#if there is some non french speaking people interested in the state of French political fanfiction

[manglechan1204]

Avant d’avoir les résultats et qu’on ait tous envie de crever, j’ai voulu faire un tour des fanfics sur la politique française ( a des fins scientifiques bien entendu ) et oh boi y’a des trucs à dire

Sur Wattpad :

-Il y’a plus de 270 fanfics Bardella x Attal ( Les gars ?? Je comprends amour haine tout ça, mais wsh )

-J'en ai trouvé aucune sur le Front Populaire ou la gauche en général ( ce qui est une bonne chose ? je suppose ? )

-Par contre j’en ai lu une ( pour la science toujours ) où ils sont des persos secondaires 🤷‍♂️

-Antoine Daniel a fait des dégâts irréparables au milieu des fanfics shitpost /pos

AO3 :

-Y’a un tag populaire " RPF Political " ( Je dois vivre avec cette info maintenant )

-La tendance est beaucoup plus au ship Macron sur ce site bien que tjr pas mal de Bardellattal ? *Ugh*

-Toujours aucune du Front Populaire mais j’en ai trouvé avec Mélenchon qui datent toutes de 2017/2018

Voila

Si vous vous voulez plus de détail hésitez pas 👍

[bimboficationblues]

so the thing about "read theory" as a mantra: in the social media sphere there is a consistent downplaying of what that kind of commitment actually entails, plus a consistent obfuscation of what exactly the commitment is necessary for.

let's say that you're interested in learning more about specifically "Marxist theory." This, I think, also raises a bunch of questions about what we mean by theory - works of political philosophy, texts on revolutionary and military strategy, political speeches, journalistic or sociological analysis, historiography - these varying things with very different discursive norms and standards of evidence or logic often get rolled into one singular object called "theory." but let's set that aside for now.

you want to learn this for maybe an assortment of reasons, here's a few (non-exhaustive) good ones:

Marxism has been a substantial historical force that has probably had a notable impact on the world around you in some way.

Learning about Marx/ism might offer some level of insight into your current social world that other things are unable to offer.

Many texts - Capital, The Wretched of the Earth, The Second Sex, The State and Revolution - are also world-historical forms of political literature, which is interesting.

Follow-up to 2 - maybe having some level of familiarity with these things will give you the ability to better articulate yourself and participate in social and political movements around you.

generally speaking the Social Media Marxist approach is to tell you to go read off a list of texts of whatever writers the author personally agrees with or whatever works she happens to have read. so you decide to start with the big guy Marx, who is at the top of the list. totally reasonable decision.

however, there are a few contextual questions that might reasonably come up when doing so.

first, it will be clear that Marx did not pop out of an intellectual vacuum; Lenin has a rather popular identification of the "three sources of Marxism" - post-Hegelian German philosophy, French socialism, and English political economy. from my perspective, these are more like three of his main objects of ire (and so in some sense are both influences and also breakages - but not strictly speaking a synthesis), but I digress. so, frequently, in order to grasp what Marx is talking about or responding to, you are going to need some level of familiarity with a lot of additional people: Smith, Ricardo, Malthus, Hegel, Bauer, Feuerbach, Hobbes, Spinoza, Rousseau, Mill, Sismondi. suddenly you are not just learning about the works of one guy, but his attitude towards all the people he relies on for support or aims his criticisms at. and each of those different intellectual relationships is going to be different. sometimes at different times!

second, and relatedly, Marx is not always the most charitable to the people he's criticizing, who were often rival socialists (so there were pretty notable political and personal stakes at work in proving them wrong or diminishing their influence over the movement). the introductory materials to the new translation of Capital also observe that Marx's approach to scholarship is, shall we say, haphazard; often he makes quotes or citations that are not actually representative of what he's citing. finally, many of the people he's criticizing have sort of been rendered obsolete historically *in no small part* due to the success of Marxism as a political orientation in the late 19th and early 20th centuries. so to determine whether Marx is being fair to the people he is basing his critique on, we will have to do some level of intellectual work to check. so now we're not just evaluating Marx's relationship to different thinkers but also the substantial content of each of those thinkers themselves.

third, Marx did not pop out of a social vacuum. all of these different writers didn't just crop up from nowhere but wrote within particular sociohistorical contexts, some of which were rather divorced from the European revolutionary wave, first worldwide financial crisis, and the shifting character of the United States in the wake of the Civil War and the formal abolition of slavery - some of the historical events that Marx was more explicitly engaging with. and the radical liberals, republicans, and socialists Marx criticized all also had their own intellectual and social histories. so now we're getting a little far afield from the initial notion, which was just to read some guy, and getting into the realm of social history, and trying to understand the relationship between world history and the ideas produced within it.

fourth, you are a subject in the world, which is to say YOU did not pop out of a social or intellectual vacuum. you likely bring predispositions, assumptions, biases, and cognitive distortions to what you read; we all do. working through those and trying to note where they're happening - where they might be fine and where they might be problematic - will require a certain willingness to reflect, to write, to take notes, to analyze and self-scrutinize, and to be critical of both yourself as a reader and of the text you are reading. (a nested problem is that we have a truly staggering amount of material from Marx and Engels, and you might have to make certain determinations as to which material is important or worthwhile or more useful, and identify the standards by which you think that - all of which requires a certain reflection on your status as a political thinker).

okay, so consider all that. we started with "I wanna read this one guy," we end with "to really grasp the work of this one guy it's also important to know both preceding and contemporaneous world history, his intellectual influences, and the gaps or silences or errors in his work.” now consider that, if you really want to be able to speak on them with some level of confidence and intellectual honesty, you have to apply approximately the same level of rigor to every other writer on the Social Media Marxist approved list - Lenin, Fanon, Che, Kollontai, Cabral, Mao, Luxemburg, whoever. not to mention their critics, both direct and indirect!

Marx developed his work through an incredibly sustained engagement with enormous volumes of different material; we have entire notebooks of him poring over Max Stirner, or Spinoza, or the political economists, or the empirical observations of English factory inspectors. I'm not saying that you have to do that, or even that one strictly *has* to go down any or all of the first three rabbitholes I identified. Marx was in the somewhat unique position of sustaining himself through the support of Engels and his journalistic work, as a product of being in perpetual exile. that's not the kind of position that most of us are typically in.

the point is not "commit yourself to being a perfect monastic scholar in order to reach perfect truth" - such a thing is probably a fantasy, even if we wish otherwise. the point is that if you think "theory" is worth taking seriously, well, you have to actually take it seriously. if you don’t think it has stakes or utility, that’s fine; different people find different things useful. I think “theory” is not a set of dead letters by canonical authors but produced through social life. but if “reading theory” is a way to clarify and assert yourself as a political subject and agent, to claim some intellectual autonomy and acquire some understanding that you can put into practice in your life, then that’s demanding. it’s not impossible, but it does take real effort and a commitment to study and a certain level of resistance to being dogmatic. otherwise you are just letting yourself be rhetorically persuaded by whatever is in front of you or whatever affirms your biases.

as Marx says in the preface to Capital, Volume I, "I am of course assuming that my readers will want to learn something new, and so are ready to think for themselves."

[mask131]

Since the French news have been blasting about the US elections since this morning, here are (if you are interested) some of the points highlighted by French commentators, journalists, politicians, politologists, and that I randomly caught this morning. If you wonder how French media are seeing this:

There are "racial minorities" among the Trump supporters and followers, despite Trump's openly racist and borderline eugenic discourse. Especially among the Latino people, where Trump gained quite a following. Why? Most of the non-White voters of Trump are men, and adhere to his conservative ideals beyond his racism. Especially over one point: homophobia. His Latino followers are hoping that by electing him they will get rid of transgenders people and the "woke madness" once and for all - this specific point of his campaign, despite actually being quite "minor", truly was a big thing for them, and his fearmongering about "Schools will turn your little boys into little girls" echoed with them. Latinos aren't the only minority to vote for Trump, but they are the ones French media speak the most about.

Turns out, Kamala Harris didn't cause a massive support of women across America: many of them still voted Trump. On a related note, commentators noted that it seems the United-States really are not willing to have a female president at all.

Part of the reason why people didn't see the red wave coming was because they under-estimated the middle-class, which is where Trump has his greatest following. The middle-class, and the literal middle of America, as this is where he resonated the most, unlike the coasts where he met some resistance (though it has been noted the coasts are more "upper-class" than the rest of the country)

Another part is how people neglected the economical factor: most Trump followers, many of those that voted for Trump, are putting their hopes and faith in him for bringing back the financial ease and comfortable lifestyle they used to have, for battling the financial crisis and inflation. Turns out, money IS indeed the motor of everything, and it was Trump's promises of money and wealth for everybody that truly won them over.

That and immigration: these are apparently the two big points that truly had Trump winning, from New-York where people are inded fed up with the mayor's handling of immigrants, to Kansas where... there's one of the smallest number of immigrants, almost none, but they're still very firghtened and angry at the issue. Trump's promises of sending the army down to the Mexican border had already formed a following base years before, but now he is also pulling on the lever of "I will bring back your men home so that they won't have to die in another land for foreigners". Interestingly, it means that with him (and his followers) the USA is giving up its former role of being the arbitrator of the world and the "policeman global conflicts". Trump promises that the American army will only care about the USA, its borders and nothing else. Even though it is also a lie because whole he speaks of bringing the soldiers home, he of course has a whole different discourse when it comes to the weapons and political plays. By this I mean:

Trump is very insistent on defending, protecting, helping Israel - or, to be more precise, he is very clear that he is a good friend and the main support of Netanyahu, and that he will help him lead his wars as much as he can. He will also helps them worsen, because unlike for example Biden and Harris which after unconditional support for Israel admitted things were going to far, a ceasfire was needed, and denounced Israel causing disastrous mass-deaths, Trump is very clear that he doesn't believe in ceasefires, nor does he belive that Israel and Palestine can coexist peacefully. Furthermore: Trump aligns on Israel because he has a strong personal beef with Iran, which is one of Israel's main enemies, originally in a more indirect, but now much more direct way. Trump even suggested that Israel be more open and violent in its attacks of Iran, even saying they should hit nuclear sites. It doesn't help that Iran is one of the countries suspected of trying to mess up with the votes and parazite the campaigns with misinformation (the other big one being Russia, but since Trump loves Putin he doesn't speak much about THIS invasion of American politics).

The fascinating thing is that there ARE Muslim followers of Trump. Muslim Trumpists exist, despite all the above, and Trump's fearmongering based on Islamic terrorism. French journalists asked them why they voted for Trump, and their answer was "To punish Biden". They wanted to punish Biden (and by extension Harris) for helping Israel in the Israel-Palestine conflict. When answered back that Trump vowed to prevent any Muslim person from entering the USA and to reject Palestinian immigrants, the Muslim voters explained that at least Trump only closed the frontier, while Biden "killed" their "brothers".

Another consequence of Trump's promises to have all American soldiers return home: it is likely the American forces will pull out of Ukraine. It was already a big complaint on his part to send so much money in Europe, and when he met with Zelensky he publicly said that he considered on the same level as Putin and wouldn't favor any of them. Add to that how much he said that Putin was great and his friend, and how he said with him the Ukrainian war would be solved in 24 hours, and how ominously Putin's official message after the election was "The Kremlin will judge the new president on his actions, not his intentions"... Oh yes and how Trump LITERALY SAID "Ukraine is gone" not that long ago, despite Ukraine still fighting for its life and to defend Europe as a whole... It is pretty clear that Trump just wants to kick Ukraine into Russia's maw, and that his "solution" for the war is to have Russia win Ukraine. As he said for the Israel-Palestine conflict, he doesn't believe in ceasefire nor in peaceful cohabitation... It also helps that a LOT of his followers don't know where Ukraine is or what it looks like, and that many of them didn't even know Ukraine existed before Russia attacked it.

Because of this, the French president official reaction to Trump's election was first a message saying "Congrats for winning by a landslide", quickly followed by another one saying "I am very happy to announce that me and the Chancellor of Germany are going to work on making a stronger, safer, more independant Europe". Aka: we know that Europe can't count on America anymore, we know that we have been too Americanized and have grown dependant of the USA, time to pull ourselves together and let America in its own mess.

Oh and also: since Trump believes climate change is a scam, despite huge storms hitting twice where he lives with disastrous consequences, and promises to rely a lot on fossil fuel and polluting business to bring back American economy to the top and make the USA the wealthiest country... The world is kind of fucked as a whole, and the weather is going to be FAR WORSE.

Plus: this time Trump's domination is far more powerful than before, as he got almost full powers, benefits from the consequences of his previous presidency, doesn't have people against him in his own party (unlike the first time he got elected), has gotten rid of those that tried to criticize or slow him down around him, AND this time he actually knows what he is doing, as the first time it seemed he wasn't planning on actually becoming president.

There's probably more about it, but that's just a handful of what I got from the news channel this morning as I woke up. Be it true or false, whether you agree or not, I just share in case you ever wondered how it looks from over here.

Now back to regular programs.

[verlaines-ex]

In addition, if we run with the monotropism theory of autism, namely that the autistic brain preferentially allocates attention to a few select channels of input and output (as opposed to dynamically distributing and re-distributing it over a large quantity of channels), the effect would be worse.

Maybe, in your natural state, you are so focused on what the other person is saying that you 'exhibit atypical body-language' by leaning in close for better hearing and looking away so you don't get disturbed by visual inputs.

In an ideal world, it would be understood that it means "this person is very interested in what I'm saying - they're even actively blocking out disturbances just to listen to me!"

In the real world, it is mostly assumed "they are uninterested and can't even be bothered to be polite about it!"

If you then inflict punishment and enforce masking, congratulations, yet another valuable & limited channel has been hijacked! There is now even less resources left over to process other streams of attention! And there were few of them in the first place!

Meanwhile, if this key difference in allocating attention was normalized and accepted, the subtle negotiations of relationships would naturally allow you to temporarily 'invest' in alternate attention allocations in a person-specific way.

The autistic person would be able to 'exercise' the intaking of alternate & more numerous streams of informations such as tone, posture etc at a self-controlled space - similarly to how you can learn a language. At first the grammar will be a mess and you'll fuck up the vocabulary, but many people will become fluent in another language, even if they retain an accent when speaking and maybe miss some cultural references in a book. But learning French probably goes best if nobody is actively screaming German into your ear 24/7.

Similarly, the non-autistic person would be able exercise their ability to limit their attention to a few channels. Much like how if you're learning to program, despite your best efforts, the computer will not understand verbal threats. Your communication will likely be most effective in C, or Python, or a graphic interface. After a while, you are bound to pick up on the fact that certain methods of input are more likely to get information across. Also, if you try to run too many programs at once, your computer will freeze. Please allocate RAM responsibly and don't throw your machine out the window because you were trying to train a personalized AI assistant in the background while playing the newest open world game and now neither are working:)

So you know how left-handedness used to be seen as demonic (it shares the latin root with the word 'sinister') and left-handed people experienced discrimination for being left-handed and they used to try to 'cure' left-handedness? Well left-handed ppl forced to use only their right hand eventually experienced a loss of fine motor function in their left hand without achieving the same degree of function in their right.

So you know how autistic ppl were often bullied and excluded for their differing traits (e.g. different non-verbal communication style) and therefore prevented from socializing with neurotypicals in the full range of what is covered by 'socialization' (i.e. positive experiences such as friendships)? Well that would imply a loss of opportunities to practice social skills! The style of the communication may be different, but getting to practice socialization in all its forms would allow the skills to develop across styles. As we stand now, social skills in their natural format (the intrinsic ones - e.g. with your social cues intuitively expressed instead of conforming to neurotypical norms) are brought to a halt due to lack of opportunities to practice, but their unnatural format (masking) fails to achieve the potential of the skills that could be developed if the inherent behaviors associated with autism were accepted as normal.

If you didn't have to focus on consciously altering your non-verbal communication in order to not be misunderstood, you could focus on actually building an emotional connection with all the complex reciprocity it involves. You could get to do this with every person you ever meet! Imagine how much you could learn! But if you're constantly bogged down with 'where are my arms? how often am i blinking? is my tone varied enough?' - how would anybody have any processing power left over to think of the other person, let alone someone already saddened by loneliness? How can I learn the specifics of this person when all my attention is focused on suppressing my natural behavior?

Left-handed people do cut paper best with left-handed scissors, but we don't laugh at them for struggling with right-handed scissors. If a left-handed person tries to draw with their right hand, we think 'of course it looks weird - they weren't drawing with their dominant hand'! If a person needs to perform a fine motor task, we will not punish them for automatically using the hand that is dominant.

What if stimming, directness, differences in eye contact, body posture, etc. were treated as natural variation? What if we learned early on that the same task may be completed naturally and correctly using a different toolset (writing carried out with the left hand instead of the right; excitement expressed with hand-flapping instead of a grin)?

When you were a kid, you learned that if your friend is left-handed, it's best if they're on the left side of the table, otherwise you're gonna bump elbows.

So why should autism be different?

[jayjuno]

Do we need political parties? Being Independent in America

Do you know which political party the first President of the United States belonged to? 

It’s a trick question.

Not every American President was affiliated with a political party- some were unaffiliated.

George Washington was not a Democrat, nor was he Republican- he was Independent. 

What is that? What does it mean when a person is Independent, politically speaking? Well, when a person isn’t affiliated with any political party, they are called unaffiliated, non-partisan, or Independent.

Washington was the first Independent President of the United States of America, and he remains the only one elected as an Independent. Think about it- how many Independents have we had in the White House since his second term ended in 1797?

George Washington was against political parties altogether. Did you know that? 

Did you know that the first President actually spoke out against political parties? That he’s still the only U.S. President to never be formally affiliated with any political party throughout his entire career? Sure, the Federalists coopted his image and his ideas for their own purposes, but that was done without his permission or endorsement. Washington never joined the Federalist Party- he was never a Federalist.

If he was alive today, he would tell us to renounce both the Democrat and Republican parties. For him, there was no red vs blue after the American Revolution- there was only the newfound unity between formerly rivaling states. 

Donald Trump represents everything Washington feared and warned us about in his Farewell Address- he explained how someone like Trump can use a political party like the Republican Party (GOP) to gain power for himself and for his family and friends. This is despotism and it must be avoided at all costs, warned the first President.

To understand how George Washington felt about political parties and how they contribute to division between Americans, read the following excerpt from Wikipedia:

“Washington continues to advance his idea of the dangers of sectionalism and expands his warning to include the dangers of political parties to the country as a whole. These warnings are given in the context of the recent rise of two opposing parties within the government—the Democratic-Republican Party led by Jefferson, and Hamilton's Federalist Party. Washington had striven to remain neutral during a conflict between Britain and France brought about by the French Revolution, while the Democratic-Republicans had made efforts to align with France, and the Federalists had made efforts to ally with Great Britain.

Washington recognizes that it is natural for people to organize and operate within groups such as political parties, but he also argues that every government has recognized political parties as an enemy and has sought to repress them because of their tendency to seek more power than other groups and to take revenge on political opponents.[4] He feels that disagreements between political parties weakened the government.

Moreover, he makes the case that "the alternate domination" of one party over another and coinciding efforts to exact revenge upon their opponents have led to horrible atrocities, and "is itself a frightful despotism. But this leads at length to a more formal and permanent despotism." From Washington's perspective and judgment, political parties eventually and "gradually incline the minds of men to seek security… in the absolute power of an individual",[1] leading to despotism. 

He acknowledges the fact that parties are sometimes beneficial in promoting liberty in monarchies, but he argues that political parties must be restrained in a popularly elected government because of their tendency to distract the government from their duties, create unfounded jealousies among groups, raise false alarms among the people, promote riots and insurrection, and provide foreign nations and interests access to the government where they can impose their will upon the country.”

You see? George Washington never wanted us to follow political parties. He wanted all Americans to be Independent. 

When he wrote about how a political party can make us want to blindly follow one individual? He was warning us about men like Donald Trump. 

When he mentioned that political parties had a tendency to provide foreign nations with access to the government? He was warning us about men like Putin. 

Do the Democrats and Republicans serving in the US congress right now know how he felt about parties? They should, since they listen to his Farewell Address every year in which he denounces them in great detail. 

Reading and understanding the Farewell Address can be difficult since Washington wrote it in the 18th century, so feel free to watch this modern abridged translation on Youtube- https://youtu.be/4mWD3T83hE0

It’s essentially a warning against the dangers of political parties. They know this, yet Democrats and Republicans in Washington D.C. keep trying to make Americans feel like we have to choose parties anyway.

We don’t have to choose between two political parties- we don’t have to choose parties who care more about holding onto power than they do about public service.

We can be Independent. 

----------------------

WORKS CITED:

Read or download George Washington’s Farewell Address for free here- https://www.senate.gov/artandhistory/history/resources/pdf/Washingtons_Farewell_Address.pdf

Wikipedia excerpt for George Washington’s statements on the dangers of political parties within his Farewell Address: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/George_Washington%27s_Farewell_Address#Political_parties

Wikipedia section on American Independent politicians: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Independent_politician#United_States

Wikipedia on George Washington’s Presidency: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Presidency_of_George_Washington

[lameravigliadoro]

oh so you're learning french, Twitch edition : 5 french streamers

you have some kind of basis in french, but you want to go further with fast-paced, advanced level vocabulary? here's a non-exhaustive list of some of the best french speaking streamers to improve your language skills and understanding of the language in a native context, as well as discover interesting people and expand your knowledge on french culture and history!

domingo : video react, most popular talkshow on twitch & League

fun, easy-going livestreams! he hosts a talkshow every Tuesday evening (8pm-10pm, +1) called "Popcorn" : in fact, it's the most popular talkshow on the french twitch and you can get introduced to most of the streamers with interviews of singers, actors, or even a football player, games, worldwide news ("les actus de PA" --'PA' is actually Domingo's real name alias, Pierre-Alexis --'actus' means 'news'). He talks clearly most of the times, though is pretty fast-paced.

here's a video extract in which Ponce (brown-haired, rond glasses), Baghera (blond girl), Simon Puech (brown-haired, black t-shirt) and Domingo (on the far left, black beard and beige sweatshirt) talk about alcohol consumption in France as well as regional clichés and their own relationship with alcohol.

littlebigwhale : singer & pubg

she actually livestreams in english sometimes! she mostly plays PUBG and other games, and on sundays she sings during her karaoke. she doesn't talk that fast so don't hesitate to go and see for yourself! if you want to sing and have fun, she does karaoke nights every so often with another streamer, Zerator, (available on youtube too, just search "littlebigwhale zerator karaoke and you should find two or three streams).

here's a stream from a among us night when pokimane joined some french streamers! littlebigwhale is the one wearing bear ears and glasses.

etoiles : culture & smash bros

smash bros player and host. also, he has a thing called "la nuit de la culture/la nuit de la cult'" (= the culture night) during which he watches a "Question pour un champion" episode (="Going for Gold" french version on the national channel) and tries to answer the questions to perfect his general knowledge skills and he spends hours looking up stuff he doesn't know --a very fun and smart way to actually get more knowledgable on french culture and history, expand your vocabulary in sciences, gastronomy, botany and just be in a friendly, positive mood on saturday nights! the culture night is every saturday from 8pm to midnight or even more. ==> fun fact : the Question pour un champion host (called Samuel Etienne) is actually livestreaming on twitch too after Etoiles showed him! his channel is samueletienne and he reads french press every morning, it's very fun and interesting if you want to be in touch with french news in an easy way.

jean massiet : french politics expert & pilot

he's one of my favourite streamer! he's a specialist in the french political life as he worked for several secretaries of state (in french, des "ministres") as a parliamentary attaché. he often does news roundups, livestreames every wednesdays debates at the Assemblée Nationale (national assembly), and is careful about democratizing politics to the youth, making it easy to understand. he's been hosting a political talkshow on his twitch channel too (named "Backseat", every thursdays, starting at 19:30, though the season finale was in last june, let's hope it gets renewed in september), i highly recommend you try and watch some episodes! they invite french politicians (ministres, députés, chefs de parti, porte-paroles) and interview them. when i say they, i talk about the commentators who are on the show with Jean and who are all knowledgable, politicised and funny and come from different political backgrounds to respect a sort of 'neutrality' : this way, ideas and visions from the far-left, left and centre-right are freely expressed on the show. another thing i appreciate is that, nevertheless this neutrality, they refuse to invite far-right politicians and fascists, even when it comes to popular candidates for the présidentielle.

rivenzi : sport games, history & all kind of nintendo games

he's famous for broadcasting and commentating sport matches (football, rugby, he also commentated the Olympic Games in Tokyo!) so if you like sport games go check him out he knows a lot and can make everything interesting! rivenzi also organises history lives as well : the one i've linked below is one amongst many on his channel in which he invites a french historian to talk informally and in-depth about subjects like nazism (like this one), the Algerian war, etc. there's more history live replays on his Spotify account so don't hesitate to check it out! i love these history lives because rivenzi is also knowledgable (he went to the uni to study history) and interested in history, so these conversations are gold mines, especially for people who know nothing about the subjects, the goal is to democratise and vulgarise difficult and heavy topics!

+ he's one of the funniest people on this platform (according to me) + he's also Breton and is very proud of it (we all are)

for this history live, rivenzi invites the historian and college lecturer Nicolas Patin to talk about his book, "Kruger, un bourreau ordinaire" (= "an ordinary executioner"), a biography about the nazi chief of the S.S and police in Poland during the WWII and is responsible for the mass deportation of Polish Jews.

don't hesitate to ask for clarifications, i tried to be as clear and consice as possible! for most twitch lives, you can find a lot of free replays on their twitch channels or even on their youtube channels, don't be afraid to do your own digging! also, i know it can be intimidating to watch un-subbed videos in french, but the more you'll hear spoken and native french, the more you'll get used to the natural speaking flow and internet slang vocabulary. finally, i restricted the list to 5 streamers, but i'm sure that if you watch a few of these streamers' videos or even catch them on live, you'll hear about other streamers as they pretty much all know each other and are friends, like Mister MV, Ponce, Zerator, Ultia, AngleDroit, Gotaga, Maghla, DFG, RebeuDeter, Aminematuer, Squeezie (most famous french youtuber and streamer), Horty, BagheraJones, etc.

have fun! :)

[modern-vellichor]

Just Like Her Mother

Chapter Three

Summary: Its your birthday, and a new side of you is seen.

Warnings: alcohol consumption, cigarettes, smoking, lakes :)

Tuesday morning rolled around, warm sun slipping through the curtains of Charles' room. He slipped out of bed and got dressed. His hair was still a mess as he lumbered down the stairs. He could see you waiting anxiously by the open door.

You were watching the driveway excitedly. Charles stood behind you and yawned.

"What's happening?"

"Theo's coming," you stated.

Just then a car began to drive up to the house. You started rolling back and forth on your heels, excitement oozing out of you. Charles watched with half-asses interest. When the car was halfway up the drive, a door opened and a boy around your age jumped out.

Immediately the two of you began running towards each other. The car kept driving and you lept into the boy's arms. He lifted you off the ground and spun you around. You walked back to the door still in each other's arms and Charles rolled his eyes.

"Charles!" You called out, beckoning for him to come to the car.

He stepped into the fresh morning air with a soft scowl.

"Charles, this is my cousin Theo"

Suddenly Charles felt bad about all the hassle he gave you about Theo. He faked a welcoming smile and shook the boys hand.

Other people exited the car. Theo backed away to fetch a baby out of the back.

You introduced him to your aunt and uncle, and to the two other children, both only young.

You ushered them all inside, Charles hung back so he could walk with you.

"hey," he whispered. "I'm sorry, about... you know"

"it's okay," you whispered back. You jogged away to catch up with your family.

When Charles arrived in the dining room, the table was laid with breakfast. You sat across from Theo, feeding a cooing baby in your lap. You were all sitting towards one side of the table, the seat at the head was free. Charles sat down and dished for himself.

Your uncle talked to him with great interest, asking him all sorts of questions. You spent the entire day with your family, laughing and drinking and smoking. As non hit and the sun was blazing down on the house, you all moved into the garden.

As Charles followed you through the backdoor he realized he had never been this side of the house. He took in his surroundings as you all walked the little path to a small patio with a table and chairs.

You propped your feet up on the table, a cigarette in one hand and a full glass in the other. The two young children played quietly at their parents feet. Everyone at the table had a cigarette but Charles. Your uncle lazily threw one across the table at him.

"So, Charles," he drawled. His English was good but you could tell it wasn't his first language. "Y/N tells me you've spent time in Italy"

"Oh, leave him, Uncle!" You giggled.

You were a different person now that your family was here. Charles could tell it wasn't an act either. You were happy and free spirited.

"oh no, it's okay," Charles mumbled quietly to you before turning to your Uncle.

You spent most of the afternoon like that, occasionally going inside to fetch another bottle of whatever they decided to drink next. They were up until late in the evening, after the children were put to bed. Eventually Charles excused himself but he could hear you laughing into the early hours of the morning.

Charles slept in late the next morning. Your uncle's car was missing from the driveway. He looked for you before finding you in the drawing room. The fire was crackling softly and you had a cup of coffee on the table in front of you. Theo sat across from you, reading the newspaper out loud. A young girl played at your feet and a baby cooed softly in your lap.

Charles sat down in a free seat next to you. You mumbled a soft good morning and Theo read on. Charles poured himself a coffee from the pot on the table.

"Who's the little guy?" He asked softly.

"this is James," you said, bouncing the baby softly. "And that's Adeline," you nodded to the girl on the floor. She was no older than five.

"Where's your uncle?"

"They've gone out for the day, won't be back until late"

Charles fell silent as Theo turned to you. He didn't even spare Charles a glance as he spoke to you. His voice was soft and in a language Charles didn't speak. His Italian was good, but he didn't speak French. He recognized a few words but the two of you spoke so quickly that Charles gave up and picked the paper up off the table.

His interest only piqued when he heard his name muttered. But the two of you still conversed in French.

"Charles?" You asked softly.

He hummed in response, not taking his eyes off the paper, though he wasn't reading.

"would you like to bring the children out with us?"

In his peripheral, Charles could see Theo shaking his head lightly.

"oh, no. You two go ahead, I'll hang back"

You murmured softly but got up anyway. You patted Adeline on the back and took her little hand, leading her away from Charles' feet.

You and Theo were out for the whole afternoon. Charles didn't even see you when you got home, you took the children into your office. Charles walked past the open door and stole a glance. You and Theo were sitting on the floor playing with Adeline and James.

Charles did get to see you at dinner. This time he was included in the conversation. You kept snapping softly at Adeline, who was hanging off of Charles' leg and asking him silly questions.

"Adeline," you whispered angrily. "come sit over here and stop bothering uncle Charles"

With wide eyes she waddled sadly over to the seat next to you. Charles chuckled quietly into his drink.

The three of you made awkward conversation as you ate. Eventually you fell asleep, little James asleep on your chest. Theo turned to Charles.

"I'm gonna take Addie and James to bed."

Charles nodded and watched him lift James out of your arms and lead Adeline towards the stairs.

Charles pushed out of his chair and made his way over to your sleeping form. He hooked an arm under your knees and one behind your back. He grunted softly as he lifted you out of the chair. You didn't stir. He carried you up the stairs and towards his bedroom, it was closer anyway. He laid you in his bed, tucking you in, before slotting in on the other side.

You woke up in the middle of the night when James began to cry. Charles woke up and watched you hurriedly walk out the door. A few seconds later the baby grew quiet again and Charles didn't see you until morning.

You all sat at the table, sharing coffee and cigarettes. You and Theo laughed loudly and your aunt and uncle watched proudly. Charles observed the scene from where he sat at the head of the table. He couldn't help but notice how domestic it all felt to him.

"so, Y/N," your uncle finally said and the table quieted down. "Your aunt and I have a little something for you"

You shook your head politely, eyes wide in soft surprise. Your uncle placed a neatly wrapped parcel on the table in front of you. You gentle untied the ribbon and unfolded the paper to reveal a thick leather bound book. You rifled through it with a smile and thanked your uncle. Charles watched in mild confusion as Theo also pulled out a little box that contained a necklace.

"happy birthday, lady bug," he said as he smiled softly.

"Any big birthday plans?" Your aunt chuckled loudly.

"uhm," your gaze fell upon the confused face of Charles. Suddenly you grew nervous. "Yeah, we're having a party. Some family friends, some of the locals are coming too. Mum planned it a while back and you know how she is so,,,"

"how is she?" Charles asked, it was the first thing he had said all morning.

"Her parties are always lavish, lots of people in expensive clothes and big dresses, you know," you choked out the words as you spoke to Charles.

You continued to tell the group the plans for the evening before excusing yourself from the table and disappearing upstairs.

The last time your mother was home, which was a long time ago. She had slipped Hilda a box with strict instructions.

'Do not give this to Y/N until her birthday'

And of course Hilda followed them and kept the present hidden. She knocked gently on your bedroom door. You called out and she pushed it open, box in hand. She left in on your bed with a smile. She gave you a quick hug and muttered a 'happy birthday, sweetheart' before leaving.

You slid off the lid and opened the tissue paper to reveal a rather extravagant gown. It was long and silky and dark, you pulled it out and laid it on the bed. In the box there was a piece of card covered in your mother's handwriting.

Happy birthday, Y/N

I'm sorry I cant be there, wear this tonight, for me.

Love, mum

You smiled sadly at the note and slipped the dress onto a hanger and into your closet.

The party was loud and full and boring. You sat, slumped in a corner next to Theo. Charles hopped from conversation to conversation lazily, always keeping an eye on you.

Every time a young man would walk over to you Charles' blood began to boil. Everytime someone asked you to dance or asked about your love life Charles nearly raged. But he kept it cool because he knew you were uninterested. And deep down he wished it was because of him.

A few boring hours passed and Theo turned to you with an excited look. He whispered in your ear and your face lit up, you nodded frantically and the two if you hurried towards the door.

Charles followed you out of the house, through the backdoor. He raced back inside and up the stairs to his bedroom, he gazed out the window, searching for you. You came into sight at the far end of the garden, by a little pond. Charles could hear your faint laughter. He rushed back down the stairs and through the garden. He slowed down as he neared the edge of the lake, half hiding behind some hedges. He arrived just in time to watch you and Theo jump into the lake, shrieking and laughing. Your dress was soaked, and Theo resurfaced to throw his sodden jacket on the grass.

The wet fabric of your dress weighed you down but you didn't care as you and Theo dived under the water once again. Reeds grew from the lakes floor. The lake wasn't really part of your garden, it wasn't part of anyone's garden. It was always busy during the summer as the surrounding houses brought their kids for a swim.

The moon was high in the sky and the evening air was cold. You could hear faint music and see distant lights from the party ongoing in the house. People would be leaving soon and you knew that. The sooner they left the better, you thought.

Charles finally left the protection of the hedge, calling out for you, feigning worry.

"Y/N?"

He heard you mutter a curse and hurry out of the water.

"Charles? What are you doing? You should be at the party," you muttered angrily, still dripping.

"so should you," he stated coolly, with a sly grin.

"what do you want?," you snapped, annoyed by the man.

"Nothing, I was just worried about you!" Charles mocked.

You rolled your eyes and dived back into the water. Charles called out for you as you disappeared under the dark surface. He stood on the edge of the grass, looking out over the glassy lake. Suddenly two hands emerged, grabbing onto him and tugging him into the black water.

It was cold and unexpected. He gasped and sputtered as he surface, you a few feet away from him, laughing loudly and uncontrollably. He glared angrily at you and you just swam away, still giggling.

Charles adored this new side of you. This playful, and free, and happy side of you. He longed to see it more often. Deep down, Charles hated himself for being soft and caring, but you seemed to bring out the best in him, for good or worse.

[aragima]

hannibal questions! 🍖🔪

@nietzscheantrout @horrorlesbians and @hanniba1 wanted me to answer these hannibal questions and i wrote too much but oh well! thanks to all 3 of you ilu!!!

favorite episode and why: oh we’re just goin straight to the hard questions huh um OKAY so i think i can only do an ep a season - s1: SORBET SUPREMACY! you get to see the exact moment will looks at hannibal and thinks “.........shit. it’s him isn’t it. he’s The One. SHIT.” and that is so important to me - s2: this one is really hard maybe naka-choko? it’s so fucking gay and sexy. but tome-wan... but mizumono............ yeah idk - s3: torn between digestivo and the wrath of the lamb cuz they both hurt SOOO good much; i love will breaking up with hannibal and hannibal manipulating the situation so will can’t leave asldkjansk it’s so toxic we have to stan..... and for twotl i mean do i really have to give a reason every scene LIVES in my mind and it contains my favorite shot in the whole show:

that is LOVE baby! that is DESIRE! that is being ENTHRALLED!!!!

least favorite episode and why: i feel like they’re all so necessary that it’s kind of impossible to say but probably antipasto. i get sick of hannibal and bedelia’s shenanigans really quickly and as much as i hate to admit it... i miss will. i also think it was an extremely weak season opener and i blame it for getting the show canceled sjshshsgsg the resentment...

favorite side character: chiyoh or jimmy or actually wait— RANDALL TIER 🖤

if you could bring back one character who died, who would it be?: RANDALL FUCKING TIER. i want there to be a weird thing with him and hannibal and will going on. but also i love what his death did for will so idfk, other than him it’s gotta be beverly

dish prepared in the show that you would like to try eating/making: i was supposed to make hannibal’s osso bucco recipe like 3 weeks ago but it completely slipped my mind so i guess i’ll get on that my next grocery trip  

which side character would you kill off?: chilton just because for god’s sake just let the man DIE ALREADY poor guy <- i’m taking ava’s answer because YEAH

was there any scene that you didn’t like to look at?: nah. the skin ripping scenes at the beginning of either kaiseki or sakizuki (idk i don’t remember, i hardly watch s2a) are particularly brutal but i tough it out

biggest ship: i mean do i even have to say

why did you start watching hannibal?: my wife, who was my girlfriend at the time, and her dad were watching it as it was airing and i was like “oh cool hannibal lecter origin story” but due to inconsistent access to the episodes i would just watch it randomly and that is... not the way to watch hannibal. i gave up around the end of s2 but knew hannigram was It regardless. i decided to watch s3 for the first time earlier this year just to have finished it and was like HOLD UP and did an immediate rewatch that left me... well, how i am now

favorite hannibal fic if you’ve read any?:

oh boy. yall ready for this? all of these can be found on ao3 obviously (i’m so sorry this is so long but i guess i’ve been asked to put together a fic rec anyway)

as soft, as wide as air by blackknightsatellite, the ladders series by emungere, blackbird by emungere, consenting to dream series by emungere, taken for rubies by emungere, at first meeting by emungere, protect me from what i want by @alienfuckeronmain, god of the cold, cold wars by highermagic, the abyss smiled back by highermagic, pomegranate seeds by highermagic, absolute zero by highermagic, in the truly gruesome do we trust by sidnihoudini, TKO by sidnihoudini, oh dear by lunarwench, each according to its kind by chapparral_crown, a flood in our hearts by nanoochka, let me sinful be by darlingred, uncomplicated by stratumgermanitivum & youaremydesign, good bones by @damnslippyplanet​, like they do in babylon by @damnslippyplanet​, your obedient servant by kareliasweet, past our satellites by shotgunsinlace, only the tender meat by isagel, the shape of me will always be you by missdisoriental, a white-walled room by rodabonor, spleen et idéal by rodabonor, the paper doll series by rodabonor, a common point of interest by rodabonor [i do NOT like a/b/o stuff but if i did... it’s this fic], just thought you should know by earthsickwithoutyou, the sacrificial lamb by princesskay, transcendent suffering by itsbeautiful, not something polite by moistdrippings, leave your message after the tone by onewhositswithturtles, holes in the floor of the mind by feverdreamblood, crossing caina by feverdreamblood, the archipelago series by melusine10, but seas between us braid hae roar’d by kareliasweet

have you watched any of the hannibal films?: yeah all of them except manhunter! i grew up watching silence of the lambs because my mom loved it and i went thru a big edward norton phase as a teen so i’ve seen red dragon like 10 times

have you read the thomas harris books?: no and i’m not going to lmao #fakefan

favorite murder tableau: if we’re talking just hannibal’s- the judge. if we’re talking Murder Bad But Kinda Pretty like in general probably the mushroom people or the totem

favorite blood spill: will imagining hannibal while he beats randall to death or The Gutting of Will Graham

what’re some of your headcanons?: - will is good at shibari (backed up in canon: his fishing knots, the firefly man’s full body hishi karada harness) - hannibal rarely listens to modern, non-classical music but he’s a björk fan and he saw one of her chapel performances during the vespertine era and was Moved - will listens to classic rock (zeppelin, the doors, pink floyd) with some classic country (patsy, merle, johnny) and blues (billie, muddy, bessie) thrown in. he’s also a sucker for early/mid-90s college rock/alternative/grunge - will plays the piano (because of the piano in his living room) and the harmonica (because he’s country white trash); he’s kind of shit tho - hannibal fell for will somewhere between “my thoughts are often not tasty” and “you won’t like me when i’m psychoanalyzed” (love at first sight! at last sight! at ever and ever sight!!!) - will’s circumcised, hannibal isn’t 🤪 - hannibal’s a gemini!!!! adaptable, creative, intelligent, outgoing, impulsive, etc - will’s an aquarius!!!!! analytical, a loner, temperamental, unique, compassionate, etc - will’s mom was jewish go read my fic about it https://archiveofourown.org/works/26774326 - hannibal is an agender man (tbh i think of this as canon, it’s just unstated/undefined) - hannibal can speak russian, spanish, and a teensy bit of portuguese in addition to the other languages we know he speaks (lithuanian, english, french, italian, japanese) - will speaks limited amounts of french; he learned it as a kid in louisiana - ED TW will sometimes has a Difficult relationship with food due to food instability by the way of poverty as a kid and goes through periods where it’s hard to keep himself fed, but hannibal is so good for him in that way because he keeps him from going hungry 😓 (yes this is me projecting but also it makes SENSE) - hannibal typically bottoms but THEY DEFINITELY ARE BOTH VERS and will never stops being surprised by how much he loves catching a dick. every time is like religious experience. okay? okay - they’re also both very kinky and switches but tbh.... will was made to Dom hannibal like that’s the reason he exists he could drag that old bitch around by a leash and hannibal would be in heaven HANNIBAL WOULD CALL HIM SIR - the first time they have sex hannibal comes like immediately but he isn’t embarrassed because he’s hannibal fucking lecter and hannibal lecter doesn’t get embarrassed - i have a hc for their favorite sex positions but i’m not gonna put that here because i don’t want yall calling me crazy any more than you probably already do but if you wanna know just DM me all i do is think about them fucking it’s a curse - okay no more dirty stuff abigail called hannibal “dad” on more than one occasion and it was half-joking but it also felt comfortable to her; she never thought to call will “dad” because he’s a weirdo and never knew her as much as he knew his idea of her - hannibal taught her to play piano at the cliff house - beverly is pansexual!!! - brian and jimmy kissed one time when they were drunk and they NEVER talk about it EVER - chiyoh is straight probably. i know, i know, everyone says she’s a lesbian and if she’s a lesbian to you that’s awesome! she’s a lesbian! but idk i just think she’s SO fucking straight and tbh i mourn bc that’s my wife. she could MAYBE be bicurious... - chiyoh is non-monogamous and doesn’t do serious relationships, she doesn’t like the idea of being tied to one person ever since she left the lecter castle - she helped hannibal and will escape after The Fall; she told hannibal she would continue to watch over him and i think she did, she got them a boat and got them the fuck out of there - MOLLY IS DOING SO MUCH BETTER WITHOUT WILL. SHE’S SO GLAD SHE GOT OUT OF THAT WHEN SHE DID. she has a good, long talk with alana and finds out all the shit about him and hannibal that will never told her (and it was a lot), gets drunk and burns all his shit, and then washes her hands of the whole thing; moves to a different state, gets a girlfriend, and never thinks about will again

okay i’m capping it there or i’m never gonna stop!! i’m not tagging anyone cuz i think everyone has done this by now lmao but if you’re a mutual who hasn’t and you want to just do it and say i tagged you!! mwah!!!!

[walaw717]

“The first peace, which is the most important, is that which comes within the souls of people when they realize their relationship, their oneness with the universe and all its powers, and when they realize at the center of the universe dwells the Great Spirit, and that its center is really everywhere, it is within each of us.” ― Black Elk

I heard the phrase “you are the Indians now” over three decades ago.  

I do not remember exactly who said it, I think it was in a conversation with Russel Means,   if was said in a speech or to me privately, but that does not matter much. I heard it the other day in a commercial Hollywood production, “You are the Indians now” and realized that  industrial colonial commercial America was finding one more way to take the strength and power out of the words we need to survive. When a phrase is taken out of human context it begins to lose its power. When a thing is commercialized it quickly become trite.

We must understand that this phrase, “you are the Indian now” actually does have meaning and power. It is a reality we all need to understand as we are demeaned, bullied , locked down and social distanced by those we have given economic, military and political authority to – what Eisenhour called “the military industrial complex”.  To understand this all we need to do is look at how the authority of the military industrial complex that stretches  back through American history has been used to the “profit” of the few at the expense of the many.

America was opened  by the ever-expanding greed of the Euro-Asians.  The Spanish who had recently broken the rule of what they considered an occupying Afro-Asian power, Islam, began to assert itself and in its assertion of its power created the voyage of Columbus not as a voyage of discovery but as a voyage of economic power and expansion. Columbus’s voyage was quickly followed by Cortez, Pizzaro and a multitude of the leaders of Spain’s military industrial complex. ( Even though this term had not been invented yet it is the appropriate shorthand for those who would rule.)

Push forward barely 300 years and  South America, plundered as thoroughly as the Spanish could in their own areas of captured authority saw another economic power create a myth of shaking off the plunderers to the north, the English, and form a new  “non colony” colonial power.  

It was a strange combination forces that created the United States – men of considerable economic authority created an economic war but based upon  human principles of freedom and self-governance. The reality is they laid the foundation a great colonial power. They used  the power of myth and spirituality to unite the colonials  and in time won an economic war against the mother corporation. These were smart men and oddly sincere, with possibly only Jefferson understanding the dangers inherent in the authority of economic power. Jefferson spoke strongly about  not giving  economic power and control to bankers, yet Hamilton did, and created the source of the force that was to colonize north America through the military industrial complex that slowly grew, in it’s need and greed for land and all the resources it contained – animal, mineral, lumber.

“So Indian policy has become institutionalized and the result has been that American people have become more dependent on government and that the American people have become more dependent on corporations.” ~ Russell Means

The devastation that followed for the American Indian nations was total and it was accomplished at first by outright war and disease and  later by confinement, control of movement , isolation and most of all by breaking the power of the spiritual structures of each community that was conquered. This occurred in America while the European economic powers did the same to Africa and Asia.

It is important to understand that behind all this “colonization” were corporations – powerful economic institutions controlled mostly by men, institutions  built upon the love of “growth, development, money, possession” feeding their narcissism. These were and are men (and women) who truly believed that they were creating a better world though pillage of communities around the world and breaking the  local social and spiritual systems they encountered.

And today – here we are again.

The corporations are supporting political authority that use that authority to again break people to the will of the power of corporate economics.  

Do not be fooled by thinking that the corporate war between Donald Trump and the Globalists is in your interest.  It is a war about who will control the economy of the world. And it is not a race war – though the corporatists want you to think that.  The heads of the corporations are as much Chinese, Arab and African today as they are American, French , Swiss and German.  Race becomes the bait for the conflict which allows them to distract us while they remake the few institutions, we have that are foundational for us to not all become slaves to their consumer machine.  And just as they did with  American Indians, African and Asians, one of the fundamental tenets of corporate power is that  we need to be separated from the land and from each other and the social and spiritual cohesion that  healthy societies have.

Are these people knowingly evil?  Not really . Well maybe some are.  

They do meet together at places like Davos and the G – summits, however many are part of the economic powers at the moment and discuss how to wring the greatest “wealth” for themselves out of the earth. Do not think for a moment however that they are really concerned for your welfare other than as a commodity which they can exploit.

The activist/poet John Trudell says this well –

“It’s like there is this predator energy on this planet, and this predator energy feeds on the essence of the spirit.”

The worldwide lock downs have crushed the poor, increased domestic violence, suicide and  fear. We all know this – at least those who continue to not trust a government that they understand is the hand maiden of the industrial/commercial/ colonial ruling class.

“The darkest secret of this country, I am afraid, is that too many of its citizens imagine that they belong to a much higher civilization somewhere else. That higher civilization doesn’t have to be another country. It can be the past instead—the United States as it was before it was spoiled by immigrants and the enfranchisement of the blacks. This state of mind allows too many of us to lie and cheat and steal from the rest of us, to sell us junk and addictive poisons and corrupting entertainments. What are the rest of us, after all, but sub-human aborigines?”― Kurt Vonnegut

This has played out it the media as a racist battle, but it is no longer, if it ever was, about race. It is about exploitation. It is about breaking the populations of the world into a weakened consumer serving class.  

The economic authoritarians have used a broken economic theory, socialism, to create turmoil with its false promise of  a new age and we, now educated by the schools they took control of fifty years ago,creating a watered down curricula that discourages thinking and enhances  emotion, have used Marxism to create a fundamental break in our society.  The people founding and  running BLM are as much operatives for the colonial driven Chinese oligarchy as the Chinese scholar spies in our universities. But again, it is not just the Chinese nor just rich white people – it is the authority class – those who control the flow of information as well as the power of the ability to work.

We are all Indians now, and African and Asian who have felt the power of the colonial might of the corporations to lock us in our homes, to cover our faces live oppressed muslim women, to comply out of fear. 

Colonialism is not new, and it is not white, though its latest  historic manifestation was white beginning with the Spanish rape of central and South America. Colonialism is historic, it does not know race – it is when one people believe they have the right and the authority to  use other people to  gain wealth for themselves.  The Mongols who swept out of Asia into Eastern Europe and India, the  Muslims who charged out of Arabia and north Africa were as much colonizers as the Persian , Romans, Greeks, Egyptians.  The real tool that all colonizers use is the dehumanization of other men women and children and  create them as commodities either on the slave block  or on the corner of the block talking about the latest phoney fad created in shoes.

When one looks at world history there seems to be a certain inevitability to this colonial oppression.

There is really only one hope and that lies in the spiritual path of  turning to a larger power than all of us whether we call it god, grandfather, mother earth – and becoming fully human in our relationships. To do that means we turn away from  consumerism and turn toward our relationship with all life that we share on this earth. And we fight back, we refuse to surrender our individual faces, our shared life and death and grief.  Although the churches, mosques, synagogues and temples have at times been as much of the problem as the solution  the fact that  those in authority do not want us to gather there speaks volumes to the power of the spiritual life and the need to gather there to good purpose. 

Again John Trudell - ���We have power… Our power isn’t in a political system, or a religious system, or in an economic system, or in a military system; these are authoritarian systems… they have power… but it’s not reality. The power of our intelligence, individually or collectively IS the power; this is the power that any industrial ruling class truly fears: clear coherent human beings.”

[lingbooks]

Wordslut: A Feminist Guide to Taking Back the English Language

While I know a lot of linguists who are feminists, there is some tension between feminist ideals and the anti-prescriptivist approach that linguists take towards language. Linguists, as a general rule, aim to document and examine language as it is used, without providing their own opinions on how they think language should be used. This approach to language allows linguists to show that certain forms of language, from split infinitives to singular they, are not bad or wrong or “grammatically incorrect.” However, when it comes to sexist language, it’s a lot harder to say that there’s no such thing as “bad” language use. 

Some of the questions that arise are easily answered. It is fairly easy to distinguish between using slurs and splitting infinitives, as slurs are meant to hurt or disparage people, while split infinitives only offend the sensibilities of some long dead men who desperately wished English were more like Latin. But what about less malicious language use that still has sexist undertones? What about calling ships or storms she? What about using the word guys to refer to groups that contain women?

 I thought a lot about this contradiction while reading Wordslut: A Feminist Guide to Taking Back the English Language by Amanda Montell, a book that attempts to cover a wide variety of topics related to language and gender. Montell’s background in linguistics admittedly isn’t particularly extensive—she has a bachelor’s degree in linguistics, but she’s primarily a journalist who only occasionally writes about linguistics. (I should probably also state that, depending on how you count my graduate work in a related field, I have the same amount of linguistics education, so I’m not going to make any judgments on who “really counts” as a linguist.) That said, Wordslut is definitely a linguistics book—and a pretty good one at that.

 Wordslut covers a broad variety of topics in sociolinguistics. Some are expected. The first chapter discusses the variety of (often derogatory) slang words used to describe women, while another chapter discusses the ways women speak to each other. Other chapters cover topics I see less frequently. One chapter, for example, looks at how women swear, while another looks at the vast array of slang words used to refer to genitalia. (I’d warn you that this book is NSFW, but if you’re reading a book entitled Wordslut at work in the first place, you’re a braver soul than I am.) One of my favorite chapters focused on how gay people speak, including both discussions of gay slang as well as examining why there’s a “gay voice” but no real “lesbian voice.” While I already was familiar with some of the topics in the chapter, I was not aware of Polari, a sort of code once used by British gay men as early as the 1500s that gave us such words as twink, camp, and fantabulous, and now I definitely want to know more about it. On a similar note, throughout the book, Montell makes sure to discuss queer, trans, and nonbinary experiences when relevant, which provides perspective that’s usually lacking in older writing about language and gender.

I did find that the quality varied from chapter to chapter—or even within the same chapter. Consider, for example, the chapter on catcalling. One section of the chapter compared catcalling behaviors with linguistic studies on compliments, breaking down precisely why catcalling is not a compliment. I thought this was a really interesting analysis, but I found the rest of the chapter fairly dull; some of it discussed facts I (and most other feminists) already know about how men dominate conversations and interrupt women, while other parts talked about the act of catcalling more generally. (A problem I found throughout the book is that Montell sometimes chose to discuss general feminist issues without really tying them back to linguistics.) While some of this unevenness is to be expected in a book with such a broad scope, one pattern emerged: I generally enjoyed the portions discussing how women speak, such as the chapter about conversational norms in groups of women or the section about the many uses of like, more than the portions discussing how women are spoken about. Perhaps this is because the former read like a celebration, while the latter was more of a rant. Montell is not happy about how our culture talks about women, and while I don’t disagree with her, I often found myself more frustrated than properly fired up.

It is worth noting that Montell is not an impartial voice throughout the book. She wants our language to become more equitable. Mostly, her ambitions are good. (And in her defense, she notes that certain approaches to making language more equitable, such as attempts in 70s to create a “women’s language” or storming a dictionary headquarters to demand the word slut be removed, are unlikely to be successful.) But in doing so, sometimes her own linguistic biases shine through. Consider, for example, an anecdote from the intro of the book, where Montell gives the following speech to a woman who critiques her use of the word y’all:

I like to see y’all as an efficient and socially conscious way to handle the English language’s lack of a second-person plural pronoun. I could have used the word you to address the two girls, but I wanted to make sure your daughter knew I was including her in the conversation. I could also have said you guys, which has become surprisingly customary in casual conversation, but to my knowledge, neither of these children identifies as male, and I try to avoid using masculine terms to address people who aren’t men, as it ultimately works to promote the sort of linguistic sexism many have been fighting for years. I mean, if neither of these girls is a guy, then surely together they aren’t guys, you know?

 It’s a nice “take down the prescriptivist” story in some ways, but while I agree that y’all is a perfectly acceptable and useful word, Montell tries to argue that she chose to use y’all not just because her geographical and linguistic background make it the natural choice for her but because it’s the best choice, thereby turning an anti-prescriptivist argument into a prescriptivist one. Later in the same speech, she dismisses the option of using the pronoun yinz because it “doesn’t roll off the tongue nicely.”  I’m more intrigued, however, by her insistence that it would be sexist to use you guys. Montell notes, “Many speakers genuinely believe guys has become gender neutral. However, scholars agree that guys is just another masculine generic in cozier clothing. There’d be no chance of you gals earning the same lexical love.”  However, she provides no real evidence that guys isn’t truly neutral to speakers who use it, only that it is less marked than gals and that only masculine terms can ever reach this level of unmarkedness. I can’t help but wonder if it’s speakers who are excluding women when using phrases like you guys or if Montell simply hears it that way due to her own linguistic background.

 Another issue I had with this book is that it heavily focuses on English. While the topics discussed throughout the book are fairly universal, only one chapter provides any non-English examples. However, given how Montell handles these non-English examples, especially those from non-Western languages, in that one chapter, that might be for the best. The chapter examines how grammatical gender affects speakers’ perceptions of natural gender, as well as the political consequences, and at points, it’s very effective. I was particularly intrigued by her discussion of French feminists’ attempts to introduce feminine terms for certain jobs in a language where words like doctor are obligatorily masculine (and l’Académie Française is trying very hard to keep them that way). A few pages later, Montell moves onto talk about more complex gender and noun class systems. She gives the now famous example of Dyirbal, where most animate nouns belong to one noun class but “women, fire, and dangerous things” belong to another. She then concludes that this demonstrates that this shows something about Dyirbal speakers’ worldviews—that they see everything as masculine unless it could “literally kill you.” It’s a compelling argument in some ways, but it’s hard to discuss Dyirbal speakers’ worldviews without remembering one thing: Dyirbal is an indigenous Australian language with a single-digit number of native speakers. Yes, it has an interesting—and perhaps problematic—approach to gender, but it’s tied to a very specific (and mostly eradicated) cultural context, and it simply isn’t problematic in the same way as l’Académie Française. 

Overall, while I had my issues with Wordslut, I had a good time reading it . It’s not a must read, but if you’re looking for a fun, modern source on gender and language, it’s certainly entertaining and informative. It’s also a book that can definitely be enjoyed by linguists and non-linguists alike; there’s not much jargon that would trip up a non-linguist, but it covers a wide enough variety of topics that linguists (at least those who don’t specialize in sociolinguistics) won’t already know everything it covers. In general, if you’re interested in linguistics and feminism, you’ll probably have a good time and learn something new.

TL;DR

Overall rating: 3.5/5 Good for linguists? Yes, unless you’re already an expert in sociolinguistics Good for non-linguists? A definitive yes, since this assumes no background in linguistics Strong points: Broad scope and a fun, modern overview of the intersection between language and gender Weak points: Very English-centric, and the author’s outrage overshadows the actual information sometimes

[jbeverywhere]

Myths about Poland and Poles

It’s time. Let me explain you some things. I hope this post will be a nice Polish culture lesson.

I asked some foreign friends what they think about Poland and Polish people, what had they thought before going there, how it was different at the end, etc. And also I added what I usually hear and drives me crazy 🤦‍

1. Temperature

Polish person: “It’s cold” ; Foreigner: “but you’re from Poland..”

And what? I’m Polish and I don’t feel cold? Aha. I think this is the most annoying answer which I hear a loooooot of times.

People have really bad image of Polish climate especially when they haven’t stayed there for longer time. So we have 4 seasons (+ 2 transitional ones).

early spring - March and April when the weather is going crazy. One day is snowing and -10⁰C, another day sunny and +15⁰C. You never know :D So if you go to Poland that time - be prepared for that, take different kind of clothes.

spring - May - first storms, during Juwenalia always rains, but the first week last years was really sunny and warm - perfect for Polish barbecue opening season :D

summer - may be hot as f.ck or colder and rainy. Many storms especially in August. Nights are much colder than days. But - surprise- temperature around 30⁰C is normal. And because the nights are colder you can sleep well - you won’t melt in your bed.

autumn - colder nights, leafs are brown, it may be really beautiful. More rainy days but still can be sunny.

early winter - October/November - crazy like early spring - may snow, may rain, may be sunny. You feel the winter in the air.

winter - yes it’s cold, but outside. Inside the buildings - it’s warm - surprise. For example I don’t have special pyjamas for winter nights because in my room is around 20⁰C. You go outside you put winter jacket and boots on. May be even -20⁰C (omg wow omg) but then you enter the house and t-shirt is enough. For example in Spain - I’m dying. Winter in Barcelona and in the flat for 3 months 12⁰C - IN THE FLAT. I opened the windows to put some warm air. In Valencia maybe not that drastic (probably it depends on the flat as well) but still I slept with 1 duvet, 2 blankets and the warmest pyjama ever xDDD So please, don’t tell that I’m from Poland and 12⁰C in the room should be perfect. Please.

So in Poland it’s like from minus extreme to plus extreme - variety! I think I like it, I just don’t like that the weather changes immediately. But the most important - inside the buildings - nooooo extreme. It’s pleasantly. So please don’t say to Poles that we should be used to the cold temperature. It’s personal not national thing, I love when is warm and I’m “more ok” with the summer in Valencia than Valencianos (they should be used to that hot no? XD exactly).

2. Music

“Omg la polaca knows reggaeton songs”

“OMG there is Polish reggaeton” 

Ok. Music is a difficult topic. But yyy yes, in Poland they use to play reggaeton (fortunately or unfortunately). For example - in Warsaw and Krakow there are clubs: Teatro Cubano - where there is only reggaeton and some latino rhythms. So if you love to dance to this kind of music, don’t worry, you will find a perfect club for you. 

I really like Polish music, especially now I think it’s really good one. But I like others as well, I have Spanish, English, French, Portuguese, even one German song in my playlists because - why not - variety! And reggaeton I like for the energy and dancing rhythms. Also I like it as a “culture”, for me it’s interesting and fascinating - I can talk about it hours! :D

3. The look

“Polish people are blond with blue eyes” XDDDD hehehehehehhehehehehehhehe

I’M NOT BLOND - first thing to note. The sun in Spain makes my hair lighter but still is not blond. In Poland there are different types of hair and skin. We are not so white. And blue eyes are not thaaaat common. Brown, green, blue, grey - but also not that brown like Spanish ;) AAAAAND - surprise - we can be tan! Wow! xD There are people who have really white skin and the sun changes it to red, but mostly Poles are tan in summer and even I would say that we love to be morenitos ;) What is funny for me (here we have the Spanish myth) that I’m more tan than many Spaniards. So let’s repair the myths: Poles may be tan in summer Spaniards are not tan at all (the Latinos yes - but also not always!).

4. Location

OK. It’s geographic lesson time.

What I heard once: “For me everything what is on the right from Germany is RUSSIA” omg. Where is my patience. omg. Please, think before saying shits like that. It hurts.

We are not that small in Europe. We have 7 neighbors, OWN language which is not Russian (it’s juuuust a liiiiittle bit similar, like some words). I can understand somehow Slovaks and Czechs but Russians - few words. AND IMPORTANT - we have Latin alphabet! Not Cyrillic like Russia. We are Slavic countries, our language is from Slavic family, Slavs love each other (in their way of love ;* ) but each of us is different and we exist, we are not Russia - note that in your head.

5. Religiousness

This is difficult topic. Yes, we are mostly Catholics and we don’t hide it. But not everybody. Many people are very religious - and I respect that. It’s kind of beauty, traditions and everything. It builds the culture. The problem appears when someone forces others to own rights. When religious is an argument in the politic world. And this I agree - in Poland we have a problem with that. But when you visit Poland don’t show your aversion to the religion. Respect it and be curious - then you can discover many nice things, interesting traditions and some kind of passion. I love to talk about our traditions and you can see it in my posts about Christmas and Easter.

6. Safety

This is more region problem than country problem. I mean, everywhere you go - you can meet bad people. In Kraków there were “bad times” but it was long time ago. When I was living there I felt really safe. Many times I came back alone and I’ve never had a strange/dangerous situation. And I always passed so many police during the night. So I think in big cities the government cares about the security. 

Just don’t enter any places where you can meet pseudo-fans of football and don’t scream any football team name. This I see still as a problem in Poland. But I don’s say that going to the matches is a bad idea.

7. Food

This I’m writing thanks to the opinions of those who visited Poland and tried Polish cuisine. So what I heard, that some Erasmus were afraid about the food, that it may be a bad quality and not tasty, but theeeen - surprise! - Where are you from? - from Poland - oooo soplica!!!! (ok, this is not food) - żurek! - pancakes - placki ziemniaczane! - PIEROOOOOGI <3 

So if you haven’t visited Poland yet, you haven't tried Polish cuisine - be prepared 😋😋😋

And you have me to ask before!

8. Language

Hehe Ok, it’s not the easiest language in the world. But it’s not an impossible one! So if you are planning to spend in Poland even only few days it’s nice to use: - dzień dobry - good morning - dziękuję - thank you - przepraszam - I’m sorry/excuse me - proszę - please/you’re welcome - do widzenia - goodbye - dobranoc - good night

Poles will appreciate a lot! We love when someone is trying to say something, and we know that it’s not easy. 

And! I know some people who stayed to live in Poland and their Polish is - wow! So as you see, NOTHING IS IMPOSSIBLE ;)

9. Character

Hmmm I heard that some of you were afraid that Poles won’t be friendly but then again surprise. Well, I think we are nice people xD We are for sure hospitable. There is always a bottle of vodka and some cookies for a casual visit.

English is not our native language, more and more people can speak it but still not all (well like in other countries). But we won’t leave you without helping you when you ask. Gesticulating, speaking slower and louder (because this changes everything xD) - there is always a way to communicate and express yourself. 

So smile and don’t be afraid of us, especially me, I don’t bite! :D

Meme to sum up

10. Famous Poles

I think you may know many but even you don’t realize that. So let me remind you or introduce you Poles who have changed the world.

- Robert Lewandowski - football player in Bayern Monachium

- Jakub Błaszczykowski - was a football player in Borussia Dortmund

- Nicolaus Copernicus (Mikołaj Kopernik) - Heliocentrism, stopped the sun, moved the Earth ;)

- Fryderyk Franciszek Chopin - composer and virtuoso pianist of the Romantic era

- Marie Skłodowska Curie - (note: her first surname is Polish. And in many places they skip it -.-) - physicist and chemist who conducted pioneering research on radioactivity. She was the first woman to win a Nobel Prize, the first person and the only woman to win the Nobel prize twice, and the only person to win the Nobel Prize in two different scientific fields

- Tadeusz Kościuszko - military engineer, statesman, and military leader who became a national hero in Poland, Lithuania, Belarus, and the United States.

- Pope John Paul II - Karol Wojtyła - the first non-Italian pope since the 16th-century, the second longest-serving pope in modern history, one of the most travelled world leaders in history, visiting 129 countries during his pontificate. Etc, etc. We are really proud of him and you can see that - everywhere there is his name, a looot of monuments etc.

- Lech Wałęsa - statesman, dissident, and Nobel Peace Prize laureate, who served as the first democratically-elected President of Poland.

- Andrzej Wajda - film and theater director. Recipient of an Honorary Oscar, the Palme d'Or, as well as Honorary Golden Lion and Honorary Golden Bear Awards.

- Roman Polański - film director, producer, writer, and actor. There was a quite big scandal with him - no comment.

- Robert Kubica - he became the first and only Polish driver to compete in Formula One.

- Anja Rubik - supermodel, activist, philanthropist, and businesswoman.

- Adam Małysz - former ski jumper and rally driver, one of the most successful athletes in the history of the sport.

- Wisława Szymborska - poet, essayist, translator and recipient of the 1996 Nobel Prize in Literature.

- Robert Korzeniowski - the best walker in the world, he won 4 gold medals at the Olympics (Atlanta, Sydney and Athens).

- Izabella Scorupco - actress, singer, and model. She is perhaps best known for having played Bond girl Natalya Simonova in the 1995 James Bond film GoldenEye. 

- Justyna (Justi, JB) Biel - Polish butterfly with Latin blood, author of this (and the other) blog. Known by you, one day by others as well.   

and much much more!

11. Alcohol

Yes, I know, I shouldn’t forget about the most important - vodka. Yes we drink it, yes, on the parties, birthdays, etc. Yes, shots. We drink shot of vodka and then one/two/many sips of juice/coke/water/etc.

But come on, I don’t get why it horrifies you. Like vodka is 40%, rum, whisky, gin - all which you drink is also 40% and for me has even worse taste (especially gin, uff please don’t offer me that, never). Or tequila! Madre mía.

We don’t drink vodka with the dinner, like many people do with wine. Wine is also kind of alcohol I would like to remind.

And yes, we love beer a lot. And normal glass of beer is 0.5l - we don’t have smaller ones.

So, I hope... since now when I ask you to drink vodka on the before party - please, don’t be afraid and drink it with me, I’ll appreciate it! 

Ok. I think that’s all. I hope that since now your image of Poles and Poland is much better - the correct one. Here you have everything in one picture xDD

[cincinnatusvirtue]

Six Day War: June 5th-10th, 1967

Background:  The year 70 AD saw the Roman Empire put down the Jewish Revolt, in the province of Judea.  Included in the quelling of this rebellion was the reconquest of Jerusalem and destruction of the Second Jewish Temple.  After this shattering of their homeland, many Jews left the Levant in waves spreading to the far reaches of the Roman Empire and elsewhere forming a diaspora.  For nearly the next two thousand years the diaspora survived amid changing polities and had to adapt to the laws and frequent whims of the societies in which they lived.  Many Jews did face many trials, pogroms, ghettos, heavy taxes, religious and social discrimination among others.  Some Jews depending on the society also could adapt and do fairly well in parts of Europe, this was relatively true in the Middle Ages in some Muslim territories like Al-Andalus in Spain & Portugal and even the Ottoman Empire.  It was also true Jews fared well in medieval Poland as well.  

The 7th century saw the rise of Islam and it spread into the Levant following the early Islamic Caliphate’s victories over the Eastern Roman Empire and Persianate Sasanian Empire which had weakened each other through continual war.  Islam was founded among the Arabs in their homeland of Arabia, today’s Arabian Peninsula.  The Arabs were previously very diverse in their beliefs with some practicing pagan beliefs, other converting to Christianity, Judaism or Zoroastrianism.  Arab Christians tended to live in the Roman Levant or on the borderlands between Arabia and the Roman Empire.  Islam provided them a sense of unity as it did throughout the Middle East and North Africa.  Following the Battle of Yarmouk in 636 AD, Islam spread to the Levant and would be the predominant religion of the region over the following centuries.  In time, Arabs who settled these lands and intermixed with other peoples would became culturally and ethnolinguistically Arabized overall and the region became known as Palestine, though never an official country, it became the common name for the region.  There did remain a continual albeit smaller Jewish presence throughout the land too and this was more or less settled alongside the ruling Islamic dynasties that came and went over the centuries.  

The Crusades, undertaken by Europeans in the Middle Ages saw temporary periods of restored Christian control to swaths of the Levant.  In these times Christian pilgrimages and settlements grew and also lived alongside Jews and Muslims to varying degrees of tolerance & intolerance in their interactions.  Nevertheless, following the 13th and 14th centuries Muslim rule was resolutely restored to the whole of the Levant under the Mamluk Sultanate from Egypt.  Control of the area fell to the Turkish Ottoman Empire in the 16th century and it remained in their hands through the early 20th century.

In the 19th century a growing modern movement for the restoration of a Jewish state was gaining some prominence in Europe & America, particularly as outlined by a Jewish journalist and activist Theodor Herzl from the Austro-Hungarian Empire.  The movement and ideology became known as Zionism.  While it is true many Jews since antiquity wished for a restored Jewish state in the Middle East, Herzl is largely credited with articulating and organizing the modern movement of Zionism as we understand it.  The main aim was to establish a nation-state for the Jewish people where their religion, language and culture could be safely practiced on their own without being subject to the politics of the societies the diaspora had found them.  Their was debate about where this homeland would be with some proposals placing Jews in South America or even in Eastern Africa.  Herzl and most Zionists however looked for a place within the confines of the then Ottoman Empire, namely a restoration to their historical ancestral homeland in the region then known as Palestine but to the Jews, the land of Israel.  How this would be accomplished was debated, most advocated for a purchase agreement, to purchase lands from the Ottomans and set up Jewish settlements which would lead to an eventual state.  World War I would provide the impetus and accelerate events, though perhaps somewhat unintentionally.

World War I (1914-1918) pitted the Central Powers of Germany, Austria-Hungary, Bulgaria & the Ottoman Empire against Britain, France, Russia, Italy, the United States and others.  One of its many theaters of war was the Middle East in which the British and French sought to knock out the Ottoman Empire to deny Germany access to the Middle East for oil and trade, political influence and to potential threats to British and French interests in the region.  The British in particular would use their influence and future political promises to undermine the Ottomans in the Middle East.  In doing so, they ignited the aspirations of both Jewish and Arab nationalist movements.  The Jews were promised a future homeland in the region under the infamous Balfour Declaration of 1917 which declared British intent to support such an aspiration.  In turn, a number of Jews formed an actual Jewish Legion which fought in support of the British, under the command of Colonel John Patterson, an Anglo-Irish Evangelical Protestant who was a Christian Zionist and major supporter of the movement.  The Jewish Legion would help put push out the Turks from the Levant, forming the first all-Jewish led combat unit in modern history.  Many future key players in Israel would serve in this unit in various capacities.  Meanwhile, the Arabs also lead a crucial revolt against the Ottomans with aid from the British, under their agent TE Lawrence, known to history as Lawrence of Arabia.  The Hashemite Kingdom of the Hejaz was supposed to be the realization of a united Arab state in the Middle East, under the rule of Hussein bin Ali, Sharif of Mecca.  They too played an essential role in forcing the Ottomans hand in the region, by 1918 the war was over and the British and French now formed protectorates over the region with Syria going to the French and Palestine & Transjordan going to the British.

Over the coming two decades, a gradual but steady influx of Jews arrived from Europe and America to settle the lands in Britain’s Mandate of Palestine.  This gradually increased tensions with the Arabs.  The British decided what yet to do with the rival Jewish and Arab claims, both of which were promised sponsorship from Britain.  Meanwhile, developments in Europe lead to the rise of anti-Semitism and the rise of Nazi Germany in particularly with its anti-Jewish sentiment and policies lead to an even greater increase of Jewish refugees for the Middle East, many were turned away as illegal arrivals by the British.  During the Second World War, tensions remained and their were attempts by the Nazis to appeal to the Arabs to side with them against the British and by extension the Jews.  Though practically speaking not much came of these attempts.  Again a number of Jews fought in the British Army as did some Arabs against the Nazi allied Vichy France which had its colonies and protectorates around the world to varying degrees fight against the Allies, including in Syria.  

Following the defeat of the Nazis in 1945 and the exposure of their crimes against humanity, most expressly in the Holocaust, world sympathy for the Jewish people was more visibly aroused.  The notion that Jews could -re-assimilate to Europe was viewed with greater doubt by the Jews and indeed many non-Jews agreed.  The British overextended and weakened by World War II’s end decided to leave the Middle East, at least overtly.  It handed over the fate of the Mandate of Palestine to the United Nations (UN).  In the years leading up to 1947-48 both Jewish and Arab communities formed paramilitaries engaged in acts of terrorism against each other as well as the British occupation which hastened the British decision to leave without a true decision made on the region’s political outcome.  The UN proposed two new states, one Arab and one Jewish that would zigzag over the region and have crisscross junctures at various spots.  Jerusalem was to remain an international city, despite its sacred status to both Jews and Arabs.  1948 saw the Jews accept this offer with the creation of the State of Israel, but this was rejected by the Palestinian Arabs and not recognized by the Arab states of Egypt, Syria, Lebanon, Iraq or Jordan which resulted in an Arab invasion of Israeli territory that was eventually beaten back by the Jews with an shipment of arms from Czechoslovakia.  Eventually an armistice was agreed to but no official declaration of peace of mutual recognition by either the Israelis or the Arabs.  The de-facto existence of Israel was accepted by the Arabs as a temporary reality but to the Jews it was the fulfillment of Zionist aspirations.

The Cold War & Prelude to 1967:  Post World War II saw the world bifurcate into largely two camps the capitalist oriented camp lead by the United States of America and NATO along with other allied liberal democracies against the Communist Bloc lead by the Soviet Union and Warsaw Pact as well as China.  Both America and Soviet Union sought influence in the world including in the Middle East and both competed for influence among the Arabs and Israelis.  Israeli for its part began to function as a full on nation with elections, growing diplomatic recognition, increased population, including the influx of Jews expelled from Arab nations following the Arab-Israeli War of 1948-49.  Meanwhile, the Palestinian Arabs or Palestinians as they had become known were forced off their lands with some settlements outright destroyed by Jewish forces during the war with both sides committing atrocities.  They had moved to the few territories maintained by various Arab powers despite their defeat, namely the West Bank of the Jordan River and  East Jerusalem controlled by Jordan and the Gaza Strip controlled by Egypt.

In 1952, there was a coup by military officers in Egypt which lead to the overthrow of the monarchy there.  It established Egypt in becoming the Arab Republic of Egypt, under leadership of military officer and now President, Gamal Abdel Nasser.  It promoted an ideology of secular Pan-Arabism and promoted a sort of anti-monarchical view, pared with Syria it became known as the United Arab Republic, though functionally speaking the two nations remained separate. Nasser was courted by both American and Soviet agents to pivot Egypt as a vital chess piece in the game of world influence between the two superpowers.  Nasser also found himself at odds with the British and French over the Suez Canal which was jointly operated by companies on behalf of their governments and had been an international waterway under their control.  Nasser sought to nationalize the canal for Egyptians as a means to coalesce support around him and assert Egypt’s independence.  By 1956 the canal was indeed nationalized by Egypt and under an agreement organized by Britain, France and Israel which sought to end Egyptian tensions with Israel, the three nations launched a joint military operation against Nasser’s Egypt.  In a military sense it succeeded, the Israelis defeated the Egyptians in the Sinai Peninsula while the British and French regained control of the canal.  However, the US did not support the move fearing it would alienate the Arab world from their and NATO’s influence in favor of the Soviets.  Under political pressure from US President Dwight Eisenhower, the British and French agreed to leave Egypt.  Meanwhile, the UN placed a peacekeeping force in the Sinai to buffer between Israel and Egypt.  Britain’s withdrawal showed its decline in stature to America and the world over.  In Egypt though a military disaster Nasser turned it into a political victory, his tough stance against Britain, France and Israel raised his profile in the Arab and greater Islamic world.  Egypt maintained control of the Suez Canal politically but it promised to open the waterway to international shipping.  Despite, America not sanctioning the invasion, it was seen as not doing enough to prevent it and therefore in Nasser’s mind and other Arab leaders, the Soviet Union became more friendly with the Arabs states than previously before.  It became a chief supplier of military arms, intelligence and joint projects.  in turn Israel became more and more under the influence of America, in effect the Arab nations and Israel became client states of America and the Soviet Union.  

From this state of affairs post-1956 a stalemate in the region developed but tensions remained on both sides.  Which lead to May 1967...

Countdown to War: May 1967 saw the Soviet Union develop a plan to increase its influence further in the region.  It sought to undermine the US which was fighting a politically unpopular war against Communism in Vietnam.  Its plan was to orchestrate a war, even a small one in which its Arab allies (Egypt & Syria) demonstrating the power of Soviet backed weaponry would crush Israel and demonstrate the benefits of its support.  It would in turn show American and NATO’s weakness, making more Arab nations turn to the Soviet fold.  The Soviets through the KGB informed Egypt and Syria that Israel was massing divisions against the Syrian border in an attempt to preemptively attack the Arabs and start a war.  These reports turned out to be false.  Whether or not the Soviets truly believed this to be the case, it started a series of events that would unravel into open warfare.  The Soviet information was taken seriously enough by the Arabs who began saber rattling.  Nasser, by then the most revered politician in the Arab world took the lead with Egypt’s forces becoming partially mobilized. In addition, Egypt began mobilizing troops on the Sinai border with Israel, kicked out the UN peacekeepers and ultimately gave the Israelis their casus belli, closure of the Straits of Tiran which was the most vital link to Israeli shipping.  Nasser claimed he was not looking for a war but famously said if the Israelis wanted a fight “We say, welcome!”  Egypt and Syria both planned to fight against Israel and Jordan, under King Hussein also agreed to fight, placing his troops nominally under overall Egyptian command.  Israel now had enemies to consider in the north, east and southwest.  Iraq also supported Jordan and Syria, as did Lebanon but Egypt, Syria and Jordan would be the primary Arab force.

Israel’s leadership at the time was under Prime Minister Levi Eshkol, largely a man known for his micromanaging and accounting skills, not a man who conveyed military expertise.  He and his cabinet met frequently throughout May 1967 to discuss options.  The military leaders wanted a first strike but Eshkol remained non-committal hoping for a diplomatic solution to growing tensions.  he hoped appealing the US and USSR would convince the Arabs to back down.  Sending diplomats to America to find out their position.  The American President Lyndon Johnson, dealing with civil unrest at home and ongoing fallout from escalating the war in Vietnam conveyed token support to reopen the Straits of Tiran through UN consensus but ultimately urged Israel not to strike first.  Ultimately, the US Navy’s Sixth Fleet was deployed to the eastern Mediterranean as a show of force against any Soviet aggression.  The Soviets in turn shadowed the American fleet with detection ships of their own.  Soviet pilots were tasked to leave for Syria on a moment’s notice.  They also urged the Arabs to restrain from striking first.  

Arab propaganda only added to tensions, Radio Cairo and Egyptian television was broadcast daily throughout the Middle East depicting the Jews in stereotypes reminiscent of Nazi era propaganda, the Arabs also depicted the Jews being crushed and killed.  In Israel, everyday citizens of the 19 year country perceived this to be an imminent second Holocaust.  Volunteers of Jews from elsewhere in the world flocked to Israel and rabbis consecrated public parks on the assumptions new cemeteries for many dead would be needed soon. The propaganda was effective in the Arab world and the Egyptian show of force created widespread excitement and support.  Even in Palestinian territory, Nasser was praised as a hero and icon, hailed as their eventual liberator.

Despite realizing the Americans weren’t going to help outright except to deter the Soviets and facing domestic pressure Eshkol continued to hold out.  Finally, the generals and other cabinet members as well as the public demanded more of Israel’s Prime Minister, especially after a speech on the radio that included awkward pauses and forgotten queues, it conveyed a sense of indecision.  The public demanded Eshkol make changes in his leadership.  As Israeli Prime Minister he could also hold the cabinet position of Defense Minister if the government formed yield to such occasions due to Israeli politics.  Eshkol was forced to relinquish his control of the Defense Minister’s position to the charismatic Moshe Dayan.  Dayan was a military figure from the 1948 War and the Suez War of 1956 in which he became a household name.  He possessed extensive military knowledge and projected absolute calm confidence in Israel’s ability to handle itself unilaterally.  Dayan was well known for wearing an eye patch, having lost his left eye in World War II fighting for the British against Vichy France.

Dayan now assumed de-facto control of the military and decisions regarding the nation’s defense.  He agreed with the cabinet by vote...a first strike was needed.

War:  On paper, the Arabs combined had more men and resources than the Israelis.  Their equipment was Soviet made for the most part ranging from planes & tanks to small firearms. Egypt had the largest army overall followed by Syria and Jordan with contributions from Iraq and Lebanon.  Other nations in the Arab world were sending volunteers to aid as well.  Egypt’s army was largely untested though and made of peasant conscripts.  The elite units were actually fighting in Yemen and would play no part in the war.  Jordan’s army and Syria’s aside from raids and skirmishes had little combat experience since the 1948 war.

Israel, even with its reservists did not have the combined manpower of the Arab coalition.  Israeli equipment was a mix of French airplanes and armored ground vehicles from American and British companies along with Israeli self-made small arms such as the Uzi among western contributions.

Israel’s strategy relied on a first strike.  Israel planned June 5th in the morning as the date of the attack.  Seeing air supremacy as key to victory, Operation Focus was the Israeli first strike.  The Israeli Air Force since the 1956 war had actually planned for a preemptive strike against their Arab foes in the event of another war.  Israeli troops were compared to their Arab counterparts much more regimented in their training.  They had relentlessly drilled their combined forces in multiple scenarios to allow for tactical flexibility and strategic deployment.  At dawn on June 5th, the entire Israeli Air Force (bombers and fighters) aside from 12 planes left in reserve took off in various waves toward Egyptian air bases both located in the Sinai Peninsula and across the Suez Canal.  Flying low to avoid radar detection and in an unexpected direction out over the Mediterranean Sea, the Israelis swept southward over the Sinai, the Nile delta and elsewhere.  Egyptian farmers actually are reported to have waved at the planes thinking the planes Egyptian.  The Israelis started bombing runs to destroy the Egyptian air force.  First targeting  runways so as to prevent the launch and potential escape of the planes, then to target the planes themselves, namely bombers that Egyptian propaganda stated was intended to bomb Tel Aviv.  The attack was so effective, that Egypt’s Minister of Defense and Chief of Staff for the military, Abdel Hakim Amer was actually touring the Sinai Peninsula reviewing troops for the upcoming war when he was made aware of its start by Israeli planes flying overhead and bombing the Egyptian planes.  In less than three hours, the Israelis had destroyed almost the entire Egyptian air force.  They then turn north and destroyed the Syrians within two hours to the east destroy Jordan’s in mere minutes.  Completely rending the Arabs without air support.  The few Egyptian planes that did manage off the ground were picked off by Israeli fighters rapidly.  There was no warning, total surprise had been achieved.  The ramifications of this first strike would essentially determine the outcome of the whole war.  

Israel had to fight on three fronts, the Sinai deserts against Egypt to the southwest, the West Bank against Jordan in the east and the Golan Heights against Syria in the north.  Israeli tanks and infantry advanced on these fronts encountering the first Arab counter attacks in Jerusalem when Jordanian artillery began shelling Western Jerusalem.  The Egyptian tanks in the Sinai were essentially sitting ducks as the Israelis at their leisure could bomb them too, destroying their armor in quick succession.  Egypt was in full fighting retreat across the Sinai towards the Suez Canal and Israeli armor was in full pursuit.  The Egyptians did put up some resistance in a number of areas but all in vain with Israeli air superiority and the qualitative superiority of their weapons against the Soviet made weapons used by the Arabs.  By June 8th the entire Sinai Peninsula up to the eastern banks of the Suez Canal were in Israeli hands.  

In the West Bank Jerusalem was the primary target, the Israelis had attempted its capture in 1948-49 but were driven back, giving the Arabs a small measure of victory in that war.  Since that time, East Jerusalem which contained the most holy remnants of the ancient Second Temple and the Old City quarter was under Jordanian control.  The earlier destruction of Jordanian, Syrian and Egyptian air forces determined the war’s outcome from the get go.  Iraq’s air force stationed in Jordan was likewise destroyed.  Initially, Moshe Dayan didn’t plan to capture the Old City but upon hearing of a pending UN push for ceasefire, he pressed Israeli paratroopers to do so, thinking it would improve Israel’s negotiation position later.  The Egyptians asked the Jordanians to retreat from all the West Bank to preserve their fighting forces elsewhere, given the Israeli armored deployment from all directions.  The Jordanians began to comply with this but on June 6th and 7th intense fighting remained within the Old City which eventually along with Bethlehem and the rest of the West Bank fell to Israel.  The emotional and political significance of Jews being able to enter the Old City of Jerusalem for the first time freely and under Jewish auspices since antiquity was not lost on many. Suddenly secular Jews began spontaneous prayer at the Western Wall, a remnant of the Second Temple, these moments were etched in Israeli and indeed more broadly Jewish collective psyche for all time.

In the north, fighting over the strategically vital high ground known as the Golan Heights took place.  Syria’s ground troops largely avoided conflict the first few days of the war.  Early Egyptian propaganda was proclaiming great victories on the radio which informed Syrian moves.  Israel having jammed much Arab military communications meant that only public radio informed the Syrians in some respects.  These false reports designed to hold up the façade of Nasser’s image would have bad ramifications for Syria.  Syria joined in shelling Israeli settlements in northern Israel and launched a few remaining fighters along with Lebanon to bomb Israeli positions but the Israeli planes either shot them down or drove them off.  Israel debated taking the Golan Heights but given past Syrian shelling and raids from this area, Dayan pushed for taking them.  Indeed, as the deadline for a ceasefire approached Israel continued its advance taking roughly 20 kilometers of territory.  By June 10th the ceasefire went into effect and the war was over in six days total.

1,000,000 Arabs between the West Bank, Gaza Strip, Sinai Peninsula and Golan Heights were under total Israeli occupation.

Aftermath:  Israel’s victory was total through a combination of pre-war drilling, advanced planning and of course the initiative gained by the first strike on June 5th to achieve total air superiority.  Their attack caught the Arabs totally by surprise and left them in no good position to defend themselves.  700-900 Israelis died, 4,500 were wounded while the Egyptians had 10,000-15,000 dead, Syria 2,500 and Jordan 700 with smaller amounts for Iraq and Lebanon.  Israel would now more than double its territory and begin controversial settlements in all the occupied territories.  Nasser for his part resigned when the obvious sight of Israelis occupying the east bank of the Suez Canal undermined the official story of victory.  The ragtag nature of the Egyptian military in retreat further showed the totality of their defeat.  Despite yet another military defeat and one much worse than 1956, Nasser was encouraged to stay on as President when political party supporters helped amp up support for Nasser in the streets,  He rescinded his resignation due to these demonstrations of support and would remain President for the rest of his days.  Though in private, he was said never to be quite the same for the humiliation of defeat and the hubris his rhetoric had played in its development.  Later that year at the Khartoum conference of the Arab League in Sudan, Nasser and all other Arab leaders took up the famous three no’s.  “No peace, no recognition and no negotiation with Israel.”  Nasser would die in 1970.  During this time, Egypt and Israel continued small scale raids or demonstrations, though it was mostly low level.  Palestinians also began to rely less on other Arab nation-states for their cause, instead many moved to Jordan and began launching attacks from there, forming the PLO headed by Yasser Arafat.

Israel for its part offered to return land for peace but given the Khartoum summit’s Three No’s policy it fell on deaf ears.  At the same time Israeli settlers begin settlements in these newly occupied areas.  Nasser’s successor Anwar Sadat continued Soviet relations despite the obvious failure of Soviet weaponry and failure of Soviet intelligence which lead to a war ending in such disaster for the Arabs.  Sadat would launch the Yom Kippur War in 1973 with Syrian help though this time the Israelis laxed their defenses and were taken by relative surprise.  That war would allow the Egyptians to re-cross the Suez Canal in dramatic fashion before the Israelis would regroup and eventually encircle and defeat the Egyptians , crossing due the west banks of the Suez themselves before yet another ceasefire was implemented.  The Syrians would try and retake the Golan Heights before being pushed back and the Israelis advanced within 25 miles of Damascus, the Syrian capital by war’s end.  In 1978 Egypt and Israel with American sponsorship signed a bilateral agreement to peace and recognition, turning against the Three No’s policy of 1967.  Sadat’s change of heart would change Arab-Israeli politics.  Realizing a military solution was no longer viable, Egypt and Israel formed an alliance which persists to the modern day.  Eventually Jordan and the PLO made similar agreements in the 1990′s with Israel.  In 1981, Egypt was given the Sinai back in accordance with the treaty.  Israel also unilaterally withdrew from the Gaza Strip in 2005.  Though settlements remain in the Golan Heights and West Bank which remain effectively under international law occupied territories but de-facto Israeli territory.  Though Israel, with some international recognition has now claimed the Golan permanently and the West Bank’s status remains controversial since a future potential Palestinian state largely is thought to majority existence in the West Bank.  Jerusalem also remains a political hotbed of controversy but remains completely in Israeli hands since 1967 and is declared its capital with limited recognition.  The conflict remains unresolved yet today and 1967 in some ways exacerbated the issue at hand but at the same time demonstrated the futility of constant warfare between the various nation-states of the Middle East.  Overall, the conflict appears intractable to many for the foreseeable future, with two rival claims to the same piece of land, fueled by religious and historic claims, it remains perhaps the most contentious conflict in the modern world. 

[pvtbenjamin-blog]

The Dust That Thinks

NASA File

Designation: Classified R9

The following are extracts from the diary of Dr Kaitlin P. Brite, assigned to the mission as a civilian observer; her background is in evolutionary biology and bioinformatics. Subject passed the program A.0i and following debriefing was classified B.i.

 February 7

I’ve had the same dream off and on for the past two years. I dream that I am looking at my face and that the lower half of my jaw is missing completely. I stare into my own eyes, unsure of whether I can detect a scream, or if I’m even trying to speak. The face of the other me just sits there, mute, surrounded by nothing but darkness and then I wake up.

So when they ask me what I dream about, I lie.

We’ve been keeping dream journals for the last four months and bring them with us to our weekly ‘Psy-Fit Sessions’; they give things these names, they can’t resist. At the third session several of us were reprimanded for inappropriate doodling in our dream journals.

It’s been clear since early on that what they fear most isn’t a technical or mechanical error – it’s us. Their faith in physics is rock solid; their faith in us is non-existent. Two words have accompanied each of NASA’s darkest hours; Human Error.

We riff on it,

“That guy’s got a screw loose.” –

“I hope you mean that literally, Jim.”

One guy, one of the Navy guys, said a white paper had gone around from the Prep Team appealing for a return to sending chimps into space, “They take less time, less testing, and they give better interviews”. He was a great guy, he reminded me of the first guys in the program; the PhD jocks, the Supermen. I expected all the military recruits to live up to that image, few of them did. If anything they seem to feel the stress more than us civilians, we go back to our day jobs when all this is over. But they are being assessed, they are on a ladder, and for them it’s never over.

I guess the only other dreams I really remember are of the wheat fields. In my dream it’s night but the moon is so clear and so strong that as the wind washes over the field causing a tide, the colour changes from silver to gold. Sometimes I hear my grandmother’s voice, reading to me.

A precondition of prep, along with the hours in Psy-fit, are our numerous and relentless physicals. Six bioinformatics candidates were invited from different labs but only two of us made it into the final program and I was the only one in the programme to be approved mission-ready. I’ve always been healthy, remarkably so. They don’t say these things out loud, but you can tell this comes with cachet here, that it invokes a sort of Darwinian deference.

In week two we were asked to memorise a nursery rhyme to recite when having our heart rate monitored on the treadmill, The House that Jack Built. Sweating and panting, wired up to innumerable machines, we go through the same physical and mental exercise; they gave us a prompt line from anywhere in the verse and ask us to deliver the rest from that point. Over-heat a computer and check how much RAM you can still rely upon.

 This is the malt that lay in the house that Jack built.

This is the rat that ate the malt

That lay in the house that Jack built.

This is the cat that killed the rat

That ate the malt that lay in the house that Jack built.

This is the dog that worried the cat

That killed the rat that ate the malt

That lay in the house that Jack built.

This is the cow with the crumpled horn

That tossed the dog that worried the cat

That killed the rat that ate the malt

That lay in the house that Jack built.

This is the maiden all forlorn

That milked the cow with the crumpled horn

That tossed the dog that worried the cat

That killed the rat that ate the malt

That lay in the house that Jack built.

This is the man all tattered and torn

That kissed the maiden all forlorn

That milked the cow with the crumpled horn

That tossed the dog that worried the cat

That killed the rat that ate the malt

That lay in the house that Jack built.

This is the priest all shaven and shorn

That married the man all tattered and torn

That kissed the maiden all forlorn

That milked the cow with the crumpled horn

That tossed the dog that worried the cat

That killed the rat that ate the malt                                                                

That lay in the house that Jack built.

This is the cock that crowed in the morn

That waked the priest all shaven and shorn

That married the man all tattered and torn

That kissed the maiden all forlorn

That milked the cow with the crumpled horn

That tossed the dog that worried the cat

That killed the rat that ate the malt

That lay in the house that Jack built.

This is the farmer sowing his corn

That kept the cock that crowed in the morn

That waked the priest all shaven and shorn

That married the man all tattered and torn

That kissed the maiden all forlorn

That milked the cow with the crumpled horn

That tossed the dog that worried the cat

That killed the rat that ate the malt

That lay in the house that Jack built.

This is the horse and the hound and the horn

That belonged to the farmer sowing his corn

That kept the cock that crowed in the morn

That waked the priest all shaven and shorn

That married the man all tattered and torn

That kissed the maiden all forlorn

That milked the cow with the crumpled horn

That tossed the dog that worried the cat

That killed the rat that ate the malt

That lay in the house that Jack built.

 Feb 8-21: no records entered

Feb 22

It occurs to me that there are hardly any mirrors at NASA. It’s not that the place is completely austere exactly - there are photographs lining the public hallways, you see charts, models, a sculpture or two, sitting neglected in the airless lobby – but no mirrors. Even in the bathroom, you wash your hands staring at the wall.

We spent our first few weeks in and out of the main buildings; forms, handshakes, meetings, waiting. Then it was over to the training base; fewer faces, fewer names, routine, running, memorising. There was a lot to learn, naturally. You come to understand that up there, you will cease to function, in the way that you’d typically understand it anyway. Your body can’t do what it normally does; you have to think differently, you are learning to do things for the first time again. You will have to put in ten times the effort for the same result. You are training to become a child, inside a toy, suspended in the universe.

This is the maiden all forlorn.

The precise terms of mission statement vary but the reason given is always the same: we are to advance human understanding of the universe.

I’m coming to think that the whole mission is in fact an exercise in keep internal from external, to deal in vacuums. We are kept apart from this world that we might be made ready to explore new ones. We are asked to report on our psychological state but not to reflect. External must never meet internal, no gaps in the suit, no screws loose.

 Feb 22- March 03: no records entered

March 4

They warn you about the possible side-effects, of the isolation, of removing ourselves from everything familiar. Depression, insomnia, anxiety, dissociation.

Dissociation is the one that interested me most, to be of your body but not of your mind, to be - for a short time – blissfully unaware of your own existence.

I tell the psychiatrist, the psychologist and the nurses at my meetings about the wheat field. I only did one semester of Freud and Jung and the basics, but I can’t see the harm in a wheat field. I imagine it makes me sound wholesome, grounded. I explain that in the dream, my grandmother’s voice is reading me Wuthering Heights. I never really understood the love story, but I thought of Cathy and Heathcliff out on the moors, that they must be like my windy wheat field, that they stand for every barren place.

In all of the sessions, I try to give them something; I make a good show of polite, respectful, engaged. But in truth I couldn’t have cared less. When we go into a laboratory and talk about ‘behaviour’, we are describing that which can be measured, tested, predicted. But the Psy-guys, they can predict nothing. They can test nothing. They look at the human mind, and they are measuring nothing.

Launch is t-16 days.

This is the horse and the hound and the horn.

 March 5-8: no records entered

March 9

The moon has only reflected light and its gravity only serves to tell us about our own. So where are we going?

In space, certain words are released from their existence on earth; they float out of mouths, into ears, unencumbered where they were once weighted down with specific meaning. They can still be used of course but must be tethered by guide-ropes of further words, of a firmer context.

When they perfect the robots, men will be sent into space for novelty alone; the way everyone loves to see a dog on a surfboard.

 Mission Dates March 10 – September 19

October 3

I’ve made lists, filled in reports, done interviews, complied with tests, affirmed facts and figures and finally they have asked for some General Reflections. If I have learned one thing in the course of the last months, it’s that NASA does not deal in ‘vague’. Shades of meaning are abhorred. In fact, I can’t think of a word taken from the French would ever be approved of. I never even saw a buffet lunch.

The truth is I don’t know just what happened and I don’t know what help I can be. I’m certain of only a handful of things: Lt. Robert Clifford Allen cannot have been in four different places at once. Two people cannot have observed him outside and inside of the craft within the space of ten minutes as it takes fifteen minutes simply to engage or disengage the outer door. Any biologist will tell you that nothing containing chemical elements ever truly disappears, it can only transform into something else. Therefor as much as it appears the only explanation, that Lt. Allen is gone, into the awesome and pitiless nothing, the only truth that can exist is that a change happened, one that we did not know how to witness nor record.

We were there primarily to observe, not even to conduct our own research. I’ve put together my observations on the program, and I suppose it will be up to others to organise my memories into something that can perhaps help to make sense of the situation.

 Oct 8-21: no records entered

October 22

A human being alone is always a danger to themselves. When you are the only movement, the only sound, the only human trace, the mind will try to expand to fill the space. And fail. Eternity is too long and endlessness is too vast, and we’re helpless, alone under the sky.

Sometimes I wonder, did Lt. Allen lie about his dreams too? Did he see something like a gaping jaw, a silent scream?

It is a strange thing to think of others picking over your unordered thoughts. I was the observer and now I am the subject.

This is the priest all shaven and shorn.

 Oct 22- Nov 14: no records entered

 November 15

If we saw the face of God, would we recognise it for what it was? Would it be a friendly, smiling face to greet us, or will it be jawless, vacant, mute? How far away is He, and what are we to him? Are we just the dust that thinks?

 Nov 16-30: no records entered

December 1

How is it possible he went missing and we were unaware? Every other crew member and observer remembers seeing him last in a different place at a different time, and the video outlay supports these reports. That is to say it can show nothing to contradict them. And the individual reports do little to contradict each other directly, but taken together, the story they tell is impossible. Lt. Robert Clifford Allen cannot have been in four different places at once.

I never really got to know Lt. Allen, everyone spoke well of him. My initial impression was that he was one of these people it’s impossible to age, he could have been thirty or fifty, only his rank was any indication and even then numerous factors can account for this marker too.

I only spoke with him directly about technical details, very little small talk. I overheard him seemingly talking to himself just once; he was looking out of Bay 2, as far as I could tell, at nothing. It sounded like he had said “darkling plain”.

 Dec 2

Observing a situation changes it, so are we each responsible to some degree, reflecting the light at different angles, diffracting and interfering?

Who was Jack? What is the significance, if any, of the house that he built?

It is dangerous to go into the unknown, when we do not know ourselves.

 December 3

Of course Jack is simply a cipher. Not a man, just a name. The text was in fact probably selected for its specific quality that it is as meaningless as possible, as it is not our associations that they are testing. After all this time, I don’t understand what it was they thought they were testing.

It’s not possible, is it, that we were part of a larger, unseen experiment?

  **CONCLUSION OF JOURNAL ENTRIES**

 Note: Each subject reported later ‘seeing’ Lt. Allen, again under different circumstances and in differing times and places. Subject 6 claimed during a psychiatric de-briefing six months after Exit Report  was filed that Lt. Allen had “come to her in a dream, arms outstretched, mouthing something incomprehensible”. This was not perceived to be of value. Subject was debriefed December 9.

[negmagazine]

Letter of Adama Keïta

Adama is Martinican and Guadeloupean woman by her Mom and Senegalese by her Dad . She started her own project called ´ The art they give ‘. This project aiming to highlight a different type of artists through immersive experiences. 

This debate which started in French West Indies on the subject of Chlordecone, led her to write :

« To my people and community, It's more than the moment for us to stand up, to stop being politically correct and to speak about the hypocritical reality of our system. A number of 2% of people practice since decades what we call : A MONOPOLY MARKET. They control our system, economy, ressources and even our health. These people based their fortune on slavery, on our ancestor. Don’t you wanna honor them and respect them ? Decades ago, colonizers deported and reduced a sovereign people to slavery. From Africa to the caribbean our ancestors have been abused, mentally, physically and emotionally. They didn’t need and didn’t’ ask for any of this. The intrusion of these people on our lands and culture has result of many consequences : Vampirization of our resources, Monopoly market, Injustice, Racism. This is NOT a statement of  « white racism » , don’t talk about something you don’t know anything about. What is happening right now is the resultant of their selfishness due to their envy to satisfy their secondary needs and so to get richer no matter the consequences.

Because like it wasn’t enough they poisoned us. These people and the state approved the poisoning of our lands and our people since 1970 whereas the role of the « state »  is  to defend our rights in order  to maintain a certain security in  terms of sanitary risk, isn’t it ?! But YOU politicians are responsible and guilty because YOU decided to prioritize THEIR interests instead of OUR HEALTH .

For now it ‘s a total of 92 % Martinicans who are breathing and living with this poison called : chlordécone. Us, people of our dear Martinique, hold the world record for prostate cancer 227 cases per 100,000 men , and chlordecone is responsible of it . It’s an endocrine disruptor and causes various neurological diseases. A countless number of babies are born with neurological and psychomotor dysfunctions but also prematurerly. Women developped deep and sometimes non reversible hormonal dysfuntions. A part of that (for a few squares that have been analyzed ) 2/4 of our lands are deeply contaminated for the next decades. Our sea is also contaminated which means that some zones are strictly forbidden for fishing  !

 And all of this for what exactly ? BA.NA.NAS. 

Screw you and  your hypocritical policy, you just abusive and money’s puppets dumb asses. It’s a whole hypocritical system that we must dismantle. Young people want to invest in their economy but the system is so based on the fortune of these people that opportunities are blocked. Even some Martinicans are taking advantage of it. This whole situation does exist since way too long. Radios ; tv channels, journal papers, malls, cars companies, are their properties. They do take decisions about everything for us, which is not normal because 

 WE ARE THE PEOPLE.   »

[neakco]

TNA - Ch. 3

Ch. 2

This is the last chapter I will be posting online unless there is any interest in it. I love constructive criticism. I probably should have mentioned this earlier but my computer is broken and everything was typed up on my phone.

Chapter 3

Briar and Azalea entered the Godfrey Enterprises Lobby fifteen minutes before their meeting with Theodore and looked around.

"This place sure has a lot of gold and marble." Briar muttered quietly in Russian.

"You would think this was some cash grab of a casino or hotel." Azalea responded in Urdu.

Approaching the reception Azalea continued to speak in Urdu. "We would like to rent a suite please."

Briar had to turn away so he wouldn't laugh and the poor receptionist's expression.

"I am sorry, but would you be able to repeat that in English?"

Azalea kept her face remarkably straight. "Apologies. We have a meeting with the COO."

The man sighed in relief that she spoke English, "May I please get your names?"

Azalea answered since Briar had barely managed to stop silently laughing. "Briar and Azalea Willowbirch."

The man typed their names into the system before his face paled and his hands began to shake. He slowly looked up at them with false cheerfulness, "I am terribly sorry but you are both banned from the building and I must ask you to leave."

"No worries. Do you mind if we stay just inside the doors as I call our ride?" Azalea smiled brightly but Briar caught the glint of steel in her eyes.

The receptionist visibly relaxed, "Please go ahead."

Briar switched into combining multiple languages once they were close enough to the door, "You would think we were the worst of murderers. So what is our plan?"

"I am going to call our ride." She answered as she pulled out her phone. She then switched over to English for the conversation. "No, I promise we are not running late. In the lobby actually. Apparently we are banned entrance."

Briar heard the sigh.

"We were graciously allowed to stay here while calling for a ride. Though we are now being glanced at suspiciously."

Briar heard a ding and looked towards the opening elevator doors. He grinned as he watched Theo step out and hang up his phone.

"Ms. Willowbirch, I am happy to see you made it. Please grant me a moment to resolve this issue before we head up to my office." He then walked up behind reception and looked over the screen.

Azalea just grinned as she put away her own phone.

"Some ride you called us." Briar smirked.

"I think an elevator ride is still technically a ride, no?" She laughed as the strolled towards the desk.

They were close enough now to hear Theo's quiet conversation with the receptionist.

"You are new so please don't worry about it. Just now you know to check next time."

"Yes sir. Sorry sir."

Theo joined them near the elevator and swiped his badge to call it.

Once the door closed Theo relaxed,

"Apparently you two are highly dangerous and top security is to be called at any sign of you being uncooperative."

"Your father?" Briar asked.

"Just be thankful for the board ruling that he isn't allowed to make any company decisions after an event." The elevator began to slow and Theo again stood straighter, "Follow me and try not to stop."

The twins shared a look but followed silently. They quickly understood as various strong perfumes assailed their senses. A fast look around showed them multiple women wearing heavy masks of makeup and all positioning themselves within Theo's sights. Some seemed enthusiastic in their attempts to garner attention while others seemed like they would rather be doing anything else.

They were almost at their apparent destination when a women physically blocked their path to the door.

"Coffee for your meeting." She fluttered her very long and clearly false lashes.

Azalea blinked slowly, while others wore masks of makeup this women's face appeared to be sculpted of it. She switched to a mix of French and Spanish, "Brother, did we enter a horror cinematic?"

Theo accepted the tray of drinks and ushered them through the door before closing it hastily. "Sadly not a horror, just my life." He then stopped Briar from grabbing one of the drinks. "That women likes to lace things with aphrodisiacs."

Rob laughed from his seat on a side couch near the desk. "Is that the one that tried to feed you bright blue Viagra cookies and claimed they were blueberry?"

Theo sighed wearily as he collapsed in his chair, "That is the one. She just needs one more instance of time fraud and I can finally fire her."

The twins shared a look of concern before taking seats in front of the desk.

"Why can't you just fire her for harassment?" Briar asked with a suppressed shudder.

Rob answered from the couch, "Father's policy, Theo can't fire anyone that father directly hired unless they have 3 non-HR infractions of the same type."

"That isn't fair!" Azalea looked furious and was slipping into an unrecognizable accent, "How did the board allow that?"

"Father has the same restrictions on anyone I hire." Theo passed over a folder, "But you are here to talk business, not hear my problems. I managed to locate your parents arrival to Lattuck after I received your message last night with the date and time your parents initially boarded their train."

Azalea and Briar carefully studied the images as Rob stood up and pointed one out.

"Cameras lost 'em there at Bismark St. Tried to get the cab transcripts but they only uselessly keep those for two months."

"This is more than enough, thank you both greatly." Briar stated as he pulled up a map on his phone and started to marking locations.

Azalea looked at the brothers with a little suspicion, "How did you get this all done in one night?"

Rob grinned, "I stayed up a little late but Theo here came to work at 3 am."

Briar stopped what he was doing and both twins glared slightly at the brothers.

"Trust me you two, it was work on this or spend more time at Godfrey Mansion. We both jumped on the excuse to leave."

"The more I learn about Mr. Godfrey the more I contemplate trace less poisons." Azalea muttered into Briar's shoulder.

"Wait until we locate our own parents before you cause other people's to disappear. I refuse to finish this without you."

Theo chose to ignore the comments, "I am sorry we couldn't find anything more."

Briar laughed, "Are you kidding? We are used to following tattered wisps of month old gossip. This is a great lead."

Rob sat back on the couch, "So why didn't you two just hire a detective? Surely you can afford it."

"There are more than a few reasons but two main ones." Azalea started.

"The first is that our grandfather taught us it is wrong to spend our money for purely selfish reasons. For everything we spend we match it with a doubled donation to charities when we can. It is surprising a lot cheaper to travel and accommodate ourselves compared to hiring a detective." Briar stated.

"And the second is that there were no detectives that took our 16 year old selves seriously enough. Those that did try to humour us were very untrustworthy." Azalea finished.

Rob nodded but before he could respond there was a knock on the door and Roisin entered.

"I know I came in early today Mr. Sapphirus, but I gathered the employee pay statements for you."

"Thank you Ms. Ballantyne. If you wish you can compare them to the time statements online and look for inconsistencies, or you can choose to help the admin staff with their tasks."

Her eyes widened in fright, "I shall work on the comparisons." She smiled briefly at Briar before leaving to return to her tasks.

Rob looked at the door confused, "Shouldn't she be in here working with you?"

"Yes but that requires a desk, and even though I have the space for it I was informed that I am not allowed to move the secretary's desk she is now using in here." Theo let out a growl of frustration, "She apparently has her own desk arriving later today and under no instance shall I bring that one in because it will soon be in use again."

"I may not be an expert, but why does the news of help make you look like you would welcome death?" Azalea asked as Briar began packing away the photos in a small bag.

"Because Father is just going to hire another useless secretary." He sighed.

Rob chose to elaborate for her, "Father got the stupid idea in his head that if he hires enough women that eventually one will seduce Theo here."

Briar looked up rapidly, "What? Why?"

"A few reasons; he wants Theo to work less and figures if he is distracted then he can probably slip some more selfish policies in. He also wants Theo to provide an heir to our family legacy. I don't like women so I am useless to him."

"But adoption is a thing. He adopted both of you." Azalea looked offended.

"True, but he can't have kids. Plus i am sure he adopted Theo because I was such a disappointment.  He would probably disown me if the media wouldn't have a field day."

Theo was face down on the desk and mumbled out, "I just wish father could understand that the restrictions he has placed on those women in their contracts causes me more work instead of less. I spend hours after everyone else has left just doing their jobs." Theo lifted his head to look at Rob, "and I don't care what Father says, you are the best older brother I could ask for."

Rob started to jokingly tear up, "Awww, you are adorable little bro, I love you too."

Azalea looked thoughtful and spoke without thinking, "Why do you not just hire your own secretary?"

She jumped as Theo suddenly leapt up and grabbed her hands, "Please say you want a job!"

Azalea looked towards her giggling twin then back towards Theo's hope-filled eyes. "I wasn't, but I have never been a secretary before. What would the job entail?"

Theo let go of her hands and sat back down to start typing, "You are the perfect fit. I saw first hand that you are skilled at data entry, You have told me before that you helped with your family’s own company when you could, you can be polite to the point that you could probably insult someone and they would thank you. Plus I feel I can trust you not to gossip about company secrets." He grinned as he handed her the contract he just printed off. "And the best part is that hiring you would annoy my father and he can't do anything about it."

Azalea looked up from the paperwork, "Administrative Assistant / Bodyguard?"

"Brilliant right?" Theo grinned, "You would be in charge of the entire Administrations Department, thus granting you access to the whole company’s files. Then by doubling as my bodyguard I get to take you to all my off-site meetings with high-end clients and contacts."

"You are granting me opportunities to find my parents while assisting you?" She looked a little stunned.

"Yes and if you look here," Theo came to her side of the desk to point some things out.

Rob took the opportunity to tap Briar on the shoulder, "While Petal is getting an offer I have one for you."

Briar looked at Rob curiously, "What kind?"

He pulled out a business card, "I own and run Umbra Security. I am need of an eye in the sky. Someone I can trust to run cameras and comms for me and my crew."

"I feel special, but you only met me last night. Why trust me?"

Rob pulled Briar over to the couch and sat him down. "I didn't last night, thought you were pulling a long game. So I did a bit of digging and found your family over in Germany. Your story checked out. The main reason though is that the job will give you access to all the public cams in town and some private ones when we got a special job. A handful of cash won't be enough to bribe you to look away and potentially lose that access."

Briar looked carefully at Rob's face, "Do you seriously not have anyone on cameras already? I refuse to put anyone out of a job just for a golden egg."

Rob took a moment to puzzle out Briar's meaning. "Just another reason you are trustworthy. Now normally I run 'em but sometimes I need to watch my crew around higher paying jobs. Last night could 'ave been avoided if I had an eye. Sometimes I get my man on cams but he is a twig and couldn't win a fight with a kitten." Rob's look grew more serious. "It is rare but sometimes thugs go after the cams. I know that I won't have to worry about anyone getting the drop on you."

"I will take the job on two conditions." Briar held up a finger, "I refuse to use a gun." He held up a second, "I am allowed to upgrade or change the room's security and equipment to suit me."

"What kind of changes?"

"Currently I am only thinking adding a pin pad and hand scanner combo that only looks like it will unlock the door." Briar grinned, "I will probably think of more things once I see the space."

"A red herring." Rob muttered before exclaiming, "I approve." He then held out his hand to shake, "All I ask is that you don't install anything deadly."

Briar shook, "You have a deal Mr. Umbra."

"Excellent, I can start you with Monday, Wednesday and Friday. Tonight can be the first shift if you want."

"Sounds good to me, where am I going?"

"It's a little hard to find, so tell me your address and I will swing by before 1900 to lead ya."

"Tranquil Estate." Briar laughed as Rob's eyes widened, "I know I know, my grandfather has the good taste not to name his properties after himself."

Rob laughed with him, "At least one business tycoon in the world does."

Briar looked over to see Azalea trying to fit a large bundle of papers into her bag.

Theo spotted his questioning look and explained, "Welcome package. It has everything she needs in order to annoy my father by following all the rules to a tee. It also includes her own badge so she doesn't need me to call the elevator."

Azalea stood up after succeeding in making everything fit. "If that is everything then I believe I shall go prepare for the battle to make your tower more bearable princess."

"Just don't stab any of the guards, they are prisoners too." Theo spoke through barely restrained laughter.

"No promises." Azalea waved, "See you tomorrow Theo."

Rob left first followed by Azalea and Briar. The latter leaned on his twin and whispered in Italian, " Grandfather would approve."

She chose not to respond verbally and instead shoved him off and went to wait for the elevator with Rob.

Briar chose that brief moment to greet Roisin and see if she would be free that Thursday.

Azalea waved him over when the doors opened and he rushed over with a large grin.

Azalea shook her head, "Come on Romeo, straighten your head back on, we have work to do."

And that is it. This honestly started as a maribat fanfic with Briar as Adrien and  Azalea as Marinette. Rob was Jason and Theodore was Tim. Since I made it into an original I changed a lot of personalities and background characters. All because I wanted to twist the fake dating idea completely. Somehow it turned into a commentary on stereotypes and how it is okay to just be how you are. This covers gender stereotypes and relationship stereotypes. My favourite chapters I have written so far are chapter 7 because I have never written anything like it before and chapters 11 to 14 because they are the serious ones that made me decide to turn this into an original. So again, if you want to see more let me know, if I don’t hear anything you will just have to wait the ten plus years it takes me to get this published.

[arecomicsevengood]

More Quarantine Movies

Going to put up this log of what I’ve seen now, as some of the stuff I liked the most is leaving The Criterion Channel at the end of the month. I really don’t know if anyone gets anything out of these posts, these are mostly synopses and they’re maybe spoiler-heavy. Let me give you the gist of it now: Otto Preminger’s a really good filmmaker whose movies are really interesting, Jean Arthur’s a great actress who enlivens everything and is also in a bunch of good-to-great movies. Also, I didn’t write about it but I rewatched Death Race 2000, that movie rules, feels relevant to today’s politics, and is leaving Criterion Channel at the end of the month.

The Pawnbroker (1964) dir. Sidney Lumet

Based on novel by Edward Lewis Wallant, whose The Tenants Of Moonbloom was reprinted by NYRB Classics with a Dave Eggers intro. Also some of the earliest nudity in a mainstream American film. About the misanthropy of a holocaust survivor, living in New York City, and interacting with black people who vaguely feel like racist caricatures, in part because it’s a movie about a misanthrope told from his perspective. A ton of movies about race from this era feel dated, this feels legitimately edgy, which is a term that gets thrown around somewhat ironically now or viewed as a pejorative, like something trying to offend, this does feel like a genuine attempt to be honest and push things forward (I really was not expecting that nudity) but also doesn’t feel totally successful, definitely not particularly enjoyable.

Shockproof (1949) dir. Douglas Sirk

I haven’t seen Sirk’s later melodramas, this one intrigued me in part because the screenplay was written by Samuel Fuller, and it’s sort of a pulpy noir thing. A woman, fresh out of jail, ends up living with her parole officer who is trying to keep her on the straight and narrow and away from her criminal ex, but they end up falling in love. There’s a thing where the male lead’s younger brother talks about how the lady is beautiful that I sort of wish wasn’t in there, feels creepy to me. There’s a bit of a shift in the narrative with the third act, where the lovers end up on the run, the once-upstanding man now a criminal on account of love, but they are having the endurance of their love tested by circumstance, is one of those things where a story which felt somewhat unique over the course of its telling shifts into something more recognizable.

…And The Pursuit Of Happiness (1986) dir Louis Malle

I have watched most of Louis Malle’s feature films at this point, I believe, and had a vague curiosity about what his documentaries were like. This one, made shortly after he’d moved to the U.S. and married Candice Bergen (something that comes up in Susan Seidelman’s Smithereens, in that some prostitutes read aloud from a fashion magazine that discusses it) he made a film talking to various recent immigrants. He covers a lot of ground, covering people working as doctors, large communities living in housing projects and causing racial tension with black neighbors (who both resent the smell of the food they cook but also suspect they don’t know their rights as the property developers plan to evict everyone and have the projects demolished). By and large everyone spoke to believes in the notion of the American dream of working hard to get ahead. Malle also speaks to anti-immigration think tank people and border patrols. Nothing too surprising but a lot of ground gets covered in a short amount of time. If I didn’t learn anything I at least admired that it felt non-didactic. Anything with more of a point of view or an argument would probably be disingenuous were it to present itself as enlightening.

The Baron Of Arizona (1950) dir. Samuel Fuller

Based on a true story, although with fictionalized elements, about a dude (played by Vincent Price) who becomes a master forger to falsify land grants and claim the entire state of Arizona as his own. Not a great movie, though that’s an interesting story. I bet I could guess what elements were made up for the sake of making a movie out of it, it has this tension of being interesting and unbelievable (although unbelievable by way of rote moviemaking formula), but also the story takes place over an extended period of time and so has some of the structureless feeling of a biopic.

House On Haunted Hill (1959) dir. William Castle

I’m going to confuse this with The Haunting Of Hill House for my entire life, that’s just the way it is. This stars Vincent Price, who’s always great, doing the famous premise where a group of people meet up to spend the night at a haunted house to win money. Vincent Price has a contentious relationship with his wife, who’s openly contemptuous of him and wants his money. There’s a moment where everyone at the house party is given a gun, each in a coffin. There’s a few “twists” all sort of being of the “there was a rational, non-ghost reason for everything” although any of them individually sort of strain the limits of credulity as something that works as a hoax. Vincent Price is basically not the villain, so much as his wife is, although he’s such a ham that loves being creepy that this again strains credibility in that the conclusion of the movie plays against the style with which the previous action has been presented. An enjoyable viewing experience.

My Name Is Julia Ross (1945) dir. Joseph Lewis

This one’s about a woman, looking for work, who falls into a scheme that kidnaps her and puts her up in a mansion, where she’s kept drugged and basically is told to assume the identity of a woman who was killed. I found this one pretty nerve-wracking, as it’s pretty nightmarish, basically about psychological torture. I found this one under Criterion Channel’s Columbia Noir collection, but before these films were considered noir, they were thought of as melodramas, but it’s also sort of a horror film about being gaslighted. There’s a part where they remove a stairwell and try to trick her into falling down? What’s funny is that one of the things that sort of separates this from horror is how quickly it resolves, whereas later work would I think give the audience the satisfaction of seeing the villain be punished in some way, the ending that just goes “then everything worked out alright” ends up making the structure feel more like the whole movie’s reason for being is just to see the protagonist suffer.

God Told Me To (1976) dir. Larry Cohen

Did I write about this already? I watched that a few months ago. Pretty wild basis in seventies grit about people going crazy, committing murders, then goes to a weird/confusing place involving some sort of holy entity in human form, the police procedural aspect butting up against this strangeness which doesn’t feel entirely thought through, and is in fact sort of incoherent, makes for a movie that is, in fact, still pretty good and worth watching although a bit tedious by the end.

Zombi Child (2019) dir. Bertrand Bonello

This I guess just came out in America this year, to the extent that anything came out this year, in theaters, it coming to streaming is basically its release. The zombies in this are of the old-school voodoo sense, taken seriously as a system of belief juxtaposed against French colonialism, as a Haitian teen feels at odds with her circle of friends, flashbacks to Haiti occur. When you watch a bunch of older movies new movies just seem to be not as good. Bonello’s not a bad filmmaker though, he’s able to capture a sort of sensual aspect of particular moments and moods, just not in a way where they then coalesce into a narrative of shifting emotion.

Anatomy Of A Murder (1959) dir. Otto Preminger

This movie is close to three hours long.  It has a Law And Order procedural quality, taking up much of its second half with a courtroom drama, where Jimmy Stewart does a proto-Unfrozen Caveman Lawyer routine. He’s protecting a man accused of murdering the woman who raped his wife. The subject was surely shocking for its time. It becomes pretty clear, extremely quickly that the husband is an abusive piece of shit, but the main thrust of the narrative is still tasked with following the lawyer trying to get him off. Lee Remick, from Experiment In Terror plays the beautiful and doomed wife, who flirts with Jimmy Stewart. Some of these interactions feel weird from a modern perspective, because Stewart’s reaction is like “Yes, you’re a beautiful woman and any red-blooded American male would enjoy looking at you, but it is my duty as a lawyer to paternalistically insist you cover up!” Preminger is sort of known for pushing the envelope, and this one has a lot more talking about sperm and Lee Remick’s vagina than you’d expect. One of the things that’s meant to be a “quirky character detail” is that Jimmy Stewart is into jazz- The score, by Duke Ellington, is great, but there’s also a pretty corny cameo by Duke Ellington where Jimmy Stewart sits in with him, a second pair of hands on the piano. Still, I guess it’s better that he physically appears in the movie than there just being a scene where it implies Duke’s music is played by Jimmy Stewart, as the music is way too good to just be a lawyer’s quirky hobby. George C Scott, from Hardcore, plays the legal expert on the other side. After being pretty long, there is this sort of abrupt, (although well-foreshadowed) downbeat ending, where the jealous and abusive husband flees town to avoid paying his lawyer and to go somewhere quiet he can beat his wife to death, but said ending is played for this “you can’t win them all I guess, shame about the lower classes” quality from Stewart, who is dead broke all movie but seems like he just enjoyed being able to do work for once, even if it’s for a total shitbag. Good movie! Feels thorny and interesting.

Bunny Lake Is Missing (1965) dir. Otto Preminger

This is even better. Great Saul Bass credits sequence too. A psychological thriller where the disappearance of a child gives way to the police not being able to confirm the child is real, and doubting the mother’s sanity, becoming pretty nightmarish, dreamy, and exhilarating by turns. Gets to a place of “huh, I wonder what is going on” and then when that finally resolves there’s a pretty extended sequence of silent escaping/hiding, which is, one of those things that films do really well and is super-satisfying. It plays out amidst this background filled with interesting supporting characters, who all, for the first half of the movie, feel like moving parts in this somewhat inscrutable narrative machine.

The Man With The Golden Arm (1955) dir. Otto Preminger

This one I don’t like. Stars Frank Sinatra, who I find annoying, as a recovering heroin addict who relapses again. While I normally like the sort of scenery-chewing supporting cast that shows up in Preminger things, I really didn’t Sinatra’s nerdy best friend, or his wife with Munchausen’s syndrome. While with the other Preminger movies there’s this feeling of a slow reveal of what the plot is with this one I feel like as soon as you know that Sinatra is out of rehab (which you learn pretty quickly) you can guess the movie will be about how he relapses and then tries to get sober for real.

The Human Factor (1979) dir. Otto Preminger

Preminger’s final movie, based on a Graham Greene novel, featuring Iman making her film debut. Movie is mostly about intelligence agencies seeking out the mole in their mist, with intentions to kill whoever it is once they’re certain. It stars Richard Attenborough, as the source of the leaks. Halfway through the story becomes interspersed with flashbacks about Attenborough and Iman’s romance upon meeting in Africa. Continues the habit of ending on a moment that maybe feels like it should be expanded upon or made more resonant.

Bonjour Tristesse (1958) dir. Otto Preminger

This stars Jean Seberg as a teenager being raised by a single father, David Niven, who’s kind of a cad/ladies man who’s very permissive with his daughter, who seems likely to grow up rich and spoiled and find another rich man to take care of her. Deborah Kerr plays the woman who Niven ends up falling in love for real with, and the conflict is then between this woman taking on a maternal role and a daughter who is resentful of this. Deborah Kerr is in Black Narcissus, a movie I love, and here she comes off as smart, the voice of reason. Seberg destroys her father’s relationship by taking advantage of his sort of innate desire to flirt and be liked by women, driving Kerr to commit suicide, and the whole film is then told in flashback by Jean Seberg a year later, as she flirts with boys but has a great sadness and emotional distance about her, which is both inherited and self-inflicted. I’m partly just writing these plot summaries as my way of remembering what these movies are about, but this one is nice because I get to account for complicated characters who are both pretty eminently understandable. I keep getting hung up on the fact that movies today now have a much dumber idea of what a female character is. Maybe it’s something as basic as the fact that, as people read less, it’s rarer for literary novels to be adapted? As I talk in terms of “less good roles for women nowadays,” which is a cliche, it’s obvious enough that bad roles for men follow, as everyone is only as good or interesting as who they’re playing off of.

It’s also funny to think, in this era of “comic book movies,” that very few artists can make a character come to life with body language and facial expression the way an actor can. “Literary” cartoonists like Dan Clowes or Tomine play into the mask quality drawing creates, generating inscrutability as part of their effect. Many of the biggest names in “noir” comics are removed from the melodrama elements of actor’s performance in favor of an aesthetic based on paperback covers, which makes for something far less lively. Meanwhile, Blutch is an amazing artist who would probably do a great job telling lively character studies in a genre form, but he’s way more preoccupied with these Godard-style interrogations of film’s cultural meaning.

Separate Tables (1958) dir. Delbert Mann

From the same year as Bonjour Tristesse, and also featuring David Niven and Deborah Kerr. Deborah Kerr’s good in this- while she is sort of uptight in a maternal way in Bonjour Tristesse, here she’s sort of crippled by repression her mother imposes on her. It’s a totally different character, but she remains defined by various manifestations of repressed energy; I would say she’s most known for playing a nun in Black Narcissus. She’s again opposite Niven in a sort of romantic context, though Niven’s character is meant to be a neurotic freak and he’s not really convincing in that capacity. I couldn’t really work out what the deal is with Niven’s character, he gets arrested in a theater, seemingly because he takes his dick out to show women? Or that’s how I interpreted what was being discussed, but he’s mostly defended by everyone except this lady you’re supposed to hate for how domineering and judgmental she is so maybe it’s something less bad. I honestly couldn’t figure it out because it seemed like the thing I was guessing they couldn’t talk about. This movie also features Burt Lancaster and Rita Hayworth as a couple that broke up once before and are reuniting now. This movie is pretty dull in a way I didn’t know whether to attribute to it being British or it being based on a play, as it feels extremely both.

Seance On A Wet Afternoon (1964) dir. Bryan Forbes

This one’s British too, and features the quality I recognize from British television, where the stars are not attractive, which always feels surprising. This one’s got a pretty great title, and a great premise. This woman, a professional psychic, convinces her husband to kidnap a child so she can comfort the parents and get publicity. The cinematography’s great. I got pretty nervous watching this, I think I am feeling more sensitive to movies as of late, way more willing to find things upsetting and nerve-wracking than usual. I can partly attribute this to the feeling of taking something in from a different cultural context, that leaves me unsure what to expect, but it’s also true that nowadays I sort of constantly have this feeling of “I don’t know how bad things are going to get” about the world in general, and it makes sense that I would apply that to films.

Only Angels Have Wings (1939) dir. Howard Hawks

Jean Arthur’s amazing in this - saw her the first time in The Devil And Miss Jones and then there’s this whole Criterion Channel featurette video running through what her whole deal is: This vulnerability/innocence crossed with an attempted toughness that really is very charming. Here she plays an entertainer just stopping briefly in town who gets hit on by some pilots, and develops feelings of impossible love for a man (played by Cary Grant) whose insistent toughness and refusal to show fear (despite having a dangerous job, of a pilot, that makes everyone who cares about him fall to pieces with nervousness). It’s this very universal type of entertainment, where there’s all these special effects shots of planes flying and a drama of men being men that’s nonetheless anchored by this love story, carried by the fact that Jean Arthur is very real and complex. She’s also a legit comedic actress, which I think makes her feel richer and more watchable than someone without a sense of humor would be. Rita Hayworth plays Grant’s ex, a woman who couldn’t take his daredevil ways but is now married to another pilot who has to do dangerous flights essentially to make up for an act of cowardice that got someone else killed. She’s got her own charisma obviously (and Cary Grant’s equally solid, in this sort of old-Hollywood glamor way) but Jean Arthur feels very alive in a way that carries the movie.

The Talk Of The Town (1942) dir. George Stevens

This one also stars Jean Arthur opposite Cary Grant, but it’s less interesting, partly because of a domestic setting and some stale-seeming comedy. Cary Grant plays Lionel Dilg, (great name!) who breaks out of prison and hides out in Jean Arthur’s attic, with a hobbled ankle, while a preeminent legal scholar moves in. There’s a love triangle between the three of them, and a friendship between the escapee and the scholar. Grant’s been unfairly framed for arson for political reasons by his boss for pointing out the factory where he works is a death trap. The people of the town are easily turned against this sort of leftist agitator  by a last and biased judge. Insanely enough, there’s a movie called “The Whole Town’s Talking” also starring Jean Arthur but it has no relation to this one.

The Ex-Mrs. Bradford (1936) dir. Stephen Roberts

Upon realizing that many of these Jean Arthur movies were leaving the Criterion Channel at the end of the month, I started taking more in. This is a murder mystery, with screwball comedy accents, and again I’d say it’s really good, although the “comedy” premise wherein a woman sort of plows through the life of a man with no real respect for personal boundaries is the sort of thing that works in a movie even though it seems totally nightmarish when looked at from a certain angle. She writes mysteries, he’s a doctor, people are getting murdered. He is played by William Powell, from The Thin Man movies, which maybe these resemble. I guess the bickering couple that solves mysteries is a trope but it’s one that I don’t think has had any currency in popular culture since Moonlighting, which was in my lifetime but before I would have had any awareness of it. (I would probably enjoy it up until the point where I got bored of the formula.) I thought this was great and would make a good double feature with L’Assassin Habite au 21.

History Is Made At Night, 1937, dir. Frank Borzage

This has Jean Arthur in it too, but the reason I became aware of it was Matt Zoller Seitz tweeting about it. Partly this is because the description on the Criterion site is so bare-bones it barely seems like anything, but it turns out this is because the plot is completely insane and has a ton of twists and to talk about them very quickly veers into spoiler territory. It is, in brief, a love story. The first totally insane in it is the handsome male lead does the “drawing a ventriloquist puppet on his hand” thing and the woman’s totally on board. An element that doesn’t spoil the plot, but does seem somewhat incongruent with the tone, is there’s a French chef character for a comic relief. It’s really good. I’m pointing out the lightest element but the story’s villain is believably sociopathic.

Secrets (1933) dir Frank Borzage

Not nearly as cool or good. While History Is Made At Night feels like a cohesive story that’s just pretty crazy, this one feels divided into acts that have nothing in common with each other. First act is romance, between a rich man’s daughter and his banker. They run away together. I’m basically unsure of when this movie takes place timewise, the rich lady is wearing massive layered gowns I know would’ve been out of fashion by 1933. The second act is a western where they make a home together and have to fight off bandits! But the action is shot in a a pretty disinterested manner. Third act, I’m pretty on edge and bored, but the banker is now the governor of California and is having an affair with another woman, and they’re at a party together, and then the ending feels epilogue style as they’re both old as hell and they have fully-grown children and they’re talking about how they’re taking their leave of the kids to discuss their secrets. Female lead is Mary Pickford in her final film role. I guess this is a remake of a silent film, which was itself based on a play. Yeah this movie sucks basically.

Bitter Moon (1992) dir. Roman Polanski

Sure, I’ll watch a sex criminal’s erotic thriller that’s way too long. Hugh Grant is a married guy on a boat who has a French dude talk about all the sex he and his wife have because he knows Hugh Grant wants to fuck his hot wife. Said wife is played by Emmanuelle Seigner, Roman Polanski’s actual wife since 1989. This is a bad movie by pretty much any metric. It kinda feels like the social function of erotic thrillers is not to be a more socially-acceptable form of pornography, but rather to be pervy enough to remind the audience why you shouldn’t talk about sex publicly and have that be your whole thing. The French, of course, misunderstand this.

The Burglar (1957) dir. Paul Wendkos

Another noir, written by David Goodis. This one is a little formulaic, in terms of what you think of crime movies as being “about.” A burglar, who learned the trade from his adopted father, works with that man’s daughter to commit heists. His gang doesn’t like her. Once the two of them are separated, a corrupt cop seeking to steal a burgled necklace for himself tries to pursue a relationship with her as a means to an end, while a woman allied with him works on the burglar. A drive to New Jersey gets stopped by cops, violence quickly escalates to make the situation more dire. Members of the gang die. Not a bad movie but by no means essential.

My Brother’s Wedding (1983) dir. Charles Burnett

Criterion Channel removed the paywall for a bunch of Black-made independent films, this is one of them, Burnett’s follow-up to Killer Of Sheep. Seemingly starring non-professional actors, it’s about the conflict a guy feels as his brother is planning to get married to a rich woman he resents, and the loyalty he feels to a guy who just got out of prison who everybody hates. The main character is a good dude who wants to help out this pretty dangerous friend the best he can. The film captures his pride and resentment.

Dial M For Murder (1954) dir. Alfred Hitchcock

A few iconic-seeming shots of Grace Kelly in the role of a Hitchcock blonde, i.e. her standing at a phone while someone looms behind her about to choke her, and later standing traumatized. Suffers a bit from clearly being based on a play, with a ton of dialogue, particularly in the second act. The first act is able to provide this very particular type of satisfaction, where someone outlines a “perfect crime” in dialogue and then we see it play out and it falls apart and happens completely differently. It’s funny the criminal gives themselves away due to mistaking one key for another, because this sort of structure really does feel like a key fitting into a lock, things perfectly designed for one another, parceled out at the right time.