#i might rant about/post a review of it later

[makiitabaki]

Finally answering this:

Thank you, @saintjustitude for asking me to rant—I adore doing just that :]

(First of all, thank you to everyone for waiting. I know I took a lot of time to write this, but I had only around an hour free every day, and I usually spent it searching for sources. My knowledge is limited; the play isn't available. I rely on memoirs, interviews, and reviews. 

My inbox is always open, and if anyone has any Wojtek questions, I'd be absolutely delighted to answer them. And I mean it. It can be anything. 

 Every quote was translated by me. All my sources are listed.

Unfortunately a part of it wasn't saved, and I don't have access to some info anymore but this post will probably serve as the beginning of a longer thread.)

And now: “Sprawa Dantona” (1975).

1. How did it all come to be? Why was ‘The Danton Case’ and not any other play?

When I say ‘Danton’ directed by Wajda, most probably think of the 1983 version, a political metaphor: Comsal representing the Polish government, Dantonist representing Solidarity. Was it like that originally? Was Wajda just calling for a fight with the government, transforming Przybyszewska's work to fit his own narrative?

In short: No! (At least if we're referring to the 1975 version, the film is completely another story; I'll gladly make another post about it.).

Zygmunt Hübner (I have mentioned him already in this post) chose Wajda to direct the play even though the latter was a relatively young director; something was telling Hübner that giving the play to him would be absolutely necessary. Pszoniak later referred to that event as Wajda being cast in it as much as he himself was.

The play was simply a way to introduce the artistic team Hübner created. There was none of some “noble patriotism’ or 'anti communism'. (None of what Wajda described as the purpose of the later film.)

Why was that play in particular chosen? That is unknown.

“The idea [of exhibiting that play] came from the fact that Hübner was looking for a play (…) that would present his artistic team as a whole, which he assembled with great imagination and intuition.”

At first, Pszoniak laughed into Hübner's face when offered the role. He thought it fine, intruiging, but the character of Robespierre was so foreign to him that he couldn't give anything from his own person or his own experiences to his Maximilien.

He asked for the role of Danton; that role seemed to fit him way better with "his [Danton's] sensuality, his dynamic physiognomy, and his balls."

Wajda and Hübner were quite insistent and more or less forced Pszoniak into the role.

“Hübner and Wajda were so stubborn that they did not take my objection into account. Nothing there [in the role] suited me; there was no starting point for the role. I had no right to play it. But they convinced me for so long that the whole situation with ‘The Danton Case’ became a dead end.”

The transformation from simply a good play to something entirely political in Wajda's eyes was very slow but steady. On that a little later.

2. Pszoniak wasn't ready to play Robespierre? How did he prepare for the role then?

It's very important to note that it was not bad will that made Pszoniak initially refuse the role, but the theater typecast he was put into and which he almost got used to. All of his power and stage presence were connected to his own physicality, to this sort of mobility and expression that he had to (presumably at Wajda's request) abandon while playing Robespierre.

Wojtekspierre getting his hair cut from a man with surprisingly modern glasses

Whether he was in a tragedy or comedy, it was the unique liveliness that made him so different. Suddenly he was offered the role of Robespierre, a man he only knew from unfavorable history books, portrayed a certain way by Przybyszewska, and he's made to stand before the expanse of that character's personality in a try to make him someone physical.

While it might seem quite shocking, when preparing for the role, Pszoniak didn't even read any Robespierre biography. Why? According to him:

“I didn’t think at all about a historical figure, and besides, you can’t play any historical figure. I put aside the books on the French Revolution. I read them much later, when, years later, in Paris. (…) I didn't want to portray a historical figure, so I didn't judge or evaluate him. I simply tried to get closer to him, to understand him as a person. Przybyszewska herself made it easier for me. The text of the play clearly indicated that she was fascinated by him. (...) Przybyszewska constructed this character in an unusual, enigmatic way. I clung to this fascination, it was a reason for treating Robespierre with empathy. This is a necessary condition for creating a character, without empathy you will never be able to get closer to the man you are to become on stage. Wandering through the labyrinth of his emotions, motives for action, opinions he expresses, I became so strongly attached to him, he took over me so much, that as a result I became Robespierre-Pszoniak.”

Pszoniak admitted he didn't want to play a politician [but, of course, as we all know, he was later forced to in ‘Danton’ (1983)].

The preparations took time and patience (especially from his wife - Barbara). Pszoniak tends to describe it as a painful process. Robespierre's physical expression was compared to being bound tightly by his own flesh, almost imprisoned by it, but freed by his mind. Pszoniak realized that all of the power in portraying Robespierre could only be gained from a deeper reflection. How to show a mind on stage?

That Pszoniak didn't know, and so he made the decision to show Robespierre's determination and faith instead of simply a calculated brain. To show a path, an objective. That's why the last scene was so hard to play (conversation between Robespierre and Saint-Just after Danton's death); he even asked Wajda for a white cloth as a makeshift shroud. To Pszoniak, that scene meant the symbolic death of his character. Robespierre (described by Pszoniak as a “very intelligent man") feels that inevitable peril awaits in the near future. The actor often described a feeling of mourning something or someone after the performance.

The challenge of creating the role, in the words of Wojciech Pszoniak:

“I started to control all my reflexes morning till night; from waking up to falling asleep, I was destroying myself. In everyday life, even the smallest activity, I slowed down; I was reducing and cleaning up [every one of] my habits. Torment, the absolute torment of controlling yourself, of managing yourself. Zero spontaneity, the phone rings, my first reaction—run to answer it—I stop myself calmly, in control of every slowed-down gesture. I imitated Zygmunt Hübner's focused gait; I noticed how he placed his feet. And I started walking like that myself. That's how I set a different, more controlled way of moving. After that, I turned to gestures, head movements, the way of getting up, and gesticulation. I felt that I was different. Acquaintances and friends both asked where this change came from. I suppressed the dynamic, extraverted myself.”

And

“I was pushing the boundaries of supervision [over myself], checking how I would behave after drinking a larger amount of vodka. One day I went out with Basia [wife] and friends (...) After a few bottles, at four in the morning, they were amused, cheered up, asking if I was sick because I was behaving like a machine. After three weeks of suffering, I reached ground zero. This happened during the rehearsals. A conversation about Robespierre and Danton. I joined the discussion, exclaiming, 'I disagree!’ - and suddenly I saw that my hand was no longer my hand, that it was not the hand of that Pszoniak that I am, but that it was already a hand—the beginning of someone else.”

3. What of Danton?

Here the problem with the play began. The man cast as Danton, Bronisław Pawlik, was just... terrible.

He was a good actor in general, definitely, but in short (explanation for the anglophones), it was like casting Danny DeVito as Danton.

He was short of stature, weak of voice, much older than Pszoniak, and simply unfit for the role.

He didn't have a stage presence; his voice was silenced by the other people on stage, and Pszoniak kept acting as if there was some great, dangerous opponent when there wasn't—the audience seemed to notice it.

It all added to a kind of feeling of resentment after preparing so long for the role of Robespierre.

Danton (Bronisław Pawlik), Camille (Olgierd Łukaszewicz) and Westermann (Franciszek Pieczka) celebrating

Pawlik was more concerned with the position of the props or the costume instead of conversing and shaping their roles. To Pszoniak it was the role of a lifetime, to Pawlik it wasn't.

“The audience was sitting on the stage because the entire theater had been transformed into the Revolutionary Tribunal. Here, a powerful voice and a [kind of] broad gesture were needed... Pawlik's charm disappeared in the feverish crowd. What consequences did this have for the play? Enormous, Danton was deprived of the strength [for both the audience and actors] to believe that he posed a deadly serious threat to the revolution. And this lack bothered me terribly...”

4. How did it become political then?

As I have previously mentioned, it was a slow, steady process. Even Wajda himself didn't think much of the play; it was the audience that began the change. 

As the first example, Pszoniak recalls a scene when Eleonore comes in with tea but not sugar—in the audience at first only a few laughing, but gradually along with the many performances it turned into the whole audience cackling. The play was exhibited just when a time of increasing problems with sugar supplies began in Poland (food stamps for sugar were introduced).

Pszoniak admitted that the cast would often laugh along with the audience. It seemed almost absurd—a tragic play blending with the real world. 

When it comes to Pszoniak himself in that time, the more he played the role, the more it felt like “punching the air.” Instead of having a genuine conflict, he had no support, no reference point in Pawlik as Danton or the audience. For the role to have meaning, to be something, it all had to be a matter of life and death. His co-actor was slipping into comedic grotesque while playing the second main role. 

"The success of the play was huge, but the audience was eager to read the play [only] in the context of political allusions. (…) The audience felt that something was happening [on and off stage], (…) the tension grew."

The audience's reaction seemed to be a direct answer to the Danton shown on stage. Instead of a political opponent, there stood a sad, tired victim of the committee who seems completely and utterly innocent, all his words said with a kind of saddened charm (doesn't that remind you of a certain film Wajda made later?).

5. What of the other actors?

Here is where I have the least information. If anyone has any more sources of information, actor memoirs, etc., feel free to reblog this post with additional info or simply contact me about it so I could make Part 2. :]

The cast.

I have to tell you something shocking... Wajda is capable of giving actual, normal characterization to secondary characters (gasp, thunderstrike, wolf howling).

Or perhaps that was just the actor/Zygmunt Hübner (I guess we'll never know).

The most information I could gather was about Saint-Just (played by the excellent Władysław Kowalski).

Based off the limited amount of reviews I could gather, he was a positive character in general. Described as “a man gifted with exceptional warmth and [someone] unconditionally devoted to his cause” or “full of raw passion."

AND HE GIVES MAXIME FLOWERS IN THIS VERSION AS WELL, EXCEPT IN THIS ONE ROBESPIERRE (KIND OF) SMILES!

I couldn't find much on Eleonore, Louise, or Lucille, though I've searched and searched for a few days. All I could find is that the actresses were excellent—that is, unfortunately, no source of any relevant information. Frankly speaking, since Wajda, in kind words, doesn't excel at writing women, I don't have much faith in their characterization on the director's part.

Camille played Łukaszewicz is usually called a “complicated youth"—that is, of course, an opinion—or “spontaneous in reflexes"—that's a bit better of a description. As you can see, I am limited by the fact the play isn't available, and I must depend on biased or subjective sources.

Worried Camille Desmoulins (Olgierd Łukaszewicz) - I do think this Camille looks quite nice.

6. And did the critics like it? Was it well directed?

In short, it was a very, very liked play by both the critics and the audience. It ran for 5 years; it ended around 1980, when many of the actors simply left Poland.

About critics and reviews written by them: What surprised me immensely is the fact that most available reviews (written before the release of the film ‘Danton’) of the play weren't anti-Robespierre. The play is often described as something of a moral discussion, something for the viewer to assess, a work that doesn't suggest one solution to understand the conflict, or revolution (in other words, a great play).

A thing I've noticed is that along with time, the descriptions of the main characters seem to change. Danton—in earliest reviews described as “absolutely repulsive," then later as a tragic man, someone who adores life. Robespierre—in earliest reviews described as an absolute “marble statue," an idealist, someone pure, then in later reviews as just a fanatic.

 

7. What about Wajda? Did he change the text much? What about the scenography?

I was surprised to learn that Wajda absolutely could make a good, Przybyszewska-accurate play.

 

From all I could find, there is not much I can accuse Wajda of when it comes to ‘The Danton Case’ stage adaptations. It was made very well. What most likely contributed to the later change in people's mentality when met with the play is the fact that the audience was sort of a part of the performance. How? Like this:

“It [the play] takes place on a stage placed in front of the audience; on the actual stage and in the rest of the audience sit in rows of chairs rising upwards. Everything encompassed by the scenography is one theater. This played out brilliantly in the second parts, in the beautifully composed group scenes, where the audience not only looks at the stage but is drawn into it as an extra audience at the hearings of the revolutionary tribunal.”

And

“Wajda made "The Danton Case" as if against himself—against his previous self: he gave up on visual effects, music, and symbolism. He built a spectacle—a spectacle indeed!—raw and beautiful. (…) During the (…) presentation of "The Danton Case," seats for viewers were also installed on the stage, which was fortunately spacious, the audience surrounds the actors, the actors are among the audience, on the balcony, in the passages.”

If Danton or Robespierre were so close to the audience, I think it really did influence the people's opinion of it later on. Pawlik was terrified, jumping like a fish out of water from one audience member to the other, and there was Pszoniak, white and still under his shroud just a few meters away. That did certainly change the performance's reception.

8. Where can I watch this?!

As I have mentioned here: the play isn't available online, but most certainly is somewhere in the archives (confirmed by Pszoniak), when it was supposed to have a TV debut the martial law was introduced, and a few years later everyone seemed to have forgotten about it.

So, erm… Who's raiding the archives with me? (By the way, fragments of the play exist online, but only 10-20 minute excerpts, so if I find the time, I'll try to track them down.).

Sources:

Books:

Aktor. Wojciech Pszoniak w rozmowie z Michałem Komarem, Wydawnictwo Literackie 2009;

Maciej Karpiński, Pszoniak, Wydawnictwa Artystyczne i Filmowe Warszawa 1976;

Małgorzata Terlecka-Reksnis, Pszoniak. Fragmenty, Wydawnictwo Poznańskie 2024

Photos used and play reviews (pardon the rhyme):

http://encyklopediateatru.pl

[sleep-deprived-person]

Oh thank god

Fuck the BOS, though, they don't deserve to be the canon ending to 4.

[rgbsilver]

long rant on why bunny duo WILL happen

If you can’t tell I am going insane (spoiler warning/leak mention)

1: Merchandise/Logos

As I’m sure your aware, WanPre’s logo scheme corresponds to just about every single Cure:

Pink for Komugi/Wonderful, Purple for Iroha/Friendy, Green for Mayu/Lillan, and Blue for Yuki/Nyammy. This leaves us two colors left: orange and yellow, just enough to fulfill another duo.

The colors don’t just stop at the logo, either.

A special shout out to the daily satoru blog for finding this out (I never could have!), but Mayu’s ribbons also similarly match up with this.

Again, two colors are left, an Orange-Yellow color and White, just enough for our bunny duo!

These buttons are also similar: notice the outer colors and the inner colors. The outer colors on the owners correspond with their pets theme color (Mayu is Blue, Iroha is Pink, which fits with Yuki and Komugi) and the opposite for their pets.

By this, we can assume that Daifuku could be a White or Grey Cure, and Satoru could be a Yellow or Orange cure.

This ones already been mentioned, but again, the yellow/white colors!

..And even more buttons. Almost all merch featuring Satoru and Daifuku is either Yellow/Orange, or White/Grey. I’m not going to list everything ever here, but check out the Precure Wiki for more merchandise listings.

2: Daifuku is an anomaly (lol)

If you are unaware, Daifuku is a huge character for merchandising from WanPre. According to the wiki, out of all of the mascots, Daifuku has sold out much, much quicker and is well-received by fans.

Also, in WPC23.. do I have to explain this screen shot? Yuki just straight up calls him not ordinary.

But, she is right. Out of all the animals we’ve seen in the show, besides the Cures and the Kirarin Animals, none have the same proportions Daifuku does. And we know he isn’t a Kirarin animal (lacking the gem), so you can assume he’s a future Cure.

Also, as of WP24, Daifuku (and Satoru) has been to Niko Garden. Not sure if that strengths the point, but yeah.

Daifuku’s movie character: note how again, only the Cures in their animal form have the wristband (Komugi and Yuki.)

And, some card listings that were leaked a while ago:

This one is pretty self-explanatory: there’s 1 more slot for a Cure (or maybe a movie exclusive character) on these cards.

And as of recently, we have seen both of them together on one card in merchandise: it’s possible they both could be a Cure, just on one card.

And last but not least..

There’s 1 more spot for a Cure, or a duo! 3. Other things

Although I do agree the ending doesn’t leave much room for more cures, know that we still might get another ending. Mahou Tsukai and Kira had 3 endings, and Star Twinkle even had 4.

The point is, it’s not too late to call it quits! We have had cures introduced later too: Majesty’s first appearance was in 31. We still have hope. Probably. I’m also probably going insane.

We also can have another ‘Black Pepper’ which personally I think is going to happen— Daifuku will be a white colored Cure and Satoru will be a orange or yellow colored Black Pepper like hero.

Plus, we haven’t had a series without a mid season or additional warrior since Smile, which was 12 years ago. It’s pretty unlikely that’ll happen again.

And it’s not like there is anyone else who can be a mid season besides these two. Unless you count like.. MeyMey but that’s really unlikely lol.

(Against some popular theories: I think it wouldn’t make sense for Niko to be a cure, as not only as she (?) doesn’t fit the orange/white/yellow scheme (based off the Niko leaks), but they aren’t apart of a duo like Mayu and Yuki, Iroha and Wonderful, Satoru and Daifuku..

Plus, in WPC24, notice how Niko’s egg only glows after both Satoru and Daifuku are touching the egg. )

According to some posts I’ve seen on the wiki, ratings for the show actually drop if they don’t have a mid season or additional warrior— having one apparently does better for merchandise sales and reviews in general. Take this with a grain of salt, however. I have no idea if this is true, but I believe it. Plus, with Cure Wing being generally well-received, it’s not impossible that we can have more male cures in the future.

anyways. This is all just a theory. A FILM THEORY.

Thanks for coming to my tedtalk ok bye. In my eyes will Daifuku be a cure? Yes. Will Satoru be a cure? Probably but more likely to be something like black pepper. I’m going insane thanks bye

[euphoricfilter]

For the drabble game could you write fluff with youtuber bf jk ? I am not creative so I couldn’t think of a sentence sorry😭 but maybe he does one of those 24hr streams, I love your writing!

youtuber boyfriend! kook headcanons:

tags/ warnings: none. just a lot of fluff and feelings <3

notes: when i got sent this idea ages ago i got so excited. and i wrote three fics for it but hated them all and then made sure they were to never see the light of day. so my solution is to write some cute boyfriend headcanons instead to make up for it!! simply because i absolutely love this idea and i need to write anything for it to sate the need within me.

notes 2: this got slightly longer than i’d intended LMAO sorry 🕺

𓇻 i feel like jungkook’s channel has a plethora of videos, though he specializes in gaming.

𓇻 its probably one of his biggest passions. though i do see him dabbling in commentary, or even review type videos. maybe he’s a bit of a collector as well and goes on hour long rants about rare items or hauls of what he purchased over the years.

𓇻 i see the both of you probably meeting at one of those second-hand game and film stores.

𓇻 maybe you’re just milling around. more content to browse the movies than the games because you only own an old console (something cute like a nintendo DS) but they don’t really sell the game cards commercially anymore

𓇻 and jungkook loses track of why he was even there in the first place when he spots you. slowly scooting towards the corner you’re in.

𓇻 jungkook might not exactly believe in love at first sight, finds it a little hard to imagine loving someone so soon. but he definitely believes in destiny, even fate. and some small part of his mind had convinced him that surely this was just that.

𓇻 he’d be a bit shy about trying to approach you, mouth opening only for nothing to come out because what was he supposed to say? and maybe he accidentally startles you, offering to pay for the few dvds you had hugged to your chest as a lame sort of compensation

𓇻 he’d be the one to ask for your number, he’d be the first to text. you’d tell him later on it’s because you didn’t want to come off too head-strong. worried you’d scare him off messaging only hours after meeting. and then he’d tell you he had worried about the same thing

𓇻 jungkook wouldn’t straight out tell his audience he’d gotten into a relationship. it’s not that he was embarrassed about you, quite the opposite; he’d love to flaunt you to the world. it’s just he’d worry about the reaction from fans.

𓇻 he’d have a pretty hefty audience, a well established one even. and he wasn’t blind to the mean comments that would occasionally show up beneath videos or social media posts. he, himself, never found much issue in dealing with them, on occasion he’d get a little down but he knew that really he put himself up for this. he chose to show his face online, and with that would come some backlash. however, that didn’t mean he wasn’t worried about you or how shitty comments would effect your well being.

𓇻 definitely the “in a relationship but it’s private” sort of photos would slowly creep their way onto his IG posts. maybe of little date nights— candles on the table with a dinner you’d cooked together (2 glasses, 2 plates and 2 sets of cutlery), or your favorite cake he’d tried to bake himself with the lego flowers he’d spent the previous evening trying to make (because at least you could look at the lego ones forever and they wouldn’t die). or maybe even your hand snuck in a photo or simply your silhouette beneath a sunset.

𓇻 maybe a few of your own collectible items had made their way onto the shelf in his studio. an obvious beanbag in the corner (you’d often sit there and read as he went through emails or scripted videos). valentines cards that he’d never thought to take down, or posters of yours that never exactly fit in the bedroom

𓇻 it would become apparent that he was in a long-term relationship when he’d film a moving video. so much of your stuff mingled with his own, split seconds of the shared rooms he’d add to the video before showing his audience his new office space. the extra shoes and cute little additions to his home; soft cushions on the couch, ceramics you’d begged him to buy. your hoard of plushies that took up half the bed or the stupid amount of skin care products stacked up in the bathroom. all a sure way of telling his fans that he was serious about you, even if they had no idea of your name or face

𓇻 maybe with enough comments he’d make a little announcement at the end of a video.

𓇻 “i know you’ve all probably guessed by now, but i am in fact, in a relationship”

𓇻 and then proceeded to talk about you for 7 minutes because really he wanted everyone to know how much he loved you. and truthfully he never knew when to shut up when it came to you, not when you were what’s on his mind most of the time. he’d tell them how you’d met, and how he had been absolutely enamored by you almost instantly. he’d show everyone the matching bracelets you’d made. grinning as he showed off the receipt he’d kept in his wallet from your first date together at a small cafe in town, mentioning how he kept a baby photo of you in the back of his phone too.

𓇻 the first time you’d show up in a video, he’d plan for the both of you to do some crafts together one afternoon. a hobby you’d been trying over the last couple of weeks, and jungkook liked to indulge you. loved to watch you sprawled across the floor of an evening with glue coating your fingers and way too much glitter imbedded in the carpet.

𓇻 he’d have been worried at first. asking you over and over if it was truly okay for you to be on camera, and after your reassured him with a kiss, he’d settle down slightly. though his anxiety had still clung to him, eyes flitting your way throughout the afternoon

𓇻 he could tell how shy you’d been, and had reassured you that really you didn’t even need to address the audience. he’d do all the silly little things you giggled at him for. and all you had to do was sit there and be pretty for him. you’d been a lot quieter than usual; itching to give him a kiss each time he was just so awfully jungkook. eyes like those of galaxies when he got something right, or the happiest smile on his face when you asked him for help

𓇻 the day he did a 24 hour charity stream would be when his audience sees you the most. milling around the house, making sure your boyfriend was fed and watered. maybe even sitting down and reading the chat when he wanted to shower. or answering questions while perched on his lap. he’d want to smother you with even more love when you’d catch his eye— a silent question if you were doing okay, that you answered all the questions correct. and he’d squeeze your thigh in reassurance, head resting over your shoulder as he listened to your voice, humming to let you know he was still listening

𓇻 you’d startle him at 4am, a little pouty that you’d had to fall asleep alone. dragging a chair from the kitchen to sit on as you watch him play a game you’d never seen before.

𓇻 “go back to bed, baby” he’d coo, “you’ll fall asleep sitting up and get a bad back”

𓇻 and maybe after that he’s a lot more open to showing you on camera. filming you on beaches, eating cakes and ice creams from a million different restaurants or dancing around hotel rooms or sitting on the balcony with the sun warming your skin when he takes you on holiday. short films dedicated to you with your favorite songs playing in the background

𓇻 maybe he even makes a playlist on his youtube channel, titled “my love” for every video that he includes you in

𓇻 idk just very much in love boyfriend kook who wants the world to love you almost as much as he does (because in all honesty, no one would ever love you more than he does)

[emojackolantern]

UPDATE I AM STILL THINKING ABOUT THE POTENTIAL DAN AND PHIL TAROT AND @slitsfordan ASKED FOR MY RANT ON IT SO HERE ARE MY THOUGHTS ON CARD SYMBOLISM AS IT RELATES TO DIP AND PIP !!

The Fool - PINOF, particularly PINOF 1. the fool is about new beginnings, pinof 1 is the origin of dnp.

The Magician - superamazingproject. the intro to their collaborative content. the dream they put out into the universe. the seed they planted hoping something would come of it.

The High Priestess - BBC Radio 1. they didn't know when it happened how much would come out of it, they just knew they had to do it. that's intuition baby. that being said whoever said sister daniel you're funny as fuck.

The Empress - DAPG. the empress is about fertility and creation, mf they birthed a whole new channel.

The Emperor - DAPC. to me, if the empress is about birthing new ideas, the emperor is about raising them and giving them structure by which to grow. DAPC is just another in the saga of their collaboration, at this point.

The Hierophant - TABINOF. the hierophant is about tradition and also represents the teacher/student archetype. i think of them kind of like profits bringing the word to the people for the first time lol.

The Lovers - TATINOF. think of any picture of them together on tour and tell me im wrong.

The Chariot - DAPGO. im ngl this one is kind of a space filler for chronology's sake, but them writing a second book was definitely a choice they made that furthered their joint image. they willed that into existence.

Strength - Interactive Introverts. Strength speaks on the bravery and fortitude needed to overcome obstacles. Dan particularly has spoken at length about how this tour was hard for him.

The Hermit - Dan's hiatus.

The Wheel of Fortune - The wheel of fortune is about inevitability of change and the cyclical nature of life. I think this one might be too vague for a direct comparison to a specific event? That being said if you can think of an example of a time they were faced with the inevitability of change I am all ears. Either way drawing this card in line with the rws but with dnp motifs would be fun as fuck

Justice - Justice is about karma, about getting back what you gave. I think of their dynamic as a duo, how they give to each other and get the same energy back. I think generally this card would be more negative, talk about literal justice, but I don't think that applies to them.

The Hanged Man - The hanged man is about sacrifice and surrender. I already said this in previous posts but to me this is Phil— going back in the closet for Dan, staying in London while he went on tour, etc. it's the willingness to let things change how they will because you have faith that no matter how much they change they'll always be a little the same.

Death - the changes themselves. sister daniel is a really good representative of this to me, and of the ways dan- but both of them really- have learned to be more comfortable both with themselves and with us as an audience. it's a change for the better.

Temperance - temperance is about balance, to me the most obvious example is their work/life balance. the value they place on their privacy. the taking weeks off after particularly long stints of work. it's doing what you have to do to make sure this work continues to be fulfilling.

The Devil - Dan and Phil Crafts - Slime (duh lol)

I WILL UPDATE THESE LATER BC IM BUSY BUT ALSO IF YOU HAVE SUGGESTIONS I AM OPEN TO THEM:

The Tower - upheaval

The Star - hope for the future

The Moon - the unconscious

The Sun - success over the unconscious

Judgement - review

The World - conclusion

[niseag-reads]

"Oh god no" - a review.

this is a review, or more of a rant, about the Kid-Friendly ADHD & Autism Cookbook: The Ultimate Guide to the Gluten-Free, Casein-Free Diet by Pamela Compart and Dana Laake. I was not going to post about this book, expecially not as the first post on my shiny new blog. but I need to talk about this. God. I am disgusted to my core and I need to talk about it. Screenshots from the books I read will not be a common occurance on this blog but I will use some here to get across what I have stumbled into.

Book TWs: Ableism (anti-autism sentiment), calorie counting I may have been naive when I judged this book by it's cover, i'm going to be honest with you. I saw this and though "oh! a book with recipes that cover for people with a variety of different needs! how nice!".You can imagine, then, that I was quite thrown off by the contents of the book. The first impression shook that believe a little. Recipes don't start until chapter 10. I skipped the preamble, because honestly I was just here for the food, and it seemed to be about raising autistic children and I am an autistic adult without any children so I figured I didn't need that. I just wanted to know what kind of delicious, sensory friendly foodstuffs the author has in store for us! this excitement was soon crushed as I got to the first recipe, and I am just goint to show you the whole page so you can get a sense of what i stumbled into.

So, some good things: page layout is great, the little icons that indicate dietary needs are lovely! in later recipes they also tell you how much the recipe makes and the estimated nutritional information which is great if you have to monitor that for one reason or another. but let's get to the rant. to begin, I am autistic and have adhd. I have many autistic friends. none of us enjoy drinking straight water. That is not to say no autistic people like drinking water, but it does make me put questionmarks on a supposedly autism-friendly cookbook to lead with it. Second of all: I don't need a fucking recipe to figure out how to put a glass under the tap right? am I the only one who thinks this is a weird thing to add as a recipe? I suppose it's probably done tongue in cheek but, really... is this the tone we're going for here? I felt somewhat belittled by this book reading this. anyway, i pressed on. a lot of recipes were just standard and seemingly random recipes none of which really stood out to me as particularly kid or neurodivergent friendly. A lot of recipes required a lot of different ingredients and different steps and kitchen appliances to use which definitely rules them out for my flavour of neurodivergence (the adhd task avoidance would never let me go through that many steps to make a meal, eat it, and then also do the dishes) but fine, I suppose, different people can handle different things, expecially if you're a parent cooking for a child this might not be an issue at all, and I also understand that to eat gluten free more work is sometimes, sadly, needed. Anyway, my various questionmarks about the recipes compiled with the inclusion of not one, but two recipes for communion wafers. what? no shade on anyone that needs gluten free communion wafers and decides to make them themselves, that's a perfectly reasonable thing to do. What confuses me is why they are here, in this book. It seems unrelated to anything? At this point, in between the water and the communion wafers and the whole first chunk of the book being about bringing up children, I was starting to realise this was a book written by a stereotypical "autism mom" I proceeded with caution, because I hadn't given up on finding nice recipes in here, though at this point I had told myself that I was definitely not reading the first 10 chapters. I should have stopped reading. because on page 215 I wa greeted with this sentence

recovered from fucking autism??? if I had any hope left that this book was trying to promote acceptance and inclusivity, it shattered right there. i went back to the first 10 chapters and scanned them. there's bits in there about how to make your child eat things they might be averse to, how to force them to comply. I then, finally, read a summary. appearently some people think that you can cure autism with a low gluten diet? I'm just so tired of this stuff, man. 0 stars. technically DNF. I feel gross after having read this.

[esperr]

My thoughts on the new trolls movie (me ranting about trolls 3 for way to long)

Disclaimer: I am aware this is just a kids movie and it’s not supposed to be a cinamatic masterpiece. I am mostly just writing this for my own entertainment

I absolutely love doing these movie reviews, my first one being on the nimona move (I will link it at the bottom for anyone who is interested)

Now I will start this off by saying that I did NOT watch the 2nd trolls movie so some of the plot holes I might mention in this post could be things I missed because of that, but most of these are specific to this particular movie

The first thing I noticed are the many inconsistencies, such as when Gristle gets his eyebrow pulled off but only a second later he is shown with both eyebrows fully in-tact. Although, the main problem I have with this movie in in fact NOT the inconsistencies, so I will leave those at that.

At the begging of the movie we see branch as a baby. His family is separated and he is left with his grandmother who is eventually eaten by a Bergen. After this is the wedding scene. During this scene poppy expresses how badly she wishes she had a sister. This whole bit of dialogue just seems so forced. It’s as if the writers were trying to figure out how to make a movie centered around branch about poppy. This is where we get into the main thing I disliked about this movie: The sheer amount of side plots.

The first side plot we run into is poppy’s yearning for a sister. We then see her father grimace and it is extremely obvious right off the bat that she most definitely has one. This was definitely a VERY strange choice considering this movie is supposed to be about branch finding HIS family members. Adding poppy’s sister into the mix is just completely unnecessary and it adds nothing to the movie overall. It essentially just takes away from the main focus of the movie, confusing the viewer.

The second side plot we run into is Tiny diamond wanting to seem grown up. This is just even more unnecessary. Like it’s ok to explore different characters in a movie but REALLY? Why him out of every character? Not to mention that despite trying to “explore” his character, we learned absolutely nothing new about him. They could have instead used this time to explore branch and his brothers a bit more, but alas we are left with these bland brothers who lack personality.

Once poppy finds her sister we run into yet ANOTHER side plot. Poppy’s sister and the other trolls that live in this area are still afraid of the bergens. This honestly just felt like filler at this point as it was a conflict that was already resolved in the very first movie. It felt extremely forced and again took attention away from the actual plot.

Although this movie is about branch and his brothers most of the screentime is used up on little things that barely add anything to the movie. So much in fact that the antagonists BARELY FEEL LIKE THEYRE THERE. Like honestly I forgot they even existed because they have so little screentime. They also tried to give vaneer a redemption arc but failed miserably. They essentially just showed us that he kinda has a little bit of remorse and that’s it. ALSO NOT TO MENTION ONE OF BRANCHES BROTHERS RANDOMLY HAVING A CHILD WITH ANOTHER SPECUES WHAT WAS THAT?? he also just left his wife with all of his children and no help?? Husband of the year award definitely goes to this guy…

The very last thing I found annoying about this blue was when branches brother died and came back to life in the same 2 minutes. They didn’t even have time to shed a single tear because right away he was straight back to life. His death didn’t even matter at that point. They didn’t even have time to use some power of love and family trope because he was alive again just like that.

This brings us to our very last sideplot that did not make sense: just when you think the movie is finally over branch randomly decides to announce that he was also in another band and these random sparkly trolls walk in out of NOWHERE for NO REASON. WHAT WAS THE POINT OF THIS?? WHAT WAS THAT?? JUST WHY?? Why?? I CANT WCEN ?? WHAT??

When watching this movie I kept thinking to myself: why didn’t they instead use all this time to explore the brothers and backstories or give velvet and vaneer ACTUAL arcs and personalities. But alas we can’t have everything

I barely scratched the surface of how absolutely Absurd this movie was in this post, but if I all about trolls 3 for any longer I think I just might lose my mind. If you made it this far I applaud you. You are very brave

[deadshowsagency]

Okay, I have been thinking about this for awhile now but I'm hesitant to post it because I might get misinterpreted or get a lot of hate from it. Just know I'm just raising awareness of what bad we could be possibly doing and I'm not taking sides or naming names except Netflix. This post is about cancellations of shows. This might be a little long so read under the cut.

I think another reason for the cancellation of shows is that fans of other shows (Let's call this tv show 1) often put in the comments on tv show (let's call it tv show 2)

"Boo! We don't care. We want another season of tv show 1!"

"Bring back tv show 1"

"No one cares. Bring back tv show 1"

I get that tv show 1 fans are upset about their show's cancelation, and that doing this could potentially bring back their show. But doing it like this could make tv show 2 meet its cancellation. Just know that there are still fans of tv show 2 that will be upset when they find out that their show gets cancelled. Fans are fans, right? Fans look out for each other. If you are about to say "it's to raise awareness and make people watch it because it's cancelled", honey... We recommend it not just because it's cancelled but to share our favorite show to another. Make them experience the same joy you had when you watched it. Not because it's cancelled, but because you had fun. That's how Netflix will know they made a mistake of cancelling it. Bombarding other tv shows with angry comments and complains about tv show 1's cancellation could make Netflix think that the tv show 2 is a flop and cancel it because of "Low viewership". I think "Low viewership" in other terms are "Negative reviews". If you want to save your tv show and complain in their comments section, I suggest you stop. Go find their email address and there you can complain. Or make a post and tag Netflix so that you can tell them how devastated you are of not getting another season. Sign the petition, post about it, recommend it! That's a healthy way of trying to save the show!! Plus, you are not risking another show of cancellation!! There are so many ways of saving the show!

I have seen this happen in real life where the comment section of my favorite show is full of angry comments from another show's fans! A few months later, it was cancelled. Not that I'm hating that other tv show, hell I even watched and enjoyed it myself! I went on a full rant about why it didn't deserve cancellation. And now my favorite show got cancelled because of negative comments that are not supposed to be for my tv show! I even see them calling it rubbish. HOW WOULD YOU KNOW ITS RUBBISH?! HAVE YOU WATCHED IT YOURSELF!?

thank you. That's it. That's the post. I'm just raising awareness. And basically attempting to save future shows from the same fate. Thank you for your time.

[we-keep-odd-hours]

ranting to myself about the Diamondback origin story fic I started in Morning and will go into more in its follow-up

The way I see it there's a few ways she could have been turned: that night, or later. If she was turned later, that would imply some...kind of prolonged hunt or courtship: still, she might not have known exactly what was going on. I just can't see Jesse turning her then and there unless it was an accident: maybe he bit her but she fought back, or said something/reacted in a way that made him stop for a minute?

Either way what did she do that convinced him to keep her???

Part of me loves the idea that she was the violent one; outlaw, bank robber, gang member, serial killer even! And she picked him up as a victim so smoothly he didn't even realize she was hunting too. A moment of "oh she's terrifying."

.....but that's...not exactly the character we get from her, unless she's changed (and I don't think she did: part of un-death in this universe seems to be stagnation, which I'm obsessed with in vampire stories but that's a WHOLE other post). She's not meek exactly--I've seen MULTIPLE film reviewers (pro critics and general horror fans) remark that she and Severen answer to Jesse like dogs. Yikes??? Severen argues with him, Mae talks back to him, and even in the script, where Diamond was definitely subordinate Jesse looked at her before making a final call. But she's...a bit soft.

Her role, according to the director, was keeping the "family" together--compared to Jesse viewing their group as a pack, a clan, and everyone else who wanted a family structure but didn't admit it to themselves, Diamondback was self-aware in her understanding of this as her family!!! She's so soft with Homer? she's wiping blood off his face at the bar! Even if he was as young as his face, he's still too old to have a parent do that; such a ''mom you're embarrassing me'' moment. (I want to study her and Mae under a microscope though because what EVEN is that dynamic--talking to her like I talk to my younger sisters, but she's her husband's favorite kid???)

Train of thought derailment aside, regardless of why Jesse turned her there's still one of two categories her getting turned could have fallen under: willing or unwilling.

Given the premise of the actual movie, that Mae turns Caleb before he knows what she is, and Caleb never really....holds it against her??? and then stays with her??? I....am inclined to think that Diamondback was meant to be a parallel to them? Which is!!!!!! Somehow so much worse!!!!!! Jesse wasn't an impulsive somewhat-new vampire with the brain of teenager, he's been dead for decades in his late 40s, and Diamond is almost half his age! And they're not Mae and Caleb, cutesy in new puppy love, they're damned married. If Diamond didn't get a say in turning vampire then she's living in a hell of a darker story than Caleb is!!!!

BUT STILL... there's two other categories that her getting turned could fall under which venn diagram with the willing/unwilling: either she was into this, or she wasn't. Maybe she didn't get a say, but she's got issues and was immediately into it! That's valid; not healthy maybe, but valid? I guess? I can't really imagine she'd still be alive if she was wholly unwilling and didn't want it; vampires can die very easily and all she would have had to do to escape was open a curtain. Hell, if she wanted she could have killed him that way too.

There could always be a funny option: Jesse intended on killing her when he got into her car/she got out of hers to help him with the flat, but instead of doing something violent, or simply trying to help out....she just came onto him, kinda flirty, and it caught him off guard enough to say 'okay where is this going?'

[side note: if he actually had a flat tire and wasn't hunting at the time, alllllll of this is a lot less dark; he met her because she was the first friendly person to pull over and help. But if he didn't have a flat tire and it was a trap, then holy hell, he's going out of his way to hunt friendly, trusting people. Which is like....there's a lot of subtle hints that the vampires are much more fucked up than we even get to see, and that was definitely one of them]

Anyway. Despite my hatred of children (I'm nice to kids, I'm good with kids, I still never want to be around them and never want my own and never have) Diamond is so Soft with Homer that like....when she turned did she know she wouldn't be able to have kids? Did she lose one before being turned/have kids with a previous partner? The script and director said that she's supposed to be helping Jesse near the end catch Caleb and Sarah, and she doesn't really try to stop him but the actual scene as it was shot reads like she gave the kids a head start.

Would she have let Severen and Jesse eat Sarah, or was she just going to have Severen kill Loy, so Homer could keep the girl? So they could keep the girl? Would she have let Homer kill Sarah if it was what he wanted? She's the one who takes Jesse's hand off the wheel at the end, accepting death now that Homer and Mae are gone (yes Mae survives but one, that didn't make sense, and two, she wouldn't have known).

There's just so many little things about her that make me wince something bad happened to you, didn't it?

[beggars-opera]

how do I use tags correctly? like, whats the propper tag etiquette? I'm pretty new here and don't wanna screw this up haha

Tags serve three main purposes: they help others find your posts, they help you find your posts at a later date, and they serve as a way to add metatextual commentary to a post.

So, at a base level, if you want other people to find your post, or want a way to find the post more easily yourself at a later date, you would add purely descriptive tags like on any other social media site so people looking in those tags will see your post. For example, a post of someone baking bread might have #food #baking #cottagecore etc. Fandom tags often utilize abbreviations (tagging #OFMD instead of #OurFlagMeansDeath for example) and these are best found by searching around yourself and seeing which tags are the most active.

A few pointers here:

Don't tag hate. It's fine if you dislike something, but going on a rant about how much you hate a thing and then tagging it so that everyone who loves the thing will have to look at it is considered aggressive and rude.

People will often tag for common triggers like gore and rape as a courtesy to those using extensions to erase posts containing those tags from their dash. The exact format of these tags has never been formalized, but most use the #cwtrigger, #twtrigger, or just #trigger format.

Tags on original posts mean that post will show up when you search for that tag. Tags on reblogs do not make it show up in the tag page a second time and are only useful for internal blog searching.

You can also choose to use tags that are just for you, like #mythoughts or #myart, which allows you to search your own blog more easily. If you are an artist of any sort, using a tag denoting what is an original work is highly recommended.

Some people also use a tag specifically for posts that are in their queue, to let people know that the post is automatic and that they are not necessarily online at that particular moment. Getting creative with puns gets you brownie points. #scoobydoobyqueue

Tags specifically go into the tag section at the bottom of the post editor. Adding hashtags to the body of a post does absolutely nothing. You can, however, @ another user in the body of the post.

Tags are also often used for commentary purposes. They are sort of like whispering under your breath after you've publicly stated whatever is in your post. This can include musings, jokes, and other information that didn't quite seem important enough to put in the main body of the post. Every post of a beautiful woman does not need five hundred people writing "as I lesbian I am looking respectfully *googly eyes emoji*" in the post but you can 100% put that in the tags.

Pointers with this:

Eventually everyone gets the hang of what thoughts are important enough to put in the body of a post or reblog and what should be relegated to the tags. You can ask yourself "is this adding something useful to the conversation, or is it just me rambling or keysmashing?"

If your tags are witty enough, other users may deem them worthy of being included in the main post, screenshot them, and put the screenshot in their reblog. We consider this a peer review process of sorts and it is a badge of honor.

Again, being kind is a common courtesy. When you add tag commentary, the original poster and person you reblogged from are notified, and everyone can see it. So if you write in the tags that the post is stupid and that the OP is a cunt, congrats, you've just made the OP cry and you should probably not be on the internet.

Tags are comma delineated so if you are typing a thought in the tag long enough to need a comma, use a semicolon instead, otherwise the tag will be split in two. Likewise, quotation marks will not show up in a tag.

I hope this helps!

[invisibleicewands]

A Very Royal Scandal review – Michael Sheen is excellent as Prince Andrew in THAT interview

If you haven’t seen the lively Scoop, Netflix’s version of the catastrophic (for him) Prince Andrew Newsnight interview about his relationship with the sex offender Jeffrey Epstein, then you might find more to appreciate in A Very Royal Scandal. This is the second time the story has been given a “real events, fictionalised for dramatic purposes” preamble in the same year. As with Scoop, it’s a buffet of top-tier acting talent. Here, Ruth Wilson is Emily Maitlis, and takes the deep voice very seriously, while Michael Sheen is Prince Andrew, and Joanna Scanlan his adoring and doomed private secretary, Amanda Thirsk. The performances are predictably strong, but it lacks the heft you might expect from a such a heavyweight cast, and from a series that follows the excellent A Very English Scandal and A Very British Scandal.

Over three steady episodes, it follows Maitlis and her Newsnight team as they pursue the interview with, and allegations against, the Prince, before re-creating the interview and exploring the fallout. Scoop focused on the producer Sam McAlister, played by Billie Piper, and turned her dogged pursuit of the sit-down into a sort of thriller. This sidelines her almost completely. Instead, it sticks with Maitlis and the Prince, fleshing out their private lives and offering a more in-depth character portrait of each, as they move towards their shared fate. It is elegantly done, though it ambles forward rather than sprinting for the finish line.

That means Maitlis at home, with her husband and sons, having a post-work vodka, talking to her whippet and Googling the links between Epstein and Andrew. We join her as the BBC is under pressure from the right-wing press and the government for its seeming partisanship. Maitlis is rebuked for a Brexit-inspired, on-camera eye-roll, and while Paxman and Humphries would be applauded for that kind of thing, she says, she still feels she has to prove herself. The Andrew interview would be perfect. “I’m not losing out to bloody ITV,” she booms.

The TV industry stuff feels pleased with itself, particularly when it is placed against the absurdity of royal life, shown here to be a surreal catalogue of hunting, golf, fine dining and charades. This goes far deeper into Prince Andrew’s world than Scoop did, and you can see that it is fascinated with his psyche, and the question of not only why he would do the interview, but why he seemed to think, in the immediate aftermath, that it had gone rather well indeed.

We get to meet Fergie (Claire Rushbrook), loyal and amoral, who describes herself and Andrew as “the happiest divorcees in the world”, and has sent her ex-husband off to his old friend Epstein with “a fucking begging bowl” to settle her many debts. Sheen’s Andrew is a near-tragic buffoon, a man-child who believes that he is charm personified, but berates his staff with endless “fuck offs” and furious tirades. If the drama makes an effort to humanise him, it does so through his daughters, Beatrice (Honor Swinton Byrne) and Eugenie (Sofia Oxenham), who by the end appear to if not accept, then at least comprehend the mess their father has made.

A comparison to the later Crown here is inevitable, not least because this spends so much time in the royal households, and runs into the same problem of trying to dramatise very recent history, still fresh in the minds of most viewers. It is hard for it not to dip into caricature. Still, Sheen is great as the ranting Prince – “I am the second fucking son of the fucking sovereign” – but the underplayed star of the whole thing might be Alex Jennings, who plays the late Queen’s private secretary, Sir Edward Young, a smooth master of the old ways. He warns Thirsk against the Newsnight interview, explaining that the royals need protecting from themselves. They live a “frictionless existence”, he says. They will never know what it is to miss a train, because the train will always wait for them if they are late.

The fallout from the Newsnight interview had no intention of waiting for the Prince. This ends with a closeup of that 2001 photograph, of Andrew with the then 17-year-old Virginia Guiffre at Ghislaine Maxwell’s London home, re-created with the actors for both A Very Royal Scandal and Scoop, but also powerfully left in its original form in the final moments here. It is a reminder that this isn’t a simple case of a stupid man making a stupid mistake. When Maitlis replied to Andrew’s description of Epstein’s behaviour as “unbecoming”, she did so with an astonished rejoinder that Epstein was “a sex offender”. Like Maitlis, A Very Royal Scandal handles itself with comportment and class, but as a drama, it is too frictionless for its own good.

[nalyra-dreaming]

First off, I absolutely LOVE your writing! You capture these characters so well, and Laden as the Sea was such a treat with filling in what might have been happening between the scenes we saw on the show. Sometimes I find it hard to remember that what you wrote didn't actually happen on the show! Thank you! Now for the ask: since you're a huge book fan too, how "necessary" do you think it is to read Blackwood Farm and Blood Canticle before the Prince Lestat books - specifically for someone who really isn't all that interested in the Mayfair storylines? Probably irrelevant background - I've been a huge fan of the VCs since way back in the mid-80s, but never read those two. I haven't read the Prince Lestat trilogy either, I think at the time those came out I thought the Atlantis storyline sounded a bit out there and I didn't want to end up being disappointed, LOL. But I just have to know what happened with all my vampires, and especially now that they're obviously dropping references to the PL books into the show I definitely have to read them. Just not sure if there's any necessary background info in Blackwood Farm and Blood Canticle that I really shouldn't miss. Thanks for any input!

Ohhhh thank you dear, that is such a beautiful feedback, thank you sooo much!!! 💕 So glad you like! *hugs* Hope you'll continue to!

Wrt to your question (also HIIIIII to another long-time fan, I totally remember being weirded out by the story hinted in the title(s), too^^^)

Those two books... are not "necessary".

I find Blackwood Farm a fun read, and also a bit of a wild ride, but ultimately there is not a lot of "new" things in there - and they barely have a connection to the later books. There isn't even a lot of Lestat in there (but the interesting tidbit that he still "cleans up" young ones from time to time, and that people warn others from going into NOLA.) Maybe the most important thing is knowing that (the names) Quinn and Mona come from this one :) Quinn is a delight though, in his own way, and while they might draw on the connections to the Talamasca and the Mayfairs later in the show (maybe) - you can read it later, if you want.

Blood Canticle... is something of a supposed follow-up, but it's... totally OOC for Lestat, and the whole thing with Rowan... *shudders*.

The book is totally ... IDK. It was written during Stan's illness and subsequent death and... mhh. I do think that influenced things. There's nothing I really like about it. Not the Mayfair nor the Taltos connections, and thank goodness Anne dropped the whole Rowan thing like a hot potato after, too. It just feels off. There is also a very infamous rant (copied here, though the Amazon link does not seem to work anymore, unfortunately) she posted in response to a negative review. In that response rant she closes by saying that Blood Canticle was the last of the Chronicles and that she was... glad.

Fortunately, she changed her mind.

The last three books are definitely a wild ride, too.

They introduce a lot of new characters, new background stories, and a lot of the interconnections of what we supposedly knew is rearranged. I have to say I appreciate them even more now reading them for the third time... there is a lot of rearranging furniture, so to speak, but, without wanting to spoil too much... Anne went, and gave "her" vampires a home, religion (in a way), and "happy ever after" (well, as much as that can be with them^^). There's also hooks in them that I'm quite sure Rolin picked up, if the changes they made for the show are any indication^^. (It will be VERY interesting to see where and when we are in Dubai, seriously^^).

So... my advice would be: skip Blackwood Farm (for now), Blood Canticle (definitely, the rant probably tells you all you need to know^^), and go into the last ones knowing that Anne actually managed to close a lot of arcs and proverbial doors (and opened a few new ones^^), leaving the future for "them" bright open and a lot more hopeful than one could have predicted.

Enjoy 💕

PS: If you feel like talking/yelling about them while you read.... *laughs*

[which-hospital]

A History of Violence Trailer Review

so, the trailer happened…

I just feel a bit like

bros….. (usual ranting below the cut)

I’ll talk about Teddy first because what is the point of this blog at this point, if not to go on about him? I watched through most of it and I was like “wow, he’s not being slutty, this is amazing for me” and then we got to the end and I clocked into the PR job. For some reason, probably projection-related ones, I struggle to believe he’d cheat on someone. But Casualty has deigned that he must and I guess that Holbyverse infidelity is basically a minor moral offence that about 50% of the population of the city must have committed at least once. Still feels especially bad coming from Teddy; hypocrisy you can see from space or whatever I said about “New Romance For Teddy” in that post a while back. Him crying? Great, I’m horrible to my faves and I love all the episodes where he is sad. And Jan’s there for him, so their relationship hasn’t been ruined past the point of no return (which I’m not surprised about, those two were always going to reconcile). If it weren’t for the infidelity, I’d probably be really excited to see what happens next in Casualty and with Teddy but it’s kinda casting a shadow that I need to come to terms with.

Also, I’m a tiny bit convinced Sah might leave/be killed off and I have been for a while. I don’t think I’ve seen a picture of Arin filming in ages but I’ve seen loads of pictures of all the others together, without them. I thought it would be weird for them to fake-leave only to real-leave a couple months later but this trailer has also got me like 👀👀 for reasons I won’t specify because I’ll sound like a conspiracy theorist, I’m probably being silly and I’m not necessarily expecting that Sah will go but I’m definitely considering the possibility.

Brief acknowledgment of FAITH STUFF WILL NEVER BE OVER, WILL IT? Still no comment beyond that.

For all that I don’t enjoy Faith and Iain stuff, it does seem to be related to some Jacob and Iain stuff in the trailer and I’ve really been enjoying their interactions so there’s that. Honestly, Jacob joining the paramedics has made Iain feel like he’s more integrated into the paramedics as a team than he was when it was just him, Jan, Teddy and Sah.

The stuff with Stevie looks really, really good. I’m really excited to see where they go with that.

So does the stuff with Jodie and Max. And Max’s mum is back too! I do wonder if the same issue I’m having with Teddy right now might start to affect Jodie a little but at least she hasn’t got anyone she should be being loyal to. I also enjoy Dylan’s continued involvement in the Max and Jodie stuff.

New characters look great, we’ve heard about Siobhan joining and she looks interesting even if I’m still bitter about Donna, but I think Ngozi is introduced to us by this trailer so that’s exciting (though I do worry a new staff nurse means Ryan, who was slowly growing on me, is leaving). Also, Zoe returning, which is something I feel like we’ve known about forever now.

Brief, but there was Rida and Rash stuff and I hope we’re about to get a sweet romance with no horrors. I guess I love the horrors on some level, or I wouldn’t watch it, but it’s nice to have something pleasant happening in between.

Oh yeah, Charlie’s leaving. That’s the whole big thing. I know it’s a big landmark for the show but I don’t really care.

Overall, I guess I’m looking forward to it being back. The focus seems to be on the Stevie storyline and the Max and Jodie storyline, and at least that hopefully means that the continuation of the Faith Stuff will take a backseat compared to before the break. Teddy… I don’t know. I believed that the questionable things he did before the break made sense for his character, they felt like reasonable developments on his personality even if they weren’t always the writing choices I would’ve made (cough the proposal). But I struggle to believe he’d do this. I think he would have to be really going through it to do something like that, and I guess he has been really going through it, but unless the writers lean into that fact when making him do this, I think I’ll struggle to come to terms with it as part of his character. A real mixed bag of a trailer for me but at least Casualty-typical horrors are still being inflicted on the paramedics, some things never change.

[I recognise that Iain is also THE STRUGGLER right now, but this is how I made it so this is how it stays.]

[an-aura-about-you]

starting in on Handbook for Mortals and I'm just going to cover all the miscellaneous beginning crap that this thing is wrapped in before actually starting on the story.

first thing I'm going to talk about is what's on the back of the book because not a lot of people talk about what was chosen for that. usually there's a brief blurb with the premise of the book or maybe some reviews, sometimes even a little paragraph directly from it to entice the reader. that last one is my standby when I need to put a summary for a fic.

Handbook for Mortals went the route of paragraph from the book as well as three quotes from romance author Skye Turner, who also wrote the foreword for the book, and the promise that this book will soon be turned into a movie. which was due to come out *checks my wrist* six years ago. this has not yet happened, but the author is still insisting it will.

anyway, the bit chosen from the book to highlight what we're getting into is a conversation between our main character and her love interest, which is meant to be some enemies to lovers stuff. but honestly I'm a bit uncomfortable at the, "looked like he might hit me, but I knew that wasn't really an option for him," in there. so, we are already setting up our love interest as a person who needs some kind of mental restraining bolt to refrain from violence instead of just, y'know, not being violent. really speaks to his morals right there. absolutely trustworthy, surely his resolve is ironclad.

this also speaks to the genre of the book because there's a lot of talk about this book having magic and being magical but it's the romance we're choosing to set up here. I think it's safe to say magic is going to be present in this book the way coffee is in a coffee shop au fanfic: it's technically true but it's not why we're reading the story and ultimately not important to it.

I'm not even gonna bother with the blurb on the inside of the dust jacket because it's literally just a synopsis of the entire book. even the ending. I'm not even kidding.

now I wanna talk about the autographs my copy came with. the book I bought for $2 off of Amazon was signed by both the author Lani Sarem and actor-potential producer of the movie Thomas Ian Nicholas, and both of them write some pretty weird things to the people they gave this book to. (there were two names in the personalizations as well as a post-it note with those same names. my best guess is one person in the couple preordered the book with Sarem, requested that it be signed, and then never picked it up. hilarious if true.)

I'll start with American Pie guy's dedication first:

"Be the magician who fools magicians."

like. what? what does that even mean?

Sarem's is both worse and funnier:

"Never forget those who do not believe in magick will never find it! Thanks for believing!"

well I guess they didn't believe too much if they never picked up their book. also that just feels so mean-spirited to me. had I written a similar dedication, I would phrase it as, "Never forget those who believe in magic will always find it!" then it's still exclusive without needlessly dragging others down for ~not being able to find the magic in their lives~. not to mention my own personal pet peeve with the whole magick thing, but that is a rant for considerably later.

there is a typo in the book's disclaimer:

"Any similarity to real persons, living or deal,"

but also that doesn't make sense because I know this book has the real life Plain White T's with their real names as well as Carrot Top and Wayne Newton.

there's also proof that Sarem had permission to use all the song lyrics she uses in the story, which are so copious that without thinking I originally wrote the word, "fic," in this sentence. because yeah, this reeks of songfic, the rare example of one where the person writing has permission to actually use the song. look, I've only seen song lyrics work in a book exactly once, and that was Good Omens. and Lani Sarem is not Terry Pratchett or Neil Gaiman.

(I should know, I just listened to the audiobook for Stardust as a sort of cleanser to remind me what a good book sounds like. it's shockingly refreshing listening to the work of an author who is actually good at their job.)

the dedication is also just. ugh:

"This is dedicated to: The granddaughters of the witches you could not burn and for all those who believe in Magic."

that exists in print in this book. I'm assuming seriously.

I took a peek at how long the foreword is but don't have time to get in on it before I start work today, so this is where I leave things for now.

[dreaminginthedeepsouth]

LETTERS FROM AN AMERICAN

August 11, 2023

HEATHER COX RICHARDSON

As I try to cover the news tonight, I am struck by how completely the Republican Party, which began in the 1850s as a noble endeavor to keep the United States government intact and to rebuild it to work for ordinary people, has devolved into a group of chaos agents feeding voters a fantasy world. 

The big news today was the hearing in Washington, D.C., where Department of Justice prosecutors argued for a protective order to stop former president Trump from intimidating witnesses and tainting the jury pool in the case against him for trying to stop the counting of electoral votes that would decide the 2020 presidential election. 

Trump appears to have given up on winning the cases against him on the legal merits and is instead trying to win by whipping up a political base to reelect him, or even to fight for him. He has filled his Truth Social account with unhinged rants attacking the justice system and the president, and on Sunday his lawyer, John Lauro, echoed Trump as he made a tour of the Sunday talk shows, misleadingly suggesting that Trump had been indicted for free speech. In fact, the indictment says up front that even Trump’s lies are protected by the First Amendment, but what isn’t protected is a conspiracy that stops an official proceeding and deprives the rest of us of our right to vote and to have our votes counted. 

A grand jury indicted Trump on August 1; when he was arraigned on August 3, the magistrate judge warned him that it is a crime to “influence a juror or try to threaten or bribe a witness or retaliate against anyone" connected to the case. Trump said he understood. 

The next day, he posted on Truth Social: “IF YOU GO AFTER ME, I’M COMING AFTER YOU!” 

Justice Department lawyers promptly sought a protective order to limit what information Trump and his lawyers can release. Trump has a longstanding pattern of releasing misleading information to bolster his position among his base, and lawyers are concerned that he will continue to intimidate witnesses and try to taint the jury pool in hopes of getting the trial venue moved.

Days later, Trump told an audience in New Hampshire that he would not stop talking about the case, and called Special Counsel Jack Smith a “thug” and “deranged.” He has continued to post such messages on social media.

U.S. District Judge Tanya Chutkan reinforced that Trump’s focus on politics had no relevance in her court of law. Justice reporter for NBC News Ryan Reilly noted: “The word of the Trump hearing today: yield. Came up six times, as in: ‘the fact that he's running a political campaign currently has to yield to the orderly administration of justice.’”

Chutkan agreed to the protective order but agreed with Trump’s team that it would not include any material already in the public domain. She also prohibited Trump from reviewing materials with “any device capable of photocopying, recording, or otherwise replicating the Sensitive Materials, including a smart cellular device.”

Finally, she warned Trump’s lawyers: “I caution you and your client to take special care in your public statements in this case…. I will take whatever measures are necessary to protect the integrity of these proceedings.” If Trump repeats “inflammatory” statements, she said, she will have to speed up his trial to protect witnesses and keep the jury pool untainted.

Just what that might mean was illustrated today when a judge revoked the bail of former FTX cryptocurrency chief executive officer Sam Bankman-Fried for witness tampering and sent him to jail. Prosecutors say Bankman-Fried was leaking the private diary entries of his former girlfriend to the New York Times to discredit her testimony against him.

In Ohio, where voters on Tuesday overwhelmingly rejected the attempt of the Republicans in the legislature to stop a November vote on an amendment to the state constitution protecting abortion rights, Republicans tried to stop the inclusion of that amendment by challenging its form. Today the Ohio Supreme Court unanimously rejected that lawsuit. The proposed amendment will be on the ballot in November. 

After demanding that David Weiss, the U.S. attorney in charge of investigating and charging Hunter Biden, be named a special counsel and then charging that Weiss had asked for and been denied that status—both he and Attorney General Merrick Garland denied that allegation—Republicans are now angry that Garland today gave Weiss that status. 

Weiss requested that status for the first time earlier this week, and Garland granted it, although both Weiss and Garland had previously said Weiss had all the authority that status carries. Now House Republicans say appointing Weiss a special counsel is an attempt to obstruct Congress from investigating the Bidens. For all that Republicans are in front of the cameras every day insisting President Biden is corrupt, there is no evidence that President Biden has been party to any wrongdoing.

One of the things such behavior accomplishes is to distract from the party’s own troubles, including the inability of House Republicans to agree to measures to fund the government after September. Far-right extremists are still angry at the spending levels to which House speaker Kevin McCarthy (R-CA) agreed in a deal to raise the debt ceiling last June, and are threatening to refuse to agree to any funding measures until they get cuts that the Senate will never accept. 

The House left for its August break after passing only one of the twelve bills it needs to pass, and when it gets back, it will have only twelve work days before the September 30 deadline. This chaos takes a toll: when the Fitch rating system downgraded the U.S. long-term rating last week, the first reason it cited was “a steady deterioration in standards of governance.” It explained: “The repeated debt-limit political standoffs and last-minute resolutions have eroded confidence in fiscal management.” 

Another thing this chaos does is convince individuals that the entire government is corrupt. On Wednesday, as Biden was to visit Utah, FBI agents shot and killed an armed man there who made threats against him, Vice President Kamala Harris, and other officials who have been associated with Trump’s legal troubles: Attorney General Garland, Manhattan district attorney Alvin Bragg, and New York attorney general Letitia James. Craig Deleeuw Robertson described himself as a “MAGA Trumper.”

It seems we are reaping the fruits of the political system planted in 1968, when the staff of Republican presidential candidate Richard Nixon reworked American politics to package their leader for the election. “Voters are basically lazy,” one of Nixon’s media advisors wrote. “Reason requires a high degree of discipline, of concentration; impression is easier. Reason pushes the viewer back, it assaults him, it demands that he agree or disagree; impression can envelop him, invite him in, without making an intellectual demand…. When we argue with him, we…seek to engage his intellect…. The emotions are more easily roused, closer to the surface, more malleable.”

The confusion also takes up so much oxygen it’s hard for the Democrats, who are actually trying to govern in the usual ways, to get any attention. Today was the one-year anniversary of the PACT Act, officially known as the Sergeant First Class Heath Robinson Honoring our Promise to Address Comprehensive Toxics Act of 2022. The law improves access to healthcare and funding for veterans who were exposed to burn pits, the military’s waste disposal method for everything from tires to chemicals and jet fuel from the 1990s into the new century. 

According to Senator Dick Durbin (D-IL), the PACT Act has already enabled more than 4 million veterans to be screened for toxic exposure, more than 744,000 PACT Act claims have been filed, and hundreds of thousands of veterans have been approved for expanded benefits.

Biden spoke in Utah about the government’s protections for veterans and why they’re important. In addition to the PACT Act, he talked about his recent executive order moving the authority for addressing claims of sexual assault, domestic violence, child abuse, and murder outside the chain of command to a specialized independent military unit—a move long championed by survivors and members of Congress.  

Today the White House released a detailed explanation of “Bidenomics” along with resources explaining why the administration has focused on certain areas for public investment and how the Bipartisan Infrastructure Law, the CHIPS and Science Act, and the Inflation Reduction Act have supported that investment. That collection explains why the administration is overturning forty years of political economy to return to the system on which the U.S. relied from 1933 to 1981, and yet it got far less traction than the fight over the protective order designed to keep Trump from attacking witnesses.

LETTERS FROM AN AMERICAN

HEATHER COX RICHARDSON

[fizzingwizard]

On Methods for Gauging Reader Interest, because it's not just about comments!

Initially, comments and kudos are what matter most to me. Hits only show how many people click, so when I post a new fic or a first chapter, there's no way to know whether people stick around till the end unless they leave kudos or comment.

For fics with multiple chapters/installments, hits begin to matter as kudos dry up. You can leave kudos on AO3 once per fic. The only way to show extra support to a writer afterward is to comment on each chapter. But a lot more people are going to read than are going to leave comments. If you start looking at hits and thinking of them as little kudos themselves, that's something. Of course some of those people are still clicking and leaving without reading to the end. But it's safe to assume that enough aren't, especially if you see a similar or increased count of new hits each time you update.

Don't overlook bookmarks! If someone's bookmarked or subscribed to your fic, count it in your head as kudos. And don't forget that on AO3 you can have private bookmarks which don't show in the public bookmark count. Check your stats and you might find your fic is bookmarked significantly more often than it appears to be. (Also check what your public bookmarks are because sometimes people leave mini reviews in them and it's such a sweet surprise!)

All fics lose interaction relative to when they were published after they haven't been updated for a while. So if you want to know whether anyone's reading your "old" fic (in quotes because I find fics are treated as old pretty much as soon as they're completed and off the first page of results!), but kudos are rare and comments are rarer still: look at hits. Indulge in that wiggle of joy you get when you see there are people reading. It's not silly to do that. That's a person who noticed your fic and was interested enough to open it.

While comments will always give the biggest serotonin boost for most of us, I think that a lot of the reason we don't feel the same towards hits is simply because they're not comments. We've programmed ourselves to see certain forms of interaction as more valuable. But if you think about it, fan art here on tumblr gets a lot more likes than it does reblogs or comments. Likes on tumblr can mean you liked the art, or you're bookmarking it for later, or even that you don't like it and are planning to rant about it. Plus people can revoke Likes any time they want, which you can't do with comments or kudos.

Likes are the bare minimum for interaction tumblr, and hits are the bare minimum for AO3. Art will still have more, because it's quicker to take in a picture than it is to read even a short fic, and easier to make a judgment on whether or not you enjoy it. But the value of that interaction isn't necessarily different if you equate likes to hits. In both cases, comments and shares occur less. Interaction is largely wordless - that's just how it is. But that lack of words doesn't mean lack of interest. You've got to arrange your mentality to interpret the coded message.

This may sound like a case for quantity over quality, but that's not my intention. I know as well as any fic writer how a joyful comment can power me through the whole of the next chapter, while posting and not getting any response for weeks can feel like I might as well give up and become an accountant. :P But it's completely out of our control. And it's better to focus on what you can control than what you can't.

"I don't get enough reader response" is a common refrain which I've heard since I posted my first ever fic as wide-eyed eleven-year-old. Over the years, I found that my reliance on comments dropped as I came to value other forms of engagement more highly, as I think they deserve to be. It doesn't mean I don't still adore my commenters, it just means I am more aware of my quiet readers and adoring them as well has done wonders for my confidence as a writer :)