girl and subsequently tries to murder her. He's a fan of Dr. Strangelove. He's questioning his sexual orientation. He was defeated by kittens, then tickles, then by a senior citizen in his underwear. He's utterly terrifying. He's pathetic and cringefail. He lies about being happy "for courtesy." He lies until he's not lying anymore. He refuses to grow up and mature. He once fell down a flight of stairs on purpose. No one will ever do it like he did

[humanjeff]

Got an interesting take on eldritch horror for all you writers out there. It's a bit of a roundabout schlep to reach the actual idea, but writers tend to be readers so I hold you'll stick with me til we get there.

So, consider a 2D creature. Little flat dude, living on the ground. No concept of "up" or "down." He's 2D, he just doesn't parse the concepts and can't perceive them anyways.

He sees you. What he actually sees is just the 2D cross section of you where you intersect with his 2D world, which is probably your footprints. So, as far as he can tell, you are a pair of footprints that are.... apparently one being? He doesn't get how it works exactly, but it's not too far out there, so he just kind of accepts that, yes, humans are The Two That Are One. Spooky. They always seem to use the singular to refer to the pair of themselves, and only differentiate between themselves as Left or Right. But other paired instances of The Two That Are One are, in fact, separate entities. So they're only in sets of two, unless accompanied by a companion called "Cane," which they are sometimes, or even a pair of companions called "Crutches." When Crutches are present, sometimes one of The Two That Are One will be missing entirely. It's a little confusing.

But wait, what now? They disappear and reappear in sequence, teleporting in turns. He never sees them just move like a 2D being, always the stop-start teleporting. Apparently this strange power is called "walking," and its accomplished by The Two That Are One moving through an unseen dimension called "Up," through a process called "lifting" themselves and re-entering the real world farther away in the direction they wanted to go. He can accept the idea of unseen dimensions, and he vaguely gets the idea that one of The Two That Are One must remain anchored in the real world to prevent something called "falling," which is some kind of uncontrolled movement through the unperceivable dimension of "Down." Which is the same dimension as "Up," but...... backwards? Reversed? He's not really clear, but "Falling Down" is presumably bad, so The Two That Are One keep one of themselves here in the real world to prevent it.

Except if they do something called "jumping." Which consists of gathering up their power to hurl themselves through the Up dimension together to reappear together somewhere else in the real world. He isn't sure why they Walk instead of Jump, since it seems better to take both of The Two That Are One together at the same time, but okay.

Okay, what the hell, they can Walk through impenetrable barriers like the great wall of Sidewalk Chalk? How do they go through that? What? They went "Over?" The hell is "Over?" Like 'around' but through the unseen dimension of Up? But they couldn't Walk through the barrier of Wall. Why could they go "Over" Sidewalk Chalk but not Wall?

And they can't go between the four small obstacles of Refrigerator Feet. The area between them is safe from The Two That Are One, for the four Refrigerator Feet are connected to each other in the strange and eldritch dimension of Up. The barriers are too powerful to be moved by The Two That Are One, and it (they?) cannot enter the real world where it is blocked by such powerful forces.

Got all that?

Okay, now consider a 4 dimensional elder god and how we 3D entities would perceive them.

[lilybug-02]

Flatland(1884) Fanart in the year of our Lord 2024.

[publicdomainreview]

Born #onthisday in 1838, theologian and schoolmaster Edwin Abbott Abbott, who in 1884 published the remarkable Flatland: A Romance of Many Dimensions, perhaps the first ever example of “mathematical fiction”. More on the book here: https://publicdomainreview.org/essay/aspiring-to-a-higher-plane #OTD

[onei-ro-piss]

Edwin A. Abbott gave Flatland an unreliable narrator that describes his sexist, classist, racist society with pride in terms of “I am a Square. I have 4 sides. the more angles and sides you have, the better you are as a person. Also you can't change this even though the people in power will encourage you to try,” and he wrote this for Victorian societies in 1884 to the tune of “THIS IS WHAT YOU SOUND LIKE. THIS IS HOW STUPID YOU SOUND.

"You claim to know intimately the nature of every being around you, yet you know nothing. You call yourself a square despite the fact you’ve never seen one! YOU'VE NEVER ACTUALLY SEEN A SQUARE.”

In the book, A Square goes down a rabbit hole of thought until eventually drawing the conclusion that women should be educated. It is after this that A Sphere chooses to teach him about the 3rd dimension, and says it's because A Square “seemed a man of sense.” A Sphere mentions the importance of love and art, something A Square thinks is ridiculous because "love" is for women, and "art" is for socialists I mean chromatists. A Square never really does get it though. He fails to explain the 3rd dimension to his fellow Flatlanders, partly due to comedically terrible political timing, largely due to the fact A Square has always been prone to understanding only what is directly in front of him. He lives out the rest of his days in prison.

And then 123 years after the book was published, Ladd Ehlinger (an incredibly reactionary misogynist and racist) makes an adaptation of the book where he voices the main character. He releases a movie that pathetically mimes the social commentary of the original, and now lives out his days as a sad, angry man crying on YouTube about leftists. He's lived out the plot of Flatland, playing an even worse version of A Square's role. The only thing that's missing is getting sent to jail and that’s bc unlike A Square, Ladd Ehlinger doesn't experience oppression of any kind. 

However, exactly like A Square, he didn't get it. He didn't fucking get it.

[emaya-chan-the-potato-headed]

referring to this? 😁

flatland ocs would be so confusing to someone who has NO idea about flatland

Like its like "hey this is my oc thomas he witnesses the horrors" and its literally ju

like do you see what im getting at like????? sir thats a polygon....

I MEAN THIS IN A /POS WAY!!!!! I LOVE THE LITTLE SHAPE PEOPLE YOU GUYS MAKE!!!!!!! DONT SMITE ME

[spaceboisstuff]

If I had a nickel for every time I had a piece of media I like from '84 where the main character is a inhuman square who is known for saying they want to touch someone and has a sad ending, I'd have 2 nickels, 100 years apart

Flatland – 1884: Victorian satire

Electric dreams – 1984: romcom

[waxdream]

In flatland, are the irregular shapes a metaphor for disability or being lgbtqia+? Or intersex? Or all of them?

I only ask because the narrative seems to draw inspiration from both. Gender in Flatland is determined by whether or not you're a shape or a line segment. The lower classes of triangles are irregular, and they are dehumanised (deconfigured?) To the point that they are considered to have smaller brains by the narrative based on angle size. I personally think that due to flatland's satire, and hints throughout the text, A square is an unreliable and biased narrator who is indoctrinated fully in the society of flatland. So what he says about the angle of triangles, and the smartness of women, shouldn't necessarily be taken for granted. I would be interested to know if the part about the triangles is a reference to phrenology and how stupid it is, but I digress.

Irregular flatlanders are reconfigured at birth. This suggests it's considered a disability, however, the irregularity doesn't seem to be disabling. In fact, the only effect it has on the person is that it makes their class impossible to determine - something which would have social effects. We also only see evidence of male children being born irregular, which is a common stereotype of autism, and the coupling with 'social detriments' being the result of irregularity, it could lead to this conclusion. However, I doubt that Abbot was commenting on this in 1884, though that doesn't prevent modern readers from taking it in this direction. I just think that he wouldn't have written 'reconfiguration' into the story, a deadly process of creating "regular" children if it was a metaphore for disability - it was often a lot more common after all to hide disabled folk away. Although, if any historians out there know about parallels in victorian society, I'd be really interested.

I'm most convinced by my reading that Abbott was talking about intersex children when writing about reconfiguration. Most of Flatland is a social commentary after all - following the wrongs of victorian society on how classes are treated, with a larger focus on women. Now, with sight recognition in flatland, women are mistaken for squares from certain angles, and sometimes for circles. Imagine if you will, an irregular semicircle - a male who would often be mistaken for a woman. Considering the sexism Abbott talks about in this world, I think that irregularity being a metaphor for being intersex is plausible. Especially since the children are reconfigured at a very young age.

When I first read the book, I read irregularity as a disability and nothing more. But now I'm thinking about it more, I really would love to know other's opinions. The book is old, and I'm not sure if my thoughts are plausible - but then again, it seems implausible that the book is mocking the sexism in victorian society. Yet it does - lots of evidence points to Abbott being a protofeminist writer. It's not a stretch to me that he might hold a stance against the mutilation of intersex children. Or perhaps a stance against conversion therapy. Let me know I guess :)

[hieronymus-botch]

Ok, so apparently, the new Gravity Falls thing is a book written from the perspective of Bill, and I'm kind of worried, because I'm aware there is a significant contingent of fans that headcanon Bill's home dimension as Flatland from the 1884 novella of the same name and have a whole elaborate corpus of fanlore based on that, and on the one hand, this book will probably end up sending that theory the way of Tad Strange, but on the other Flatland is public domain so there's a chance it might actually confirm it which would be pretty cool. Also there's a big warning on the cover that says TRAVELS TO DIMENSIONS MEANT FOR OLDER READERS and I NEED confirmation that this means bill will be able to swear.

[rjalker]

apparently a bunch more people are coming to the Flatland fandom / tags because of gravity falls so PSA:

Flatland: A Romance of Many Dimensions, is public domain. It belongs to everyone. You do not need to buy a physical copy to read it. It has no copyright. It belongs to everyone.

It is free to read online. There are free audiobooks.

Here's another masterpost

Here's a link to it on Project Gutenberg where you can read and download it in many formats:

Here's an amazing free audiobook on the internet archive:

Here's where you can read the 2024 translation into modern English on the internet archive:

there are some typos that I need to fix but. I have covid I'm not doing that right now.

You can also read this translation here on tumblr at @flatland-a-2024-translation

There's an audiobook version on youtube as well now.

___

Here’s an animation from 1965

Here’s a stop motion film from 1982 in Italian with English subtitles

Here’s an animation from 2006

___

I do not recommend watching the free 2007 Flatland film which you can find on youtube until you've read or listened to the book unless you want to be really confused. The movie is an absurdist comedy. The book is a political satire. The movie is better appreciated after you've already read/listened to the book.

It also has a lot of flashing lights and motion-sickness inducing spinning. The timestamps for those can be found here. Please be careful if you have photosensitivity.

do not spend money on Flatland until you already know you like it. you do not need to spend money at all. It's public domain. it belongs to all of us.

Very important edit: The creator of the 2007 film that's free on youtube, Ladd Ehlinger is an extremely racist and misogynistic conservative. He made a political ad so blatantly racist and sexist that youtube has literally resstricted it, so that you can't share the link outside the site. Simply google his name and you will see dozens upon dozens of articles about how bigoted he is.,

Please be aware of what kind of person made that movie when you watch it. His bigotry is baked into the movie, and is why he refused to actually do anything with the original political commentary from the book.

You are not a bad person if you already watched the movie and enjoyed it, but you do need to be aware of what kind of person made it and how that affected the movie, and make sure others are warned.

[bi-hop]

why the vulture scene in atsv is pure horror (spoilers under the cut)

As promised, I now have the mental bandwidth to actually talk about Adriano Tumino aka the Medieval Vulture in Across the Spiderverse. This is a spoiler fest, so I'm putting everything under the cut. Enjoy!

So, at some point when I was younger, I first heard about Flatland. It's this satirical novella from 1884. When I was looking it up again last night to prepare myself to explain it to other people, I was SHOCKED to hear it was satire on Victorian society and class structures. I had only ever heard about it in science and horror spaces. As a work, it's mainly known now for exploring the idea of 4th dimensions before Einstein, but it also continues elements that are straight out of horror. So, instead of breaking down the whole thing, I'm going to be focusing on that stuff specifically.

Flatland is about A. Square (yes, that's his name), who is a square. As you can imagine, his entire world is two-dimensional and functions as such. There's a lot of worldbuilding, but just keep in mind that

The people in his world cannot conceive of a 3rd dimension, and any mention of such is heretical.

Circles are the highest ranked people in this world.

One day, he encounters what he thinks is a circle. Said character is actually a sphere. Even as said sphere fucks with his perception by looking like disks sliding in and out of reality and tells him about the 'truth' of the world, A. Square can't comprehend the third dimension until his teacher lifts him into it, into Spaceland. The square is enlightened! His mind has been opened! He tells the sphere, if his reality is false and there's truly a third dimension, what if there are more? What if a fourth dimension exists with fourth dimensional beings who cannot be accurately perceived?

His teacher immediately casts him back down into Flatland, where he is subsequently imprisoned. No one believes that the third dimension and Spaceland exist. He only is able to write the novella and hope that one day Flatland will be ready for this knowledge.

All of this to say that Adriano is A. Square.

I read a lot of dimension-based horror. Maybe it's because the multiverse has compelled me since I was a kid, or maybe it's because I've heard way too many thought experiments about how every person on the planet may see the world differently, and we just use the same language to describe fundamentally different visuals because we can't accurately verify anything. The horror of it all, for both readers and writers, isn't necessarily the idea of seeing things others can't. At least, it's not in the hands of someone sincerely thinking about the 'eldritch'. Instead, imagine a higher being grabbing you and exposing you to a whole new, weighty aspect of reality you could never conceive without actively being dragged into it. And then you're thrown back into your reality. It consumes you, drives you, and no one believes you. How can they, when it's something so alien to your reality that no one can even think of it unless shown?

Because of the ripple effects of the collider, Adriano Tumino is dragged into Earth-65, the home of Spider-Woman (Gwen Stacy). We don't know a lot about his world. As far as I remember, we don't even get a number designation. But his design, dialogue, and track all communicate a great deal about him. Vulture Meets Culture as a track blends Gwen's theme with the sort of opera he might listen to back home. He's designed heavily on the aesthetics of Da Vinci notebooks. As he affects the world, you can even see notations a la research scribbles next to diagrams. From memory alone, disregarding the fact that he's Italian (though I'm sure the insistence on English in Earth-65 was probably disorientating if his entire world speaks Italian), he also finds this new reality to be abhorrent and lashes out. This alone, an exposure to new colors and strange art and even weirder people who look nothing like you and the rest of your world, would be hard enough to cope with.

And then Miguel, this Spider-Man from 2099, drags Adriano out into the modern day.

The thing with movies being in theaters is that I'm at the mercy of random people who film showings on their phone to get footage. Because everyone finds the helicopter scene directly after this more interesting (which is valid), I don't have a picture of this moment. But when Adriano is flying out into this future, when he lays his eyes on these towering skyscrapers alight with color, you can see his shock, perhaps even terror. It'd be rough enough being exposed to a version of Italy that's, say, his time period but in technicolor. But this is worse. This is his Spaceland moment. The opera builds almost mournfully.

Soon, he will be sent back to his reality. This will happen in an even more incomprehensible future dimension, with even more people who look nothing like him. Perhaps there's a version of his granddaughter there. Tiana Tumino? It doesn't matter. Imagine this though. Your grandfather is yanked out of existence. He comes back. And he tells you 'I have seen colors beyond the ones we live in. I have seen towers of glass and metal scraping the sky, all alight in these colors. I have seen art that contains more art, and it was hideous. No one understood me. Flying things neared me that were beyond anything even our greatest geniuses can make.'

Do you believe him? Can you even imagine it all, even if he describes it, even if he shows you drawings of what he witnessed?

What will you say?

[haveyoureadthisbook-poll]