#i love remembering that i have free will. and that fictional caregivers exist.

[lunarghoulette]

papa spine papa spine papa spine

[otherworldlybooksgoddess]

Five Exceptional Fantasy Books Based in Non-European Myth

Photo by Josh Hild

Don’t misunderstand me: I love reading well-written fantasy with roots in the familiar Celtic and English folklore of my childhood, but with the vast majority of High Fantasy being set in worlds closely akin to Medieval Europe, and a large amount of of Mythic Fiction drawing on legends of similar origin, sometimes the ground begins to feel too well trodden.  There is, after all, an entire world of lore out there to draw from.  That’s why I’m always thrilled to find excellent works of what I call “the Realistic Sub-Genres of Fantasy” based in or inspired by myths from other cultures.  Such books not only support inclusiveness, but also expand readers’ experiences with lore and provide a wide range of new, exciting realities to explore. So, if you are looking for something different in the realm of Fantasy, the following novels will provide a breath of fresh air.

The Golem and the Jinni by Helene Wrecker

In this beautifully written novel, Wrecker draws on both Middle-Eastern and Jewish mythology to tell the stories of two unwilling immigrants in Edwardian New York and the unlikely friendship that springs up between them.  Chava, an unusually lifelike golem created for peculiar purposes, has only days worth of memories and is practically childlike in her innocence.  Ahmad the Jinni has lived for centuries, but is trying to reclaim his forgotten past. The former is as steady and calm as the earth she’s made from while the latter is as volatile and free-spirited as the fire within him.  Both must learn to live in an unfamiliar new culture and find their places in a city too modern for myths even as they hide their true natures.  It’s a wonderful metaphor for the experiences of immigrants everywhere, who often find themselves feeling like outsiders—isolated and even overwhelmed— as they struggle to adapt to life in an alien society.  

Full of memorable characters, vivid descriptions, and interesting twists, The Golem and the Jinni takes readers on a journey that is driven as much by internal conflict as external action.  The setting of 1900’s Manhattan is well-researched and spectacular in its detail.  Wrecker blends two old-world mythologies into the relatively modern Edwardian world with a deft hand.  The result is not only fascinating, but also serves to illustrate the common early-twentieth-century experience of an immigrant past colliding with an American future.

The Tail of the Blue Bird by Nii Ayikwei Parkes

One part Detective Mystery and one part Magical Realism, this novel invites readers to experience modern-day Ghana in a way that is both authentic and profound.  When Kayo, a forensic pathologist just beginning his career, is pushed into investigating a suspected murder in the rural village of Sonokrom, the last thing he expects is to have a life-changing experience.  Soon, however, he gets the acute sense that the villagers may know more than they’re letting on. When all of the latest scientific and investigative techniques fail him, even as odd occurrences keep dogging his steps, Kayo is finally forced to accept that there is something stranger than he thought about this case.  Solving the crime will require more than intelligence and deduction; it will require setting his disbelief aside and taking the traditional tales and folklore of an old hunter seriously.  Because whatever is happening in Sonokrom, it isn’t entirely natural.  

This novel is brilliant not only because of its deep understanding of Ghanaian society and realistic setting, but also because of Parkes writing style.  The narrative is gorgeously lyrical and everything within it is described with a keen, insightful eye.  The dialogue is full of local color, and while some may find the pidgin English and native colloquialisms difficult to follow, I found that the context was usually enough to explain any unfamiliar terms. Sometimes the narrative feels a little dreamlike, but that is exactly the way great Magical Realism should be.  The Tail of the Blue Bird insistently tugs readers to a place where reality intertwines with myth and magic, all while providing an authentic taste of Ghanaian culture.

The Deer and the Cauldron by Jin Yong

During the reign of Manchu Emperor Kang Xi, China is in a state of barely-controlled sociopolitical unrest.  Many of the older generation remember the previous dynasty, and there still remain vestiges of a resistance movement hidden among the populace.  As his forces continue to hunt down the malefactors, called the Triad Societies, the boy-emperor turns to his unlikely friend and ally: a young rascal known only as Trinket.  This protagonist is a study in contrasts: lazy yet ambitious, cunning yet humorous, roguish yet likable, foul-mouthed yet persuasive. Born in a brothel, Trinket has made his way by his wits alone.  At age twelve, he accidentally sneaked into the Forbidden City—a bizarre occurrence in itself—afterward befriending Kang Xi.  Now, rising quickly through the ranks, he is on a mission to (ostensibly) find and weed out the Triad Societies, and he uses the opportunity to infiltrate various organizations, playing their leaders against one another for his own gain. With a dangerous conspiracy brewing in the Forbidden City itself, however, he is forced to choose sides and decide what is most important to him: friendship, fortune, or freedom.   Supernatural occurrences, daring escapades, and moments of deep introspection abound as Trinket struggles to navigate the perilous maze his life has become.

This novel is like a gemstone: bright, alluring, and many faceted.  At times it may seem somewhat simple on the surface, but looking closer reveals new depths and multiple layers.  Full of intrigue, action, horror, and even laughs, The Deer and the Cauldron mirrors not only the complexities of its setting, but those of the China the author himself knew during the Communist revolution. By blending together history, fantasy, realism, humor, and subtle political commentary, Yong not only beautifully captures these social intricacies but also creates a narrative that is as thoroughly engaging as it is unapologetically unique.

Like Water for Chocolate by Laura Esquivel

Magical realism related to food has almost become a movement in itself, with novels like Aimee Bender’s The Particular Sadness of Lemon Cake, Joanne Harris’ Chocolat, and Sarah Addison Allen’s Garden Spells all finding their places in readers’ hearts.  Originally published in 1992, Like Water for Chocolate helped create this fascinating trend, and it has become something of a modern classic in the fantasy genre.  

The narrative centers around Tita de la Garza, a mid-twentieth century Mexican woman possessing deep sensitivity, a strong will, and a special talent for cooking.  Born prematurely, Tita arrived in her family’s kitchen, tears already in her eyes.  It is in that room where she spends most of her childhood, being nurtured and taught by the elderly cook, Nacha.  The relationship that flourishes between Tita and her caregiver is a special gift, as it provides the girl not only with the compassion and support her own mother denies, but also with a passion and skill for creating incredible, mouth-watering dishes.  At Nacha’s side, Tita learns the secrets of life and cookery, but she also learns one terrible fact: thanks to a family tradition, she is destined never to have love, marriage, or a child of her own.  Her fate, rather, is to care for her tyrannical widowed mother, Mama Elena, until the day the older woman dies.  With a vibrant, independent spirit, sixteen-year-old Tita flouts this rule, falling deeply in love with a man named Pedro who asks for, and is denied, her hand in marriage.  Undaunted, the young man agrees to wed one of Tita’s older sisters, Rosaura, instead, as he believes this to be the only way he can be close to the woman he loves.  Thus begins a life-long struggle between freedom and tradition, love and duty, which is peppered throughout with supernatural events and delicious cuisine.  So great is her skill in cooking that the meals Tita prepares take on magical qualities all their own, reflecting and amplifying her emotions upon everyone who enjoys them.  Controlled and confined for much of her existence, food becomes her outlet for all the things she cannot say or do.  The narrative itself echoes this, by turns as spicy, sweet, and bitter as the flavors Tita combines.  At its heart, this is as much a tale about how important the simple things, like a good meal, can be as it is a story about a woman determined to be her own person and choose her own fate.

Cuisine is fundamental to this novel, with recipes woven throughout the narrative, but that is only a part of its charm.  In the English translation, the language is beautiful in its simplicity.  The characters often reveal hidden depths, especially as Tita grows up and is able to better understand the people around her.  Heartfelt in its joys and sorrows, Like Water for Chocolate glows with cultural flavor and a sense of wonder.  It’s a feast for the spirit, and like an exquisite meal, it never fails to surprise those who enjoy it.

The City of Brass by S. A. Chakraborty

When I first read this novel, I found the early chapters enjoyable and engaging, but felt the story was no more than a typical, if especially well-written, work of mythic fiction.  The deeper I got into the narrative, however, the more wrong I was proven.  The City of Brass is anything but ordinary. While basing her work in Middle-Eastern lore and history, Chakraborty nonetheless manages to create a setting and story that are both wonderfully unique. Lush, detailed, and bursting with magic and intrigue, this book spans the lines between several sub-genres of fantasy without ever losing its balance.  

Beginning in eighteenth-century Egypt, the narrative follows a quick-witted antiheroine. Nahri doesn’t live by the rules of her society.  She doesn’t believe in magic or fate or even religion.  Orphaned for most of her life, survival has required her to become a con artist and a thief.  As a result, she is practical and pragmatic, a realist who has never even considered donning rose-colored glasses, and the last person who would ever expect anything supernatural to occur. Which, of course, means that it does, but the way in which it is handled is intricate and interesting enough not to feel trite. When Nahri’s latest con—a ceremony she is pretending to perform and doesn’t believe in even slightly—goes awry, and the cynical young woman finds herself face to face with a Daeva.  Magical beings, it transpires, are real after all, and this one is furious.  To both of their dismay, he’s also bound to Nahri, who soon realizes that he has an agenda of his own.  In return for rescuing her (and refraining from killing her himself) Dara, the Daeva warrior Nahri accidentally summoned, wants her to pull of the biggest con of her life: pretending to be the half-human heir to the throne of his people.  Worse still, she soon realizes that Dara, whose mentality sometimes seems a little less-than-stable, actually believes she may be exactly who he claims.  He has something planned, and his intentions may not be in her best interest.  Dragged unwillingly into a strange world of court intrigue, danger, social upheaval, and magic, Nahri quickly discovers that some things remain familiar.  People are ruled by prejudices, the strong prey on the weak, and she can’t fully trust anyone.  The stakes, however, are higher than ever, and Nahri will need all of her wits, cunning, and audacity if she wants to survive.

This novel was thoroughly enjoyable, and in fact prompted me to buy the following books in the trilogy as they became available. Chakraborty’s style is lyrical, her world building is superb, her plot is intricate, and her characters are well-developed.  She not only frames unfamiliar words and ideas is easily-comprehensible contexts, but weaves those explanations smoothly into the narrative. The culture, mythology, and history surrounding her tale are all carefully researched, but the tale itself is nonetheless unique. What begins feeling like a fairly ordinary mythic fiction novel will pleasantly exceed readers’ expectations.

So, while we, as fantasy readers, love the works of authors like J. R. R. Tolkien, Marion Zimmer Bradley, and Charles de Lint, there is also a plethora of other enchanting books to enjoy.  Exploring magical realism and mythic fiction based in cultures and folklore from all around the globe ensures that our to-read lists will always hold something unexpected and exciting to surprise us.  So, if you’re starting to feel like you’re in a bit of a reading rut, or if you’re simply looking to expand your horizons, open up new realms of imagination by opening up one of the novels above.  Who knows see where it will lead you?  You may just discover a new favorite to add to your bookshelf.  Happy reading!

[hollywayblog]

How “The Umbrella Academy” Surprised Me

In many ways, good and bad.

This is a spoiler-free review of season one of The Umbrella Academy

I remember when The Umbrella Academy comics came out. It was 2007 and I was a broke thirteen-year-old living in suburban Australia (a cultural wasteland!) so I never actually read them, but as a rabidly obsessed My Chemical Romance/Gerard Way fan, I managed to fold The Umbrella Academy into my identity anyway. I’m not sure exactly how that works, but hey. Adolescents are powerful creatures.

As a distinguished almost-twenty-five-year-old (I’d like to acknowledge that I took a small break here to have an existential crisis) my walls are free of band posters and my eyes are no longer encircled with that thick black eyeliner that always managed to look three days old and slept in, but I still got kind of a thrill when I learned that The Umbrella Academy was being adapted into a Netflix show. It was something I had always assumed I would end up reading, back in the depths of my emo phase (which is probably more accurately defined as a My Chemical Romance phase) but then just kind of forgot about. So, great, I’m simultaneously being reminded that this thing exists, and freed of the nostalgic obligation to go seek out the comic and read it. As much as I love reading, comics have just never been my thing.

Then the trailer came out. Honestly, it kind of killed my enthusiasm. It just looked kind of generic. Apocalypse. Superpowers. Bold characters. Lots of action. My takeaway was a big ol’ “Meh.” Frankly, without my pre-existing attachment to Gerard Way and the very idea of The Umbrella Academy, I highly doubt I would have given it a chance - not because it looked inherently bad, but just because I’m a hard sell on the kind of show it appeared to be.

But it’s Gerard Way, man. I had to watch at least one episode.

The Umbrella Academy centres around the famous-yet-mysterious Hargreeves family. The seven children - six of whom have special powers - were adopted by Reginald Hargreeves, a cold and severe patriarch who didn’t even deign to name them. He made them into “The Umbrella Adademy,” a crime-fighting squad of tiny children who would later dissolve after a tragic incident. Now they’re grown up, and Dad’s dead. His spare and tense memorial is what brings the adult Umbrella Academy back together, and this is where the show kicks off.

We’re treated to a rather clumsy beginning; a gripping opening scene followed by an unimaginative montage. We get a glimpse of each of the Hargreeves’ regular lives, leading up to and including them learning of their father’s death. It’s a heavy-handed introductory roll-call, complete with on-screen name cards. It’s a baffling waste of time, considering we don’t learn anything in this montage that isn’t later reiterated through dialogue or behaviour. We don’t need to see Klaus leaving rehab to know he’s an addict. We don’t need to see Allison on the red carpet to know she’s a movie star. It dragged, even on a first watch not knowing that the whole thing would be ultimately pointless, and I’m surprised no one thought to cut it and let us go in cold with everyone arriving at the mansion for the memorial - an opening that would have both set the tone and let us get to know the characters much more naturally. Maybe it feels like I’m focusing too much on this, and that’s only because it gave me a bad first impression - and I want anyone who reacts the same way I did to stick with it. It really does get better.

The further we got from the montage the less gimmicky it felt, and I started to sense some sort of something that I liked about this show. Stylistically it was interesting, and there seemed to be an underlying depth; room for these characters to be more than brooding ex-vigilantes with daddy issues. I was intrigued enough by the end of episode one to keep watching, and was gratified as the series went on and truly delved into those depths. There was a memorable turning point for me around episode five, where Klaus (the wonderful Robert Sheehan) was given space in the runtime to visibly, viscerally feel the effects of something he had just been through. It sounds so obvious, and so simple, but it’s something that is frustratingly glossed over so often in fiction. You know. Fallout. Feelings.

It wasn’t just that moment, though. Prior episodes laid the groundwork, developing not just Klaus but all the Hargreeves. Each character feels real and grounded, each of them uniquely good, uniquely bad, uniquely damaged by their upbringing. It’s this last point I particularly appreciate, this subtle realism in the show’s execution of abused characters. We see how siblings growing up with the same parents does not necessarily mean they got the same childhood, endured the same abuse, or that their trauma will manifest in the same ways. And certainly, it’s important to see the different coping mechanisms each of them have developed. Furthermore, there is a lot more to each of these characters than just their trauma. There are seven distinct personalities going on, and I have to applaud the writers for this commitment to character. It was largely this that kept me hooked (I’m such a sucker for good characters), and to my own surprise very invested in the way things unfolded.

I love the tone, which found a cool rhythm after the pilot. The pacing was decent and the character development balanced well against the plot. I like the little quirks that remind you of the show’s comic book roots, like Pogo, the talking ape and Five, the grouchy old man in a teenager’s body.

Weirdly, I like the apocalypse stuff, which they managed to put their own spin on despite it being such a played-out trope at this point. I like that the show found small ways to go in unexpected directions, even if the overarching plot and big twists weren’t all that surprising. And most of all I love that in a world saturated with forgettable media, I woke up today still thinking about this show.

Even if not all of my thoughts were so generous.

See, for everything I love about this show, there are also quite a few things that rubbed me up the wrong way. I can’t list them all without going into spoilers, but I think it needs to be said that there are like, a fair few problematic elements in this show. I couldn’t help but notice that while women and people of colour are the minority in this cast, they also seem to cop the worst abuse. Only two of the Hargreeves siblings are female. One of them has no powers and the other’s power is influence (a non-physical power). Their “Mom” is literally a robot created for the sole purpose of caregiving; she dresses and acts like the epitome of a submissive 50s housewife. The Hargreeves sisters are also the ones most likely to be left out or ignored when it comes to making decisions, with one of them even literally losing her voice at one point (yikes!). Beyond that we have some truly disturbing imagery of violence being inflicted on women of colour almost exclusively by white men, and the fact that the only asian character is um… well, he’s literally dead. Before the show even starts.

Overall the problem is not just insufficient diversity, with white men taking up most of the screen time, dialogue and leadership actions, but the way that the few female and non-white characters are depicted.

These are all depictions that, in a vacuum, would be innocuous. I mean, just looking at the root of many of the show’s problems exemplifies that - the root being that all of these characters were white in the source material (uh, a problem in itself, obviously). It wasn’t a problem, for example, when Dead Ben was not the only Asian character but just another white Hargreeves sibling. And wouldn’t it be nice if we lived in a world where you could race or gender-swap any character and have everything mean - or not mean - the same thing. But life is more complicated than that. Art is more complicated than that.

Honestly, I’m not sure if we should give props to the developers of The Umbrella Academy for diversifying their cast when the fact is they did so - and I say this gently - ignorantly and lazily. Race-swapping willy-nilly and leaving it at that ignores a lot of complex issues surrounding the nuances of portraying minorities in fiction, and leaves room for these kinds of harmful and hurtful tropes to carelessly manifest. So many storytellers don’t want to hear it, but let me tell you writer to writer that it does matter if the person being choked is white or black, male or female, trans or cis. It does matter who’s doing the choking. Camera angles matter. Dialogue matters. It’s all a language that conveys a message - about power and dominance and vulnerability in the real world. Because art doesn’t exist inside a vacuum, as inconvenient as that might be. Having the empathy to recognise that will actually make us better storytellers.

In shedding light on these issues, I am not dragging this show. I am not condemning it. And although it is problematic in itself, I’m not even saying it’s problematic to enjoy it. I’m pulling apart the lasagne, looking at the layers, poking and prodding at the individual ingredients and saying, “Hey, the chef probably should have known better than to put pineapple in here. Maybe let’s not do that next time.” I’m also saying, “When I get a mouthful with pineapple in it, I don’t enjoy that. It’s jarring and unpleasant. But it doesn’t ruin the whole meal for me.”

I’m getting better at allowing myself to dislike something on the basis of its shitty themes. To not have to justify myself when something is problematic in a way that just makes it too uncomfortable for me to watch. That wasn’t the case here. I won’t lie; the bad stuff was no afterthought for me. That kind of thing really gets to me. It does ruin a lot for me. But in this case, the show redeemed itself in other ways; mostly by just being a compelling story with characters I liked. I’m trying not to justify that too hard either.

So I liked The Umbrella Academy, and I hope it gets a second season. I also hope that the creators will listen to people like me who want to be able to enjoy their show even more and create more consciously in the future.

And please let Vanya be a lesbian.

The Umbrella Academy is out now on Netflix

Watch this show if you like: witty characters, iconic characters, complex characters, mysteries,  dark themes, superpowers, vigilantes, comics, dark humour, epic stories, shows about families, stylistic TV shows, ensemble casts, character dynamics, dramedies

Possible triggers (don’t read if you care about spoilers): suicide, child abuse, claustrophobia, addiction, violence, violence against women, violence against women of colour, death, torture, incest, self-harm, pregnancy/childbirth, kidnapping/abduction, blood, mental illness, medication/themes of medication necessity, blood, manipulation/gaslighting, homicide, forced captivity, guns, hospitalisation, medical procedures, needles, PTSD, prison rape reference (1).

Please feel free to message me if I failed to include a relevant trigger warning and I’ll include it.

[weekendwarriorblog]

The Weekend Warrior Home and Semi-Theater Edition 7/10/20 – GREYHOUND, PALM SPRINGS, THE OLD GUARD, RELIC and More!

I hope everyone had a good 4th of July weekend, even though movie theaters don’t seem any closer to opening, and I believe some in certain areas even closed! New York City just hit Phase 3 this week, and I’m not sure Phase 4 even includes movie theaters. Let’s not even talk about L.A. as it will just depress me. I literally have no idea what’s going on or if movies being back in theaters nationwide by the end of this month is even realistic.  There are a lot of available movies this week, and I did my best to see as many as possible, but honestly, I’m getting a little burnt out watching movies on my computer and even on my TV set (the few times I can), so we’ll see how far I get this week. Hold on tight, because this week is gonna be a doozy! (I actually wanted to write a defense of Quibi and its content, but I’ll have to save that for a quieter week.)

Believe it or not, Tom Hanks has a new movie out this week, too, but it’s only on Apple TV+, since Sony decided to sell Hanks’ fictitious submarine drama GREYHOUND to the relatively new streaming service. Surely, that can’t be a good sign, right? Directed by Aaron Schneider (Get Low), it has Hanks playing Commander Ernest Krause, who is put in charge of his first fleet of ships to sail across the Atlantic Ocean’s notorious “Black Pit,” bringing supplies and troops to Europe during America’s early days in World War II.  The area of the Atlantic got its name because the planes that normally escorted the fleet to keep an eye out for German UBoats would have to turn back. As Captain of the USS Keeling aka Greyhound, Krause is solely responsible for dozens of ships and men.

Greyhound is a classic case of “Well, it looked good on paper,” because when you have a piece of fiction by C.S. Forester and one of America’s most beloved actors wanting to make it into a movie, what could possibly go wrong? Well, I’ll tell you. As someone who generally loves submarine movies and movies with great sea battles, certainly this movie was made for me, but no, although there are a few decent CG battles, the majority of the movie involves Hanks calmly stating orders to his men from the control deck of the Greyhound, as they take evasive measures to protect the fleet from the UBoats. Really, it’s mostly about Hanks, because other than Stephen Graham in a small role, none of the other men on the Greyhound have much personality. The movie even has the audacity to waste a great actor like Rob Hunter on a nothing role as the ship’s cook who brings Krause food and coffee he never has time to eat or drink anyway, because fighting the Germans is very busy work indeed.

While some of the firefights do bring a much-needed level of excitement, there’s otherwise no real stakes or tension, because you always know that Hanks’ boat will never be sunk. Every once in a while, Hanks will ask for coffee or his slippers to change things up. That’s how boring this movie is. And then, despite all the “non-stop fighting,” they somehow have time to stage an elaborate burial at sea when the ship is hit by enemy fire. Maybe this would have been a better movie seen in theaters, but probably not. It’s absolutely astounding how boring this movie is, but if naval speak gets you hot then Greyhound might just be the movie for you!

Now that that’s taken care of, let’s try to get some of the other movies, hopefully some of them are better than Greyhound.

Andy Samberg stars in PALM SPRINGS (NEON/Hulu), the new romantic comedy and first feature from director Max Barbakow. Calling it a “romantic comedy” wouldn’t really be doing the movie justice, since it’s more of a quirky comedy that offers more than the simple Sundance rom-com formula of Samberg’s previous Sundance movie, Jesse and Celeste Forever. The movie begins with Samberg’s character, Nyles, waking up at a wedding with his horrid girlfriend Misty (a very funny Meredith Hagner). At the wedding, Nyles gives a rousing speech (despite no one knowing who he is) then connects with the bride’s sister, Sara (Cristin Milioti). But wait, maybe you think you know where this is going but when the two go off somewhere private to “hook up,” it’s rudely interrupted by someone trying to kill Nyles, and well, it just gets stranger from there.

I’m not sure how much of the plot and the early twist would be considered a spoiler, although maybe not if you’ve watched the trailer. Essentially, Sara follows Nyles into a cave where there’s some sort of dimensional thing that returns them back to the beginning of the same day over and over. They go to sleep or they die, and they’re right back at the start of the day, so yup, it’s basically a similar Groundhog’s Day premise that we’ve seen in movies like Happy Death Day, Natasha Lyonne’s Russian Doll, Before I Fall or others, but it’s all about what Barbakow, writer Andy Siara and the two leads do that make Palm Springs so much more entertaining and even deeper.

I have to be honest that I wasn’t familiar with Milioti at all before this film, so this ends up being an amazing spotlight for her talent, and similar to Rashinda Jones in Jesse/Celeste, she makes Samberg that much easier to palate. Not that I dislike Samberg, but I’ve never been the biggest fan when he’s given free reign like in movies such as Hot Rod. (But I did like Popstar: Never Stop Stopping, so maybe he’s grown on me.) I will admit that I’m a sucker for a good wedding-based romantic comedy—as seen by recent ones like Plus Oneand Destination Wedding -- and with its odd quantum physics twist, Palm Springs continually finds new ways of exploring the tenuous existence that is a new relationship. Oh, I should also mention that Roy, the guy trying to kill Nyles, is played by JK Simmons, and while it’s definitely a smaller part for one of my favorite actors, he also plays a significant role in the story.

You’ll probably know right away if Palm Springs is your kind of movie, but the mix of quirkiness and honest heart and emotion makes it one of Samberg’s better endeavor. It hope it allows us to see much more of Ms. Milioti, since I think she’s quite wonderful as well.  Palm Springs can be watched on Hulu or in select drive-ins starting this Friday, and since it is this week’s “Featured Flick*,” I hope you’ll check it out! (*I changed the name of this just to see if anyone is paying any attention… or even reading.)

Greg Rucka and Leandro Fernández’s comic, THE OLD GUARD, has been turned into a movie directed by Gina Prince-Bythewood (Love and Basketball) that will hit Netflix this Friday. It stars Charlize Theron and is written by Rucka himself, and it’s a fairly high concept action movie involving a group of “immortals” – warriors who aren’t able to die, so they’ve lived for hundreds of years and are now hiring themselves out as hired mercenaries. When they learn there’s a new immortal awakening, they seek her out to recruit her.

I generally like Charlize Theron in action mode as seen in Mad Max: Fury Road and Atomic Blonde, and she’s pretty kick-ass as Andromache the Scythian aka Andy, the leader of the Old Guard. Kiki Layne from If Beale Street Could Talk offers a nice counterpoint as her trainee in the form of Nile, the newest immortal, who discovers that she can’t die while serving as a soldier in the Middle East. The rest of the cast includes Chiwetel Ejiofor, Matthias Schoenaerts and others, who are all okay, but I just wish there was more to the story than just watching them have to deal with a lame corporate villain named Merrick (Harry Melling), who wants to harvest their blood to create life-saving pharmaceuticals for others.

While I liked the flashbacks to historic times showing Theron’s Andromache in another light, the stuff in present day is rarely as interesting. I’m not sure I ever would have thought of Bythewood doing action, even though she was supposed to do a Silver Sable/Black Cat movie at one point, but her fight scenes pretty fairly impressive, but she doesn’t lose sight of losing the focus on characterization, at least in terms of the two women.

The Old Guard isn’t bad, and it really would have benefited from being seen on the big screen, but I’m not sure it really offers enough with its concept other than a few decent fight scenes. Personally, I felt it paled in comparison to Netflix’s other recent action film, Extraction, at least in terms of the story and characters.

A horror movie that got a lot of lavishing praise out of Sundance is Natalie Erika James’ RELIC (IFC Midnight), which you may remember me mentioning last week, because apparently, it opened in a few drive-in theaters last Friday.  I had been looking forward to this due to the amount of praise it got from Sundance, comparing it to the likes of The Babadook or Hereditary.

The story revolves around Emily Mortimer’s Kay and her daughter Sam (Bella Heatchote) travelling to their grandmother Edna’s country home in Australia after she’s reported missing. Edna (Robyn Nevin) soon returns and is behaving oddly, and with Gran clearly not herself, Kay has to figure out if she’s possessed by something or just suffering from advanced dementia.

I feel like I have a general idea what James was trying to accomplish with Relic, as it explores what it’s like being the caregiver for your elderly parent once they’ve become debilitated by something that makes them unrecognizable, put into the context of a horror film. I ended up watching the movie twice, mainly because I had no clue what was going on during my first viewing, but honestly, this movie just ended up annoying me, and it was only partially due to the fact that I had very little idea what was going on since most of the movie is so dark. More than that, I found a lot of the movie to be incredibly dull, and comparisons to The Babadook are inane, since the only thing is that it’s a horror movie (sort of) directed by an Australian woman.

The movie also involves some sort of “evil presence” and a creepy old house that was on the premises when Kay’s family moved in, but this information is revealed in such a dreary and confusing manner that makes it harder to figure out what you’re watching.  In fact, if not for a number of eerie random images, it would be hard to even consider the first half of Relic “horror” since it’s more of a family drama about these three women from different generations contending with each other in this house. As someone who has had many conversations with my sister about what to do about my own elderly mother, I could see why this might connect with viewers, but planting this idea haphazardly into a typical horror movie just never worked for me. Relic has some good things going for it, such as the performances by the three actors (particularly Nevin), plus the creepy imagery and sound design do a lot to create a mood even if it doesn’t necessarily help with the storytelling.

The problem is that this story is told at such a snail’s pace and by the time the horror elements start kicking in within the last 20 minutes of the movie, almost everything is in pitch blackness, making it almost impossible to tell what you’re watching. Any earlier qualities worthy of praise are lost with some of the bad choices in lighting and editing, as well as an ending that’s dragged on for so long and at such a drowsy pace that any good will towards the movie will likely be lost. Ultimately, Relic is a disappointing high concept but single-note thriller that fails to deliver on the scares, instead delivering a dull and slightly unsettling family drama about aging and dementia.

In fact, I actually much preferred Jeffrey A. Brown’s horror film, The Beach House, which comes to the streaming network sShudder this Thursday. It stars Liana Liberato and Noah Le Gross as Emily and Randall, a young couple who travel to his father’s beach house to reconnect. Once there, their vacation is broken up by Jake Weber’s Mitch and his wife Jane (Maryann Nagel), but as the two couples get to know each other, a freak environmental event unleashes an infection that leads to all sorts of freaky occurrences. While there was just as much weirdness and not knowing what was going on as in Relic, at least this movie mostly takes place in the sunlight, so you can actually see things that are equally or even more disturbing than anything in Relic.

Brown’s film starts out so simply with this young couple wanting to spend some time alone together, but there’s this constant menace looming that’s foreshadowed in the opening credits, and as Mitch and Jane show up and start behaving oddly, you’ll wonder what exactly is happening to them. Things get even more disturbing when Emily is on the beach and experiences even odder and grosser circumstances that lead into the film’s “body horror” portion that will make even those with the strongest constitutions slightly queasy.

Part of why the film works so well is the small cast Brown has put together.  I’ve been quite a fan of Liberato for many years, and she effectively becomes the film’s lead. Certainly, there are a few common horror tropes in place including ones that can be traced back to the likes of Eli Roth’s Cabin Fever, but there’s also enough new ideas that the film doesn’t seem like retread. While I’m not 100% sure exactly what was happening in The Beach House, Brown and his cast do a good job keeping the viewer uneasy and disturbed.  

Atom Egoyan’s new thriller GUEST OF HONOUR (Kino Lorber) will premiere this week as part of the Kino Marquee (and there’s lots of great stuff on there that will help support your local arthouse while you’re checking that out!)  It stars David Thewliss as Jim, a health inspector whose high school music teaching daughter Veronica (Lausla de Oliveira) has been jailed over an indiscretion with two teen students.

Egoyan has proven himself to be quite a master at the thriller genre, and Guest of Honour involves a complex family drama narrative that scuttles between timelines in order to keep you guessing where things might be going. I’ll freely admit that the non-linear storytelling was somewhat confusing at first, as the movie is framed by a conversation between Veronica and Luke Wilson after the death of her father. It also flashes back to an important moment from Veronica’s childhood before her mother died of cancer, which led to other things that would affect her years later.

I’m frequently amazed by Thewliss as one of England’s more underrated exports, but I was equally impressed by Ms. de Oliveira, whose work I was not familiar with before seeing her in Egoyan’s capable hands.

While we’ve heard plenty of true stories about the relationships between teachers with their students, Guest of Honour isn’t just about that, and it’s the way Egoyan reveals some of the story’s more interesting complexities, like Veronica’s relationship with an obsessed bus driver (Rossif Sutherland), that builds to some of the events that happen later. Honestly, I’m hesitant to reveal too much about the plot since there’s a way that Egoyan unveils various elements that makes Guest of Honour another compelling entry in the filmmaker’s constantly-evolving oeuvre.

A really interesting crime-thriller with a sci-fi twist hitting Apple TV, Prime Video and other digital platforms this Friday is South African filmmaker Tony Dean Smith’s own directorial debut, VOLITION (Giant Pictures), a film co-written and co-produced with his brother Ryan. It stars Adrian Glynn McMorran (Arrow) as James, a man constantly down on his luck who has clairvoyant powers that he uses to get himself involved in a scheme involving valuable diamonds. Just before this happens, he meets Angela (Magda Apanowicz), a young woman who gets pulled into the problems James gets into with others wanting the diamonds, and when he sees a murder, he has to do what he can to change the future.

I feel like this column’s running theme is that I’m being deliberately vague about the film’s plot, and in this case, it’s because halfway through the movie, there’s a pretty big twist that involves time travel. While that immediately makes the movie more interesting, it also makes things far more confusing.  Up until that point, Volition felt like a rather weakly-written indie crime-thriller from filmmakers who may have seen Memento a few too many times. In fact, it opens with such a pretentious bit of narration I was worried the movie wasn’t going to be very good, and there was very little in the first half to keep me invested. When that new element/twist is added, McMorran’s character ends up on a far more interesting journey, and that turns Volition into a far more inventive and original story. Sure, it isn’t Primer, but if you’re a fan of the twists that come with time travel, Volition does a good job keeping you wondering what might happen next, and it does this with a mostly no-name cast, which is always quite impressive. In that way, it reminds me of The Wretchedwhich opened earlier in the year, as that was also by two filmmaking brothers taking a DIY attitude towards independent film. Volition isn’t perfect but it’s far better than I was expecting, and it’s a testament to the filmmakers’ perseverance to bring their very specific vision to the screen.

I was pretty excited to learn out about the quirky Japanese coming-of-age musical comedy WE ARE LITTLE ZOMBIES (Oscilloscope) from Makoto Nagahisa, because it’s the type of movie that I would usually see at the New York Asian Film Festival that would have been going on right now if not for… well, you know what. But it did play Fantasia in Montreal last year, so I’m sure it would have been fun seeing it with that audience. It’s certainly cute and quirky, involving a group of kids who come together to deal with their parents. Honestly, I don’t have a ton to say about it, but if you like oddball Asian films like the ones that play those festivals, you’ll know whether the film is for you. You can watch a trailer and find out where you’ll be able to catch We Are Little Zombies at its Official Site.

At least that was more watchable than Gavin Rothery’s sci-fi directorial debut, ARCHIVE (Vertical Entertainment), starring Theo James from the Divergent movies as George Almore, a man in the year 2038 who is working on an AI that is as close to human as possible, one that will hopefully reunite him with his dead wife in this new form. If you watch this, you’ll immediately think that Rothery must have watched Moon quite a lot. In fact, he was the conceptual artist and visual FX artist on Duncan Jones’ movie, and the influences of that film are so obvious it’s hard to get past it. Then again, Theo James has so little personality and charisma, he’s almost constantly being overshadowed by his robotic companions. So yeah, not recommended, and I’m a little shocked this was accepted into this year’s cancelled SXSW. Honestly, I couldn’t even get through it.

Also premiering in the Kino Marquee is Nicholas Leytner’s Austrian drama The Tobacconist (Menemsha Films), starring Bruno Ganz (Downfall) as Sigmund Freud and based on the bestselling novel by Robert Seethaler, which I haven’t read (if that isn’t obvious). It deals with the friendship between a teenager named Franz (Simon Morzé) and Freud during the Nazi occupation of Vienna, when the former travels there to work as an apprentice at a tobacco shop where Freud is a regular customer. When Franz falls in love with a music hall dancer, he turns to Freud for advice.

Apparently “showing only in theaters” this Friday is Michael W. Bachochin’s sci-fi/”psychodrama” Parallax (The Primal Group) starring Naomi Prentice as a young artist who is haunted by nightmares and who wakes up to a life she doesn’t recognize. At this point, I might as well just post the actual synopsis: “As she begins to uncover the truths of the life that she's found herself in, the gravity of her failing reality weighs heavily on her psychological identity and the reliability of her sanity is called into question.”

Let’s get to some docs, and you can probably safely assume that Harry Mavromichalis’ Olympia(Abramorama) is about Oscar-winning actress Olympia Dukakis, because it is. Featuring interviews with Whoopi Goldberg, Laura Linney, Diane Ladd and more, that covers the Greece-born actress as she opens up about her struggles with depression, suicide and drug addiction, as well as stories from some of the actors she’s shared the stage and screen with over the years.

The next doc is about the Chinese artist who probably has had more docs made about him than…well, anyone else? Ai Wei Wei: Yours Truly (First Run Features), directed by Cheryl Haines and Gina Leibrecht, covers how the artist developed his 2014 exhibition, @Large: Ai Weiwei on Alcatraz, inspired by his 2011 detention by Chinese authorities (which has generally inspired all his recent work?) Hey, if you’re a fan of his artwork, then you’ll probably want to see this doc, too.

One doc that I really wanted to see was Brett Harvey’s Inmate #1: The Rise of Danny Trejo (Universal), which had a virtual world premiere and is now on ITunes and other VOD, but my attempts to get a screener was met with absolute silence. The film documents the amazing life and career of the 71-year-old character actor and action hero who went from a life of drugs and doing hard time in prison to becoming an easily recognized and respected star, mainly thanks to Robert Rodriguez. I would like to see this movie, and maybe someday I will.

Film Forum’s Virtual Cinema will be adding Jacques Becker’s 1947 film, Antoine and Antoinette, this Friday, as well as the 1927 filming of the original Broadway play, Chicago, long before it was turned into a musical, although it does have Ginger Rogers playing Roxie Hart. Reinhold Schünzel’s original 1933 film Victor and Victoria (which was later remade by Blake Edwards for wife Julie Andrews) also joins the fairly hefty list of repertory films available, being shown as part of the “Pioneers of Queer Cinema” series.

Other movies I just wasn’t able to get to this week include Tito (Factory 25), I, Pastafari (Gravitas Ventures), The Medicine (1091), Never Too Late (Blue Fox Entertainment), Deany Bean is Dead (Global Digital Releasing) and Bloody Nose, Empty Pockets (Utopia).

Also beginning on Apple TV+ this Friday is the new JJ Abrams series, Little Voice, starring Brittany O’Grady as Bess King, a 20-something singer trying to find her voice in the rat race that is New York City. I haven’t had a chance to watch this yet but apparently, Abrams got Sara Bareilles from Broadway’s Waitress to write some of the tunes, so it should be decent.

Next week, more movies—some in theaters, some not in theaters! But most of them watchable from home in case you don’t drive or your city is exploding with the COVID after the rest of us have been in quarantine for months. Thanks bunches.

By the way, if you read this week’s column and have bothered to read this far down, feel free to drop me some thoughts at Edward dot Douglas at Gmail dot Com or drop me a note or tweet on Twitter. I love hearing from readers … honest!

[tortuga-aak]

I grew up without a TV — here's why I deprive my kids of all screens

Sean Gallup/Getty Images

It is much more difficult for parents to implement a screen-free upbringing for their children now than it was a couple decades ago.

Parents who implement certain parenting methods can become quite sanctimonious.

While parents actively try to keep their children from becoming addicted to tech, it is almost impossible at times and unrealistic.

Choosing what's best for your child does not speak for all children.

  I grew up without a TV at a time when it was still possible for parents to raise kids screen-free without acting like insufferable prigs about it. Although Jerry Mander published his sweeping anti-TV polemic Four Arguments For the Elimination of Television the same year I was born, my parents don't remember their decision to raise us without TV as being much of a political one.

"As anyone can see, time is a zero-sum game," my mom wrote me when I asked her how she and my dad decided not to get a set. "When one is watching, one is not reading, listening to music, having meaningful conversations, etc." They declined my aunt's offer of a TV as a wedding present and asked her for a sewing machine instead. When they started having kids five years later, they saw no need to add TV to the household.

It worked. We read, spent time outside, and sat for hours at the dinner table (especially as we got older and more patient). My parents' friends and family generally believed in sending kids outside to play, so the no-TV decision didn't stand out much in their circle.

We drove to Colorado and back twice in the family Oldsmobile with no DVD players or tablets. Some kids at school made fun of us ("Are you Amish?"), and I wished I knew popular shows like Unsolved Mysteries so I'd have an easier time making conversation with people in my class, but I was generally happy to binge The Babysitters' Club instead. (Just because a kid reads doesn't mean she'll read quality!)

So I'm convinced, from personal experience, that a happy screen-free childhood is possible. Now, my husband and I want to keep our 10-month-old daughter screen-free. This is a task that's going to be much harder for us than it was for my parents.

Sure, there's the question of practicality: Screens are in everyone's pockets now. And the advent of the internet means there's a whole universe of tempting content, far more alluring than Muppet Babies, that simply didn't exist when I was a kid. But it's also a personal challenge, because the potential for parental self-righteousness has ballooned in the 40 years between my birth and my daughter's. I don't want screen-free parenting to turn me into a monster.

The screen-free parenting Facebook groups I follow are full of advice, encouragement, and nightmarish levels of smug self-congratulation. Just let an unsuspecting newbie suggest that going screen-free might present difficulties! He'll instantly be bombarded with stories of just how perfect other screen-free kids are.

"Yesterday at the park," one mom posted in response to a question about whether screen-free kids could feel socially isolated, "my son was asked what his favorite show was by a kid we didn't know. He simply said 'I don't watch anything. Want to be a St. Bernard with me?'"

Aww, so wholesome, unlike kids who watch TV and never imagine anything! The children of the people in these groups are calm, helpful, social, and polite: total paragons of virtue. Their moms seem happy to spend endless hours dreaming up leaf-collection projects and filling sensory tables with new kinds of sand. In another group, one person posted a picture of her two kids parked in front of a fish tank, watching the fish eat their food. "Before school 'screen time,' " the caption read.

Fiona Goodall / Stringer / Getty Images

And while I find myself imagining the Jennifer Lawrence OK gif when I read these absurd posts from these absurd parents, I can absolutely see myself climbing aboard the same high horses they're riding. My sanctimoniousness surfaces when I start to follow a system that I delight in that makes me feel as though I've cracked the code. It's happened to me in the past with Anusara yoga and American studies. This whole-hearted love of a system can be dangerous, because when I've found the right way to do something, it's easy to think everyone else should do it the same way as me.

And going screen-free feels so right for our vision for J's life! We want her to go outside a lot. We want her to play independently. We want her to learn from watching us do things around the house (this is the Waldorf idea of daily life as the child's "curriculum"). We want her to sleep well. We want her to be excited by life, and to feel flow, which is difficult when you're overwhelmed by the kinds of choices and inputs screens offer. We want her to enjoy being around other people—watching their faces, hearing their voices. Eventually, we want her to like to read. All of these things seem like they'll happen more often if screens aren't even a possibility.

And, if I'm being honest, I don't want to fight with her over the iPad. What is it about kids begging for screen time that is so grating to my ears? They sound out of control, driven by primeval desires. Adults are better at hiding or justifying their addictions to the internet; kids shamelessly panhandling for screen time remind me just how compulsive the human-screen interface can become. I know the way I feel when I get off the internet after a good run on Twitter or am pulled away from Netflix mid-Riverdale binge. If I were a kid I'd be crying for the iPad, too.

And when I hear other kids begging to watch a show, how will I be able to avoid giving their parents the side-eye? I remember how it feels to have sanctimony directed my way. I'm not an attachment parent; I give J formula, and did a modified form of sleep training.

During early parenthood, when we were making decisions around those issues, I would sink into the internet for hours looking for advice, emerging in a panic because there was no way I could do what everyone on a random BabyCenter comment thread was insisting was the "only" way to raise a baby. The last thing I want is to be responsible for panicking someone else that way.

I must also remember that because of the circumstances of our lives, remaining screen-free when J is around is much easier for us than it might be for those other people whose choices I'll be judging. When she was very small, and I was on maternity leave, she seemed to spend most of her waking hours feeding, and I had a lot of trouble not looking at my phone around her. (My god, the boredom of those sweet early days.) Now that she's bright and curious, I don't dare. But I also don't find the loss of screens too difficult to bear.

My husband and I both work full-time, and get plenty of contact with the internet during the day. J is an only child, and will remain one, so there is no older sibling to muddy the issue of what's allowed, or younger one who needs a lot of parent-diverting care.

We live in a small town where commuting is minimal, so there are no long car or subway rides that would be so much easier with a DVD player. We have J in a preschool run by a caregiver who is even more of a screen-free partisan than we are. And in truth, there are only a few hours per weekday in which we must eliminate screens from our own lives to keep J away from them.

She goes to bed at 7 every night (something else I believe in strongly … sanctimoniously, you might say); after she's down, we can watch all the Cavs games we want. On the weekends, it feels good to bend our lives away from the virtual world and toward the real one. I sneak a few hours of internet during her naps, and come back ready to take her to the farmer's market or into the woods, where she can mess around with pinecones and get all that good pine sap on her hands. (Sensory table curation, here I come.)

But here's the biggest caveat of all: She's only 10 months old. When she no longer naps, how will we get downtime? What will I do when she's begging to see a movie her friends at school are talking about? (I'll probably take her because I don't totally hate fun.) Will we buy her a Kindle, or install new bookcases to handle the influx of trashy kids' series fiction, like my parents did? Will I picket her school when her first-grade class watches a movie instead of going out to recess on a rainy day?

Parents plan; God laughs.

NOW WATCH: 6 airline industry secrets that will help you fly like a pro

from Feedburner http://ift.tt/2iEWhLM

[atrayo]

Jewels of Truth Statements and Favorite Quotes of the Month

Hello All, Some of you will be scratching their heads saying that I've done this segment already for this month of October? Well yes, you're right however this repeat segment has two motivations behind it currently. First, it is a makeup post for missing this favorite segment of mine for the past two months of August and September. That was the time I was baptized by fire as a newly minted full blown caregiver for my mother having Parkinson Dementia. The second reason is moreso do to as a Leap of Faith as guided by my Angels and God himself. Now I may have lost some of you when stating I channel God as well. For many years I presumed that was a feat for a select historical few only. I guess not, gladly. For many years I had assumed by my decade's long channeling of the Angels that Moses the Great Patriarch when speaking to the Burning Bush. Was actually talking to his Guardian Angel instead versus God Almighty, not the case. In our contemporary times when author "Neale Donald Walsch" in his "Conversations with God" series of books states he talks and does automatic writing with God. I again said to myself he must be confused he's probably channeling his Guardian Angels. Chalk that error on my part to my innocence in these ancient metaphysical soulful practices. For the past year, I have been experimenting with precautions in the Holy Heavenly Light by channeling the Ascended Masters of several global faith traditions. Making sure I'm safe and graced in faith when doing so. This is around the time guess who showed up out of the blue and I started to channel telepathically and now in clairvoyant automatic writing the Big Cheese a.k.a. the Creator. This must be par for the course and not an obscure mediumship gift of those in a righteous faith tradition. Please bear with me since I do not take this lightly or flippant so this will be a longer Introduction preamble message than I'm used to in practice. The Leap in Faith again is to share these most recent "Jewels of Truth" statements I've channeled from God. The topics are of Divine Inheritance, Morpheus Principle, and on Abrahamic Mysticism. I'm very skittish in sharing that last topic of Abrahamic Mysticism expecting a firestorm to erupt since it involves the Arch Angel Azazel. Although it is in the context that there wasn't ever a Battle or Rebellion in Heaven itself a place of celestial perfection. The Morpheus Principle channeled statement almost gets overshadowed by what I've just stated above. However, it basically gets into what humanity deems as authored fiction from elsewhere for our entertainment purposes. Has a metaphysical meaning behind it as the Soul Recall Memory Dynamic in play. Reincarnated souls even as fantasy to ourselves are remembering a saga from elsewhere metaphysically. In another time and place of the Universe and certainly a Parallel Earth Reality.

Lastly, on the topic of Divine Inheritance where many of us in humanity assume it only happens in our afterlife especially in religious circles. Well, God points out that was an innocent mistake made at best. Our raw talents and our greatest unconditional loves in life are part of the holy package as the Will of God in our individual lives. Including those Children of God that have been blessed with the psychic-mediumship pool of holy graces often taking a lifetime to explore fully. What religions are fearing being it Christians and Muslims as haram has divorced themselves from their Heavenly Gifts as their combined Divine Inheritance. Nonetheless, as always even in this case if you vehemently disagree with these statements. Please consider it as expanding your inventory of metaphysical possibilities in the eternity of now and the infinity of here we all occupy together. At the good righteous pleasure of God Almighty. Peace to all. Amen. Divine Inheritance:

2549) With every age of humanity there comes a realization of pre-destined divine inheritance from God. In America, it has been the version of the Shining City on a Hill of Washington D.C. as its seat of power through the exceptionalism doctrine. The British Empire has had its global Common Wealth as Imperial territorial expansionistic glory shaping the great roots of our modernity.  As had once the mightiest Navy centuries ago by the Spanish Armada laying claim to the world for the Monarchy. Nationalism is often cited as a Blessing from God himself on societies of various scales of value. This is not to say these do not have some truth to them in such assertions. However, like all good things that are abused as power by nation-states throughout history. They dwindle and are withdrawn by God for having served their Grand and Great Mysterious Purpose. All people, creatures, and entire swaths of eco-systems as the plants and minerals as Mother Nature herself is also a daughter of God. All part of the celestial family in Heaven of the Children of God plural resting comfortably beyond the ego-centric egos of humanity. We all collectively receive the Instantaneous Glory of God as an inexhaustible premium known as Grace. Christians often call it as their Divine Inheritance of God. Although they deem it akin as a delayed gratification upon their earthly demise upon entering the paradise of the afterlife. They like countless others across eternity have misconstrued the Glory of God once more often very innocently. Ones glorious gifts in life as talents and great nearly magical loves with purity in the heart. Is God's purpose in your collective lives importantly as directly the micro version of his Will of God in you. All magic is otherwise known as divinity is the Essence of God supremely realized is also a gift to all meta-life forms inherently so in sublime truth. Moreover, this divinity in action known as magic can also equally be experienced as multi-disciplinary specializations of grace developed metaphysically as soulful muscles. Known simply as everyone's deeply entrenched Omnipresence and Omnipotent nature of God in you. As your special particular selection of unique angelic properties for this lifetime as your psychic-mediumship abilities.

To fear the Omnipresence of God in the soulful gifts of another spiritual being. Is to Immediately discount the blessed sacred presence of God in you equally like an echo boomerang effect. Do not cheat yourselves of God's Glory in your combined spirits and souls in the Oneness of and by the Creator. Only by paying lip service to God and by your next set of breath's and actions deny the heavenly truth reborn in you and all other macro lifeforms upon Creation. Amen.  ---Ivan Pozo-Illas / Atrayo. Morpheus Principle: 2550) Every parallel dimensional reality from our native point of origin is only slivers away from this our united continuum with God Almighty. To this, we say collectively as God and his Angelic Image and Likeness upon Paradise is that all fiction of our Earth. Is a Soul Recall Memory Dynamic in exquisite motion. Being neatly couched like a bowl from a sisterly parallel universal Earth reality elsewhere upon Infinity. All macro human fiction to date upon the world and of our shared sentient species in this cosmos is such a marvelous "Morpheus Principle" at play. All is a soul recall dynamic to one infinite relative degree to another upon Creations. For this totality by means of reincarnation as one out of countless modus operandi metaphysically. Such is the Omnipresence of God(dess) existing Supremely everywhere constantly at once. All the endless sagas and stories of the Creator are regurgitated endlessly as wishes to remember and not to forget what has been, is, and will be again. This is the Everlasting Life of God lived through his Infinite children as his Omnipresence reborn beautifully and tragically by errors committed through free will. All of it retold as fiction by means of the selective history of the victors, religious pruned theologies globally, and tall tales. The Absolute Truth and Absolute Fantasy is a living paradox. Both of which rely upon objective facts and subjective elements to remain neatly credible conveying their memory. 

Somewhere and somehow the Great Mystery as God Inspires authors to remember the Saga of outstretched realities from our native realm through fiction. Be it as potential futures, probable presents, and forgotten distant pasts all have a basis upon God for the Creator stands apart from puny facts forever! We are collectively the stewards and the heirs to these memories of Infinity remembered in our totality by means of fiction and truths for all times. No matter the technological medium at hand that may be used to be conveyed be it the ancient cuneiform tablets well past into movies and digitized realities to come. The Testament has been laid soundly down by the Will of God inspiring co-creators the world and universe over for an eternity upon Creation. The truth of Accounts by the Absolute Love of us all is anointed as it has been encoded upon our reincarnated souls. We only remember through our souls with God and his scribes as the authors and co-authors of endless generations to come. All share in the Glory of God beautifully and deeply for they have had reincarnations in the ancient past, present era, and impossible futures. Happening right here and now metaphysically in all unified parallel realities. This is God's way of saying "I Love You" with totality as itself beyond judging outcomes in all of his playground through all Creations plural. Amen.  ---Ivan Pozo-Illas / Atrayo. Abrahamic Mysticism:

2538) Every once in a while a soul realizes that pre-existing religious theologies have errors in it. To one form of a mischaracterization to another let alone mistranslations due to differences of a language. Not to pick apart sacred faiths in the world as wholly evolved methodologies of worshipping the divine dearly. One can easily conclude humanity is error-prone by design as a mere observation. Even when it comes to sacred religious doctrines of theologies the world over. We say this from the eons of misinformation that is taught and retaught when fusion between two or more spiritual traditions collide over the centuries. There is much sampling and in some ways, it is enchanted and encouraged in the guise of cross-pollination of cultures upon the Earth. However, errors that are costly as fallacies are introduced regularly by re-edits. Whether by Institutional favoritism by power brokers as hubs of religiosity seeking to dominate worshipping versus letting them be by God's good graces alone. The perfection of the Holy Father God is without reproach and unequal even by all the Angelic Choirs combined. Upon All Creations as the trinity of the afterlife of Heaven, Limbo, and Hell Itself. For example in the Abrahamic faiths theologically speaking to have a battle in Heaven an Absolute realm of pure perfection is ludicrous! A battle fought in heaven would denote a corruption or clash of Angelic souls in the perfect realm of Absolute Peace where God resides deeply as Heaven Itself. That is purely human approximations as inadequate and plainly oxymoronic in the holy pure divine nature of God's Being. A projection from known human norms of antiquity where battles were fought in ancient bygone kingdoms. This may be true for the Earth itself with primitive creatures however metaphysically it doesn't jive or make sense in Paradise. For the Singular Spirit of God, a battle in heaven is an untruth at best or a salacious morality tale gone horribly wrong adopted as theology long gone for the Abrahamic faith traditions. What God gives in his Almighty Supreme Perfection is Never Withdrawn or Diluted into bastardizations! When God gives it is Absolutely Perfect and Pure multi-dimensionally without unparalleled equality! No Angels have ever been cast out of heaven a perfect reality metaphysically, to begin with in all paramount holy truth. For Azazel and his loyal guardian flock remain in one of the many plateaux's of the endless heavens permanently perched as adjudicators of the eternal Holy Light of God by free will and choice of selected duties.

All Arch Angels are Enlightened Forever by the Blessed Will of God by decree of the Creator. That can never be stripped away nor trampled underfoot by any misdeed as God gives perfectly without ever making mistakes! For as God is Absolute Love the Creator is always also Absolute Forgiveness constantly forever. Arch Angel Azazel never sinned or committed a crime against God for God forgives absolutely in his Greatness alone and without end. That leaves the question of Lucifers role in the bowels of hell as a governor devil chieftain. As each person in the world is capable of doing good, being neutral, and committing evil. The originator of all totalities of God is no different albeit he does so with Pure Enlightenment reconciled in every which way possible and impossible. As God is the Alpha of all our souls and all things without end it goes without saying that God is the Original Creator, Sustainer, and Destroyer of all Creations and Realities therein as the Omega. All Arch Angels constantly observe these tenets by means of enlightened edicts reconciled with all pure good, pure neutrality, and pure evil as One phenomenon known simply as God's Essence. What this means is that all angels including the beloved Arch Angels such as esteemed Ariel have total dominion of all metaphysical Creations including the entirety of the afterlife. (ie Heaven, Limbo, and Hell) Every Angel sourced from the simplest in duties and to the mightiest Arch Angels have numerous privileges as titles and honorary functional roles to act upon. Which means the Arch Angels, not unlike the Seraphim and the Principalities and Powers as angelic choirs have triple personifications of the aforementioned totality of God(dess). Meaning they the angels all have triple duty roles in heaven, limbo, and hell as keepers of God's Pure Essence be it as correctional officers here on Earth. The Abrahamic faiths have recognized Azazel as both Arch Angel and his alter ego as Lucifer the devil. Much like Arch Angel Ariel is a keeper of all beasts and creatures as Holy Mother Nature of the earth and of the underworld simultaneously. This isn't an isolated event and act of God for all Arch Angels in Heaven as Enlightened Divine minor gods and goddesses have triple duty roles in Limbo and Hell as well. Performing by voluntary free will at the behest of the sincere Will of God as adjudicators of God's Great Mystery.

Every soul is equally capable to have dispositions by their thoughts, intents, words, and actions whether based on pure truth or false assertions. As God decreed Azazel is Forgiven Absolutely and Loved Equally as you and I are as the Infinite Children of God. Amen.  ---Ivan Pozo-Illas / Atrayo. ==================================== Peace, like most beautiful things, begins small. ---Common Prayer: A Liturgy for Ordinary Radicals. Never be so focused on what you're looking for that you overlook the thing you actually find. ---Ann Patchett. What you seek is seeking you. ---Rumi. For wisdom will come into your heart, and knowledge will be pleasant to your soul. ---Proverbs 2:10 When we do the best we can, we never know what miracle is wrought in our life, or in the life of another. ---Helen Keller. We know truth not only by reason, but also by the heart.  ---Blaise Pascal. The soul of the soul of the universe is Love. ---Rumi. Ivan "Atrayo" Pozo-Illas, has devoted 22 years of his life to the pursuit of clairvoyant automatic writing channeling the Angelic host. Ivan is the author of the spiritual wisdom series of "Jewels of Truth" consisting of 3 volumes published to date. He also channels inspired conceptual designs that are multifaceted for the next society to come that are solutions based as a form of dharmic service. Numerous examples of his work are available at "Atrayo's Oracle" blog site of 12 years plus online. Your welcome to visit his website "Jewelsoftruth.us" for further information or to contact Atrayo directly.

[tortuga-aak]

I deprive my kids of all screens, but I try not to be smug about it

Sean Gallup/Getty Images

It is much more difficult for parents to implement a screen-free upbringing for their children now than it was a couple decades ago.

Parents who implement certain parenting methods can become quite sanctimonious.

While parents actively try to keep their children from becoming addicted to tech, it is almost impossible at times and unrealistic.

Choosing what's best for your child does not speak for all children.

  I grew up without a TV at a time when it was still possible for parents to raise kids screen-free without acting like insufferable prigs about it. Although Jerry Mander published his sweeping anti-TV polemic Four Arguments For the Elimination of Television the same year I was born, my parents don't remember their decision to raise us without TV as being much of a political one.

"As anyone can see, time is a zero-sum game," my mom wrote me when I asked her how she and my dad decided not to get a set. "When one is watching, one is not reading, listening to music, having meaningful conversations, etc." They declined my aunt's offer of a TV as a wedding present and asked her for a sewing machine instead. When they started having kids five years later, they saw no need to add TV to the household.

It worked. We read, spent time outside, and sat for hours at the dinner table (especially as we got older and more patient). My parents' friends and family generally believed in sending kids outside to play, so the no-TV decision didn't stand out much in their circle.

We drove to Colorado and back twice in the family Oldsmobile with no DVD players or tablets. Some kids at school made fun of us ("Are you Amish?"), and I wished I knew popular shows like Unsolved Mysteries so I'd have an easier time making conversation with people in my class, but I was generally happy to binge The Babysitters' Club instead. (Just because a kid reads doesn't mean she'll read quality!)

So I'm convinced, from personal experience, that a happy screen-free childhood is possible. Now, my husband and I want to keep our 10-month-old daughter screen-free. This is a task that's going to be much harder for us than it was for my parents.

Sure, there's the question of practicality: Screens are in everyone's pockets now. And the advent of the internet means there's a whole universe of tempting content, far more alluring than Muppet Babies, that simply didn't exist when I was a kid. But it's also a personal challenge, because the potential for parental self-righteousness has ballooned in the 40 years between my birth and my daughter's. I don't want screen-free parenting to turn me into a monster.

The screen-free parenting Facebook groups I follow are full of advice, encouragement, and nightmarish levels of smug self-congratulation. Just let an unsuspecting newbie suggest that going screen-free might present difficulties! He'll instantly be bombarded with stories of just how perfect other screen-free kids are.

"Yesterday at the park," one mom posted in response to a question about whether screen-free kids could feel socially isolated, "my son was asked what his favorite show was by a kid we didn't know. He simply said 'I don't watch anything. Want to be a St. Bernard with me?'"

Aww, so wholesome, unlike kids who watch TV and never imagine anything! The children of the people in these groups are calm, helpful, social, and polite: total paragons of virtue. Their moms seem happy to spend endless hours dreaming up leaf-collection projects and filling sensory tables with new kinds of sand. In another group, one person posted a picture of her two kids parked in front of a fish tank, watching the fish eat their food. "Before school 'screen time,' " the caption read.

Fiona Goodall / Stringer / Getty Images

And while I find myself imagining the Jennifer Lawrence OK gif when I read these absurd posts from these absurd parents, I can absolutely see myself climbing aboard the same high horses they're riding. My sanctimoniousness surfaces when I start to follow a system that I delight in that makes me feel as though I've cracked the code. It's happened to me in the past with Anusara yoga and American studies. This whole-hearted love of a system can be dangerous, because when I've found the right way to do something, it's easy to think everyone else should do it the same way as me.

And going screen-free feels so right for our vision for J's life! We want her to go outside a lot. We want her to play independently. We want her to learn from watching us do things around the house (this is the Waldorf idea of daily life as the child's "curriculum"). We want her to sleep well. We want her to be excited by life, and to feel flow, which is difficult when you're overwhelmed by the kinds of choices and inputs screens offer. We want her to enjoy being around other people—watching their faces, hearing their voices. Eventually, we want her to like to read. All of these things seem like they'll happen more often if screens aren't even a possibility.

And, if I'm being honest, I don't want to fight with her over the iPad. What is it about kids begging for screen time that is so grating to my ears? They sound out of control, driven by primeval desires. Adults are better at hiding or justifying their addictions to the internet; kids shamelessly panhandling for screen time remind me just how compulsive the human-screen interface can become. I know the way I feel when I get off the internet after a good run on Twitter or am pulled away from Netflix mid-Riverdale binge. If I were a kid I'd be crying for the iPad, too.

And when I hear other kids begging to watch a show, how will I be able to avoid giving their parents the side-eye? I remember how it feels to have sanctimony directed my way. I'm not an attachment parent; I give J formula, and did a modified form of sleep training.

During early parenthood, when we were making decisions around those issues, I would sink into the internet for hours looking for advice, emerging in a panic because there was no way I could do what everyone on a random BabyCenter comment thread was insisting was the "only" way to raise a baby. The last thing I want is to be responsible for panicking someone else that way.

I must also remember that because of the circumstances of our lives, remaining screen-free when J is around is much easier for us than it might be for those other people whose choices I'll be judging. When she was very small, and I was on maternity leave, she seemed to spend most of her waking hours feeding, and I had a lot of trouble not looking at my phone around her. (My god, the boredom of those sweet early days.) Now that she's bright and curious, I don't dare. But I also don't find the loss of screens too difficult to bear.

My husband and I both work full-time, and get plenty of contact with the internet during the day. J is an only child, and will remain one, so there is no older sibling to muddy the issue of what's allowed, or younger one who needs a lot of parent-diverting care.

We live in a small town where commuting is minimal, so there are no long car or subway rides that would be so much easier with a DVD player. We have J in a preschool run by a caregiver who is even more of a screen-free partisan than we are. And in truth, there are only a few hours per weekday in which we must eliminate screens from our own lives to keep J away from them.

She goes to bed at 7 every night (something else I believe in strongly … sanctimoniously, you might say); after she's down, we can watch all the Cavs games we want. On the weekends, it feels good to bend our lives away from the virtual world and toward the real one. I sneak a few hours of internet during her naps, and come back ready to take her to the farmer's market or into the woods, where she can mess around with pinecones and get all that good pine sap on her hands. (Sensory table curation, here I come.)

But here's the biggest caveat of all: She's only 10 months old. When she no longer naps, how will we get downtime? What will I do when she's begging to see a movie her friends at school are talking about? (I'll probably take her because I don't totally hate fun.) Will we buy her a Kindle, or install new bookcases to handle the influx of trashy kids' series fiction, like my parents did? Will I picket her school when her first-grade class watches a movie instead of going out to recess on a rainy day?

Parents plan; God laughs.

NOW WATCH: This animation shows how terrifyingly powerful nuclear weapons have become

from Feedburner http://ift.tt/2iEWhLM