#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 👍

[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.

[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!!!!

[paulinedorchester]

Mosley, Leonard. Backs to the Wall: London Under Fire, 1939-1954. London: George Weidenfeld & Nicolson, 1971; reprint, as Backs to the Wall: The Heroic Story of the People of London During World War II, New York: Random House, 1971.

Each generation gets the history that it needs — or wants, or demands. That’s what kept going through my head as I read Backs to the Wall, which appeared three years after France’s youth explicitly rejected both Charles de Gaulle, the self-appointed leader of the Free French during World War II, and the political ideology that he represented, and amidst ongoing unrest over the Vietnam War. (It’s also worth mentioning that it was published in the same year as Norman Longmate’s How We Lived Then: A History of Everyday Life During the Second World War and two years after Angus Calder’s The People’s War.) This book gives up a World War II narrative in which Churchill was an improvement on Chamberlain only in that he wasn’t an appeaser, de Gaulle was worse than both of them put together, the Allied leaders all cordially loathed each other, half the British public wanted to sue for peace, and there was across-the-board mutual dislike between London civilians and American troops (and British dismay at the way African-American troops were treated by their white counterparts was far from universal). Do I exaggerate? Only slightly. Backs to the Wall is a sort of distant, city-specific pre-echo of Juliet Gardner’s sour 2004 book Wartime: Britain, 1939-45.

As with Wartime, however, this book does have the virtue of introducing us to a number of very interesting people. I became interested in reading it because it brought Vere Hodgson’s wartime diary to public attention. Mosley quotes or paraphrases Hodgson’s writing from the beginning of the war through its end, and also seems to have interviewed her extensively. His primary villain, meanwhile, is not Chamberlain but Chamberlain’s chief acolyte, Henry “Chips” Channon, from whose diary he quotes widely (and who turns out to have been born and raised in the United States, to my surprise). We hear a great deal from the chemist and novelist C.P. Snow and follow the misadventures of two civilians, Jenny Martin and Polly Wright, whose consistency in both bad luck and bad choices meant that neither of them was able to stay out of serious trouble for any length of time.

There are many glimpses of the London home front through the eyes of two boys, both eight when the war began: John Hardiman, of Canning Town and later of Aldgate, who was evacuated in 1939 but soon returned to London, and Donald Ketley of Chadwell Heath, who was never evacuated at all. Donald, who thoroughly enjoyed himself during the war, had an experience that speaks to our own recent reality:

Another good thing: quite early in the Blitz, his school had been totally destroyed by a bomb. Since Donald was shy, a poor student and unpopular with his teacher, he was overjoyed when he heard the place was gone. Thereafter he went each day to his teacher’s home to pick up lessons, which he brought back the next day for marking. In the following months he changed from a poor student to an excellent one, and although he was aware that his teacher rather resented it, he didn’t care. 

Mosley also introduces us to Archibald McIndoe, the real-life counterpart of Patrick Jamieson, Bill Patterson’s character in the Foyle’s War episode ‘Enemy Fire.’ Art seems to have imitated life pretty accurately in that instance: he and his burn hospital in East Grinstead were apparently exactly like what was depicted, the only difference being that the hospital was set up in an existing hospital building, not in a requisitioned stately home.

Backs to the Wall seems to have been one of the earliest books to make substantial use of Mass-Observation writings. Most M-O diaries are anonymous, but there are two named diarists here who stand out. John James Donald was a committed pacifist whose air of lofty detachment as he observes the reactions of those around him to air-raids and other wartime event and prepares for his tribunal — which, in the end, he decides not to attend — quickly grows irritating. More interesting is Rosemary Black, a 28-year-old widow, in no small part because she differs markedly from what I had thought of as the archetypical M-O writer. Here’s her self-description on M-O documents: “Upper-middle-class; mother of two children (girls aged 3 and 2); of independent means.” Mosley continues:

She lived in a trim three-story house in a quiet street of the fashionable part of Maida Vale, a short taxi ride from the center of the West End, whose restaurants and theatres she knew well. She was chic and attractive, and lacked very few of the niceties of life: there was Irene, a Hungarian refugee, to look after the children; Helen, a Scottish maid, to look after herself and the house; and a daily cleaning woman to do the major chores.

Black took her children out of London at the beginning of the war but quickly brought them back, and when bombs began falling she kept them in place — air raids might be disruptive for them, but apparently relocation had been worse. She was very much aware that she was riding out the war in a position of privilege, and she often expressed guilt feelings; but this tended to fade away before her irritation at the dominance of “the muddling amateur or the soulless bureaucrat” in the war effort. Offering her services, even as a volunteer, proved very frustrating. “She was young, strong and willing; she typed, spoke languages, was an expert driver and had taken a course in first aid,” Mosley tells us, “but finding a job even as a chauffeur was proving difficult” in September 1940. (She actually wasn’t all that strong physically: as we learn, she suffered from rheumatism which grew worse during the war years and probably affected her outlook.)

Black was greeted with “apathy and indifference” by both A.R.P. and the Women’s Voluntary Service. Early in 1941 she was finally able to get a place handing out tea, sandwiches, cake, and so on to rescue and clean-up workers at bomb sites from a Y.M.C.A. mobile canteen. She was a bit intimidated by the women with whom she found herself working:

Their class is right up to the county family level. Nearly everyone is tall above the average and remarkably hefty, even definitely large, not necessarily fat but broad and brawny. Perhaps this is something to do with the survival of the fittest.

And the work did bring her some satisfaction, even if it was of the type that lent itself to being recorded with tongue placed firmly in cheek:

We had a pleasant and uneventful day’s work serving City fire sites, the General Post Office, demolition workers and Home Guard Stations, etc. We were complimented at least half a dozen times on the quality of our tea ... I think the provision of saccharine for the tea urns to compensate for the mean sugar allowance is my most successful piece of war work. What did you do in the Great War, Mummy? Sneaked pills into the tea urns, darling.

For all her good humor and astute observations, Mrs. Black was far from immune to tiny-mindedness. After an evening out in 1943 she wrote:

I had to wait some time for the others in the cinema foyer, and I was much struck, as often before, by the almost complete absence of English people these days, from the capital of England. Almost every person who came in was either a foreigner, a roaring Jew, or both. The Cumberland [Hotel] has always been a complete New Jerusalem, but this evening it really struck me as no worse than anywhere else! It is really dismaying to see that this should be the result of this war in defence of our country.

Indeed, Mosley cites the results of a multi-year Mass-Observation study that showed a marked increase in anti-Jewish views London’s general population over the course of the war. Since it’s just one study, and since I haven’t seen that study mentioned anywhere else, I am reluctant to trust blindly in its accuracy; and there’s also this:

The small flat which George [Hardiman] had procured for [his family] ... in Aldgate was cleaner and airier than the old house in Canning Town [which had been bombed], and the little Jewish children with whom John now went to school seemed to be cleaner than the ones in Elm Road; at any rate, he no longer came home with nits in his hair.

On the other hand, Mosley himself gives us only a fragmentary view of London’s wartime Jewish population: everyone seems to be either a terrified refugee or an impoverished East Ender. We hear nothing about the substantial middle- and upper-middle class population — mostly of German descent and in some cases German birth — that had already taken shape in Northwest London; and while we are briefly introduced to Sir David Waley, a Treasury official, in connection with the case of an interned Jewish refugee, we aren’t told that Waley himself was Jewish, a member of “the cousinhood.” On yet a third hand, Mosley also quotes other M-O surveys from the same period that indicate largely hostile attitudes to most foreigners in London, with Poles at the bottom of the ladder and the small Dutch contingent on top. (Incidentally, the book’s extremely patchy index identifies Vere Hodgson as a Mass-Observation diarist, which she wasn’t.)

Backs to the Wall closes with a very brief, remarkably non-partisan account of the 1945 general election and its immediate aftermath. “Neither side had any inkling of the way the minds of the British voters were turning,” he writes.

When [Churchill’s] friends suggested that he was a victim of base ingratitude, he shook his head. He would not have such a charge leveled against his beloved countrymen. Ingratitude? "Oh, no," he said quietly, "I wouldn’t call it that. They have had a very hard time."

The book is worth reading for the primary materials that it includes, but it probably tells us as much about the era in which it was written as about the period that it covers.  

[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.

[citizenaycock]

Cold War (2018) | Directed and Written by Pawel Pawlikowski

Before getting into Cold War, as a prelude, I’d like to mention a funny documentary the filmmaker Pawel Pawlikowski released back in 1991 called Dostoevsky’s Travels. It follows the great-grandson of the famous Russian writer Fyodor Dostoevsky who died in 1881.  Fyodor is generally known as one of the greatest writers of all-time and possibly one of the first modern psychologists, deeply probing the human soul in his work.  Great-grandson Dmitri drives a tram in Leningrad, Russia and agrees to go on a speaking tour about his “prophet” Grandfather.  He doesn’t do this to pay his respects, but only because he dreams of scraping together enough money to buy a used Mercedes to impress his friends.  And he is OBSESSED with buying a Mercedes and knows nothing about his Great-Grandfather. He talks to crowds of intellectuals and hardly has anything to say about his kin Fyodor and just wants to get paid. He buys one Mercedes and it breaks down immediately. He then buys another at the end of the documentary and it gets stolen by bandits. As the doc progresses you see Dmitri is a bit of a numb-skull and a scoundrel. I liked it due to the irony of Dmitiri’s complete uncaring attitude towards Fyodor’s highly regarded esteem, and obviously this absurd infatuation with acquiring a used car as a status symbol compared to his novelist grandfather, who is held up so highly for his spiritual profundity and depth.     It’s a great piece of work no one has heard of...part-cautionary Capitalist tale at the end of the Soviet Union, while Cold War is part-cautionary Communist tale post World War II.  

Official Trailer for Cold War

Intro and Technical Specs

To start, my main fear of writing about films I love is that it will suck the joy out of the film itself by looking at it so closely.  I have only written in depth about two films, and thus far, am finding it to be the opposite.  When going under the microscope, I am just becoming more aware how great a truly well-made film is when breaking it down.  

Cold War may be the most beautiful black-and-white film I’ve seen.  The category Amazon has placed it in is “Arthouse Drama”.  Amazon Studios also is the distributor of the film.  My guess is because it did very well at the Cannes Film Festival and Pawlikowski won the Oscar for his previous film Ida in 2013. Sometimes they get it right.   To give some more context, I am very familiar with Ida and studied it for research for making my latest short film.  I found it interesting Pawlikowski implemented a particular style similar to filmmaker Paul Schraeder’s book, “Transcendental Style in Film”.  One aspect of this style pertaining to Ida is the cinematic framing for the action and not moving the camera until the end.  He framed his subjects in a squared 4:3 aspect ratio while leaving lots of headroom, sometimes leaving them in the bottom corner of the frame, which carried over to Cold War.  I don’t exactly know why he does this, but I have some theories that I will flesh out within the post in depth.  While watching, I immediately noticed the grain in the 4K version.  I looked it up and the film was shot with an Alexa digital camera and also a 35mm film camera, so apparently they were able to mimic film grain with the Alexa in post to match.  A 32mm lenses was used for almost all the shots. According to Pawlikowski it was because this focal length closely mimics the viewing width of the human eye and allows a wide space of action that can fit around the subject(s) in the frame. Similar to Ida, there is no non-diegetic music in the film (music added outside of the film’s music itself) until the closing credits, reminiscent of the French director Bresson.  

Opening in Rural Poland

The film opens on the hands of a man playing an instrument that resembles bagpipes, looks handmade and I assume is indigenous to Poland. The camera tilts up to reveal a bright-eyed rural man, and eventually pans over to another interesting looking character playing a violin as they sing together.  We soon learn that Wiktor (one of the protagonists) is traveling with two others (Irena and Kaczmarek) and they are recording various forms of folk music unique to the Polish people.  Kaczmarek immediately degrades this type of music as “possibly crude” or “too primitive” immediately marking a divide in perspective compared to Irena and Wiktor, who visibly enjoy interacting and recording the villagers’ authentic music.  

They soon come to a house where a unique-looking dirty village girl sings a song not accompanied by any instruments.  She has deep-set eyes and looks slightly haunted, and the lyrics of the song are about unrequited love. Not a happy song. Wiktor and Irena are enraptured by the raw singing and are recording this. In contrast, Kaczmarek disinterestedly eats soup in the next room, spoon klanking against the bowl, probably interfering with the recording.  Kaczmarek is representative of the Communist State for this film, high on bureaucracy and lacking in soul. The song being sung by the little girl is a huge part of the film as a whole.  Little do we know (and probably not evident to most who have seen the film) the lyrics tell the story of what happens between the protagonists we are about to follow in the film. The song is called Dwa Serduszka (Two Hearts) and is an authentic Polish folk song like much of the music in the movie.  After watching for the first time (I commonly do this) I went online to look up background information and found a very well-made youtube video essay describing the song as being the “Leitmotif” for the film. Leitmotif is a term defined as “a recurrent theme throughout a musical or literary composition, associated with a particular person, idea, or situation”.  In this case, the song operates as a direct pointing of what is to happen.  The song pops up several times throughout the course of the film, forecasting the fates of the two protagonist lovers, Wiktor and Zula, who are brought together by music.

This “forecasting” I believe goes deeper.  It’s as if it is pre-determined. Pre-determined due to the current political environment in Poland and the two characters’ difference in personality and upbringing.  Also, most importantly, is because they love each other in a way that seems beyond their control and not a choice, eventually becoming impossible for them to live life without one another. The leitmotif reminds us throughout the film of Wiktor and Zula’s inability to escape their fate, which is already etched in stone by powers beyond their will:    Two hearts four eyes Crying all day and night long Dark eyes, you cry because you can't be together You can't be together My mother told me You mustn't fall in love with this boy    But I went for him anyway and love him until the end I will love him until the end  

Folk Ensemble

Now we are at a large building which looks to still be in the rural area.  Auditions are going to be held here for singers and dancers for a folk ensemble performance.  A couple of trucks haul the commoners in and Kaczmarek gives a stately speech to the bunch before cutting inside to everyone waiting to audition for Wiktor and Irena.

We then meet Zula waiting.  She elects to audition with another girl, naively, rather than shine in the audition solo. They enter the room to sing for Wiktor and Irena.  Wiktor is immediately transfixed and asks Zula to hold on and asks her to sing another song alone.  She sings with an authentic, untrained beauty.  We also see her feistiness here.  It’s obvious Wiktor is smitten and she is marked down to be selected as one of the singers after they exchange a parting look.  By now, the framing style of the cinematography is noticeably unique compared to other films.  As mentioned in the intro, characters are often framed with lots of headroom and sometimes placed in the bottom of the frame, leaving it mostly open space.  My theory on this is that the environment the characters inhabit are shaping their destiny more than the characters’ own free will, therefore their heads are often seen at the bottom with action on top and around them. For example, Communism looms larger than the individual, tamping he or she down (literally) to the bottom of the frame.  Not only Communism, but their uncontrollable love for one another, the characters’ upbringing and the people around them with their general wants and needs. These factors shape their present and future more than their own willful, self-determination and I think the filmmaker is aware of this fatalism, yet doesn’t just come and say it because that wouldn’t be interesting.  We just see that Wiktor and Zula are never able to comfortably settle anywhere with their love nor escape the love they feel for one another, making their situation impossible due to the circumstances.        In Ida, duty to God looms large and so does the characters’ Jewish unknown family past (to only name two) and the shots are framed accordingly as well.   On a broad level stepping outside of the film, what’s interesting to me is how much free will do humans actually have and how much is self-determinant?  After studying the film closely, this is the deep question (not answer) that I came to that transcends the surface story.  

Wiktor watches Zula from a distance outside that evening.  Irena then tells him Zula killed her father and did some prison time for it.  After rewatching, I suspect that Irena loves Wiktor, and there are a few subtle cues later on that I noticed as well.  During private lessons, Wiktor curiously asks Zula what happened between her and her father while Wiktor plays scales on the piano and she matches the notes with her voice.  Zula says her father tried to be sexual with her so she stabbed him.  It is a very matter-of-fact and short answer.  Wiktor doesn’t say anything and continues playing the piano.   I’ve thought about this scene more so than any other scene after rewatching.  I think it is because of the dialectical nature of Zula saying she stabbed here Dad because he tried to have sex with her, one of the darkest things you could imagine, then the slight humor of Wiktor’s reaction while seamlessly transitioning back to the softness of the piano and her soft voice syncing.   Wiktor is very watchful, internal, reserved, most likely from a more refined family and musical background.  Zula is tough, spirited, tenacious and has lit a fire in Wiktor.  Wiktor is tall and dark-haired.  Zula is short and blonde. Opposites!

It is now time to perform for a large audience in a theatre.  Wiktor conducts. Zula and about 20 other girls in Polish folk attire sing the leitmotif song that was sung by the young girl earlier.  The group sings beautifully.  Zula shines in front.  Even Kaczmarek on the side of the stage behind the curtain seems to be in awe and carefully walks about as if not to disturb the magic.

Afterwards there is a reception.  Wiktor and Irena lean against a large mirrored wall and everyone else in the room is seen in the reflection. When you first watch it, it takes awhile to figure out the orientation of the room due to the mirrored wall.  I think this is the most interesting shot of the film.  Kaczmarek then gleefully enters frame and says that the performance was so beautiful, calls Wiktor a genius and says it’s the most beautiful day of his life.  He really means it and is the most authentic emotion we see from him in the whole film.  Previously, Kaczmarek thought all this “folksy stuff” was foolish.  There is a funny moment between the three.  Wiktor and Irena are obviously moved by this but not sure how to express it as the stately Kaczmarek leans against the mirror with the two.   On a second viewing, one sees Zula in the reflection staring at Wiktor the entire time.  The two make love soon after in a bathroom at the party.

The Ensemble + The State

The performance is so good, now the State wants to get involved and meets with Wiktor, Irena and Kaczmarek.  The government wants to turn the repertoire into a “calling card for our Fatherland” and incorporate “Land Reform”, “World Peace” and a strong number about the “Leader of the World Proletariat”.  In return the group will be held in high favor, able to travel to other countries to perform, etc.  Irena and Wiktor are visibly uncomfortable with this.  Irena speaks first and says thank you but the ensemble is about authentic folk art and the rural population doesn’t sing nor understand these difficult issues.  Kaczmarek quickly intervenes and calls the man from the state “comrade” and says the ensemble, on the contrary, will do this after given proper direction. Irena stares him down.  Wiktor says nothing.  The next performance is stained by a huge tapestry of Stalin behind the singing ensemble.  The tone now is more dutiful rather than soulful, as if singing a church hymn they are forced to sing.  Zula’s face while singing now lacks the life it possessed in the performance before.  The State must extinguish all individuality and uniqueness with the goal to homogenize.  Irena’s heart looks broken in the audience.  Everyone dutifully rises for applause afterwards and Irena walks out.  We do not see her again in the film.  Everything has changed.

The stuffiness of the singing troops is saved afterwards by a beautiful shot of Wiktor and Zula laying in a golden wheat field together at dusk. Golden?? The film is in black and white but my mind says “golden”.  Birds and crickets sing. Tranquility away from the group.

But it doesn’t last long, as they are unable to run from the larger outside factors.  Zula soon confesses that she reports on Wiktor to Kaczmarek about their relationship and the things he tells her. She says it’s because she’s on probation for something and assures Wiktor that it’s nothing that will hurt him, but Wiktor gets up and walks off angrily at a loss for words.      As mentioned, the scene starts with their eyes closed as if in a dream, beyond the State, but it's inevitable that the state has to enter their relationship at some point, infecting the dream, and will remain a problem for the rest of their lives.   Zula calls him a “bourgeois wanker” as he walks away and she reacts oddly by jumping in a nearby river.  As soon as she hits the water, Wiktor stops and turns around.  She floats in the river and begins singing the leitmotif song.  

The next shot is of the two silently sitting together again in the wheat field at nightfall with a campfire going.  Zula’s hair is wet. The two just stare at each other and never say a word. What are they thinking?   I think Wiktor is thinking that he can not escape her because of his love and that they are stuck!  Zula knows this too.  This is a type of love that transcends choice.  Just like the State, their love controls them. The silent shot in nature cuts to black, then diverges to a busy train station with a brass band as the ensemble leaves to go to Berlin for a show.  Kaczmarek gives a stately speech to the group about their trip.  Wiktor meets Zula privately in a train car and lays out a plan for their escape once in Germany to go to France.  Zula is nervous she will not be able to make it somewhere other than her homeland Poland due to her inability to speak French and lack of experience.  I doubt she has any family to rely on, and at the moment has the ensemble in Poland as a decent occupation.  Wiktor assures her she has talent to learn and the most important thing is they’ll be together. They kiss.   The performance in Berlin is shot very uniform and proper, perhaps further pointing to its newfound soulless rigidity.  Afterwards, Wiktor goes to the meeting place to cross the border.  Zula remains at the reception with the comrades and Kaczmarek (as if in a trance) and never shows.  Wiktor waits until nightfall and eventually stiffly walks across without her.  

Defection

Wiktor is now playing piano in a cool jazz night club in Paris with a band.  It is 1954.  His beard is now grown out a bit and his hair messier than before.  He is now in an empty cafe at closing time and speaks French with the waitress. He seems to have assimilated well here.  It is revealed he is waiting for someone. That someone is Zula.  She eventually walks in and they stare at one another for a few moments.   One look at Wiktor while sitting across from her shows how much he still loves her and has missed her. The actor playing Wiktor, Tomasz Kot, really shows this wonderfully. He is very good at being still yet showing so much.  Regarding the performances, this is one of the most authentic love films I’ve seen in a long time.  And an expert director and writer doesn’t hurt.  The film never feels sappy, in my opinion, while simultaneously remaining very romantic.   Zula doesn’t show much and stays cold during this scene, but can’t help but ask, “Are you with someone?”  Wiktor is.  So is she.  He asks if she’s happy.  She isn’t, but doesn’t say it.  Wiktor knows and walks her to the hotel.  She says she wasn’t good enough, not as good as him, to make the escape from Poland to Paris.  Wiktor says he believes love is enough.   Zula coldly kisses his cheek and then stolidly walks away.  Wiktor watches her go.  But eventually Zula breaks! She turns back around, walks quickly back and they kiss passionately for a few moments before she leaves again.      If one just read this and didn’t watch the film, you might think it seems like any other love story you’ve seen a million times. But to me, because of the authenticity of the performances and lack of constant soundtrack music, it really felt great to see these two embrace again. And I think it proves that moments in movies that may look cliche on paper can be pulled off with a skilled filmmaker and actors.  Also, there’s only a few angles that the camera covers in this scene and ALL the scenes really!  There’s a graceful economy and no superfluous closeups with unnecessary dialogue.  And as mentioned, no outside music booms in like most films commanding you to feel something! You feel it because you feel it, not because you’re told to feel it with an over-bearing soundtrack trying to compensate for lack of performance or direction. Wiktor now walks into his apartment, smokes a cigarette alone deep in thought, then gets in bed with his girlfriend.  He tells her he’s just been with the woman of his dreams.  She doesn’t seem to care and turns around to go to sleep, highlighting the lax and blase nature of their relationship and possibly Paris artist life as a whole.  Wiktor then turns off the lamp and looks up at the ceiling in lovestruck thought.

We are now in Yugoslavia in 1955, which looks much more lush than I would’ve imagined Yugoslavia.  Wiktor gets off the train to attend a performance of the ensemble.  Kaczmarek quickly greets him at the front of the theatre and is oddly cordial and confident in a sharp suit.   Once inside, Zula sees Wiktor in the audience and looks startled.   Wiktor looks side to side and men are watching him from the aisles.  He is escorted away by authorities yet remains adamant to see Zula rather than be afraid of being thrown in jail or hurt.  The first time I watched I thought he was definitely going to be thrown in prison. Kaczmarek obviously ordered the men to take him away and send him home in a train before he could see Zula, because of Kaczmarek’s interest in Zula.

Zula and the ensemble are shown singing the leitmotif song now.  Zula notices Wiktor is no longer in his seat.  Perhaps he was escorted out at the intermission.  She sings with a melancholic intensity.  The black-and-white contrast is especially beautiful here, maybe more so than anywhere else in the film.  There is a black back drop and all of the singers’ alabaster skin glows, as well as their folk costumes.  

Wiktor is back in Paris now and has gotten work as a Film Composer.  Two years has passed since the Yugoslavia concert.  While in the middle of working on the soundtrack, the side door of the sound stage opens. Wiktor is spellbound as a smiling Zula is revealed.  

Zula has married an Italian so she could legally move to France.  She says the marriage doesn’t count though because it wasn’t in a church. Neither seem worried about it.  This time Zula does not hold back her feelings and, obviously, neither does Wiktor. They make love.   They ride on a boat down the Seine at night past the buildings and cathedrals. They messily and drunkenly dance alone at a night club in rapture. Heaven for a moment.   

Which begins Zula’s vast transition from the performing rural ensemble in Communist Poland to a solo singer at the Paris jazz club with Wiktor’s band.    She sings the emblematic Dwa Serduszka most wonderfully here. Order.  Everything in it’s right place. She is luminous as the camera slowly dollies around her, eventually revealing a packed club.  Everyone is captivated and still.  Then at the end is a lovely moment, maybe my favorite moment of the film, where Wiktor is staring at her intensely and she turns to check in with him and he gives her a nod of approval.  It’s almost corny, riding the edge, but is powerful, conveying a silent understanding between the two seeing one another perfectly clearly.

Poles to Parisians

We now are at where Wiktor and Zula live, which looks like a cool version of a converted attic with a Paris view.  Juliette, Wiktor’s ex, has translated Dwa Serduszka from Polish to French and Zula is unhappy with the translation, which most likely includes some self-consciousness about her pronunciation.  The manner is which the leitmotif song appears here runs parallel to the first step in the descent of the relationship in Paris.  Zula is defensive and anxious about the Parisian artistic circle Wiktor has introduced her to and she drinks to ease the anxiety of feeling inferior.  Wiktor tells her not to because she is “charme slave” as they say, alluding to how everyone has a narrative role and label in these circles.  Zula is becoming difficult and insecure.  Wiktor is becoming caught up in the scene and ignorant of Zula’s dramatic change of environment.

The film director at the party looks Zula up and down when they arrive.  Wiktor allows this without rebuke, most likely due to the nature of the sexually-lax Parisian art culture. Everyone is beautiful and chic at the party.  Zula immediately goes for the drinks.  She then sees Juliette and approaches her abruptly (yet with restraint for Zula), subtly challenging her French translation of Dwa Serduzska.  Juliette calmly explains her reasoning according to the lyrics’ metaphors. It’s obvious Juliette sees through what’s happening in the situation here..  Juliette’s part is small but the actress is excellent and conveys a lot.  She eventually mentions how the transition to Paris must’ve been a shock...the cafes, cinemas, shops, restaurants. Apparently Juliette sees this shock more than Wiktor does.  Zula tries to play it cool here but you can see she’s flustered.  This is a game she’s not used to playing. She then retorts that her life in Poland was better.  

Wiktor is talking to someone and looks over and sees Zula and the Film Director sitting closely, flirting.  Zula glances back over at him to see if he cares, but Wiktor stays put.  Then later she aggressively confronts him about giving her story “more color”.  It is apparent now that he has enhanced her Polish story to seem more dramatic in order to captivate his French friends and colleagues.  Wiktor shrugs this off.  Zula’s vibe is not carefree and cool like the rest of the party with her straightforward, intense rawness which creates an isolation for herself.   She sits in the bathroom now alone, drinking from a bottle, talking to herself in the mirror.  She calls Wiktor a jerk, but then says she loves him. She calls herself an idiot at one point. She continues to talk in the mirror as if to console herself.  And I can’t help to mention how much she looks like a young Gena Rowlands here.  It reminds me of the 1968 film Faces, which is also black and white.  They look so much alike, and both fantastic actresses that are blonde, voluptuous and troubled.

Gena Rowlands in Faces (1968)

Joanna Kulig in Cold War (2018) Wiktor, unknowingly and excitedly, opens the bathroom door and says that they’re all going to the Jazz Club now.  Zula says she’s a bit sad and wants Wiktor to come in the bathroom with her, but he ignores this and says let’s go.  She takes a moment to herself and then it cuts to the club.  She looks miserable and wasted sitting at the bar.  As we go, I am still noticing the framing I mentioned at the beginning with the subject at the bottom, but for this shot she really seems low!

Her melancholy is interrupted by an upbeat, American song (”Rock Around the Clock Tonight”) and she gets up reinvigorated and starts dancing enthusiastically with a few different guys.  The camera goes handheld and is the messiest camerawork of the film (a good messy).  She eventually gets sloppy and gets on the bar and almost falls and people drunkenly cheer as Wiktor exasperatedly watches.

We then see Wiktor carrying her into their room.  Zula says he is no longer a man in Paris like he was in Poland, and says she and the director get along well in attempt to get under his skin further.  He then sits alone in the dark and smokes a cigarette.

It now cuts to Zula in a sound studio singing into a mic in French.  I don’t speak any French, but her accent and pronunciation feels correct, but her spirit is muted...and we soon see one reason why.  Wiktor’s voice ominously interrupts her over a speaker behind glass in the recording booth.  Now the shot is on him and he looks disheveled and dark and tells Zula they only have 40 minutes left and not to blow it.  There is a deep hate in his eyes we haven’t seen yet, perhaps retribution for calling out his manhood and their recent relationship woes. An engineer and the film director are also in the booth.  There is just a bad energy in the room and anyone that’s ever tried to perform anything would be able to detect how difficult it would be to bring a great performance here.  The music starts back up and Wiktor looks down as if disappointed right before she starts singing.  

We are at a listening party now for Zula’s record at the French Director’s apartment.  Zula is standing in the middle of the room alone, listening intently as several others sit around in the background drinking champagne.  Dwa Serduszka plays, but now in French.  It’s okay but not great. It doesn’t have the soul that it had before in Polish.  I’m trying to put my finger on it, but the French seems a little stiff and the vocal track seems extra-produced.  Too loud and too clear when mixed with the band’s instruments and it’s just not what it was before like the first time at the jazz club, for example.  Again, this leitmotif song is also a metaphorical indicator for the stage in the relationship. She looks over at Wiktor who is cooly leaning on the wall off to the side (maybe too cool) and gives Zula a nod similar to his nod after the jazz club performance.  But this nod doesn’t have the effect it did then and seems oddly forced.  The record playing here in this posh Paris apartment compared to the Polish rural girl singing at the beginning of the film is night and day. It’s obvious why, if you think about it.  They’ve taken a folk Polish song, translated it to French for a rural Polish singer, then recorded and produced it in a slick Paris sound studio under difficult conditions.  How could the quality not suffer a bit?! Another example of the larger outside obstacles making it impossible for them, even in a free society like Paris, France.    

It cuts to them now walking home afterwards.  Immediately it’s apparent Zula is unhappy.  Wiktor recognizes this but apparently didn’t know while at the party.  As they pass a fountain next to the street, Zula throws the record in <splash> yet continues to mostly hold her sadness in, which has become more of a depression at this point.  Assimilating is one thing, but they have gotten into this habit of holding back and not being up front, maybe due to the social circles they run in now.  Zula cooly mentions that the French Director has fucked her well 6 times and "not like a Polish artist in exile,” which causes an eruption in Wiktor (what she wanted) and he slaps her.  

This is strange to mention but, technically, the slap doesn’t sync with the sound. Lol. I watched this part 3 or 4 times to make sure and it just doesn’t (unless there was a lag in the internet connection).  Maybe nobody else notices this, but I’ve had to edit-sync slaps, kicks and punches before many times on this very computer and immediately saw something didn’t look/sound right. After the hard slap, Zula raises up and says, “Now we’re talking”, which is sarcastic but also the truth.  Often one needs a crisis moment to break out of a behavioral habit and apparently the French translation broke the camel’s back. The next day Wiktor frantically goes to the Director’s apartment looking for Zula.  He stomps through the rooms looking for her.  The Director then says she went back to Poland.  Wiktor slowly walks out of the apartment with a terrified look on his face.   Wiktor has become unhinged and plays maniacally on the piano at the Jazz Club.  The other band members just stop playing and look at him as he bangs on the keys in isolation.  There is some slight comical levity here for a couple of seconds due to the look on the clarinet player’s face.    You assume Wiktor has lost his job.  He is now miserably pumping coins in a phone booth for talk time to find out where Zula is in Poland.  Afterwards, Wiktor goes to what I assume is an embassy.  A Polish man at a desk tries to dissuade him from leaving Paris and going back to Poland.  You can see the Eiffel Tower outside the window as the man asks Wiktor why he would ever want to leave this place.  He says Wiktor doesn’t exist anymore to Poland because he left and let down all the young people he worked with. The man takes a drink from his cup and reacts as if he’s spiked it with something strong, perhaps how he’s able to get through his job.  He then mentions there is a way Wiktor can go back if he truly regrets what he has done.  

The Exiles Return

It is 1959 and we see Zula back in Poland on a dreary, crowded train with peasants.  Soldiers whistle at her as she walks on a snowy road.  She has come to visit a very broken, gaunt Wiktor who is being held prisoner by the military for being an exile.  He says he has to be here for 15 years and got off lucky.  Zula gives the guard what I assume are cigarettes which buys them 10 minutes alone.  

His right hand has been beat severely.  They kiss and Zula says she will wait for him.  Wiktor tells her to find someone else, but Zula says she will get him out.

Cuts to 1964, 5 years later.  A performing Zula is on stage singing a ridiculous Latin-infused song with a black wig on, resembling a late Judy Garland.  She looks overweight and drunk with her comical, sombrero-wearing band. We now see an older Wiktor backstage with Kaczmarek who is holding an unhappy, despondent child.  Kaczmarek doesn’t look like he’s aged a bit and still has a detached soullessness about him.  With Kaczmarek, you wait for him to be rude or mean but he is not.  He always stays at a steady, robotic hum of cordiality.   It is revealed Wiktor can no longer play music because he can no longer use his right hand.  It is also now apparent that Zula married Kaczmarek in order for Wiktor to be released.  Zula now comes off stage and walks quickly toward them but drunkenly falls down. She manages to rapidly get up and falls directly into Wiktor’s arms, completely disregarding Kaczmarek and her son.  They go off to the restroom together and sit on the floor staring at one another.  Zula pulls off her wig, perhaps finally able to shed this horrible identity she's had to create to survive. 

She asks him to get her out of here...for good.  

The two take a crowded bus and get dropped off on a country road next to a lovely field.  They look slightly rejuvenated but stolid.  

Early in the film, Irena and Wiktor sat in the van while Kaczmarek took a walk to take a pee.  Kaczmarek then aimlessly walked into the ruins of this old church. He looked around, then left...point being we’ve seen this place before.  And earlier, even Kaczmarek’s face showed a certain amount of reverence for this old church and felt the power it gave off.  Wiktor and Zula now enter this same church.  There is a circular hole in the ceiling, perhaps so God can see them.    

They now kneel with a candle lit in front of them on an alter with a row of white pills. They have a brief, simple marriage ceremony. They both have a glow to them.  They cross themselves and mention God.  They ingest the pills.

They kiss.  

They then sit on a bench at dusk and look out into the field, holding hands, quiet.

You can hear the insects and an occasional bird chirp.  Both have dark circles under their eyes.  It’s so beautiful yet so sad.   Zula then says, “Let’s go to the other side.  The view will be better there”.  They stand and go, leaving an open frame.  A gentle gust blows the wheat from behind where they were sitting.  Perhaps God’s sigh...

This last time I watched, the ending really got me...and is powerful now as I write about it.  As mentioned in the intro, Pawlikowski’s last film Ida incorporated a particular style.  Pawlikowski never moved the camera until the end of that film, so when he did the viewer would be raised up in a transcendental way as the first external music came in, lifting us from the real world for a few moments.  I think he did the same thing here with Cold War in a different way. The moment of transcendence for this film comes at the end also but not with the movement of the camera but with the movement of the wheat behind the bench before cutting to black.  This film is high on realism, but this gust is something otherworldly, therefore a powerful contrast from the stark, real world tribulations previously in the entirety of the film up to this point.  This is what makes it so heartbreaking and beautiful and poetic all at the same time.  And also, for a moment, the viewer might weigh whether the fate of Wiktor and Zula is so horrible after all.   “for my parents” appears before the credits, pointing to the fact that the story is based on the filmmaker’s parents’ true experience during that time period.  Bach’s Goldberg Variations comes in and you know it’s Glen Gould when you hear the humming, which I don’t necessarily like but it doesn’t ruin the mood.  Bach was also used for the ending of Ida and is also the only non-diegetic music used for Cold War.  

In conclusion, I think every great film has to have a surface story that one can follow and then a large idea hidden within that story (or as a result) to meditate on which includes something deep about the human condition.  With some films, one has to work to find out what that larger idea is. For future posts, I may try to specifically focus on this “larger idea” rather that breaking down the entire film.  This often appears as a question, not an answer, and Cold War does this masterfully.