#it all happened on britannia | Explore Tumblr Posts and Blogs

homoeroticbetrayal · 1 year

Text

Iconic Homoerotic Betrayal: Round 2

Round 2 Directory

Context:

Lelouche/Suzaku

Summary by Anonymous Contributor

szll is already iconic but I'm just going to list all their betrayals (and perceived betrayals) as a refresher:

(first, for context, one thing you gotta understand is lelouch, leader of the rebellion who believes ends justify the means, is also the discarded prince of the empire he's fighting against. suzaku, rising knight of the empire who believes means have to justify the ends, is the son and killer of the prime minister of the country being oppressed. this is PEAK narrative foils and enemies-to-lovers recipe right there.)

- lelouch and nunnally were sent to japan as political hostages. britannia takes over japan quickly after and lelouch, knowing how much japan means to suzaku, promises to destroy britannia. suzaku should be angry at britannia! lelouch will free them!! except years later he learns that suzaku is now WORKING for the empire? he's becoming a KNIGHT for the empire, betraying his own country and their shared hatred for britannia. what the fuck, what happened to principles, suzaku? this is lelouch's first (perceived) betrayal.

- lelouch (accidentally) kills euphemia, the only princess who's trying to make peace with the japanese, the princess that suzaku is knight of, the princess suzaku LOVES and lelouch adores. now yes, this was an accident, but lelouch ROLLS WITH IT and lets suzaku and the rest of the world believe that it was intentional, thus fully driving that knife deep. he never tells suzaku this was an accident. this is suzaku's most painful betrayal.

- suzaku finds out lelouch is zero, leader of the rebellion, and turns him in to his evil dad, emperor of the empire, in exchange for becoming a knight of round (the highest military status). now if you count akito the exiled as canon, this also means sending lelouch to be BRAINWASHED into serving the empire as a master tactician before R2 happens. suzaku monitors him all throughout, watching lelouch destroy nations and praise the empire against his own principles.

this is just season one of code geass. this doesn't even touch how suzaku is also forced to betray his own loyalties/principles sometimes whenever the "live" geass that lelouch condemns him with acts up. how suzaku would monitor lelouch and keep deceiving him that rolo is his beloved sibling, not nunnally. etc etc.

AND YET despite all of this, code geass culminates with them SWEARING LOYALTY to each other, with lelouch becoming the demon emperor and suzaku becoming his right-hand man, the knight of zero. lelouch becomes a tyrant that suzaku is destined to kill. lelouch brings peace to the world but will never be able to live in it. he will always be remembered as the dictator, the scourge of the world. suzaku atones for all his sins by being reduced to a heroic symbol, by being punished to kill his best friend and never becoming suzaku the person ever again. with the "live" geass, he is cursed to never die, never to escape, always bearing both of their sins -- the eternal punishment he has been seeking. and by killing lelouch, he is able to avenge euphemia in the end, and bring the peace all three of them desired.

code geass is a hot mess but there is poetry in their betrayals. they are thematically bound to live this tragedy, and that is why they are iconic. the ending of code geass is well-known and highly regarded as one of the most iconic endings ever, and it can only ever be so because it stands on the love and loss and betrayals of suzaku and lelouch.

Charles/Erik

Summary by @sing-the-beginning-of-moana

it was love at first sight. they got together and were happy for a while until erik caused charles to feel the excruciating pain of dying (without actually dying), tried to kill hundreds of people, accidentally paralyzed charles, and then abandoned him altogether. and that's just the first movie. repeat with the same sort of behavior and constant breaking up and getting back together for the next several decades.

See other descriptions of Suzululu or Cherik

#suzululu #cherik #suzaku kururugi #lelouch lamperouge #charles xavier #erik lehnsherr #x men first class #code geass #polls

1K notes · View notes

ancientcharm · 8 months

Text

Claudius: The fool of the dynasty.

Claudius was born in Lugdunum, Gaul on August 1, 10 BC. On his mother's side, he was the grandson of the legendary Mark Antony and great-nephew of emperor Augustus. His father was the son of the Empress Livia and brother of emperor Tiberius. He also had blood ties with Julius Caesar.

According to historical sources: His sister, Livilla, after hearing an Augur say that her younger brother would be emperor, exclaimed: "May the gods save Rome from such misfortune. That would be the end of the empire." His grandmother, Livia, avoided talking to him because "when he was a child, the empress felt uncomfortable seeing and hearing him." During his childhood, the family avoided taking him to public events so as not to be seen. All this drama just because Claudius was lame, stuttered and had a tic.

During the reigns of Augustus and Tiberius, that is, for almost his entire life, he was prohibited from holding public office because of his "defects." From a very young age it was determined that he could never be heir to the throne. This was determined by his family but not by his destiny.

Three wives, three troubles.

Year 9: The Empress Livia convinced a senator who was a close friend of her family, to marry her daughter, Plautia Urgulanilla, to her 18-year-old grandson. They had a son, Claudius Drusus, who died at 14-15 years old when he threw a piece of pear into the air to catch it in his mouth and the piece got stuck in his throat. Years before the son's death, a girl was born. But months later, Claudius noticed that the baby looked more like one of his freedmen than him. Claudius publicly declared that the girl was not his daughter. This scandal occurred at the same time that her brother-in-law, Plautia's brother, murdered her wife by throwing her out of a window. After this, Claudius immediately divorced.

Year 28: The prefect of the Praetorian Guard, Sejanus, was plotting to occupy the throne. Knowing that no one would accept an emperor who was not related to the dynasty, he married his sister, Elia Paetina, to Claudius. They had a daughter named Antonia. In the year 31 the plots and murders of Sejanus were discovered; Emperor Tiberius sentenced him to death. Claudius was forced to divorce the relative of the traitor but he never abandoned his daughter Antonia.

Year 38: During the reign of his nephew Caligula, Claudius married a woman member of the dynasty. The young and beautiful Valeria Messalina was the granddaughter of Antonia the Elder, Claudius's aunt. Antonia the Elder was the first daughter that Mark Antony had with Augustus's sister. Ten years later, this third marriage will end in worse circumstances than the first two.

Interestingly, "the mad emperor Caligula" was the first of that family to see that nothing prevents Claudius from holding an important position. Claudius at age of 46 was appointed consul.

The less thought day

On January 24, 41, the emperor was assassinated by the Praetorian Guard in collusion with several senators. Minutes later, the emperor's wife and daughter were also murdered.

And what no one would have thought possible happened: At the age of 50 Claudius became Caesar. The fourth emperor of Rome.

According to the historians Flavius Josephus and Cassius Dion, Claudius, terrified, thinking that the senators' plan was to exterminate all the members of the imperial family to restore the republic, hid behind a curtain. A Praetorian soldier found him and immediately proclaimed him emperor because he was the only male in the dynasty who could rule, the other remaining member being his 3-year-old grandnephew Lucio Domitius, whom 9 years later Claudio himself would give the famous name Nero.

Claudius the Conquer

Claudius surprised Rome by proving to be not only an intelligent emperor but also a conqueror who would make the empire greater. In 43, Claudius begins the campaign to conquer Britannia. Circa 50 the Romans founded the city Londinium /London.

Although this was his most famous conquest and territorial expansion, it was not the only one. Noricum: Present-day central Austria (west of Vienna), part of Bavaria (Germany), northeastern Slovenia, and part of the Italian Alps. Thrace (Bulgaria), and he made the Danube River a new border of the Roman Empire.

Claudius the Emperor

He distinguished himself for his policy of Meritocracy. He rewarded for ability , not for personal sympathies. He allowed men from of non-aristocratic origin access to the Senate. Claudius gained the respect of the Senate, the army and the people at the same time, something that had not been seen in Rome since the time of Augustus.

He had two children with his third wife: Octavia, born late year 39, and Tiberius Claudius, later nicknamed Britanicus due the conquest of Britannia, born 19 days after Claudius' accession to the throne.

He wrote many works, most during the reign of Tiberius. In addition to a history of the reign of Augustus and some treatises on the game of dice, his great passion, among his main works are a History of Etruscan civilization in twenty books, a History of Carthage in eight volumes, and a dictionary of the Etruscan language.

Pliny the Elder refers to Claudius as "One of the best writers". Evidently, Claudius learned a lot from his teacher, the most prestigious Roman historian, Titus Livius (Livy), author of the extraordinary work Ab Urbe Condita.

In the year 47 Claudius celebrated the Ludi Saeculares of the eighth centenary of the founding of Rome.

The tragic end of the empress.

Empress Valeria Messalina becomes the lover of Senator Gaius Silius. Taking advantage of her lineage as a woman of the Julio-Claudian dynasty, she convinced that man that together they could take the throne from Claudius. In 48, while Claudius was in Ostia, Messalina divorced him and married Silius. Three freedmen arrived in Ostia to give the incredible news to the emperor.

According to Tacitus: "Claudius, having returned to the palace, ordered that Messalina be brought to him, but the freedman Narcissus, fearing that the emperor would forgive her, ordered a freedman, a centurion, and some tribunes to proceed with the execution. The woman was overtaken in the gardens and executed; informed of his wife's death while he was at the table, Claudio would not have asked any more questions."

The senator and his group of accomplices and supporters were also executed.

Seven years earlier: Claudius ordered the return of his nieces, daughters of his deceased brother Germanicus:, Livilla and Agrippina the Younger, both exiled by Caligula in 39. Livilla was highly favored by Claudius, and Agrippina the Younger was beloved by the people. This situation caused Messalina worry and jealousy.

Messalina, through intrigue, in a very short time managed to send Livilla back into exile, along with the philosopher Seneca -a close friend and ally of Agrippina the Younger- accusing them of being lovers and conspiring. Livilla died in exile shortly after arriving.

Livilla was just one of the first victims of Messalina's intrigues; The list is very long. The only really bad thing I found in Claudius was allowing himself to be easily manipulated and convinced by Messalina and committing many injustices because of her.

But Mesalina could not make Agrippina the Younger disappear, who was extremely cunning and more dangerous than Livilla because she had a son, that is, a candidate for the throne who, to make matters worse, he had more blue blood than Britannicus. In all likelihood, this could be the reason Messalina attempted to overthrow Claudius.

The fourth wife, and the death.

If Senator Gaius Silius was able to use Messalina's lineage to try to overthrow Claudius by marrying her, what could another do who marries the widow Agrippina, a direct descendant of Divine Augustus? This was the reason for Claudio's incredible decision to marry his niece: simply so that no other man could marry her. Agrippina immediately accepted the proposal to become empress of Rome.

The marriage between an uncle and his niece was considered incest and a crime in Rome. However, this was not an incestuous relationship but a political union. Even so, dispensations had to be presented to the Senate and religious authorities, and there were endless ceremonies.

Finally, in the year 49, in an unprecedented event in Roman history, the Emperor married his own niece. Immediately Agrippina gets Claudius to bring her close friend Seneca from exile, and orders the remains of her exiled sister to be brought to be cremated in an honorable funeral and the urn placed in the mausoleum of Augustus. Agrippina appoints Seneca as her son's tutor and teacher. Claudius granted Agrippina the title of Augusta. Curiously, when Claudius ascended the throne he did not grant that title to his wife Messalina but to his deceased mother Antonia the Younger.

In 50 Claudius adopted his great-nephew Lucius as son and changed his name to Nero Claudius. Agrippina's son become the heir to the throne, instead Emperor's own son. Many historians believe that this was because in the Dynasty, when choosing the successor it was more important to take into account who he was descended from in a direct line. Nero, unlike Britannicus, was a direct descendant of Augustus (great-great-grandson).

Later, Agrippina convinces Claudius to marry his daughter Octavia to Nero. At that time Nero and Octavia are around 14 and 12 years old respectively.

In October 13 of 54, at age 64, the emperor died suddenly during a banquet, after having eaten poisoned mushrooms, according to Juvenal's version.

There are several versions about his death, however they all agree on the theory that the emperor was poisoned. Personally, I want to believe that his death was due to natural causes. The life story of this emperor is extraordinary, it does not deserve such a poor ending.

Below, a text that is not mine but from a very important site with an extensive article on Emperor Claudius. I copy and paste the final part that I was happy to read.

However, as Levick points out, those present at the banquet do not seem to have suspected poisoning of any sort; moreover, the eunuch Halotus, whose job was to taste the Emperor's food, kept his job when Nero assumed the throne—evidence that nobody wanted to put him out of the way, either as an accomplice or as a witness to assassination. We see no reason to believe that Claudius was murdered. All the features are consistent with sudden death from cerebrovascular disease, which was common in Roman times. Towards the end of 52 AD, at the age of 62, Claudius had a serious illness and spoke of approaching death. Around that time there were changes in his depiction in busts, cameos and coins—with thick neck, narrow shoulders and flat chest. The Apocolocyntosis, addressed to an audience some of whom were present at the death, makes clear that there is no need to postulate poisoning, accidental or otherwise.

The Divine Claudius

Sculpture of Claudius deified (1st Century) Vatican Museums.

After his death, like Augustus, he was deified.

The boy who everyone said could never achieve anything became a great writer, emperor, conqueror and a god.

#history #ancient rome #roman empire #roman emperors

166 notes · View notes

llyfrenfys · 5 months

Text

"Rule Britannia is out of bounds" - How England invented Great Britain

("Rule Britannia is out of bounds"- Life on Mars, David Bowie, 1971)

As promised, here is a more in-depth exploration of Wales' relationship to indigeneity or colonised status. And how England created the (political) concept of Great Britain when it formally annexed Wales in 1542. This is a long post but I will try and be brief where possible to do so. I graduated with a degree in Celtic Studies last year from Aberystwyth University so it's time to put that to use.

In my last post, I went over the groundwork for this conversation - so if you haven't read that one yet I strongly suggest you read that one first then come back to this one. In that first post, I establish the stickiness in claiming or applying the status of colonised onto the modern nation and people of Wales. I also explore how claims of indigeneity (intended to legitimise Welsh nativism through dubious claims of descent from the Iron Age Britons) are weaponised in modern political contexts.

With all that said - how does one categorise the suffering of Wales/its culture and language without straying into the language of the colonised?

Early Medieval English Imperial desire for Wales:

Very often, you will hear people make the claim that Wales was 'England's first colony' and that the other nations bordering England were guinea pigs for Britain's later colonial empire. My previous writing on this topic has established the difficulty in applying colonised as a term to Wales and its context. Which leads to the question of what do we describe it as instead?

For this, we need to make a distinction between colonialism and imperialism.

The two concepts are very similar (and do overlap slightly) but they have crucial differences which allow us to be more precise and succinct with our wording which aids both communication of the subject and quells misunderstanding through language which doesn't fit the situation.

Put simply, Imperialism is when one country, people or nation desires to extend power over another (usually a close-by or neighbouring territory) - especially (but not solely) through the means of expansionism.

Colonialism is also when a country, people or nation wants to extend power over another - but primarily through invasion and typically (but not always) against territories that are further afield and not immediate neighbours).

A lot of the way in which we view early British history in Wales is tinged with a kind of exceptionalism for what happened between England and Wales. Very often, what was done is framed as uniquely terrible for the time and held up as a poster child for the unique evil of England's expansionist desires. Yet all over Europe at the same time this was happening - other European nations and peoples were engaging in the same subjugator-subjugatee relationship. The exceptionalism present in framing Wales as uniquely suffering in this period is, unfortunately, borne out of the same British imperial culture which was thrust upon it and has become irrevocably entwined with culturally. It is a kind of British arrogance (which ironically crops up in anti-British arguments in Welsh independence activism) which presupposes nobody could have suffered the same or worse than they have, which demands the active ignorance of other, contemporary examples of that which they claim to oppose.

Wales was the first victim of English (later British) Imperialism - not its first colonial victim.

The build-up to and annexation of Wales by England:

Wales was annexed twice - once before the age of states and once shortly before that age dawned. The concept of states (as in, sovereign countries) didn't really exist until after the Treaties of Westphalia (1648). In which the concept of non-interference in the religious affairs of other countries (and other domestic affairs) was established and international relations was born. This is relevant to Wales' situation - as what England did to Wales happened long before the age of states began.

There was the Conquest of Wales by Edward I between 1277 and 1283. (Before that, the Norman Conquest of Wales by 1081). (However, the latter being conducted by the Normans is not necessarily equatable to the actions of England the country, which itself had only just been invaded by the Normans). And then the Laws in Wales Acts which formally incorporated Wales into the realm of the Kingdom of England in 1542.

The Conquest of Wales by Edward I overran the territories of the last Prince of Wales (from the Welsh monarchic tradition), Llywelyn the Last and divided the territories into Welsh Principalities and Marcher Lordships. This setup remained until 1542, when Henry VIII passed the Laws in Wales Acts and formally annexed Wales and made it (in all the legal senses) a part of England.

By the time international relations was in its infancy (i.e. shortly after the Peace of Westphalia) Wales had been absorbed into England for just over 100 years. The relevancy of this is that Westphalia had been about religious liberty - Henry VIII's incorporation of Wales into the Kingdom of England was partly informed by religion. Henry VIII had just broken away from Rome and established the Protestant Church of England, whereas Wales was still largely Catholic. The Laws in Wales Acts also replaced the language of the courts in Wales with English, cutting off monolingual Welsh speakers from legal representation. The language of worship became English instead of Latin. Wales was culturally assimilated into England over a long period of time. And that meant ensuring Wales followed the 'correct' religion and spoke the 'correct' language. After the Peace of Westphalia, these actions by Henry VIII to bend Wales to his new religion and to assimilate Wales into England would have been in poor taste or decried in light of the new Westphalian system that was developing in Europe. Alas, these events took place before then and temporally speaking, Wales was locked out of this recourse.

By contrast, Scotland was unified with England into the Kingdom of Great Britain in 1707 (after the Peace of Westphalia). England committed numerous acts of cultural erosion and destruction against Wales and Scotland at this time - but its Union with Scotland differs to that with Wales. Wales was incorporated into England, whereas Scotland was 'invited' to join a union between England (which then included Wales) and itself. Simplifying it greatly - like a marriage proposal in which the two spouses are *supposed* to be equals. After the Act of Union with Scotland, the whole island of Great Britain was 'unified' and thus the Kingdom of Great Britain was formed from two states - England (inc. Wales) and Scotland into one state.

Welsh Nationalism and Nationhood as separate from Statehood:

Wales and Scotland were the victims of English imperialism in many similar, but also many different ways.

Wales, having never been a 'state' was unable to acquire this status since it had long been incorporated into England by the time the concept of states had developed. Wales was unlucky in this way, because other nations on this island such as Scotland had managed to establish themselves long enough to survive into the age of states and thus became one. Because of this, Welsh nationalism cannot look to an era in which it was a free state because that did not happen. Instead, Welsh nationalism very often looks back with rose-tinted spectacles to Wales prior to Edward I's conquest and/or prior to Henry VIII's Laws in Wales Acts.

But nationhood and statehood are not the same thing - and it is the conflation of these two concepts (like the conflation of colonialism and imperialism) which has led to much of the confusion on these topics. Nationhood is acquired by a group of people who share several of these things: a common language, history, culture and (usually) territory. Not all of these things are required, but most nations have all or almost all of these qualities. Wales has a language (Welsh), a common history, culture and territory (Wales). Statehood is acquired by an association of people who have most or all of these things: formal institutions of government, laws, permanent territorial boundaries and sovereignty. Wales before 1283 very loosely had government and laws (monarchy and Laws of Hywel Dda) but had no permanent territory due to the conquest and lost some sovereignty in 1283 and total sovereignty in 1542.

Even if Wales had met all the criteria for a state in 1283, it would not have been eligible to become one - no nation in the world was able to do that yet because the concept (or proto-concept) for it would only be invented in 1648. Even England did not qualify for state status yet. Put simply, Wales got very unlucky with history and geography in such a way which prevented it from having a historical statehood post-1648 like neighbouring England and Scotland.

Naturally, when Welsh nationalism attempts to recall a past in which it was a 'state' - it is always an imagined and romanticised history. A fantasied history which generates ideas of the persecuted 'indigenous' Cymro where it shouldn't really be (in all seriousness, the injustices inflicted upon Wales by England are enough - extra additional injustices reliant upon a claim to to 'nativeness' do not need to be invented in order to be taken seriously). In the modern world, claims of nativeness in a European context are fraught, misguided, in poor taste and often copy the homework of the indigenous peoples those same European powers marginalised or colonised. In the modern world, a white Welshman claiming indigeneity is doing so in a postcolonial world and there really is no escaping that. Succinctly - the Welsh nationalist who relies upon a created sense of nativeness can only do so by drawing upon the work of marginalised native peoples living in parts of the world formerly colonised by Great Britain. To claim native status as a Welshman is to misunderstand and misappropriate history while wielding the language of the genuinely colonised while contributing nothing to it. It is purely extractive and a slap in the face of non-European native peoples everywhere. The pining for this return* to a prior point in Wales' history where it was a fully functional, sovereign nation populated only by 'native' or 'indigenous' Cymry is an alarming and ahistorical fantasy that all too easily slides into ethnonationalism and nativism -ancient or modern.

(*the choice of the word 'return' here is no accident - the desire to 'return' is inextricably linked to the alt-right dogwhistle 'retvrn' and it it is frighteningly common to see elements of that subculture crop up in Welsh nationalist calls to return to a point in Wales' history where it was 'sovreign'.)

Welsh nationalism which isn't vigilant to this kind of thinking very often will find itself arguing blatant untruths. For example, on the milder side of fake history, I've come across Welsh nationalist groups claiming symbolism from Owain ap Gruffydd's coat of arms - despite the fact he lived before the age of heraldry and he never used these arms because they were attributed to him later.

What next for Wales after 1542?:

Since Wales was fully and formally incorporated into the Kingdom of England by 1542, English colonisation of the Americas prior to 1707 naturally included Welsh colonists as well as English colonists. After 1707 Scots joined in with the now British colonisation of the Americas (both as/for/on the side of the Brits and as Scots fleeing Scotland after the Act of Union decimated Scottish Gaelic traditional culture). The Welsh, on the other hand, were more intimately involved with the colonisation of the Americas before that.

Though England spearheaded its colonisation of the Americas, Wales was not an unwilling participant dragged along by its association with and incorporation into England - Welsh colonisation, like Scottish colonisation, was often motivated by religious or cultural persecution - of which colonisation of another land was a possible solution to cultural loss in their home countries. Pennsylvania was settled by many Welsh Quakers and the idea of a Welsh Tract was floated to the Welsh settlers in 1684. The idea was to create a county which would operate in the Welsh language and serve as a vehicle for the preservation of the Welsh language. This attempt was not as successful as Wales' colony in Patagonia, Argentina in which native populations there were displaced at the behest of the Argentinian government - who needed the land settled and cleared. Welsh colonists took up this mantle and created Y Wladfa colony there in 1865.

Returning to the 17th Century - Welsh people were active colonists in the Americas during this time - motivated by saving the Welsh language and freedom of religion (especially the developing Nonconformist denominations of Protestant Christianity developing at this time). It was not so much that England was forcing Wales to participate in its colonialism, but that Wales has its own wants and ends for colonialism and was motivated entirely on its own grounds.

Back at home, Wales was still hard-done-by due to England - but two things can be true at once. Wales was a victim of English imperialism, but was also a perpetrator itself of colonial violence against Native Americans. England was no such victim of imperialism of any kind and the power dynamic for England had always been one rooted in absolute expansionism.

Summary and Conclusion:

With all of that said - if you were to ask point blank if I feel it is appropriate or okay for Wales to claim it was colonised by England and that Welsh people are in some way, more indigenous to the island than any other people living here - my answer would be no, I don't think it's okay.

I can't stop people from thinking otherwise, but I can reason that perhaps we shouldn't appropriate the struggles of people marginalised by the very nation we are talking about in order to craft a victimhood which is entirely unnecessary. Wales was a victim of English imperialism - but Wales was also an active colonising European nation. In the modern world, people are thankfully more willing to listen to the wants and needs of victims of colonialism - particularly victims of British colonialism in the Americas, Oceania and Asia. But I would warn against Welsh nationalism which seeks to capitalise on that increase in indigenous visibility in order to add legitimacy to itself (necessitating the crafting of an 'indigenous' narrative which did not exist there before). We live in the modern world where indigenous peoples are being taken more seriously than in centuries past - but that does not mean the only peoples hard-done by being taken seriously are colonised indigenous populations.

I believe it comes from a deep seated insecurity within Wales in which it is not uncommon to feel like Wales is being left behind because of all of this advancement. And this insecurity manifests as rejection of anything not obviously Welsh or demonstrably 'home-grown'. It's the national equivalent of a survival mechanism - but this is detrimental not only to the cause of Welsh nationalism, but to Wales itself. I've had people say to me (and I have read in historical sources from the last 100 years in Welsh) that the LGBTQ+ movement is actually an English invention created to erode Welsh traditional culture. Or variations on that rhetoric in which it is immigrants or other minorities which are made into this boogeyman come to destroy Wales and all Welsh ways of life. And it is so demonstrably not true but also bitter to see from the hearts and minds of my fellow Welsh speakers/Welsh people. Who have been hurt so much by the historical erosion of their culture that they confuse non-threats for threats and can only resolve to obtain some more legitimacy by appropriating the language of nativeness and colonisation in this ever changing world which, right now, is listening to native peoples for once.

It's difficult to put into words, even with all of the background knowledge above - but Wales is valuable and legitimate all on its own and doesn't need to rely upon things which isn't serving it - like ethnonationalism and nativism.

I want to live in a Wales which is uncompromising not only in its own fight for recognition and respect - but for other nations and peoples' fights for the same as well. I want to live in an independent Wales which is an ally to all those who share Wales' struggle and a Wales which rights the wrongs of its past without hesitation or compromise.

Would you rather a Wales for the few or a Wales for all who call it home?

134 notes · View notes

spro-o · 2 months

Note

LanceTris and Melban headcanon please?

fuck yeah,,, lets go,,,

okay so the lancetris ones are not as plentiful and defined as the melban ones, but heres what i got :3

Melban

Ban makes all of his meals with Meliodas in mind. He doesn’t care much if the others don’t like it - he wants to see if Mel does, and if so, he adds it to a little ranking he keeps in his head of Mel’s favourite dishes. He will never admit this to his face though.

They are both extremely crow-pilled. They gather and gift little trinkets all the time (usually pretty, shiny, and sparkly or metallic things). They each have a seemingly bottomless chest, courtesy of Merlin, in which they keep their gifts.

Ban has a collection of various knives and daggers given to him by Meliodas - they’re super varied and span across many cities in Britannia which Mel visited during his missions. Ban treasures these a lot and loves looking at them and playing with them.

Ban learned how to make flower crowns during that first week he spent with Elaine, and now he makes them for Mel when no one else is looking.

Ban is not immune to Meliodas’s pervy groping - Mel will take any and all chances possible to grab at his chest or ass (the latter or which is rather easy to do considering the height difference). It’s a gamble whether Ban will just stay there and take it or if Mel will get punted into the ground

Meliodas (in assault mode) is responsible for all of Ban’s piercings (doing them normally always ended up in the wound closing and rejecting the piercing :( )

they get freaky with it, 100%

Meliodas will often flop himself over Ban’s shoulders while he’s cooking; scarf-style.

If either of them makes a flirty comment towards the other, it will start a back-and-forth of increasingly blunt and explicit comments until either one of the others Sins breaks it up, or they start making out.

Lancetris

There have been more than a few instances where their duels/fights have gotten very up-close and homopilled; what followed remains a “mystery”

Lancelot is the biggest tease out there but acts like he has no idea what he’s doing, which successfully gets Tristan flustered ~100% of the time.

Whenever Lancelot trains, he often does it shirtless, and the sight makes Tristan’s face turn bright red. He’s not complaining about it though. (Lancelot knows what he’s doing, once again).

Lancelot is not one for PDA, but he does get very clingy in private, though you will never see him admitting its because he loves the physical contact. It just so happens that he wanted to be in this exact space independent of Tristan being there. And you better not mention anything about the fact his entire body is wrapped around Tristan’s.

Tristan finds Lancelot’s Sin form adorable, and he insists on Lance switching into it every now and again so that he’s able to provide more efficient and well-encompassing hugs.

hope you liked them!! X3c

47 notes · View notes

whencyclopedia · 14 days

Photo

Maglocunus

Maglocunus, known as Maelgwn Gwynedd in Welsh (d. c. 547), was a 6th-century monarch based in Gwynedd, in north-western Wales. Maglocunus' name means "princely hound", and he expanded his influence to become one of the pre-eminent rulers of Britain in the 6th century.

Unusually for an early medieval British king, we have a contemporary account of his reign, in the form of Gildas' De Excidio Britanniae (On the Ruin of Britain). Gildas (c. 500-570) presents him as a violent and tyrannical ruler; later writers, however, generally portray him in a more neutral or positive light. Maglocunus is the version of his name given in Gildas, and appears to come from the Common Brythonic *Maglo-kunos or "princely hound". This evolved to Mailcun in Old Welsh, and Maelgwn in Middle and Modern Welsh; all three versions of the name are given to him in the historical and legendary sources.

Background to Maglocunus' Reign

After the withdrawal of the Roman army from Roman Britain and the collapse of Roman authority during the 5th century, the island had reverted to the control of native British leaders ruling over small kingdoms based on the old Roman government districts, or civitates as they were called in Latin. These little realms were vulnerable to raids and invasions, particularly from the Irish to the west and the Picts to the north. In an attempt to boost their defences, the Britons hired Saxon mercenaries whom they paid with land and food – a strategy copied from the Western Roman Empire.

As often happened, this strategy ended in disaster, as a dispute over pay caused the Saxons to rebel against their erstwhile employers c. 441 CE. Almost uniquely among the inhabitants of the former Roman Empire, however, the Britons managed to organise against the invaders before they were completely overrun. There followed about half a century of warfare between the Britons and the Saxons, with many victories on either side. Although the Britons could not drive the Saxons out of Britain altogether, they controlled most of the island, with the Saxons driven back to the eastern parts of the island. A period of relative peace ensued, lasting until c. 577, and it was during this time that Maglocunus' career was situated.

#History #6th-century #Britain #British #WHE #[#]

26 notes · View notes

gawrkin · 25 days

Note

Why did gawain not become king of orkney after Lot died?

That's a simple question with a very complicated answer.

To be really, really, really short and concise**, it boils down to two things:

One: Lot originally didn't die fighting Arthur.

In the earlies stories of Arthuriana, like Geoffrey of Monmouth's Historia Regum Britanniae, Lot never warred with Arthur. The Sword in the Stone and the Mayday Massacre never happened in these older stories, so Lot has no reason to fight Arthur.

In fact, King Lot lives all the way to the end of Arthur's reign. Here's one example:

Didot Percival

So really, Gawain doesn't succeed Lot because originally, Lot was alive the whole time and Gawain dies at Mordred's rebellion before he can succeed Lot, who dies shortly after.

Lot's early death is actually a relatively recent Plot Point that was introduced in Vulgate/Post-Vulgate.

Its a retcon that only exists as a plot device to give Gawain a motive to be evil for revenge against Pellinore and his family.

There's also a bit Stations of the Canon at play here - Traditionally, Gawain is supposed to be one of Arthur's Greatest Warriors, so inevitably, he must join the Round Table... even when later stories change things so it doesn't make sense anymore.

By Post-Vulgate, Arthur is not only responsible for the death of his father but also seemingly the death of his newborn baby brother, Mordred. Gawain, logically, has no reason to like Arthur, much less join him.

So basically, its later retcons that don't jive with Gawain's positioning as member of Arthur's household. With Lot's early death, Gawain shouldn't be running around adventuring and questing when his homeland needs him to run things.

The medieval writers took for granted that Gawain is able to be present in Arthur's court for particular reasons.

Which leads us to the second reason

Two: Because then Gawain would be unable to adventure anymore

Basically, Gawain is a traditional hero of Arthuriana, and him not being in Camelot anymore would drastically change the cast dynamics and the story. It's like if Superman and Batman retired from the Justice League and didn't show up anymore.

Gawain can't meet Lancelot and join the Grail Quest if he's stuck up in the North, doing boring Kingly duties.

Ultimately, the Medieval writers just simply didn't care about Gawain's realistic feudal duties and obligations. To them, Gawain and the other knights are adventurer-protagonists: they're heroes first, feudal lords second.

That's why you don't see Lancelot managing Joyous Gard - that's boring real life crap the Medieval audiences wouldn't be interested in seeing. So, Lancelot goes around joining tournaments and beating up knights in random directions instead.

Arthurian Literature is essentially Chivalric escapist fantasy. It's about quests and fights, action and excitement.

And YES, it doesn't make any sense that Gawain isn't called "King Gawain"

**(I wrote an entire essay as an answer, only to stop I when realized its too long and overly wordy LOL)

#yay #my first ask #ask #oc #arthuriana #sir gawain #king lot #i sincerely hope this was a good answer #if not please continue to ask #i'll try to simplify it #gawain not being a king is a complex problem #with no simple answer

29 notes · View notes

thedarkcornerwithdjevildave · 1 month

Text

I think this is the 15th World Goth Day, having begun in 2009 when BBC Radio six chose to play different genres a day for one week. May 22nd just so happened to be goth. The few goths that picked up on it, including DJ Martin OldGoth and DJ Cruel Britannia (Now Batboy Slim) called in requests to other radio stations in an attempt to make it a bigger thing. By the next year, World Goth Day was as its name implies a global institution with events happening all over the world. I for one released a special playlist each year on a podcast. Some bands recorded a special song or released a remix for the occasions. As the celebrations grew year after year, mainstream news outlets like The Huffington Post covered the annual occasion with lists of gothic bands (hit and miss, though interesting from someone not in the scene). You can visit the World Goth Day web page for events near you. Go to http://www.worldgothday.com. You can also celebrate with this playlist, wherein I have included and will continue to add a song per band or artist from the gothic, darkwave, and associated genres. Enjoy and keep yourself in the dark!

#world goth day #gothic rock #pagan rock #darkwave #post punk #dark cabaret #ethereal wave #trad goth #May 22nd #deathrock #Spotify

27 notes · View notes

duchessdepolignaca03 · 2 months

Text

Early tags from my loves @onthewaytosomewhere and @thinkof-england woke me up and got me all excited. So here’s something from my Royally Big Bang fic, Odalisque!

King Alexander is finally turning towards him again, holding out his hands for Henry to take. Henry does so, and Alexander gently guides him back up to his feet. The public portion of the ceremony is over, Henry realizes and he flushes with hot anticipation knowing what is going to happen next. Together, they step forward on the dais, following the Priest through a passageway on the other side of the high altar. The murmuring of the crowd reaches a crescendo then goes vanishingly quiet as the door shuts behind them.

The lights in the antechamber are dim and they are alone together for the first time.

He turns to King Alexander and is barely able to hold back a smile. Alexander looks feral, hands clasped in front of him as he considers Henry. With his stance and the way he looks at Henry like he wants to devour him, Alexander is telegraphing that he simply wants to tear Henry’s veil and clothes off, but that he is mindful of the ceremony and their responsibility to complete it.

Henry thinks if Alex is God then he must have the right to do whatever he would like, rituals be damned. But he is also enjoying simply being observed by King Alexander this way, anticipation thrumming through the both of them as they spend the last minutes - or possibly even seconds - in which Henry is shielded from Alexander’s view.

Then their happiness can truly begin.

No pressure tags for my dears @taste-thewaste @zwiazdziarka @hgejfmw-hgejhsf @priincebutt @suseagull04 @sparklepocalypse @agostobuwan @tailsbeth-writes @firenati0n @myheartalivewrites @thesleepyskipper and anyone else who might want to take advantage of this open tag!

I’m off on vacation on Thursday, and my dream of posting a new chapter of Rule Britannia before then has died. *sniff* But please tag me in all the things anyway!

#red white and royal blue #rwrb #henry and alex #rwrb fanfic #firstprince #rwrb au #alex claremont diaz #henry mountchristen windsor #prince henry rwrb #rwrb movie #odalisque #wip wednesday #duchessdepolignac

22 notes · View notes

theprinceofliones · 4 months

Note

Omg your headcanon for Lancelot are great! I also got a headcanon for Lancelot....😗....he likes kissing Percival on his forehead when nobody is looking...😚🤭 got some more headcanons for Lancelot or any other character?

Aww thank you hun!!! And yes! I have a ton of more headcanons for other characters! Mainly for Meliodas, Ban, Elizabeth, and Elaine hehe

One more Lancelot headcanon tho that I forgot to mention, something that's kind of au-like but, since he was stuck with the Lady of the Lake for so long, he considers her like a mother almost. She was the one who was with him the entire time he was stuck wherever he was. Of course, had Master Jericho, but Lady of the Lake, /Mother/, was by his side, in his mind, whispering words of comfort in his ear and running her hidden fingers through his hair when he needed reassuring. She was a rock he didn't know he needed. But, she's also the reason for everything he hates about himself. It's why he avoids Benwick, why he doesn't come home. He can't face his mother---his /real/ mother, how could he, when he replaced her so easily?

Very much Stockholm syndromey for sure with the whole Lady of the Lake situation. He feels like he needs her even though she was the one keeping him trapped. He needs her like he needs a limb, but at the same time, he feels like he could make do with never seeing her again because he hates her for taking away those years he could've had with his parents, his uncles, his aunties, with /Tristan/---

But, that's a story for another day...

MELIODAS HEADCANONS HEHEHEHE

Meliodas is a VERY overprotective father. It might not seem like it at first, but he's extremely careful and watchful of his son. That's his baby. The one thing he's been waiting for for nearly three thousand years, the thing that brings him and Elizabeth eternal joy and happiness, the one thing that makes all of their suffering worth it.

When Tristan is born, Meliodas is like "dude I hit the jackpot first TRY" because holy shit THAT'S ELIZABETH REBORN...AGAIN! It's why they stopped at one---they don't need to try again bECAUSE HE ALREADY WON AHAHAHA

(Ban and Meliodas are like sobbing for joy together because they BOTH won man. Sons that look just like their mothers first, TRY. A millennia in purgatory was all worth it for THEM)

He's TERRIFIED of the thought of Tristan training with real weapons when he's a toddler though. Elizabeth is all for it, saying that he'd be fine and they'd be right there if anything happened. She was always willing to let Tristan have the freedom they never did---but Meliodas was biting his knuckles bloody because what if his little boy gets HURT??? Goddess healing or not, his precious boy would still be in pain!!!

Like I said, VERRYYYY overprotective but slowly tries to learn to let go and let his son be his own, although as Tristan grows up, he mistakes his father's overprotectiveness for disappointment and doubt in his own child. But, Tristan couldn't be more wrong...

Hehe onto Elizabeth!

She is a boy mom. A boy. Mom. Not them toxic boy moms, a BOY MOM. She dresses her son up in pretty little outfits when he's a newborn through his toddler ages, almost like a cute tiny doll. He has two entire wardrobes filled with frilly dresses and adorable little fluffy blouses by the time he's four. She braids his hair, lets it grow long and longer still. Ties his silver locks into ponytails, or buns, and even puts little accessories on his head here and there. Tristan surprises her with how much he seems to love it---or maybe it's because his mother's attention is solely focused on him.

SHE IS THE QUEEN OF BRITANNIA! I'm sorry but making Meliodas King makes absolutely no sense to me...probably bc I'm a hardcore ASOIAF fan so seeing a daughter who is technically in line for throne get cast aside by a random male protagonist with no claim whatsoever makes me lose my mind lmfao. BUT SHE IS THE QUEEN! She handles diplomatic and domestic issues all throughout the kingdom meanwhile Meliodas is in charge of the military, trade routes, training Holy Knights, and other little things that the Queen doesn't need to be involved with.

She acts more like the Elizabeth we meet at the beginning of the series, a little more reserved and a little shyer but she will stand her ground and be the Queen her kingdom needs when the time calls for it.

Nakaba, I like you sometimes and all, but that god awful, horrible, eye traumatizing DRESS you put that beautiful woman in is a crime against women. I WON'T STAND FOR IT! Elizabeth wears the most REGAL ELEGANT gowns. Thinking more of victorian and medieval fashion slapped together with some Targaryen fashion sprinkled in as well. She WILL be dressed beautifully with a silver band that wraps around her head with little jewels and crystals hanging from it. Meliodas has a gold band with a single gem, indicating his status as the Prince-Consort to the Queen, and then Tristan has a silver band like his mother with sapphires and pearls, indicating HIS status as the Crown Prince of Britannia and biological relation to the Queen of Britannia.

Oh, final thing. BAN, MELIODAS, ELIZABETH, AND ELAINE HAVE ALL HAD A FOURSOME AT LEAST ONCE I DON'T MAKE THE RULES I'M MERELY A PAWN IN NAKABA'S GAME

okay okay I'm so sorry I went on a tangent BUT I HOPE YOU ENJOYED! I love answering asks so keep them coming! Feel free to ask about Half Light as well! I'd love to chat about it!

#nanatsu no taizai #mokushiroku no yonkishi #the seven deadly sins #the four knights of the apocalypse #tristan liones #meliodas #elizabeth liones #4kota #lancelot #ban the undead #ban nnt #elaine #nnt meliodas #nnt manga #nnt #meliodas nnt

30 notes · View notes

anonymoushouseplantfan · 1 year

Note

So I wouldn’t say the coronation itself boosted the brand. However, I would say that the coronation is the start of a process that will boost and enhance the brand. It’s a seed and we will watch it grow and bloom in the next 5-10 years.

But haven't they been doing this? There was a subtle shift in their branding, towards a "Britannia"-esque branding that began in the lead-up to William and Kate's wedding and has persisted (in some shape or form) since. Hindsight being 20/20, it's almost as if someone saw the turbulence coming of the Scottish independence referendum, Brexit, the Commonwealth shifting to republics, the Australia issue, etc. and knew they had to build back the royal brand after the turmoil of the '90s and early '00s.

The coronation felt like the continuation of that Britannia branding, like a new phase in a multi-phased Way Ahead* strategy (Phase 5, if my theory is right), rather than a relaunch or a rebrand where they start a whole new campaign centered around service.

*I know the Way Ahead group disbanded in the late '00s or early '10s but I think we can see their fingerprints over a lot of things that have happened since then -- including the coronation.

True, but that was very much centered around the figure of QEII, which is partly why everyone was so nervous about what would happen once she was gone. How do you project Britannia after Britannia is gone?

I feel this new version is more primal, almost Arthurian in a way. The Orders are, after all, inspired by the Round Table and we kind of a had a Lady of the Lake holding a sword.

107 notes · View notes

depressedraisin · 11 months

Text

Parklife (1994) and Tranquility Base Hotel and Casino (2018): What does it mean to be an album of the times?

At face value Blur’s third studio album Parklife, released in 1994, and Arctic Monkeys’ 2018 release Tranquility Base Hotel and Casino, their sixth, are very very very different albums. One the Britpop classic, the other a widely divisive experimentation -- they don’t even seem like they could hang out in the same sentence together. Then what the fuck am I on about?

Both albums are individually iconic in the respective band’s discographies -- with Parklife Blur conquered the heights of the Britpop war and firmly cemented its place in British music history while TBH&C marked a pivotal turn in style for the Monkeys, which in my very humble non-musician opinion, will make it historic sometime in the future. If you have spent as much time as I have overthinking the lyrics and pondering over interviews of another British rock band you are hyperfixating on though, you might see something more connecting these two albums. Written about 20 years away from each other, in wildly different times, the two weirdly enough, have these faint threads tying in their themes and subject matters.

Damon Albarn, the principal author of Parklife, described the album to NME as, “a loosely linked concept album involving all these different stories. It's the travels of the mystical lager-eater, seeing what's going on in the world and commenting on it." Rings a bell? That’s extremely TBH&C coded! That one has often been called a concept album based on a luxury hotel and casino on the moon with various eccentric characters and their stories, wryly commenting on issues plaguing life in the 2010s.

Parklife was a kind of a study of middle class English life of the mid-90s. With an extremely catchy pop soundscape and cheeky-cockney-laced lyrics about London parks and bank holidays, it became a quintessential symbol of Cool Britannia. They say the album never took off in the States because it was so British. In the years since, however, the band has described it more as sarcastic critique rather than a celebration of Britishness. Going through the lyrics with a fine toothed comb with that in mind then, you can feel the impatience a bunch of 20s somethings were feeling with the ideal 9-to-5 picket fence lifestyle as well as exhaustion with the hedonistic decadence of youth in the backdrop of an unpopular Conservative-led economy in decline. A similar, if updated for 30 year olds in 2018, sentiment can be sensed in the absurd surrealism of the lyrics of TBH&C. What do you do when you are fed up with tribulations of life and the ghosts of mistakes you’ve made along the way-- you fuck off and escape into whimsy of science fiction.

The political context of the time when Parklife and Tranquility Base were released does matter. Opens up another perspective to reading the album. It’s quite a stretch but bear with me.

The 90s in the UK began with Thatcher resigning and the Conservative government which dominated the 80s, becoming increasingly unpopular. There was a recession plaguing the early years of the decade. Britpop happened smack dab in the middle of this, and it was all about reacting to grunge and shoegaze and bringing back what is essentially British back to its music scene. Oasis, Suede, Pulp, Elastica (Justine Frischmann is the queen of Britpop btw) -- and ofcourse, Blur, were reviving guitar pop, singing in working class accents and about working class life and bringing back memories of the Swinging Sixties. Though each drawing from a wide variety of influences, these bands were becoming the face of a wider movement in music, art and youth culture. The political scene took note.

In the mid-90s, the Labour Party led by Tony Blair quickly aligned itself with Britpop and Cool Britannia. Noel Gallagher and Damon Albarn were being courted by politicians , label execs getting party membership invites, headlines went like “What’s the Story? Don’t vote Tory”. Britpop soon acquired nationalist undertones --- never forget Brett Anderson showing off his twinky waist with Union Jack in the background and “Yanks go home!” headline.

By the end of the 90s, when Britpop had begun crumbling, the economy had recovered and Tony Blair was in Downing Street.

TBH&C and the Monkeys in general, perhaps have less political currency. When they burst onto the scene with their Sheffield accents and garage rock riffs in the generally stable pre-2008 economic climate, the Arctic Monkeys did occupy the space in British pop culture left vacant by Blur and Oasis in the wake of post Britpop, at least for a time. Their debut broke the record of being the fastest selling one, which used to be held by Elastica previously. The Monkeys were indie rock darlings in the UK and with 2013’s AM, became darlings in the US (and Tumblr) as well. Tranquility Base though, came out in a whole different world.

2018 was a fucking atrocious time, to put it mildly. The world was in total freefall inching rapidly towards disaster, which ultimately culminated in the pandemic of 2020. Trump had been elected in 2016 and 2018 was arguably one of the peaks of his shitshow. Over in the UK, Theresa May and her Conservative Cabinet were deep in the quagmire of Brexit negotiations. (Gotta note that Turner has said he voted against leaving in the referendum. Albarn is of course, a very vocal critic of Brexit.) Right wing governments were coming into power everywhere it seemed like, the climate crisis took on a new sense of alarm among the larger public - and things only spiralled in the years following. I can’t think of another album which could accurately capture the sheer fatigue of seeing outrageous headline after headline, how desensitised we had all become, how disillusioned with life- in a mason jar like TBH&C has.

That’s what makes an album legendary doesn’t it? You listen to it and immediately remember what living at the time was like. Even if 1994 was 10 years before I was born.

Now that we have gotten that out of the way, let’s look at the two albums a little more closely.

Some lyrics which give me very similar vibes:

sexual hedonism // start treatment (tbh&c) and girls & boys (parklife)

mundanity of relationships // four stars out of five (tbh&c) and end of century (parklife)

the performativeness of middle class activism/social work // tranquility base hotel and casino (tbh&c) and parklife (parklife)

losing friends and losing touch // the ultracheese (tbh&c) and badhead (parklife) - now these aren't really similar, but i feel a connection. in my bones trust me bro. the whole "i'll grin and bear with it" thing about badhead is very reminiscient of the sense of insouciance about life that haunts tbh&c....almost??

the myth of america // the ultracheese (tbh&c), golden trunks (tbh&) and magic america (parklife) - magic america is making fun of reagan era the american dream while a disillusionment with the glitz and glam of life in la is pretty much consistent throughout tbh&c

a pathological dependence on technology as escapism // jubilee (parklife) and start treatment (tbh&c) - digital cameras and the internet and tvs were taking baby steps into invading our daily lives back in 1994, and by 2018 we were all fully under the vice grip of tech addiction. this parallel i find particularly funny so.

astronomical references // far out (parklife) and star treatment (tbh&c) - alex james, the blur bassist wrote and sung far out about his love of space. it's a pretty nice parallel hey.

For the last one, let's talk about Tracy Jacks from parklife. I couldn't really draw a direct parallel with a song from the other album, but that song spiritually fits right in I feel. An average Joe in the throes of a midlife crisis, teethering so so close to the edge and one day just snaps - that's a character one would expect dwells in the lounge of the Tranquility Base Hotel to drown themselves in the decadence and escape from all their shit, when all is said and done.

Now what's the concluding point of all this rambling. I don't know lolz. Y'all just read a thousand words of nothing.

Just kidding. Actually I read somewhere Damon Albarn was inspired by the 1989 novel London Fields, a science-fiction adjacent black comedy set against the backdrop of an impending nuclear crisis, while writing Parklife. That kinda rung a bell. (Yes, I did wonder if Alex has read this)

I just wanted to see if we can find any interesting connections parrallels or references between Parklife and Tranquility Base Hotel and Casino. I dunno if I've been successful in getting any point across, or it's just pointless waffling on. But one thing that did get confirmed to me once again, these two albums are really the Albums of Their Times. Captures the zeitgeist in such a specific but unique in their own ways, it's really wonderful.

And also studying the legacy and impact of AM with reference to other musical outfits is always fun. I think we can all safely say that AM is well on their way to capturing a seat in the pantheon of great British bands, where somewhere in a corner Blur also sits. Damon Albarn is a fucking legend of course -- from the pretty posh boy of Britpop he has gone to becoming one of the most versatile, experimental and prolific songwriter/composer in the contemporary music scene. He is apparently working on the music for an Goethe's fragmented libretto of Magic Flute Part 2. How many rockstars do you know have composed operas - how fucking dope. I wanna hope that we'll get to see Alex exploring crazy paths in music like this, he definitely has the potential. This whole exercise would probably have made more sense with one of Damon's post-Blur works, his first solo record Everyday Robots or even Blur's last album The Magic Whip, but I started this essay so had to finish it.

Maybe another day eh.

#arctic monkeys #blur #tranquility base hotel and casino #parklife #lyric theory #extensive rambling #rolling stones or nme pls hire me i just wanna be paid to infodump and overthink about my favourite albums #damon albarn alex turner collab PLEASE i can't die without seeing one happen

91 notes · View notes

homoeroticbetrayal · 1 year

Text

Iconic Homoerotic Betrayal: Round 3

Poll Directory

Context:

Judas/Jesus

Summary by Clock

Judas sold Jesus to the Romans for 13 pieces of silver. He signaled the Romans and marked out Jesus amongst the disciples with a kiss. (He could have just pointed and said "that's Jesus" but he decided to kiss Jesus one last time.) He later hung himself, the 13 pieces of silver laid unspent by his feet.

Lelouch/Suzaku

Summary by Anonymous Contributor

szll is already iconic but I'm just going to list all their betrayals (and perceived betrayals) as a refresher:

See other descriptions of Suzalulu

#jedas #suzalulu #polls #suzaku kururugi #lelouch lamperouge #jesus christ #judas iscariot #jesus christ superstar #code geass

490 notes · View notes