#frankly I enjoy that my portrayal of him is evolving

[syntaxeme]

it's MY interpretation of Alastor and I get to decide how slutty he's gonna be 😤

[darkburning]

thoughts or headcanons regarding palladium oracle mana?

design wise : i understand why they might have changed mana's appearance to make her look more egyptian ----- but, i personally am not a fan of change. and frankly, she doesn't even look like the mana i grew up with. i absolutely adore her manga appearance : dark skin with blonde hair / aquatic eyes, and the ivory white garb. i enjoyed that she looked quite different and historically, it made sense. egypt's new kingdom was a hub of trade in the known world. diplomats naturally would come and go, and since mana was raised closely with egypt's prince ---- it's makes sense to me if she was some royal mage's affair baby with some foreign ambassador / emissary. it showed that she was unique, that her blood (although mixed) didn't really matter, and she will always be a true egyptian. it matters not if she was an apprentice or high priestess, this mana shouldn't need to hide behind black wigs and dressed dark just to prove she was a "black magician". her original design is deceptively beautiful the way it was. so appearance wise, no i will not acknowledge palladium oracle mana looks.

now, the title ----- yes, i will acknowledge that. i adore the title : palladium oracle and i want mana to achieve that capability / status. HOWEVER, i do not think or associate her to be a palladium oracle during her time in ancient egypt. i will always prioritized my original depiction of high priestess mana's evolving her ka into magi magi magician gal. after all, magi magi is still very close to original mana's appearance --- just much more older / mature, which is exactly how high priestess mana should have become in the aftermath of all things. ancient egyptian mana will ALWAYS be remembered as either the apprentice of the great mage mahad, or a high priestess of pharaoh seto's inner court.

my portrayal is very unique because i also incorporate the idea of mana being connected to ancient atlantis. ( after all, why was it that an egyptian ka would suddenly be an overseer of a realm so closely tied with atlantis during doma ? ) so in all likelihood, my atlantis mana will always be a sage (inspired by the sage stone) and it is very likely that is the title atlantic mana would have carried in her final years.... and frankly, it's just an excuse for me to stubbornly just hold onto mana's signature blonde hair and her capability to match / surpass her own master after living thousands of years over him. by the time mana became dark magician girl in doma, she probably was considered the palladium oracle by then lol. she's old.

TLDR ; mana's title in egypt was : high priestess , in atlantic it was : sage, and in her dark magician girl spirit form : palladium oracle of the dominion of the beast.

[oetravia]

For the character break-down game: Brainy?

Answering this one for you, Anon and @should-be-studying-not-shipping (who is right, it would’ve been remiss to not ask me about Brainy xD).

Buckle in friends, this might  will get long winded. 

How I feel about this character:

I love him to bits, I do. Truly, it was only a combination of accidentally falling into a wormhole of Brainy related videos on YouTube, and massive interest in how the show actually handled Nia after all the hype around her introduction (imagine my pleasant surprise in finding out these two characters were not just an item, but that I actually shipped them?!) that encouraged me to watch the show again (I’m a bit of a magpie, the allure of shiny new things always distracts me - and led to me accidentally dropping the show at the end of S2). 

So, I’m very fond of him for that reason, but also because his character is one of the few that is genuinely always fun and interesting to watch. There’s something a little bit different each time we see him (honestly, what did this show do to deserve Jesse Rath? The way his portrayal of the character has evolved has been truly incredible to watch), and it’s great to see a character that is allowed genuinely stand out emotional moments and to be a source of comic relief (even if they sometimes overdo it...balloons, anyone?). 

All the people I ship romantically with this character:

I mean, if you follow me, you know that Brainia is my #1 Supergirl ship, but this show makes me a filthy multishipper, so…

Even aside from Kara/Brainy being such a major relationship in the comics, because honestly, let’s not go into any of the arrowverse shows expecting major things in terms of comic book accuracy (especially where relationships of any nature are concerned), I absolutely adore the dynamic they have in the show. If it wasn’t for Brainy/Nia (and Mon-El/Kara), and how awkward that would make things (and the fact that I don’t think for a second Kara (or Brainy) would ever do that to her friend), I’d definitely ship them more than I do. Kara/one of the Brainys we met in the Bottle Episode would be very interesting.

And Winn/Brainy made me smile every second of screen time they shared. Much like Brainy’s dynamic with Lena, it’s always nice to see him having conversations with someone who can (at least try) to keep up with him intellectually. Aside from the intellect thing, I just loved watching them move from begrudging allies to genuinely being friends (preschool flirting tactics included). And the fact that Winn was the only one to recognise Brainy when he first started wearing his image inducer was, quite frankly, adorable. 

My non-romantic OTP for this character:

Oh boy. 

Look, I love watching Lena/Brainy’s scenes (and, as I said about Winn, Brainy being able to work with someone who, while not a twelfth level intellect, can actually engage in deeper scientific conversations with him), the platonic dynamic that I enjoy most has to be Alex/Brainy. Specifically watching Alex’s journey from being annoyed by Brainy’s every move to that ‘if anyone so much as looks at you wrong, I will murder them, but I will happily murder you with my bare hands because you’re annoying me’ that all siblings recognise so well. 

My unpopular opinion about this character:

I don’t think I have any unpopular opinions, to be honest (feel free to correct me if I’m wrong). 

I just wish they’d let Brainy be slightly cockier like his comic book counterpart (more like he was in S3), and that they’d stop dumbing him down to make other characters (Lena, in particular. She doesn’t need them to reduce Brainy’s intelligence to show she’s smart. The way she used to be dragged in every time Brainy was working on something to magically find the solution Brainy couldn’t got a little bit much. I don’t blame Lena, and I enjoy watching them interact...but it was a little tedious) look smarter. 

One thing I wish would happen / had happened with this character in canon:

I’d love to see more about his family, honestly. We’ve gotten so many little snippets of information, but I’d love for them to have gone slightly more in depth (and especially with his more immediate family, particularly his mother). 

I don’t know, I have loads of silly things I’d like to see, but his family is one of those dangling threads that they’ve never really committed to pulling on. That and his life before the Legion. 

And in general, for them to stop using him for cheap comic relief (those sodding balloons, I swear). We get it, Jesse has good comedic timing...but so do other actors on the show. Brainy doesn’t always have to be the punchline. Or if he is, can it at least be more intentional on his part than him being socially inept or...balloons.

Sorry that got long... I can’t be concise to save my life, and I had a lot of feelings, apparently. Thanks for asking!

[9worldstales]

INTERESTING POINTS TO PONDER FROM INTERVIEWS 7

Interviews might not remain forever available or not be easy to find so I’ve decided to link them and transcribe the points I find of some interest so as to preserve them should the interview had to end up removed.

It’s not complete transcriptions, just the bits I think can be relevant but I wholeheartedly recommend reading the whole thing.

And of course I also comment all this because God forbid I’ll keep silent… :P

Title: EXCLUSIVE: Screenwriter Don Payne Talks Thor!

Author: Elisabeth Rappe

Published: Feb 23, 2011

BEST BITS FROM THE INTERVIEW

ABOUT THE SCRIPT FOR “THOR”

Thor has seen a lot of screenwriters come and go, and I imagine that led to some very drastic changes to the character and story. Can you talk at all about that process, and what changes were made over the course of project? (For example, I know rumors swirled very early that the Thor movie would be an origin story with his alter ego, Dr. Donald Blake!) How did the script come together? At what point in the process did you come on board, and what was your contribution?

Don Payne: First off, for the record, the final, official WGA writing credits for the film are “Story by J. Michael Straczynski and Mark Protosevich, Screenplay by Ashley Edward Miller & Zack Stentz and Don Payne.” Any other writing credits you might have seen elsewhere are either outdated or incorrect.

As far as how the script came together, J. Michael Straczynski and Mark Protosevich worked on the project before Kenneth Branagh came on board to direct. At that point, Ken and Marvel sat down and decided exactly what kind of story they wanted to tell. They took everything that had been written so far and figured out a game plan. Marvel then hired Ashley Miller and Zack Stentz, and, as I understand it, those guys worked pretty intensely on the screenplay over the course of four or five months. After they left the project, Marvel hired me, and I stayed on all the way through the end — about a year and a half total. For the first eight months, I continued to develop, rewrite, and restructure the screenplay, bringing in new characters and new scenes. I worked closely with Ken and Marvel throughout the process, and, as the cast came together, I worked with Ken and the actors during rehearsals here and in London.

Then, once production started in January 2010, I was on set writing every day, both at the studio in Manhattan Beach and on location in New Mexico, and continued to work through post-production.

I’d like to say more about how the script has evolved since the very beginning of the development process, but I don’t want to spoil anything. I hate spoilers. (Mostly because I’m weak, and I can’t resist them myself!) But I’ll be happy to talk about it all after the film comes out. What I can say is that this really has been the greatest writing experience of my life. I’ve never worked harder or been as closely involved day-to-day on a project as I have on Thor.

And as far as Thor’s alter-ego goes, as Kevin Feige has said, people looking for a Donald Blake reference might just find one.

ABOUT THOR’S JOURNEY AND FAMILY

I know you’ve worked with iconic superheroes before, was Thor more or less daunting to deal with? He’s a real anachronistic, medieval character. How do you bring that into the modern world? Is it ultimately the same as trying to make any superhero realistic and relatable?

Don Payne: Well, I think the challenges are pretty apparent. As you say, Thor’s a unique character, and it’s an unusual story we’re telling. When you’ve got something like Captain America, the premise is easier to get right away — he’s a superhero fighting Nazis in World War II. Whereas we’ve got an extra-dimensional being once worshipped as a god by the ancient Norse who’s banished to earth and stripped of his powers to learn humility, all set amidst the Shakespearean intrigue of a dysfunctional royal family. It’s not as simple to grasp.

You just have to find the things that make Thor timeless and relatable as a character. It certainly helps that he’s charismatic and likeable, albeit flawed. He’s banished for good reason, but I think people will want to go on the journey with him and root for him to find redemption — particularly with Chris Hemsworth’s performance.

I think what really makes Thor relatable are the family relationships. There’s a lot of dysfunction in the House of Odin. Thor’s got a hard-ass father and a jealous brother. But for all of Thor’s hardheaded rebelliousness, he, like Loki, is really just trying to live up to his father’s expectations and make him proud. I think people can relate to that father and son dynamic.

ABOUT SIF, THE WARRIORS THREE AND HEIMDALL

What can you tell me about the parts popular Asgardians such as Heimdall, the Warriors Three, and Sif play in the overall plot? Will we see more of them in other Marvel movies? Is there potential for a Sif spinoff, as she has enjoyed in the comics?

Don Payne: The Warriors Three and Sif are very much like they are in the comics. They’re fierce warriors who are fiercely dedicated to their friend Thor. They’ll follow him anywhere — which might not always be the wisest thing. Also, as in the comics, Heimdall is bound by duty and honor to guard his post on the Rainbow Bridge, and he’s got serious issues with anyone who tries to cross it who would endanger Asgard.

As far as seeing these characters in other movies or their own spin-off films, I think Marvel already has a full slate of projects in development, so I imagine we’ll only see them as part of the Thor franchise. But you never know. I’d ask Kevin Feige if I were you!

ON THE HUMOUR OF THE MOVIE

One element that jumped out at me in the trailer was the comedy – it felt very light and natural, not corny. (Jane reacting to Thor’s name, for example, or the coffee cup scene.) How did you strike the balance between the comedy and drama of the piece? Were there moments where you thought “Ok, this goes too far with the fish-out-of-water joke”?

Don Payne: Well, my hope is we’ve included just enough humor in the script, but no more than that. This isn’t a comedy, and that’s not what I was hired to do. It’s an action film, and, as in all action films, you need those fun moments. But you have to do it sparingly. You don’t want things to get silly.

One thing we all agreed about early on was to make sure we were careful about how we approached the fish-out-of-water moments. We didn’t want Thor to come to earth and suddenly become an idiot for comic relief. Even without his powers, he’s the same person on earth as he was in Asgard — a smart, headstrong warrior. He’s a being from an advanced race who’s used to travelling to other worlds and thinking on his feet. We didn’t want him looking at a television set and going, “What is yon magic box, with phantoms that move and speak inside it?”

Still, he’s on unfamiliar turf, and there’s some fun in that. You just have to find the right balance. You also want to have fun moments and dialogue during the action sequences, so you put those into the script. Of course, those bits are the easiest to cut in editing if you find the jokes are too much or too distracting. You can pick and choose.

ON JANE AND DARCY

I particularly liked how Jane and Darcy react to Thor’s arrival. They aren’t immediately throwing themselves at him. They think he’s hot, but likely to be crazy. I know you’re a staunch feminist, so I imagine their portrayal was important to you. Can you talk about how you approached them? It seems rare to have two girls in a single Marvel film, possibly competing for Thor’s attention. How did that play into the romance, and how did you approach the relationship between Thor and Jane? Did Natalie Portman and Kat Dennings have any input into their characters?

Don Payne: Kat did an amazing job taking the words on the page as written and making them fly. She really embodied the character of Darcy.

After the second trailer came out, I read some people mistakenly speculate that her character was created as a marketing decision to appeal to the youth audience or some such thing — as if the producers sat down and said, “Hmm… this script is good, but we need a character to appeal to the tweens! With current pop cultural references!” I promise you, that wasn’t the case at all. I came up with Darcy because we needed someone to work with Jane Foster, and the character had to have a vastly different background, personality, and world-view from Jane in order to make that relationship interesting. I decided to make her a woman, frankly, because other than Sif and Frigga, we had a very male-heavy cast of characters. I thought it might also be interesting to have someone working for Jane who both frustrated her and who Jane saw as protégé whose potential she could help fully realize.

But I also wanted Darcy to be the voice of the common man. We’ve got Asgardians and astrophysicists, so I wanted someone to say what the average moviegoer might be thinking. If someone in the audience is thinking, “What the hell is that weird, glowing thing?!” Darcy should be asking “What the hell is that weird, glowing thing?!” (That line isn’t actually in the movie, but you get the idea…)

Natalie actually helped out tremendously with the character of Jane Foster. Let’s be honest, Jane Foster in the comics has traditionally been one of the most boring characters in the Marvel Universe. In the film, she’s an astrophysicist, so that makes her more interesting right off the bat. And it doesn’t hurt that she’s played by Natalie, who brings loads of personality and charm to any character she portrays.

Originally in the script, however, Jane was more of a traditional scientist — a hardcore skeptic. But Natalie came to the first rehearsal with the idea of turning that on its end. She suggested making Jane the believer. She thought Jane could be more of a kind of “scientist as poet” — someone who thinks outside of the box, someone whose theories are considered outlandish and are frowned upon by the scientific community. But it’s the kind of thinking that leads to great discoveries. When Thor arrives, she’s willing to take a leap of faith — and she has to pay the consequences for it. Natalie’s input made the character more interesting, improved her relationship with Thor, and, in general, made the story better. And she helped make sure Jane Foster isn’t boring. So I’m grateful to her for that.

During my story meetings with Ken and Marvel, we put a lot of work into the Thor/Jane relationship, and there was much discussion about exactly how and how quickly things should progress between them. I think we succeeded in developing their romance realistically, so it doesn’t feel forced.

ABOUT HEIMDALL AND THE MCU TAKE

There has also been a lot of ugly and foolish controversy about Idris Elba being cast as Heimdall. I don’t like to justify bigotry with attention, but has the reaction surprised you and the rest of the team?

Don Payne: You’d think as a society we’d be beyond this now. The funny thing is, this film was never meant to be a straight representation of traditional Norse mythology. It’s the cinematic take on the Marvel comics take on Norse mythology. In fact, in the reality of our movie, the Norse myths are actually based on our version of the Asgardians, after they visited ancient Norway. The Norse just got some things wrong, based on their primitive understanding of their encounters. (Like, for example, worshiping the Asgardians as gods.)

The bottom line is Idris is great in the movie. I think almost all of the people who are skeptical or have issues with the casting will be convinced when they see the movie — except for all the actual racists out there. But who needs them?

MY TWO CENTS

This interview is so goddamn awesome because it’s so informative. Don Payne talked about a lot of topics and didn’t give just two lines answers but well rounded explanations. There’s so much more than the bits I’ve selected but I couldn’t really copypaste it all, though I wholeheartedly recommend you to read it.

I’d kill to get a peck at the old scripts but definitely there was a lot of work ongoing to produce the definitive one.

Anyway I love how almost all Marvel seems to know Odin is a bad father yet Odin doesn’te ven get a slap on his wrists. Really guys...

I like how he admits Thor’s journey is one of redemption... but really that’s not how you made a redemption arc...

I also find interesting how again we get a confirmation that Sif and the Warriors Three are ‘fiercely dedicated to THEIR FRIEND THOR’.

In the movie Thor says:

Thor: Why don't you tell her how you sent the Destroyer to kill our friends, to kill me?

But the truth is that those were his friends, not both’s. For the Warriors Three and Sif there was never a choice between Thor and Loki. They were Thor’s friends and to him their loyalty went.

I also like how he says he hopes they included enough humor, but no more than that as this is an action film, and, while fun moments are needed they need to have them sparingly of things get silly. How they didn’t want Thor to come to earth and suddenly become an idiot for comic relief. How they didn’t want for the jokes to end up being too distracting. I think this speaks of care for the story.

They even put care in creating Jane and Darcy. I still think they could do Jane better, but still they tried.

[enchi-elm]

This is a summary of some of the historical research I did for Chapter 4: WWCD? of my Turn:Washington's Spies fanfic, You've Caught Me Between Wind and Water.

Disclaimer: my information is the result of only two weeks extensive googling. I have focused on Oneida sources for the Oneida material. This is meant as an overview, and I heavily recommend looking into the events and subjects described to supplement your own understanding.

I'm not going to talk about the dozens of articles I read about supply problems the Continental Army endured during Valley Forge because enough is enough. The information is easy to find. It's practically an origin myth.

In this post:

Native/Indigenous Involvement in the American Revolution

Oneida Language

Tehawenkaragwen, or Han Yerry (Hanyery, Honyery, Han Ury)

Sea Shanties

Sackett's Cryptography

Native/Indigenous Involvement in the American Revolution

I cannot overstate the importance of Indigenous contributions to the American fight for independence and the British attempts to quell it. 

By the 18th Century, the many Indigenous nations were a powerful political force in their own right. They were vital trade partners and it behooved both the colonists and the colonizers to make important and life-saving trade and political alliances with them.

For the start of the American Revolution, the Indigenous tribes (loosely comprising here the Six Nations (Oneida, Mohawk, Tuscarora, Seneca, Onondaga and Cayuga) along the other tribes, such as the Algonquin, the Mikmak, etc.) were neutral--and this was a lot of political pressure they wielded, because they could often threaten to side with the others if trade agreements were unfavourable. Eventually though, and I'll be narrowing in on the Six Nations, cause that's kind of what I understand the best from my research, sides were taken.

The Six Nations overwhelmingly sided with the British: Cayuga, Onondaga, Tuscarora, Seneca and Mohawk, often making up almost half the fighting force on the field. The Oneida, due to where they were living, i.e. in closer proximity to and having stronger trade ties with the Continentals, sided with the Patriots. Now--this was not clear cut. Individuals within the tribes could lean either way. And often, this provided a means to parlay formally between the British and the Americans, for example, through Mohawk-Oneida connections.

The Battle of Oriskany featured such a pre-battle parlay, between the Oneida teenager Paulus and the Mohawk chief Joseph Brant. This link provides some great information on the Oneida-Mohawk relationships in the Revolution, particularly leading up to the Battle of Oriskany.

You really get the sense that, despite how contemporary portrayals brush it under the rug, political ties within the Six Nations and other Indigenous tribes hugely affected allegiances and outcomes of the war. 

This quote really says it best:

During the Revolutionary War, Oneidas bound themselves “to hold the Covenant Chain with the United States, and with them to be buried in the same, or to enjoy the fruits of victory and peace” (Duane, 1778). Choosing to ally with the young United States, the Oneida Nation served the American cause with fidelity, effectiveness, and at terrible cost.

The Oneida also famously arrived at Valley Forge in May 1778 with, it is said, anywhere between 60 and 600 bushels of corn for the army. It was a relief mission.

In my story, I’ve massaged events a little (mostly because I completely messed up the timeline while I was researching, mea culpa) and the Oneida will save the day much earlier. I figure a little gratitude is overdue, so I’m not fussed with this detail.

Oneida Language

The two phrases used in the story were chosen after looking through an Oneida language source (useful, but beyond what I needed) and then consulting an Oneida-made youtube video. Languages evolve with time, and it is worth noting that Oneida now likely sounded different than Oneida in 1777.

Tehawenkaragwen, or Han Yerry (Hanyery, Honyery, Han Ury)

I had the toughest time researching this man. Considering he was a chief warrior in one of the bloodiest battles of the Revolution, not to mention an important political ally, the fact that he is memorialized as an "Indian guide” is... deeply unsatisfying and undignified. 

There's also very little known, or at least available to read, about things a fiction author would value: his demeanor, his appearance, his values.

His characterization in my story I have based mostly on this account, see "Hanyery at Oriskany." He's described as being in his fifties, fearless, competent and evidently much admired. His wife, Tyonajanegen, and his son fought with him at Oriskany. When Han Yerry was shot through his wrist, on horseback, his wife would load his gun for him so he could still shoot.

There is only one other specific account of Han Yerry in his role as a chief and interlocutor. It is... horribly biased, awfully phrased, and reads like... *flaps hands, shakes head* Forget it. All I took from it is that Han Yerry is referred to as the "leading chief of the Confederacy" and interfaced with Patriot magistrates. My description of him is deliberately light, as there are no paintings or accounts I could find that suggest what dress or ceremonial/practical items he would keep on him in his capacity as a chief, or as a warrior. (And frankly, I'm not sure that I would trust a Western portrait.)

I also wanted him to speak words that were spoken through Oneida oral tradition:

As the Oneidas expressed it: “In the late war with the people on the other side of the great water and at a period when thick darkness overspread this country, your brothers the Oneidas stepped forth, and uninvited took up the hatchet in your defense. We fought by your side, our blood flowed together, and the bones of our warriors mingled with yours” (Hough 1861 1:124).

In 2x01, Caleb calls him Han Yerry, and he is credited as such, so I used this version of his name.

Sea Shanties

To start with, please behold this glorious master post by @gerrydelano​. 

There is no reason for Caleb to be singing "Santiana" other than that it is currently my favourite shanty. "Santiana" describes events that take place during the Mexican-American War in 1846-1848. So, you know, a good seventy years after this story is set. I was going to look up era-appropriate songs, then ran into this baffling article that declares that sea shanties were a thing that had fallen into disuse by 1777. Given the highly romanticized and very lucrative economy of whaling and seafaring in the 18th Century, I find that hard to believe. And at any point, I remembered that this is fanfic and I can do what I want, so, Santiana it is.

Sackett's Cryptography

In 1x06 "Mr. Culpeper", Sackett discusses his favourite methods of encryption, including Rossignol, Trithemius, and Dumas then promptly roasts Ben for not using any encryption at all. These are all single substitution ciphers, where individual letters, syllables or words are substituted by numbers.

The Spartan scytale, which I name-dropped, is a transposition cipher, where the text itself is unaltered but the letters are put out of order. It indeed, as the name suggests, dates back to fifth century B.C.E.

A polyalphabetic cipher like the Vigenère cipher, a very complicated substitution cipher, had already been invented by the 18th Century, and wouldn't be cracked until 1863. A downside of this cipher is its complexity and the time it takes to compose a message (though I'm not sure it's less secure than keeping copies of codebooks with multiple agents).

[cynthiajayusa]

Sandra Bernhard Still Has Her Blunt AF Opinions

Before unloading her candid thoughts on TV co-star Roseanne Barr’s alt-right politics and fellow comic Kathy Griffin’s viral Trump-beheading pic (“It just wasn’t funny”), Sandra Bernhard proclaims herself, quite aptly, to be “no-nonsense.” That has been, after all, her way since the ’70s, when lambasting Hollywood’s who’s-who first became a calling card for the fearless comedian, actress, and musician.

Then, from 1991 to 1997, she famously put a face to bisexuality not just as herself — Bernhard was out from the get-go — but also as Nancy Bartlett on ABC’s hit sitcom Roseanne. Introduced in Season Four as the estranged lesbian wife of Arnie Thomas (Tom Arnold), Nancy, who later came out as bisexual, gets chummy with Roseanne Conner and Roseanne’s younger sister, Jackie Harris (Laurie Metcalf).

Bernhard, 62, will revisit her groundbreaking character during the show’s revival. As for the controversy regarding Roseanne and her TV alter ego’s support for President Trump? “Roseanne is gonna be another round of really fun and really smart television,” Bernhard tells me. “Roseanne has never turned on the gay community. Roseanne likes to stir the pot. She always has. So, I guess that’s the way she’s doing it now, and I don’t agree with any of the Trump shit, but I think she’ll transcend that, and the show will still be amazing.”

What can we expect politically from the Roseanne reboot? 

I think they’re gonna do a deep dive into where the working class is at right now. I mean, maybe not as deep as you would need, considering that half of the working class who don’t have their industrial-ass jobs anymore are strung out on opioids. That’s not very much fun; I don’t think they’ll go there. [Laughs.] But I think we’re in a real crossroads in this country, and Roseanne has always been good at revealing that — and at the same time making it funny and moving and insightful. I’m only in the last episode, so I don’t know exactly how they’re approaching it. I know there will be very personal stories like there always were, as opposed to globalizing it. I think that’s what makes the show special.

I imagine you’ve been hearing about the backlash Roseanne’s politics have ignited since the reboot was announced. 

I was hearing about that way before they announced the reboot, and I just dropped out of the conversation because I don’t want to get into that on Twitter. You can’t do that; it goes nowhere. And everybody who makes political decisions also has to live with the fallout. That goes for famous, successful people and for people on the street. If you voted for Trump and you thought it was gonna be a lark and funny, the results are right there in front of you every day.

RELATED:

My hope is that it might bridge some severe societal gaps, perhaps open some minds, maybe even my own. But it’s been very difficult for people who didn’t vote for Trump to even begin to understand or empathize with someone who supported him.

I don’t have any empathy for people who voted for him. Honestly, I really don’t. It’s obvious that he didn’t know anything about the working-class population; he just exploited it, and [his supporters] were naive and unwilling to read or to know what was really going on. He played them — and to a certain extent, the few people who are still in his corner. He still plays them. So it’s just kind of a bummer.

A lot of people have strong opinions about the liberal-minded cast returning to a show led by a Trump supporter. 

I’m glad they do. She should hear it. And it’s better for her to hear it from the people that have supported her and watched her show than it is from me. I mean, we’re friends, we’re friendly, and I’ll continue to do the show. But it gets underneath your skin when 20 million people who used to watch your show are like, “What the f*ck?”

She seems to know how people feel about her politics. At the Golden Globes, presenting with co-star John Goodman, she said, “I’m kind of known for creating some great drama.”

Of course she knows.

WATCH:

Well, I’m excited to have Nancy Bartlett back. You told me in 2013 that you didn’t think Nancy would have a place on the show if it ever returned. 

It’s not that she didn’t have a place. But I didn’t think they’d be able to fit her story back in because of all the new characters, and the family, and reestablishing what’s been going on politically. So, when they added the extra episode and wrote me in, I was thrilled.

Nancy was one of the earliest portrayals of bisexuality on TV. What surprised you most about how her sexuality was treated on the show in the ’90s? 

I mean, she was fun, and it was a fun concept that she ran from being married to Tom Arnold into the relationship with Morgan Fairchild. It was sort of a lark at first, and of course it evolved. They wouldn’t let me kiss Morgan Fairchild under the mistletoe — we had to cut the kiss — so that’s how far we’ve come in terms of what you see sexually on TV.

But yeah, she was a funny, kooky, free-spirited character who got to do things and say things that were part of the evolution of sexuality on TV. It wasn’t intentional — it wasn’t like we were trying to do something groundbreaking. But that is how Roseanne is and was. She just did things that felt organic and authentic. She ended up having the actual kiss with Merle Hemingway [at a gay bar that Nancy took her to]. But nonetheless, Nancy’s fun, and if they picked up the show again, they’ll expand her story.

We’ll get more Nancy if there’s another season?

Oh yeah, absolutely. For sure, yeah.

Roseanne will have a genderfluid grandson, Mark, played by newcomer Ames McNamara, on the show as well.

Yes.

What are your thoughts on the show continuing to be inclusive?

I just think there has to be a little bit of everything in all the shows now, and I don’t know. I’ve gotta see the show before I can comment. He’s in my episode, but to the extent of what they’re trying to do with that character, we’ll have to see.

Speaking more generally, how do you feel about representation as far as LGBTQ people go on TV?

It’s certainly gotten a helluva lot better than when Nancy first came on the scene. And I think with each year that goes by, especially with the advent of Hulu and Netflix and Amazon, there’s been major breakthroughs.

Are you currently enjoying any shows with LGBTQ characters?

I watch 9-1-1 just because I think it’s a ridiculous show. Everywhere you turn there’s new, interesting gay characters. But I don’t go to a show for that. For me, my life has never been informed by that. I’ve always been comfortable with who I am sexually. I’ve been sexually fluid, I’ve broken all the ground rules since I was 17 years old. So, I’ve never had any need for somebody to be my role model. I’ve been my own role model. So, it’s a non-issue. But I think for the public at large it’s been a great time and a revolutionary time for people to see all kinds of characters — racially, sexually, women, men — come to life in a new way.

Have you heard of the very gay-centric Schitt’s Creek?

Honey, I was one of the first people to be hip to it!

Oh, snap.

[Laughs.] I know, yes. But yeah, of course. Love it. Dan Levy is terrific — super funny and smart.

What can we expect from you in the future?

I’ve got three scripted projects I’m trying to get off the ground right now, so that’s a lot of my focus, and it’s a lot of hard work. So, I’m chipping away at that and, of course, continuing to go up for roles as an actress and do my live performing.

What kind of scripts are you working on? 

They’re all comedic. One is based on my early years in L.A., when I started off as a manicurist. One is a project with [performance artist] Justin Vivian Bond. We wrote a musical about six years ago called Arts & Crafts, and we’re trying to make it into a TV series.

I remember you telling me you’d never stoop so low to do a reality show. Still out of the question?

Yeah, listen, if I haven’t done it by now, I’m certainly not gonna do it at this late date.

How do you feel about the way comedy has addressed the Trump era?

Everybody’s speaking about it and being funny and creative about it. And, obviously, people like Bill Maher and those types do it in a more political way. I think it’s been really interesting.

Has your recent comedy reflected current politics?

Sort of, kind of through the back door. I don’t hit people over the head talking about that stuff because so many people are good at doing it verbatim, so I try to keep it more global than just obvious.

Did you think Kathy Griffin went too far with the picture of her holding Trump’s decapitated head?

It’s not about going too far — it just wasn’t funny. And she’s not political. Why is she suddenly jumping on the bandwagon? That’s not what she does. And it wasn’t smart enough or interesting enough. That was the biggest crime.

But Kathy Griffin has been politically engaged and an activist for the gay community.

She’s an activist? I don’t know. I don’t think she’s an activist, frankly. I mean, that’s — she certainly takes advantage of the gay population in her own way, but I don’t think she’s done anything earth shattering for… I mean, I don’t agree.

Who would you consider an entertainer and an activist?

I mean, I’m an activist for being a human being. There’s bigger fish to fry, and my work is inherently political, and it’s been inherently LGBTQ-informed because it’s who I am; it’s what I’ve done from the beginning. I don’t call my audience “my gays.” My audience is my audience, and everybody in it forms an alliance every night. You perform for the entire crowd — it’s not about singling anyone out. And if your work is very, very daring and interesting, then smart people come to it, whether they’re gay, straight, black, white, men, women. I mean, you gotta be able to get underneath what’s really going on culturally, and then you’re always gonna have a smart audience sitting in front of you.

Who else in the comedy world can really dig into the cultural zeitgeist?

I don’t have a litany of people I’m sitting here thinking about. I’m sorry. It’s, like, too hard to do that. Right now the people who are impressing me the most are all these kids from the school in Florida. They’re activists. Went through a terrible trauma, and they’ve been able to transform it into total activation, and that to me is really impressive and exciting. To talk about entertainers and people — it’s easy for all of us to do all that stuff because we’re not under duress. But when you’ve been practically severely injured or murdered [and you speak out about it], yeah, that’s something to really applaud and stand by.

source https://hotspotsmagazine.com/2018/04/26/sandra-bernhard-still-has-her-blunt-af-opinions/ from Hot Spots Magazine https://hotspotsmagazin.blogspot.com/2018/04/sandra-bernhard-still-has-her-blunt-af.html

[demitgibbs]

Sandra Bernhard Still Has Her Blunt AF Opinions

Before unloading her candid thoughts on TV co-star Roseanne Barr’s alt-right politics and fellow comic Kathy Griffin’s viral Trump-beheading pic (“It just wasn’t funny”), Sandra Bernhard proclaims herself, quite aptly, to be “no-nonsense.” That has been, after all, her way since the ’70s, when lambasting Hollywood’s who’s-who first became a calling card for the fearless comedian, actress, and musician.

Then, from 1991 to 1997, she famously put a face to bisexuality not just as herself — Bernhard was out from the get-go — but also as Nancy Bartlett on ABC’s hit sitcom Roseanne. Introduced in Season Four as the estranged lesbian wife of Arnie Thomas (Tom Arnold), Nancy, who later came out as bisexual, gets chummy with Roseanne Conner and Roseanne’s younger sister, Jackie Harris (Laurie Metcalf).

Bernhard, 62, will revisit her groundbreaking character during the show’s revival. As for the controversy regarding Roseanne and her TV alter ego’s support for President Trump? “Roseanne is gonna be another round of really fun and really smart television,” Bernhard tells me. “Roseanne has never turned on the gay community. Roseanne likes to stir the pot. She always has. So, I guess that’s the way she’s doing it now, and I don’t agree with any of the Trump shit, but I think she’ll transcend that, and the show will still be amazing.”

What can we expect politically from the Roseanne reboot?

I think they’re gonna do a deep dive into where the working class is at right now. I mean, maybe not as deep as you would need, considering that half of the working class who don’t have their industrial-ass jobs anymore are strung out on opioids. That’s not very much fun; I don’t think they’ll go there. [Laughs.] But I think we’re in a real crossroads in this country, and Roseanne has always been good at revealing that — and at the same time making it funny and moving and insightful. I’m only in the last episode, so I don’t know exactly how they’re approaching it. I know there will be very personal stories like there always were, as opposed to globalizing it. I think that’s what makes the show special.

I imagine you’ve been hearing about the backlash Roseanne’s politics have ignited since the reboot was announced.

I was hearing about that way before they announced the reboot, and I just dropped out of the conversation because I don’t want to get into that on Twitter. You can’t do that; it goes nowhere. And everybody who makes political decisions also has to live with the fallout. That goes for famous, successful people and for people on the street. If you voted for Trump and you thought it was gonna be a lark and funny, the results are right there in front of you every day.

RELATED:

My hope is that it might bridge some severe societal gaps, perhaps open some minds, maybe even my own. But it’s been very difficult for people who didn’t vote for Trump to even begin to understand or empathize with someone who supported him.

I don’t have any empathy for people who voted for him. Honestly, I really don’t. It’s obvious that he didn’t know anything about the working-class population; he just exploited it, and [his supporters] were naive and unwilling to read or to know what was really going on. He played them — and to a certain extent, the few people who are still in his corner. He still plays them. So it’s just kind of a bummer.

A lot of people have strong opinions about the liberal-minded cast returning to a show led by a Trump supporter.

I’m glad they do. She should hear it. And it’s better for her to hear it from the people that have supported her and watched her show than it is from me. I mean, we’re friends, we’re friendly, and I’ll continue to do the show. But it gets underneath your skin when 20 million people who used to watch your show are like, “What the f*ck?”

She seems to know how people feel about her politics. At the Golden Globes, presenting with co-star John Goodman, she said, “I’m kind of known for creating some great drama.”

Of course she knows.

WATCH:

Well, I’m excited to have Nancy Bartlett back. You told me in 2013 that you didn’t think Nancy would have a place on the show if it ever returned.

It’s not that she didn’t have a place. But I didn’t think they’d be able to fit her story back in because of all the new characters, and the family, and reestablishing what’s been going on politically. So, when they added the extra episode and wrote me in, I was thrilled.

Nancy was one of the earliest portrayals of bisexuality on TV. What surprised you most about how her sexuality was treated on the show in the ’90s?

I mean, she was fun, and it was a fun concept that she ran from being married to Tom Arnold into the relationship with Morgan Fairchild. It was sort of a lark at first, and of course it evolved. They wouldn’t let me kiss Morgan Fairchild under the mistletoe — we had to cut the kiss — so that’s how far we’ve come in terms of what you see sexually on TV.

But yeah, she was a funny, kooky, free-spirited character who got to do things and say things that were part of the evolution of sexuality on TV. It wasn’t intentional — it wasn’t like we were trying to do something groundbreaking. But that is how Roseanne is and was. She just did things that felt organic and authentic. She ended up having the actual kiss with Merle Hemingway [at a gay bar that Nancy took her to]. But nonetheless, Nancy’s fun, and if they picked up the show again, they’ll expand her story.

We’ll get more Nancy if there’s another season?

Oh yeah, absolutely. For sure, yeah.

Roseanne will have a genderfluid grandson, Mark, played by newcomer Ames McNamara, on the show as well.

Yes.

What are your thoughts on the show continuing to be inclusive?

I just think there has to be a little bit of everything in all the shows now, and I don’t know. I’ve gotta see the show before I can comment. He’s in my episode, but to the extent of what they’re trying to do with that character, we’ll have to see.

Speaking more generally, how do you feel about representation as far as LGBTQ people go on TV?

It’s certainly gotten a helluva lot better than when Nancy first came on the scene. And I think with each year that goes by, especially with the advent of Hulu and Netflix and Amazon, there’s been major breakthroughs.

Are you currently enjoying any shows with LGBTQ characters?

I watch 9-1-1 just because I think it’s a ridiculous show. Everywhere you turn there’s new, interesting gay characters. But I don’t go to a show for that. For me, my life has never been informed by that. I’ve always been comfortable with who I am sexually. I’ve been sexually fluid, I’ve broken all the ground rules since I was 17 years old. So, I’ve never had any need for somebody to be my role model. I’ve been my own role model. So, it’s a non-issue. But I think for the public at large it’s been a great time and a revolutionary time for people to see all kinds of characters — racially, sexually, women, men — come to life in a new way.

Have you heard of the very gay-centric Schitt’s Creek?

Honey, I was one of the first people to be hip to it!

Oh, snap.

[Laughs.] I know, yes. But yeah, of course. Love it. Dan Levy is terrific — super funny and smart.

What can we expect from you in the future?

I’ve got three scripted projects I’m trying to get off the ground right now, so that’s a lot of my focus, and it’s a lot of hard work. So, I’m chipping away at that and, of course, continuing to go up for roles as an actress and do my live performing.

What kind of scripts are you working on? 

They’re all comedic. One is based on my early years in L.A., when I started off as a manicurist. One is a project with [performance artist] Justin Vivian Bond. We wrote a musical about six years ago called Arts & Crafts, and we’re trying to make it into a TV series.

I remember you telling me you’d never stoop so low to do a reality show. Still out of the question?

Yeah, listen, if I haven’t done it by now, I’m certainly not gonna do it at this late date.

How do you feel about the way comedy has addressed the Trump era?

Everybody’s speaking about it and being funny and creative about it. And, obviously, people like Bill Maher and those types do it in a more political way. I think it’s been really interesting.

Has your recent comedy reflected current politics?

Sort of, kind of through the back door. I don’t hit people over the head talking about that stuff because so many people are good at doing it verbatim, so I try to keep it more global than just obvious.

Did you think Kathy Griffin went too far with the picture of her holding Trump’s decapitated head?

It’s not about going too far — it just wasn’t funny. And she’s not political. Why is she suddenly jumping on the bandwagon? That’s not what she does. And it wasn’t smart enough or interesting enough. That was the biggest crime.

But Kathy Griffin has been politically engaged and an activist for the gay community.

She’s an activist? I don’t know. I don’t think she’s an activist, frankly. I mean, that’s — she certainly takes advantage of the gay population in her own way, but I don’t think she’s done anything earth shattering for… I mean, I don’t agree.

Who would you consider an entertainer and an activist?

I mean, I’m an activist for being a human being. There’s bigger fish to fry, and my work is inherently political, and it’s been inherently LGBTQ-informed because it’s who I am; it’s what I’ve done from the beginning. I don’t call my audience “my gays.” My audience is my audience, and everybody in it forms an alliance every night. You perform for the entire crowd — it’s not about singling anyone out. And if your work is very, very daring and interesting, then smart people come to it, whether they’re gay, straight, black, white, men, women. I mean, you gotta be able to get underneath what’s really going on culturally, and then you’re always gonna have a smart audience sitting in front of you.

Who else in the comedy world can really dig into the cultural zeitgeist?

I don’t have a litany of people I’m sitting here thinking about. I’m sorry. It’s, like, too hard to do that. Right now the people who are impressing me the most are all these kids from the school in Florida. They’re activists. Went through a terrible trauma, and they’ve been able to transform it into total activation, and that to me is really impressive and exciting. To talk about entertainers and people — it’s easy for all of us to do all that stuff because we’re not under duress. But when you’ve been practically severely injured or murdered [and you speak out about it], yeah, that’s something to really applaud and stand by.

from Hotspots! Magazine https://hotspotsmagazine.com/2018/04/26/sandra-bernhard-still-has-her-blunt-af-opinions/ from Hot Spots Magazine https://hotspotsmagazine.tumblr.com/post/173324824080