#i (my character) probably wouldn't be around to see the actual revolution but... man. fires deserves all that it's got coming

[blacknovelist]

“I’m not gonna cry when I finish my ambition in fallen london” I said, when I was looking up what i need to finish it so I could finally get around to it a month ago. “I won’t cry because I know what’s gonna happen, more or less” I said today, five minutes ago.

you know, like a liar.

[barricadebops]

As I'm about 99.9% positive you would agree, I will never understand why people say that Enjolras isn't a good friend or wouldn't be a good boyfriend. Like I get that the revolution and his work was important to him (I personally believe that he would balance his friends and work to the best of his ability), but you cannot tell me that he wouldn't drop everything, including his work, at a moment's notice if a friend needed him. This is something that I believe wholeheartedly, and someone would have to pry this head canon/belief/whatever you want to call it out of my cold dead fingers.

Yes, I of course agree with this 100%. I really don't understand why people would say that either, it is just not him! The thing about Enjolras is that he cares so much, enough to the point where it was what got him killed. Some may argue that he cares more for his cause than for people, and I would say that is because they are viewing the cause and people as two different concepts, when, in reality, they are actually one and the same! Because Enjolras' cause is the people and that includes all people—the common man Feuilly, his (probably previously) wealthy friend Combeferre, and even the man who on several occasions has let him down, disappointed him, and given him all the reason not to trust him, Grantaire. If his cause is the people, how could he ever feel cold towards the people who matter most to him?

I think the idea a vast amount of people have that Enjolras doesn't love comes from the fact that canonically Enjolras does not experience romantic love, and frankly, this sort of thinking is rather dangerous, because it erases the fact that love comes in so many more forms than just romance. Enjolras is filled with an incredible amount of love—love for his friends, love for the people around him, and love for the future, and every one of those aspects links back to the love he feels for those who surround him. It is the love for the people he would encounter everyday while walking on the streets, it is the love for the people he would meet when he would go to buy his bread, it is the love for the friends who would look to him as their beloved friend and leader—it is his love for these people that he launches an entire rebellion— and subsequently dies for it, too. His ideals are defined by the motto of France—liberty, equality, and fraternity—but these ideals are driven by his greatest ideal of all, the one he hold key above others: love, and he makes his value of the ideal abundantly evident in his speech following the execution of Le Cabuc when he says:

"This is a bad moment to mention the word 'love.' I mention it anyway, and I glorify it. Love, the future belongs to you... In the future there will be no killing, the earth will be radiant, the human race will love." (5.12.8.)

From this, it is quite clear that Enjolras does not just experience love, but feels one of the highest and most greatest forms of it, so the characterization that he knows not of the feeling of love is quite unfounded.

He absolutely does love his friends to death. The one time we see him ready to forsake his ideals is when rather than keep the valuable spy Javert, who holds information about the rebels at the barricades, he is willing to hold an exchange so that they may bring back Jehan Prouvaire.

"'Yes,' replied Enjolras. 'But not as much as by Jean Prouvaire's life.'" (5.14.5)

He also sees so much good in his friends, he believes in them wholeheartedly, and for Enjolras, his belief is his expression of love.

"He composed, in his own mind, with Combeferre’s philosophical and penetrating eloquence, Feuilly’s cosmopolitan enthusiasm, Courfeyrac’s dash, Bahorel’s smile, Jean Prouvaire’s melancholy, Joly’s science, Bossuet’s sarcasms, a sort of electric spark which took fire nearly everywhere at once." (5.1.6.)

I've always loved this passage because it allows us to glimpse into Enjolras' mind and see how he truly thinks of his friends, and the way he sees them is incredibly sweet. He sees these people as his brothers who are capable of amazing feats, who are just as passionate as he is, and will be the ones to help him fight for the future. The love he holds for them is incredible, and though we get to see inside of Enjolras' head so little, this passage here is quite enough to inform the reader of just how much Enjolras draws joy from his friends.

In terms of the canonicity of the brick, I have always seen Enjolras' final moment as him realizing and accepting Grantaire's love for him (I would also argue that this moment is also when Grantaire himself, having not known exactly what it was he felt for Enjolras, also realized what exactly he felt for him), but dying with him only as a friend, but the fact that he smiles, and that it is him who extends his hand towards Grantaire says a lot about how strong his platonic love for his friends is. And of course, once again it is not just for his friends; far too many people see Enjolras as a man willing to sacrifice whoever and whatever in order to accomplish his goals, but his words once he discovers that Paris has abandoned their barricade say otherwise. When the rebels stubbornly insist that they all remain, no doubt fantasizing of dying "heroic martyr deaths," rather than encourage them, he instead essentially chides them by reminding them that:

"Vain-glory is wasteful[,]" (5.1.14)

so to paint him as merciless holds no merit. I feel as if this image comes from the quote:

"Enjolras was a charming young man capable of being terrible." (4.4.1.)

While yes, it is very capable for Enjolras to turn ruthless, the key word in that sentence is capable. The word that preceeds it, the one that follows after the definite word was, is the word charming, and the fact that charming is put before terrible holds great significance. Enjolras' first instinct, what comes to him naturally, is to do good, to be good, to be charming. He can be terrible, yes, but he must put his mind into doing so, whereas being a good person comes to him without thinking. Many tend to ignore the first part of the sentence in favour of the second, and they twist it to mean that his first instinct is to do bad instead of good, which really does not define his character at all.

Perhaps the biggest contributor to the misinterpretation of Enjolras' character is the way people have read his dynamic with Grantaire, and the way the lines between canon and fanon Grantaire have been so thoroughly blurred that it has ended up distorting Enjolras' image while erasing major parts of Grantaire's character that makes him the character and to a greater extent, metaphorical representation he is. I will not lie; I write fanfiction, and the version of Grantaire that I write into my stories is most definitely his fanon image; in other words, he is a vastly improved version. But it is incredibly important to acknowledge the way the two concepts deviate from each other, or you'll end up with a situation in which the character you have in mind isn't really the original character itself. It's okay for people to have different perceptions! Everyone understand literature differently, and that's the beauty of the arts! I think it's totally cool that everyone believes in characters in different ways! But for me, it really bothers me the way the fandom tends to paint Grantaire as a saint while portraying Enjolras as a character who always seems to know less than Grantaire, always is on a lower platform than Grantaire, and is always harsh and unjust towards Grantaire, because it simply is not true. A lot about Grantaire is ignored in terms of the canonicity of the brick. For example, it is true that Grantaire is, in fact, ugly, and he's described that way for a specific element of the narrative that Victor Hugo is writing in (@lilys-hazel-eyes is writing a great analysis on morality represented by beauty, which is exactly the point here—you should definitely go check it out!) In the brick, Victor Hugo describes Grantaire's cynicsm to be the "dry-rot of intellect" (4.4.1.) Hugo's stance on nihilism and cynicism is made quite evident in the way he portrays Grantaire, a character meant to represent the physical manifestation of cynicism (some say that he's the physical embodiment of Paris itself and I think that's a really neat reading on that!)

"A rover, a gambler, a libertine, often drunk... Grantaire, with insidious doubt creeping through him, loved to watch faith soar in Enjolras... his soft, yielding, disclocated, sickly, shapeless ideas..." (4.4.1.)

From these descriptions, it is quite clear what sort of opinion Victor Hugo holds of cynics, which is why Grantaire's characterization is so deliberate. He is trying to make a commentary here about the harm those who do not hold passion or belief can do, to both themselves and society. It is why Grantaire's redeeming moment is the one in which he finally comes to accept the hope of the revolution and proves through action his belief in Enjolras.

In terms of what is presented in the brick, Grantaire does not exactly have much to really defend him. Often drunk, he expends his energy into drunk rambles rather than meaningful meeting contributions, (though admittedly, he does say some rather valid and eloquent things within his rambles—the quote "Take away 'Cotton is King,' what remains of America?" [4.4.4] comes to mind) he deliberately pokes and bothers people as seen when he calls Enjolras "heartless," (5.1.6) and when given a task, does not hold up his end of the deal and ger it done despite having asked for it in the first place. Enjolras' doubt in him is actually entirely understandable; after all, what has Grantaire really done to prove himself trustworthy and reliable? When Enjolras asks if "[he is] good for anything" (5.1.6) the question is, likely in his eyes, genuine rather than insulting. And even when he has every reason not to, Enjolras still puts his faith into Grantaire to get something of extreme importance done for him, which I do think says a lot about Enjolras' willingness to believe in the best in people.

Victor Hugo ends the chapter right before we can see Enjolras' reaction to Grantaire's failure, and while this part, I will say, is up for interpretation, personally I have always extrapolated that the most emotion this would draw from him is disappointment—though it is disappointment that he definitely thinks he should have seen coming, rather than imagining him as getting insanely mad at Grantaire.

Their next interaction is during the rebellion itself, during which Enjolras is put under quite a bit of stress and Grantaire's behaviour really is not helping matters, so him snapping is actually very believable, if a little harsh.

The Enjolras seen in fanon, derived from these interactions, always seems so harsh, so rash when he speaks to Grantaire and therefore is characterized as rash and reckless in general, and generally seems to not understand emotion very well, which is very unlike him. Rather than harsh, I would say that with the exception of course of the rebellion at the barricade and the lead up to that time, Enjolras actually seems to be quite calm.

"All held their peace, and Enjolras bowed his head." (4.4.5.)

Rather than instantly explode at Marius for his rather awful beliefs of Napoleon, instead, Enjolras keeps calm and silent, which demonstrates what an incredible depth of patience he has. And as for Enjolras not understanding emotion, when it comes to fanworks, I'm generally tolerant of people holding different perceptions for different characters, but of all perceptions, this one is one I cannot begin to comprehend, and this is one that I will say that to say he knows not of emotion is to have wrongly read his character.

"And a tear trickled slowly down Enjolras' marble cheek." (5.1.8.)

I simply cannot allow myself to believe that the man who cried at the prospect of having to shoot the artillerman, who calls him his "brother," who is no doubt thinking that had circumstances been different, the action he would be taking would not be necessary—I do not believe this is a man who would not understand feelings and emotions.

The Grantaire in the book who has "the dry rot of intellect," (4.4.1) only ever makes unnecessary rants during meetings, and is very much untrustworthy, is a far outcry from the Grantaire who bases his cyncism on being what he would say is being "well informed," often makes valid points in meetings, and proves himself reliable. Similarly, the Enjolras that is thoughful, as he proves himself to be in his "Outlook from the Top of the Barricade" speech, still chooses to believe in the best in others despite being given every reason not to, and is actually quite patient, is very different from his rash and reckless, short tempered, seems-to-hate-Grantaire, fanon counterpart.

Of course, if you take characters who are shaped by their surroundings and circumstances in the nineteenth century and adapt them to fit the scene of the twenty-first century, it's obvious things are going to change! However, I think it's important to keep these key traits in mind when doing so, and more often than not, it is these key traits that end up getting mangled. When one sticks to these traits, it's easy to say Enjolras would be a wondeful friend/boyfriend (if you see him as having one.) Enjolras' whole deal is loving and caring immensely, and to put his absolute one hundred percent effort into everything he does, and that includes into his friendships and relationships.

Once again, I'm not bashing on the fandom here, I'm part of it. I'll repeat again, I too write with the fanon image of Grantaire in my head. Everyone takes away different things from literature, and that's fine! This is simply how I have interpreted it.

One more note on Enjolras.

Les Amis de l'ABC absolutely love Enjolras. The way Enjolras' character has been misinterpreted has ended up having an effect on the way the Amis are looked at as well. The Amis are all so passionate about the revolution, they attend meetings because they truly do believe in the change they can create in their world, so I'll never truly understand the characterization of the Amis as laughing at Enjolras' devotion to the cause, or finding his passion for it stupid or bothersome. Victor Hugo himself describes just how passionate of a group they are:

"All these young men who differed so greatly, and who, on the whole can only be discussed seriously, held the same religion: Progress... The most giddy of them became solemn when they pronounced that date: '89... the pure blood of principle ran in their veins. They attached themselves, without immediate shades, to incorruptible right and absolute duty." (4.4.1.)

Everyone here, with the exception of Grantaire, is here because they believe wholeheartedly in the revolution. This is not something Enjolras forced upon them, this is not something they groan when thinking about, it is something they all believe in so passionately. It is not something they make fun of him for.

"Affiliated and initiated, they sketched out the ideal underground." (4.4.1.)

They are all here by choice, by will, and by the values they hold close to their heart, and so to say Enjolras is someone who constantly whines about his cause and the others think he needs to lighten up is both an insult to him and the rest. Furthermore, the Amis really love Enjolras, and not just as their leader, but as a beloved friend, and as strongly as I believe Enjolras would drop all of his work to help any of the Amis when they are in need, I believe the Amis would do the same for him. The unity of Les Amis de l'ABC says a lot about the kind of charismatic leader Enjolras is, and his friends most definitely adore him.

So yeah, anon, I 100% agree, and rest assured, if they try and take this canon fact away, they'll have to pry it from both our sets of our cold dead fingers.

[skriaki]

Resistance: Fall of Man GAME REVIEW (PlayStation 3)

For better or worse, Sony has a history of trying new things. The PS2 in particular had such an overwhelming market dominance during the 6th console generation that Sony had all kinds of weird franchises going. Some of them never went anywhere, but others survived to fight the next console war. Ratchet and Clank was one of the success stories, from the now-famous Insomniac (recent developers of the PS4 Spider-Man game), and after a few instalments of action platforming they decided to mix things up.

Resistance is a first-person shooter and easily one of the better-known PS3 launch titles, though it has to be said that the PS3 had a notoriously shaky early life. Truth be told, MotorStorm is the only other launch game I remember with any clarity. So Resistance had a bit of a reputation boost by virtue of not having a lot of competition, but that doesn't mean it's bad. I've seen reviews that call it either a killer app or a massive disappointment. In reality, I think it's somewhere in the middle.

Far and away what stands out most is the setting. Resistance takes place in an alternate 1950s where the Russian Revolution never happened because the Tunguska Event of 1908 turned out to be carrying some kind of horrific virus. Russia went into lockdown for many years without anyone else knowing why, only for an army of mutated former Russians to suddenly swarm over the walls and overrun Europe and Asia. Being islands, Britain and Ireland hold out for a while until the monsters dig their own Eurostar tunnel. You play an exceptionally boring American soldier who's flown into York (the old one) without adequate briefing just as the invasion gets underway.

I really like this kind of alternate history setup, as evidenced by my covetous love for Wolfenstein: The New Order, and Resistance takes its wacky concept very seriously. England is a surprisingly uncommon setting for a game as well, especially outside of London, and it's cool to see a war-ravaged depiction of places like Manchester and Nottingham. This is the kind of game that might be overly reliant on text logs to flesh out its world, but I was always genuinely excited to find out details like America's militant isolationism (what else is new?) or the sad story of a squad hunted by unknown assailants. The Chimera are the real stars, especially since the human characters are pretty disposable, and throughout the story they become increasingly well-entrenched until it's clear that Britain has fallen and the Chimera have the home team advantage.

So the tone is as far removed from Ratchet and Clank's cartoon antics as it could possibly be, but the gameplay still bears some resemblance under all the grey and brown. Insomniac are famous for their crazy weaponry and even Resistance's starter carbine has a grenade launcher. All the guns have a secondary fire that helps give them a distinct place in your arsenal, rather than being fairly interchangeable like the rifles in Killzone, and Insomniac didn't miss the opportunity for weird alien guns. The Bullseye is inaccurate but the secondary fire marks a target which your shots will then home in on. The Auger can shoot through walls and the secondary drops a shield for you to hide behind. Even better, you can carry all the guns at once (which is something Resistance 2 sadly fucked up), so at any time you can bring up the selection wheel as the situation demands.

The Chimera are notoriously bullet-spongey, unfortunately. In particular they have this one animation where they *start* to fall over before standing up again, which is pretty infuriating. Death can come very swiftly on the harder modes, despite the health system which regenerates up to each quarter of the bar, so I personally didn't feel any shame playing on easy mode just to compensate for the more annoying design quirks. Until you know the levels it's quite common for a hybrid to sneak up and pepper your arse with lasers.

Still, at least the game runs well. It actually runs noticably smoother than Resistance 3, since a lot of later seventh-gen games sacrifice frame rate for graphics. Resistance 1 isn't much of a looker these days but it holds up better than something like Killzone 2 because it doesn't feel as if the PS3 is about to catch fire.

Unfortunately, some of that performance is probably due to the mid-game slump; halfway through the level design starts to rely on underground corridors without even a pretence of exploration. This is one of the main symptoms of Resistance's launchgameitus. It doesn't help that the story loses a lot of steam at the same time. But then there are some vehicle segments which almost have the opposite problem, particularly when you're driving around a lovingly-rendered but fairly empty Cheddar Gorge. This middle third is when I'd probably have gotten flustered with the occasional cheap death if I hadn't played on easy mode. Still, things definitely pick up when the military decide to make a final push into London (it's always fucking London) so they can attack the Death Star's thermal exhaust port.

Resistance is your classic launch title: a middle-of-the-road game which seemed better when everyone had a limited selection of choices and no money after paying Sony's extortionate price for a big black sandwich toaster. I probably wouldn't have been so forgiving if I hadn't played it in that context, but I can forgive a game for a lot if it tries something interesting. While the sequels upped the scale and tightened up the gameplay, the original Resistance has an atmosphere of mystery that was never quite matched. The Chimera are a threatening and unnerving presence, especially when we learn details like how those big metal bits in their backs are cooling equipment that keeps their hyperactive metabolisms from burning out. The contrast of mid-1900s quaintness with high-tech alien technology is also really effective, and despite being a completely stock protagonist I did feel a bit of Nathan Hale's awe and trepidation when standing in the shadow of an snow-covered London crawling with mutant abominations.

Resistance is series that never quite lived up to its full potential. Still, getting murdered by alien sharpshooters on the underground is still more pleasant than actually commuting in London.

(3/5)

Availability: Resistance 1 and 2 only seem to be playable on PS3, but physical copies are extremely cheap so don't be suckered into paying a tenner for the digital version. Otherwise you can get Resistance 3 on the PS4 store, either as a single purchase or as part of PlayStation Now. The latter service only lets you stream it, as opposed to downloading, but it's perfectly playable so long as you have good internet. I actually like Playstation Now quite a lot because the service got a big price cut (since Microsoft's Game Pass was kicking its arse) and you can download a hundred or so games, but the rest are stream-only. It'd be nice to get some modern ports but it doesn't seem likely unless the franchise makes a comeback.