#look similar to itself�� and to that i say. yes. cohesion is important but take a look at Kogane and Bento from jsr and you'll see

[laugtherhyena]

Playing Bomb rush cyberfunk has been a crazy experience so far because i feel like I've been enjoying the game just as much as I'm not doing so

[that-ari-blogger]

We Are Running Out Of Time

I am fascinated by the structure of Fractures. Or more specifically, the lack thereof.

The fourth season of She-Ra and the Princesses of Power has devoted itself to experimentation with storytelling. They are winding up to a final season and are throwing everything at the wall until then to see what sticks.

Hero, for example, messed around with temporality to great effect, but the reason Fractures interests me is that the effect is so much more subtle.

Fractures is about context. It tells the story of a ton of moments that needed to happen but wouldn’t fit neatly into their own episode. It is also a cushion from the absolute emotional wreck that was its predecessor. A cushion with a rock or two in it, but a cushion none the less.

Let me explain.

SPOILERS AHEAD (She-Ra and the Princesses of Power)

Structure is one of those terms that gets thrown around in media analysis and is synonymous with conventionally accepted rules of writing. If a story doesn’t have a structure, it doesn’t use the three-act format, or a hero’s journey or something similar.

But I want to be clear, every story has a structure, sometimes that is just more flexible, and that is just as ok as everything else. The structure is just the way that a story is held together and constructed. Since all stories are constructed, everything has one. Fractures episode is actually a really good example of that.

The episode’s structure is play by play. The events happen and just flow into each other. There are no acts here, there is very little foreshadowing, Chekhov has left the building and taken his ball with him.

Except, no. That paragraph is only true if we look at the episode in isolation.

This shot specifically positions Scorpia as unnatural in her setting. Not only is she on the opposite side of the table, but she is in the centre of a shot, framed by the arches of Brightmoon. All eyes lead in to her, and continue to that Horde symbol on her back.

Zooming in to this episode for just a moment. Scorpia arrives, and everyone debates what to do. The knowledge of the Heart of Etheria project is made apparent, and everyone debates what to do. Glimmer and Adora have a falling out, and everyone debates what to do. This episode is all set up for stuff that doesn’t happen.

If you looked closely, you could point to the payoff of Glimmer interrogating Double Trouble twice, failing the first time and succeeding the second. You could say that that is something conventional, but that is the… hold on a second.

What is the A plot of this episode?

I was going to say that Double Trouble being a diva and annoying everyone is the B plot, but is it? Is Glimmer’s descent into madness the main event? Or is the news of Entrapta more important? Is Catra’s story in this episode the focus?

Yes. The answer to all of those questions is yes. Put more simply, it doesn’t matter. The episode is presenting them all as equally important.

I write analysis, not reviews. So, if you want my opinion on this episode’s flaws and strengths, I am sorry. But the issue I am running into is cohesion within this episode. What thematic are we going for here?

The answer within this episode is more complex, until you look at the episode count.

There are three more episodes left in this season, one of which is a two-parter. Pop culture osmosis tells you that Horde Prime will probably arrive during part two of the season finale at the latest. And Adora and Bow have just buggered off to Beast Island.

I'll come back to this episode's final shot. But this episode goes out of its way to portray Glimmer as alone and specifically small. She is the underdog in the face of overwhelming odds, and she has nobody to help her.

The theme is stakes and time. We don’t have time for this episode, that’s exactly why it is here. If we instead spent this episode going to Beast Island, we would be much safer when it came to the finale and whatever battle is going to take place, but instead everybody has been debating each other.

This is why Glimmer’s side of the story is so compelling. She’s wrong, and we all know that, but you can see why she is making the decisions she is making. She is stressed, she is scared, and she has been given a way out.

She even namedrops a bunch of places that the Horde has taken, and the audience has seen those places in the series. The threat is very real.

Glimmer is also a deeply flawed human being, just like everyone else, and we are finally seeing that come into play.

As a side note, I could talk about how this is an example of monarchy as a system being ill equipped for its purpose. I could mention how, ignoring the power dynamic and just focusing on the fact that there is one person who is making all the decisions limits the effectiveness of the leadership purely by the human flaws of that one person. I could talk about that. I could. But I won’t.

Glimmer is stubborn. This is her greatest strength and her greatest weakness. She doesn’t back down from any fight, she pushes through. Glimmer is relentless.

In its best form, this is Glimmer saving people powered by sheer force of will and developing a skill with magic by just being determined to get it right. In its worst form, it is Fractures.

Girl. You are angry and backlit. That's not a good thing for anyone. Don't double down and pull rank. Cool it for a moment.

Glimmer’s flaw is that she won’t take no for an answer, because she can’t be wrong. She is going to do what she wants anyway, because it doesn’t occur to her that she might fail.

I have talked about Glimmer before in the context of black and pink morality. I.e. There is good and there is bad in Glimmer’s worldview. There is nothing in between. However, that sense of good is so heavily tinted that in reality, her worldview isn’t so much “good and evil” as “Glimmer and evil”. You are either with her or against her.

But, as a corollary, I feel the need to make this heard. Being flawed as a person doesn’t make someone a flawed character. Complexity is not a mark of bad writing. I don’t want people defending She-Ra from me because I criticise Glimmer’s leadership, and I don’t want people using me to back up the opinion that the show is bad.

Like what you like, dislike what you dislike. What you enjoy says a whole lot less about you than how you express that enjoyment. Be civil.

Glimmer is a flawed character. I disagree with her entire deal in this episode and season, but I still think she is fascinating and, in my opinion, I think she is a compelling character because she is flawed.

Case and point, the objectively best character in the series, Mermista, agrees with her.

Speaking of whom, Mermista is flexible. She can take any form and I have already devoted two posts entirely to her role in the story. But in terms of morality, she takes this in a wildly different direction to Glimmer and ends up in the same place.

Where Glimmer is unyielding and ends up in dark places because that’s where her morality led her and she can’t fathom different situations needing different responses, Mermista has weighed the odds and chosen violence.

Where Glimmer comes at this from a perspective of “I know right from wrong”, Mermista is looking only at her objective and working to create that outcome. She is also still bitter about Selineas. There is a line she won’t cross, sure, but that line is wavy.

On the other hand, the other two princesses also come from this perspective. Perfuma has that unyielding moral compas just like Glimmer, and Frosta gets some actual characterisation in this episode when she lets Adora and Bow go.

“I didn't join the Princess Alliance just to fight. I joined to save people. And the Horde, even after everything they did, they're people, just like us.”

The entire series is a metaphor for the cycle of abuse. The first ones were fighting someone, and their response was mutually assured destruction. This generation is trying to do the same thing.

It’s fitting that Perfuma, who grows things and is all about making new life, and Frosta, the youngest of the crew, are both against destroying everything and letting he next generation pick up the pieces.

Final shot of the episode. Once again Glimmer is tiny, but now in the face of the power she is about to attempt to utilise. But come on, context is important. This place is in ruins. The first ones aren't around any-more. What happened to them, Glimmer? If they had an instant win button, why didn't they win? We know the answer, Glimmer knows the answer, but she hasn't listened.

Final Thoughts

This episode is entirely set up for events that will happen in the space of three episodes, and since we are leaving for one of them, that is a single two-part episode that will contain everything. Oh boy, we’re in for a wild ride.

I have been deliberately avoiding talking about Catra and Adora because I’m going to devote most of my coverage of the final season to them. But there is one moment in this episode that needs talking about.

In as brief as I can make it, the camera focused on the face shows that she is holding things together for others. It is somethings he puts on, but her actions betray her true feelings. Catra is a wreck, and when the camera peels back to show that, holy moly is it a good scene.

Next week, Beast Island, and Daniel Dae Kim of all people.

Previous - Next

[bronze-bell]

(The letter is written once again on decorated paper, with watercolor depictions of jellyfish that seem to climb the sides of the pages. The ink is a dark purple, but has a slight iridescence to it, with a more blue appearance under certain lighting. The seal appears to be stamped on somewhat more hastily than usual, as if the stamp was removed just before the wax had set and the pattern appeared slightly distorted as a result.) Dear Victor Grantz,

The thoughts you've been seeing are not the untidy ones. The thoughts I've been writing down are not the untidy ones. Yes, drafting is key, and I have many sheets in my wastebin of compositions that didn't turn out. I suppose it is best to be honest about certain things when committing to something physical, and there's the matter of finding the... right way to be honest, I suppose. What to say without disclosing too much. At least with letters I can check that I don't share those things that I shouldn't.

I'd ask why your employers wouldn't hire another, since it would mean the same amount of knowledge is divided over more people, therefore less knowledge per person, and less losses if one person got lost, but in a business such as yours, where you've mentioned how little trust there is and how much people see danger...

(The handwriting here appears to be ghosting off the page, as if written much more lightly.)

I shouldn't pry. Still, shooting the sole messenger never did any good, did it? And being the only one, without you, what do they have? No method of making deliveries. I understand making sure people don't talk is its own problem... but putting so much weight on one person does no good for anybody. Not you, not your employers.

(The handwriting returns to normal here.)

That is good, at least, that you enjoy finding your way through the streets. And... I'm glad you think of looks as less important than actions and ability. With how long I work on my skills, I'd hate for such things to be ignored. I won't pretend I do not enjoy tending to my appearance, but it is tiring when it's the only thing people bother to see in me.

My apologies— I assumed, since you mentioned that your face was the proof... If you say so, however. I am glad they do not hurt, at least.

Morals, you say. I suppose that is one way to look at why people keep others quiet and why they choose some methods over others. I feel like it also has to do with what kinds of actions are seen as commonplace and acceptable within the circle. Whether with violence, words, or distance, threats can be neutralized. I think we've both learned this in our own ways. I don't know what you've seen, but it was likely... difficult. I know we both prefer to keep our secrets, so of course, you don't have to say anything.

I also hope to not feel so trapped. I've wanted to have that spotlight, that recognition of my talent, to perform on a grand stage. Where it's me on the stage, everyone else in the audience a good distance from me.

(Around here, the words are scratched out, written quicker, more frantically.)

It should have been like that. I shouldn't have lost the ability, the name, the connections to have that. ...Who am I kidding? I never had those in the first place. Not when such things weren't allowed for a man like me. Though, maybe it means I have to prove myself without a false step up. I have to. Even a cacophony can produce a cohesive melody at times. I'll turn that melody into art, turn myself into—

(Beyond this point, the words become unreadable.)

Sincerely,

Frederick

(Instead of the letter being pushed under the door like usual, Victor had instead placed the letter in front, knocked, and then left after he had confirmed it didn't fall into anybody else's hands. It seems he takes preserving your secrets very seriously.

The letter itself is a pale, dull yellow, and a symbol of a bell is printed on the envelope in brown ink. It looks like something that could have been produced en masse if needed. The wax is a similar brown, but shinier. The paper is much more pleasant seeming than the letter, despite only a simple border around the edges to give it detail)

[Dear Frederick,

I do hope you're doing well.

I do not want to come off as if i am judging you in any way, but first and foremost I would like to confirm if you are alright. At the end, there, you seemed... stressed. I may not have the best grasp on emotions, and I do not want to pry, but you were writing frantically enough that I admit I could not make out almost the last paragraph of your writings. I am likely overthinking, but I do hope if something went wrong that you feel better, now.

Somehow I feel like this may have been a fragment of those "untidy thoughts" you mention. Thank you for entrusting them to me. I will do my best to read the parts I couldn't originally, but I will do my absolute best to keep its contents safe from prying eyes.

I could certainly see why you would need to draft something like music, although i never quite understand when people draft letters, as I said before. I suppose I may just have a skill for writing them correctly the first time?]

(the writing here is riddled with shaky handwriting and redacted text which is clearly designed to be unreadable. He did not do a good job of this.)

[It's more truthful than conversation, why would you need t

On your next point, I apparently was the only one who fit the bill! They've no doubt replaced me. I do not know why. It seems they liked me? I remember them saying I was “easy to satisfy” Perhaps it was that? I suspect how scared how quiet I my personality was a factor too. They do not like it when you linger, or talk, or listen or cry too much. I am happy to have been entrusted with the job, regardless. If I wasn't, I wouldn't have insisted on continuing.

I completely understand liking to tend to your appearance! I used to have a phase like that, but now I find myself scared of what I see in the mirror it's the eyes it's always the eyes without much care for it. I am glad it entertains you!

There were a lot of things acceptable in that circle, and lots of ways to shut someone up. A bottle of alcohol can bribe more people than you might expect, as it turns out. It's the least scary of th I assure you, it really wasn't as bad as I seem to have made it sound. If anybody reads this you're dead why are you still bringing him up you need to stop now before

I... Do not know how to comment on your last notes, I will admit. I wish I didn't have any connections at all It is not my area of expertise, but I do feel deep empathy for you. I hope that you can be happy, truly happy, someday.

Sincerely, Vict Postman.]

[thecarnivorousmuffinmeta]

Hi again! Honestly, I kind of love your meta about the Cullens with and without Edward as a framing device. They're so delightfully fucked up. What do you think the Cullens like about each other? Like, do Jasper and Rosalie ever just share a commiserating glance when Edward is getting particularly judge-y? Does Carlisle ever tell Rose how proud he is that her self-control is That Good? Do Emmett and Esme hang out, does she appreciate how light-hearted he is? Like - other than their "mates" do you think the Cullens are super close? What do you think it would take to get them there/what's the ideal "family" dynamic?

Thank you, and for reference, Edward's thoughts on the family.

All the Cullens about all the other Cullens? Well, this will certainly be a large post. I guess we'll tackle this one at a time and then get into what an ideal "family" dynamic even is (especially for vampires).

Let's buckle in friends.

Alice

By far, Alice is closest to Edward.

When she first sees him, she runs to him and embraces him as a brother. Throughout the series, Alice and Edward are the ones that share a close bond with each other, rely upon one another, and hold each other in the highest esteem.

Much of this comes from their respective gifts.

Per their gifts, they unwillingly invade the privacy of everyone close in their lives. More, it's something that forces them to see the world differently beyond even Jasper (who is also gifted). They have a strong sense of kinship with one another.

Bella is important to Alice not only because Alice sees her as a friend but because she is the one who will make Edward happiest. And that means quite a bit to Alice.

Otherwise, Alice isn't that close to any of the others.

Bella comes in slot number two in Alice's esteem and that's very telling, because Alice treats Bella like her life-sized Barbie doll and makes it clear on a number of occasions that she's more than willing to risk Bella's life for the sake of Edward's happiness without a hint of remorse.

Then there's the rest of them.

People, to Alice, are a bit like pawns in a chess game. Part of this is because of her gift, she sees so many futures that it's very easy for her to dehumanize those around her. The people she's closest to aren't people, but a collection of possible choices, and Alice helps guide those choices to the ones she finds preferable.

And preferable, here, is preferable to Alice. Oh, it might work out for everyone else, and Alice will tell you she looks out for the future of everyone over all, but ultimately because everyone else is just a collection of choices it's what happens to Alice that matters.

Alice is with Jasper because a vision told her to be, nothing more, nothing less. Every interaction they have just emphasizes that they are nothing together, not even a real emotional bond.

The others don't even seem to share a connection with Alice at all. She's in their lives, is this perky kind of fun girl, but that's it. They barely know her as she seems to barely know them.

Alice is with the Cullens not for the Cullens themselves but because visions have guided her to be there as the best future for her. Oh, she treats them like family, but I imagine she'd be the same with anyone else had visions dictated a different path.

As for why the Cullens, they're large and very talented, and Carlisle is one of the few vampires in such a large coven who would not use Alice's gift as a means of war or expansion. It's really the safest place for Alice to be, and why she'll likely do everything in her power to keep the coven together.

Carlisle

Despite Edward's, Edwardness, Carlisle is incredibly fond of Edward and does see him as something of a son. He's also very devoted to his marriage to Esme, despite its unseen flaws. And he seems to be very close with Rosalie, easily seeing her as a daughter and acting much like a paternal figure to her throughout the series.

He doesn't seem as close with Emmett, Jasper, and Alice. This is in part because Emmett doesn't really reach out to him the way the others do, Jasper keeps very much to himself, and Alice is Alice.

However, he's very fond of the Cullens as a whole and looks on each of them highly, even if they don't really deserve it all the time. He would be devestated were the coven to fall apart.

Emmett

Emmett's closest is with Rosalie, for obvious reasons, but even they have a pretty dysfunctional relationship. What Emmett appreciates most about Rosalie is her beauty, when it comes to her personality, he openly admits he's not the largest fan (but what are you going to do, it's the wife, amirite?)

Otherwise, he's a very amiable guy and gets along well enough with everyone, but doesn't seem particularly close to any of them. He wrestles with Jasper and seems to engage in the most 'fun' activities with him, but Jasper is a very haunted soul with a difficult past that Emmett doesn't touch with a ten foot pole.

Emmett tries to bond with Edward, but they just don't understand one another. Especially as Edward seems to go increasingly mad when he decides he's in love with Bella Swan, Emmett doesn't know what to do with that one at all.

Emmett never embraces the whole Esme and Carlisle as his parents thing, and to him it's likely a hilarious joke, but otherwise he doesn't bond with either of them too much.

So, when you get down to it, it's pretty much just Rose.

Esme

Esme adores the family, and by the family I mean Edward. Edward is far and away Esme's favorite child, really the only Cullen I'd say Esme considers her child, and she makes no pretense otherwise and openly says as much.

That said, if you asked her, it would be about the family unit as a whole. And she would be devastated if the Cullens fell apart on her, though not as much if one of the fringe members left vs. Edward leaving.

Otherwise, there's Carlisle, who she adores as her husband. Though they, too, have significant issues. Specifically, neither of them truly knows who it is they married and one day they will find that out. Personally, I think Carlisle ranks far less in Esme's priorities than Edward, in part because he doesn't need her quite so badly, and also because in a way he just is Husband to her and little else.

I think she has very little connection with Jasper and Alice specifically, as they came in so late and in a way are so self contained. Emmett I think amuses her, but he's not really a "child" per se. Rosalie's closest, but as Rosalie doesn't need her as a mother I think that puts a wedge between them.

I also think that Rosalie and Esme wouldn't really understand each other. Despite having lived through similar experiences as humans, they are very different women from one another. I just don't see the bond there.

Jasper

Jasper seems to be the eternal outsider in the family. Edward despises him, but more, I think he doesn't quite know where to fit in with these people. He came from such a different from world than each of them and lived a very different life.

We see him wrestling with Emmett, so there's a bond of friendship there, but I never saw it as a particularly deep one. They'll wrestle, play games, but they never have the hard and difficult conversations in life.

He and Alice have their relationship, but there doesn't seem to be anything really holding them together. The conversations they need to have don't happen, and Alice manipulates his life like a piece on a chessboard, and he consents because he has no trust left in himself at all.

We see Jasper despair to Carlisle in Breaking Dawn that Bella, a newborn, has better control than him but this seems to be an extreme moment for him. It doesn't seem like he and Carlisle are talking often even if, perhaps, they should if only to gain more perspective from one another.

Jasper didn't come to the coven for Alice, nor is that solely the reason he stays, but he very much is an outsider and the one who doesn't quite fit in with the rest of them.

Rosalie

Rosalie is very invested in the family itself. She loves these people, even the ones that aren't so hot on her.

Yes, she wishes she and Alice had an actual relationship, and is pissed off when Alice blows her off for Edward's human girlfriend of all things. Yes, she wishes that she and Edward could get along, but she sees him as the brother you sometimes have a rocky relationship with.

Point being, to her, they are very much a family and she strives to keep them together.

As for who she's actually close to, I'd say it's Emmett and Carlisle. Her relationship with Edward is tense at best and antagonistic at worst. She and Alice have virtually know relationship at all, Jasper keeps to himself, and we don't see her really connecting with Esme.

On the other hand, in terms of her education (pursuing all she can and especially getting her medical degree), her strict adherence to the diet, she seems to emulate Carlisle in all that she does. He's very much a father figure to her and someone she wishes to be like.

So, I do think Carlisle tells Rosalie he's proud of her and she beams up at him. That one I do very much see happening.

Emmett is her rock, the man who keeps her steady and pulled her out of misery, who loves her near unconditionally. For the wrong reasons, perhaps, but time will tell if that relationship works out for them.

Summing it Up

The Cullens are actually fairly disjointed. They may look like a single cohesive unit, and they are in a sense, but if you look closer they divide down into cliques and subgroups quite easily. Not one of them is equally close to all other Cullens, and most of them are strangers to at least one of them.

This perhaps isn't surprising, given I think the coven is ultimately doomed, but it lays the foundations as for why it's doomed. Edward tells us this himself, what holds them together (vs. other smaller covens) is the diet. Edward, of course, didn't mean it like this, but to me that spells a very tenuous bond. One that, with not much of a catalyst, will break.

And I don't think they're going to get to the point where they reach that family ideal.

First, they'd have to truly understand each other, and understanding Edward would break the coven. So that's not going good places.

More though, they're such different people who ultimately do not share common ideals. They don't want the same things in life and certainly not for the same reasons, and because of that they're not going to be incredibly close to every other person in the coven. And that's fine, they don't have to be.

To be honest, I'm not sure the family dynamic is something they should strive for. They already, mostly, care about one another deeply and do live together. Why should they emulate human families?

The place where it falls apart on them is that half of them don't know who the other is, they all think they have different values than they actually do, and Edward is Edward.

And there's no getting around Edward being Edward.

[wisteria-lodge]

lion primary (bird model) + slightly burnt lion secondary

Hi there! I’m a fan of your sorting posts, and of your kind and insightful way of supporting people in finding out more about themselves. So naturally I’d be very interested in your take about my own sorting, if you’re game! :)

I won’t talk much about my Secondary, because now that I’m starting to unburn my Lion seems very clear to me, even when my explosion-prone Badger model still tries to get in the way of that clarity sometimes. The more interesting riddle is my Primary. So far I’m operating under the working theory that I am a Lion with a very strong Bird model - or is it the other way ‘round?

The supposed dichotomy between “thinking” and “feeling” in many of the more binary personality models has always bugged me, so it’s no wonder this is the area where whenever I feel like I’ve decided on who I am (for now) a new question mark pops up (so much fun!).

If ‘thinking’ and ‘feeling’ doesn’t work for you as terminology, it might help to think of Lion as leading with subconscious reasoning, and Bird as leading with conscious reasoning.

Instead of trying to formulate a cohesive text, which would have gotten even longer, I’m putting together an associative list of thoughts and stories that kept turning up while I was trying to figure out my Primary.

A very Lion primary way to solve a problem, not gonna lie ;)

- I think I got my Bird model from my father, who made quite an effort to teach me to look at things from all angles. As a child, whenever I got in a fight with this friend I had, he would sit me down and ask me to put myself in my friend’s shoes. It was hard, because a lot of the time my friend was being unfair to me and I actually could have used some support, someone to tell me that it was not okay to treat me this way. But I’m still immeasurably grateful for my father’s lessons, through which I’ve learned to understand peoples’ motivations and gained an understanding for the complexities of every conflict. He also taught me to doubt, to look closer, to not just believe the first thing I see, or want to see. To this day I still consider my ability to pin down the relevant factors of a situation before I make judgments one of my strengths.

That definitely sounds like a very strong, beloved Bird model.

- Whenever I had to write an essay at school or uni, I first had to come up with some aspect about the subject that I really cared about, even could be passionate about. (I am passionate about many things, so it was usually possible to find some connection to that.) Then I would use the essay to discuss this aspect in great detail, ending with a polemic flourish. I had the time of my life doing that; meanwhile the text would structure itself magically in relation to the issue I had chosen to focus on. Whenever I tried to write without such a focus, I’d get bored, stressed and the text would be of a much lower quality.

- Something similar happened in oral exams at uni: Only when I got the opportunity to bring a discussion paper (a few pointed statements regarding the exam topic) which I could then debate, I was able to recollect all the important details I needed for that. If I just had to report on the topic or answer questions, I often got confused, to the point of drawing a complete blank.

Linking things to emotion and passion - thinking with emotion and passion, basically - is a Lion primary thing. Especially if doing that makes you feel safe & comfortable & effective & happy.

- Even as a teenager I was very interested in philosophy, ethics and moral decision making.

I love teaching philosophy to teenagers. It’s the perfect time for it, they are so into it, and if it were up to me I would absolutely make it a required class.

I picked up certain philosophical ideas and concepts that I liked and integrated them in my belief system (yes, I know how very Bird that sounds).

I had my mind blown by Genealogy of Morals in high school, and I still won’t shut about Eichmann in Jerusalem. But what was so staggering to me in high school was… here are these ways of thinking that are possible and allowed. The fact that here they are in words in front of me made me a great deal more expansive.

Now that I think about it — I don’t remember adjusting my beliefs as in any way traumatic back then. The shift from a belief in the Christian God to Mother Goddess to my very own brand of agnostic paganism was smooth, natural.

Now that I think about it… I would describe myself as a mythic relativist (which is a term I just made up.) Systems of belief are metaphors, and they’re metaphors trying to describe and say something large and beautiful about what it means to be human, and what it means to live a good life. And since we are all human, they are all attempting to describe the same central, indescribable thing in different ways.

I feel this very deeply, but it took me a long while to be able to articulate it.

I constantly reevaluate, and I adapt.

You stop reevaluating and adapting, might as well be dead.

Still, there are some basics I’ve kept with me that just make too much sense to me to give up, and some that perhaps I keep because I just really like them and I’m kind of attached to them.

… somebody’s thinking with Pathos :)

- I’m a constructivist at heart, so that makes it much easier to tweak the content of my beliefs while staying true to the principle that we (socially) construct our reality, and (my take on this): that I choose what kind of world I want to live in, and according to that I make choices which are the most likely to create that world.

- At uni I attended a seminar about the development of moral judgment and action. What I remember most clearly about it is how much it bugged me that the other students didn’t seem to understand that morality always depends on the perspective. Even though I had definite moral convictions that I was ready to fight for, at the same time it seemed obvious to me that theoretically there could be a justification for every kind of moral guideline; it depended on your principles and the world you wanted to live in.

A human after my own heart.

I wanted to understand these different perspectives, not talk about empty categories like “right and wrong” or “good and evil” that meant nothing to me. I still feel that way.

Absolutely. I don’t use alignments when I DM Dungeons & Dragons. I mean, I can list evil *things* but that’s not the same thing as defining *being evil.* I want to know WHY these people did these evil things.

It just seems so impractical and complicated to base a conversation on those broad categories that don’t have any definition people can agree on instead of referring either to defined principles (in order to explain what good/ bad is *for you*) or consequences of certain actions, and whether you want them/ accept them/ don’t want them.

Oh that’s a fun discussion. Asking a highschooler to define “evil.”

(and then they have to figure out what moral systems Jigsaw, Pinhead, the Joker, and Bane all subscribe to.)

- Between “the Revolutionary” and “the Grail Knight”, I would love to be the former, but I’m clearly the latter. I’m someone who questions, not someone who knows.

Take my archetypes with a grain of salt, they are supposed to describe characters. (Who are different from people - but still useful, because they are attempts to describe us.) I actually want to write more about the differences I see between the way fictional secondaries are written and the way real-life secondaries work.

And just “knowing”... is dangerous. That’s how Exploded Lions happen. 

There are a lot of causes I find worthy to fight for, but I haven’t committed to any one, which so far I’ve attributed to my Burned Secondary (How do I do things?).

Sounds about right.

If I’m honest, though, it feels a bit strange to really, really fight for anything. I’d rather contribute to the cause by keeping an eye on whether we stay aligned to our values on every level of the fight, not by storming sightlessly in front of some army. (I got polemic again, didn’t I? ;))

So after all this Bird talk, why do I think that I’m a Lion?

… that was the Bird segment?

- I trust my intuition. It has never steered me wrong, with one exception: My Primary burned for a time when I first understood the concept of privilege and internalized bias, which was coincidentally at a time when I also went through a lot of changes in my personal life. Like many people unaware of their own privilege, I had thought of myself as “one of the good ones”. I learned that even with the best intentions I could cause great harm without even noticing it. This then also happened to me in a relationship, when I was already confused, hurt and more than a bit burned. It seemed like I couldn’t trust my intuition anymore, but I also couldn’t figure out intellectually what to believe, because I felt mentally overwhelmed by all those new concepts, all of which put my previous convictions into question. Which Primary burned then?

Been there, done that, it’s brutal. It sounds to me like a Lion dramatically changing direction - that’s what I mean when I say that it *hurts* when a Lion changes their mind. Birds see their past selves that thought wrong as almost different people. “I wasn’t aware of my privilege then, now I am, and can take steps doing forward.�� But if you’re a lion it’s like… I *should* have been aware, and the fact that I wasn’t says something terrible about my moral/emotional calibration, and THAT has to be put right.

- I felt like everything I had learned about the world and myself didn’t count anymore. My concepts and my strategies didn’t serve me anymore. So I started to rebuild everything from scratch, this time with less pride and more practicality.

Yeah. That’s some Lion recalibration. With a Bird Model, to help.

- Anyway, I trust my intuition. It contains my experiences, instinct and all my accumulated unconscious observations of the situation, and it’s very reliable. Usually I use it as an important source of information which I try to back up with data/ understanding, but when push came to shove and the apparent facts would contradict what my intuition told me, I would be unable to set my gut feeling aside. I wouldn’t follow it blindly, of course. But I would never just go against it either. If the voices of my unconscious and conscious mind don’t align, I keep poking at the issue until they do. If I absolutely cannot come to a satisfying conclusion, I go with my gut. Since I know it usually knows what it’s doing, I’ll find out the reasons for my feelings later. (Weird, says my inner bird who is busy compiling these examples.)

I’LL FIND THE REASON FOR MY FEELINGS LATER. What a perfect way of articulating what is perhaps the central experience of being a Lion primary.

- Probably I’m just both, you know. Some interesting lion/bird-chimaera. I like it.

I read you as a pretty clear Lion Primary, Bird primary model. But as always, the decision is very personal.

- I have a weird way of processing information: I read/ hear it, work to understand it, work to connect it to existing knowledge in my mind, then my beliefs, my existing knowledge and my feelings about it all wind around each other, grow into each other, some dissolve together, becoming a swamp which then nourishes the plants of new ideas and connections that grow from it.

You grok it. And that’s not weird.

I often can’t remember where certain knowledge came from. I can’t take it out of a memory shelf and tell you about it. I usually remember that I’ve read a certain book and whether I liked it / it influenced me, but I won’t exactly remember what was in it, even if it was important to me. Because all that information is already processed/ digested/ transformed into something new. It’s much easier to access my memory swamp intuitively than consciously.

and you seriously had like… any doubt that you were a Lion.

In intellectual discussions I tend to get stuck because I just can’t remember enough of the details (for my satisfaction), just my conclusions about the topic and how I feel about it.

I’m inclined to think that not accessing the details is either a secondary thing, or an entirely unrelated processing thing.

What do you make of all this? I’m very curious!

:)

[On an unrelated note, I’d like to specify the compliment I made at the beginning of this post. I’m really impressed with your ability to pick up on what people need, not just what they say they want. As a counselor this is a skill I try to hone, so I know how difficult it is to not get too distracted by the story people tell and miss the more subtle cues. You have a powerful combination of perceptiveness, insight and so much kindness, which you use to effectively support people who have questions, are in distress or confused. You don’t generalize. You don’t judge. You see the people who talk to you.  I love that you’re a teacher, because I can see you’re using the influence that gives you in a way that contributes to making the world a better place. Fellow Idealist, I’d like to give you a High Five for that, if I may. :)))]

I’m not sure I’ve ever been given a better compliment. Thank you.

[dodgefred]

spring awakening for the direction thing please

this is another long one please hit read more

i sort of have two answers for this one because for a while i’ve been thinking about how i’d direct the spring awakening play so i have a bunch of ideas for that but you probably meant the spring awakening musical so i’m gonna do my thoughts for the play in bullet points and then i’ll go more in depth for the musical.

the play:

the time i wanted to seriously do this irl was mid-pandemic and i was losing my mind so a lot of my blocking ideas were fully socially distanced and every character would wear face masks matching their costumes.

on the note of costumes i really wanted to have the actors able to choose their own costumes. the style would be the nonspecific time period most productions go with w the girls in dresses and the boys in like suspenders or whatever. i think it would give the actors more of a sense of connection to the characters, especially considering how strange the text can be to modern americans.

it would be performed either outdoors in a field or in a blackbox theater. the set would be fairly minimalistic. i would love to find a set motif like the falsettos revival’s foam cube but i haven’t put too much thought into what exactly that motif would be.

i’m not sure how legal this is but i think it would be a fun reference to get soft instrumentals of the musical songs to play behind their corresponding scenes.

any scene where actors would need to be closer than six feet (touching, kissing, etc) would be prefilmed in a silhouette style and projected onto a white sheet. this way actors would only have to be physically close once and not every night. during the show, actors would go behind the sheet for the scene. metaphorically this would also be an indication of the concept that while the children generally aren’t afraid of sex or kissing, they still have the knowledge that it’s an intimate act and still have some sort of inherent shame attached to it.

unrelated to my ideas specifically for this because i just thought of this but on that note i also think it would be really interesting for a production where the actors act behind a white sheet and all the audience sees is silhouettes. i think it would be a really cool way to play with shapes like that, and a bit of an extra challenge for the actors to try and be emotive and expressive when no one can see their expressions. it would also add to the idea of the children in the show not being understood despite their best efforts.

now in terms of the musical, i’m jumping around a lot for this one because with spring awakening i’ve seen it so many times and everyone’s done it a million different ways and so i don’t have exact ideas for the show scene-by-scene like i did with alice by heart. i do have an overall concept i’d like to follow, as well as a few specific scenes that i’d like to address. this is also going to focus more on my mindset while directing rather than the blocking and concepts itself, because spring awakening is much more clear with its stage directions than alice by heart is.

i know this is cheesy af but hear me out: a les mis dallas-style modernized production would hit so different. i’ve seen a lot of spring awakening productions and a lot of them try modernizing it but the directors don’t understand that putting a modern outfit on a period piece isn’t going to change much in the grand scheme of things. however i do think a lot of the problems in spring awakening can and should be addressed under a modern lens- these are real issues that still plague today’s youth, albeit maybe less dramatic than death by botched abortion.

this is also why for the song of purple summer, i’d make this connection between past and present much more clear by making the final costumes historically accurate (or at least historically accurate to the extent that most productions go for) in a similar color palette to their everyday wear. this is kind of an inversion of what spring awakening tried to do when it was off-broadway / in previews on broadway, but hopefully less……bad?

i think in order to be effective, some spring awakening scenes need to be done a certain way and most productions don’t do them correctly.

the first of which is the beating scene. in most productions, wendla and melchior enjoy it too much. i think this needs to be the exact opposite. wendla is a young girl with no concept of bodily harm and this leads her into some much less than ideal situations throughout the show. in this scene, we need to see wendla’s regret as soon as the beating starts, and yet her stubbornness and naïveté prevails. for melchior, we have a young boy who doesn’t know what he’s doing, either. in the play, we find out one of melchior’s worst nightmares was a dream where he started punching his dog and couldn’t stop. while the musical doesn’t include this but it context, i still need to see that bit of backstory in a melchior. contrary to wendla, melchior’s regret begins to kick in more at the end. in this scene, their emotions directly foil each other. we need to actually be able to see that.

also while i adore otto and georg and their woyb reprise, i really don’t understand why it belongs to them and i think just the instrumentals itself should be a taunting reprise, or wendla can quietly sing it to herself as the scene fades to black.

the next vital scene is the hayloft scene. quick trigger warning here for discussions of rape here so feel free to skip to the next chunk of text if you don’t want to read that sort of thing! i also want to apologize if i misstep in my description of this scene in any way, and if i actually directed this, i’d like to talk to some survivors to see what would actually be an appropriate way to perform this scene in a nonromantic way. these are just my immediate thoughts with the scene presented.

in the text of the musical, the hayloft scene is heavily romanticized, but i still think with the right direction, it can be played as how it is in the play. in the play, it’s more clearly rape, and even though in the musical wendla says yes, i would like to emphasize the fact that wendla doesn’t know what she’s saying yes to. a very important point of emphasis of this should be the climax of i believe. as the rest of the ensemble comes to their final harmony, we should cut to a blackout and hear wendla scream in pain overtop of the music.

the vineyard scene needs to be performed much more tenderly and sensitively than written. i would ideally like to work with queer actors for this scene and ideally have hanschen and ernst’s connection be much more genuine.

i think it would also be neat if there was a big set piece that looked like a tree branch and this scene can take place sitting on top of it.

overall my ideas for spring awakening are a lot less cohesive than for alice by heart because i’ve been thinking about this for a longer time and therefore everything is all over the place and i have concepts in my head for literally three different productions of it i guess, but i think it would be so much fun to work on no matter which way i do it!

[twentiethcenturymoviesandtv]

Dead Poets Society: Genre and Themes

Dead Poets Society has no action scenes, no scares, and no fantastical elements.  It does, however, have an emotional storyline, dramatic moments, and a story focused on teenagers, with a few comedic scenes sprinkled throughout the film.

With that understanding, there really doesn’t seem to be too many genres that Dead Poets Society can fit into.

On a surface glance, Dead Poets Society doesn’t lend itself to any genre besides drama.  A story about boys at a boarding school discovering the power of words certainly doesn’t seem like it’s going to be a barrel of laughs, or thrills.  Indeed, this would seem to be the perfect film to codify the very genre of drama: a ‘serious presentations or stories with settings or life situations that portray realistic characters in conflict with either themselves, others, or forces of nature.’ (Filmsite)  

It’s very true that, again, on a surface glance, our work is done.  With a basic understanding of the variety of film genres, it doesn’t really look like there’s much more to be said about it.

Luckily, we’re here to look below the surface.

If we’ve said it once, we’ve said it a thousand times: Every story ever told, no matter how complex or simple, has to fall into at least one genre.  Genre is, put simply, the sum of similarly themed parts that come together to give a cohesive theme and atmosphere to a story.  It’s a form of shorthand, existing to clue the audience in to what kind of story they are about to see.  

And in almost every case, it’s never as simple as it seems.

See, there’s a lot more that relies on genre than just setting and how much, or how little, action or scares fills a screenplay.  Storylines, themes, and especially characters are often seen most commonly belonging to certain genres, such as Final Girls in Horror,  Action Heroes in….well, action movies.

But why bother, you may ask?

Does it matter what genre a film is?

Actually, yeah.

Studying where a film fits in among genres is extremely helpful to us as readers, allowing us to build expectations for the type of story you are about to see, but it also allows us as creators and audiences to expand the limits of genres as they are constantly played with.

Which is to say that today, we’re going to be taking a look at Dead Poets Society and how it fits into genre, which categories it is, and which it is not.

Starting with drama. (Possible spoilers below!)

Drama, as it turns out, is a pretty wide umbrella.  There are plenty of styles of drama a film can be: a courtroom drama (Check out our series on Twelve Angry Men!), crime films, melodramas, epics, romantic stories…and coming of age stories.

These films can deal with any number of real-life topics, such as social issues, race relations, and the generational conflict.  Dramas are typically easily spotted by their genuine attempts to talk about something important.

Such is the case with Dead Poets Society.

Dead Poets Society is a coming-of-age drama, a common enough genre in the time period it was created in.  Following in the footsteps of films like The Breakfast Club and Stand By Me, this is a film very preoccupied with the youth and where they stand in light of their background and environment.  These are boys on the cusp of adulthood, groomed in various ways by their various parents, to fulfill a certain role, a role that some of the boys aren’t comfortable with.  It deals with issues of being stuck in an oppressive system, when to rebel and when not to, very topical concerns for the 1950s, when the film was set, when the youth were beginning to rebel for the first time.  It’s a story that’s very interested in the lives of teenagers who are beginning to realize that they are not what their parents are making them.

Dead Poets Society is focused on finding your own path, making your life yours, following where you feel you need to be.  Every beat for every character is centered around finding their own way, whether it’s Knox’s awkward romantic attempts or Charlie’s struggle to find appropriate avenues for his playful nature, or Neil’s breaking away from the plan his father has set out for him.  The film revolves around an emotional core, building on the audiences’ concern for these particular people and their lives.  There are no ‘gimmicks’, just life reflected back to us, people that are meant to be painted realistically, that we might even know in some way.

Such is the point of drama films.  Even if we’ve never met people exactly like Todd, we know people who demonstrate a few of his traits, or maybe even do it ourselves.  We can empathize due to the ‘real life’ nature of the story.  There are no barriers of implausibility.  Characters’ lives and emotions are laid bare, and we as an audience are meant to care for how their stories end.

There is no question that Dead Poets Society is a drama, or one focused intently on the ‘coming of age’ elements that young people struggle with so often.  Like I said before, this is one of many dramatic ‘teen’ films of the 1980s, focused on the youth and their problems, ideas, and thoughts.  There are very few who could argue that this film was not a drama, including myself.

However, the genre I would argue with is that of comedy.

Dead Poets Society is labeled in some places with the genre of ‘comedy’, a categorization that seems out of place.  Despite the fact that the film does feature legendary comedian Robin Williams, the role he plays, and indeed, the film in general, has far from a comedic tone.

This isn’t to say there aren’t moments of levity.  On the contrary, Mr. Keating’s schoolroom antics can induce a chuckle, and the boys’ personality clashes (Notably Charlie’s behavior) results in a few light-hearted moments, clearly meant to be funny, but that doesn’t really seem to justify the film being placed into that category.

A comedy can be a drama, but the thing that sets most comedies apart from most standard dramas is that comedy exaggerates a situation, character, or dialogue, like the outrageous situation of a 13 year old boy magically becoming a grown-up Tom Hanks overnight in Big, or the more subtle but still exaggerated opposite personalities of the main couple in Frank Capra’s It Happened One Night.  In Dead Poets Society, there really isn’t any exaggeration.

The film isn’t making jokes, or setting up humorous situations for the audience to laugh at purposefully.  Scenes that could have easily been turned into gags (Knox’s pursuit of Chris could easily parallel similar plots in many teen movies of the time) are allowed to play out dramatically, not comedically.  The moments where there is a laugh are scenes that are very natural, jokes within the context of characters and scenes, like Todd’s flying desk, or Keating’s cheerful and unorthodox ways of keeping his students on their toes.

These scenes, while funny, are more intent on showing the audience the characters laughing than making the audience laugh themselves.  The scenes demonstrate bonding, character, and moments within life where people joke around with one another and enjoy each other’s company.  They are intended for the audience to laugh with the characters, rather than at them.

And that makes all the difference.

The other major problem with this classification is, like I said, the overall tone of the film is far from comedic.

As sweet and funny as a few of these moments can be, there is no erasing the huge third-act game-changer that is Neil’s suicide, and there are very few things that could be less funny.

Neil’s suicide serves as a tonal shift from the film, from a traditional ‘be yourself’ message into a sharp downturn in what could honestly be labeled tragedy.

Although tragedy generally isn’t used as a film genre, it seems to apply very well to Dead Poets Society, especially where Neil is concerned.  He has moments of high points throughout the film, but it’s all in vain.  His path is set, and when he rejects it, he feels trapped, with no choice but to get out of it altogether.  His story, and indeed, most of the characters’ stories, are not happy ones.  Even Mr. Keating is fired for trying to do what he thought was right.  Every character who strove for something different is shut down in some way.

The establishment wins.

But at the end, there’s still hope.

As much as it might sound like it, Dead Poets Society doesn’t end on a complete downer.  Yes, Neil is dead, Keating has lost his job, Charlie is expelled and the rest of the Dead Poets are probably going to be, but in the end, Todd has managed to seize the day, to stand up and say something.

But does that count as a win?

It depends on who the story is about.

Here’s the thing.

The genre of a film is very rooted in the context of the individual story, themes, and characters.  Because of that, we as an audience can tell, pretty definitively, what genre a film is by answering two simple questions:

Question 1: What type of story is this?

Question 2: What type of hero/protagonist is this?

In the case of Dead Poets Society, we know the ‘type’ of story is a drama, but how do we know that?  By the context and content of the film, sure, but there’s another element that sometimes goes overlooked:

It matters whose perspective the movie is from.

From Neil’s perspective, the film, as mentioned before, is a tragedy.  And indeed, at first, he’s who the film seems to be about.  For the first two-thirds of the film, we follow Neil and root for him, getting out from under his father’s tight control and living his own life.  We want him to succeed, and it is a crushing blow when, at the moment he should be turning things around, he doesn’t.  His father is unmoved, and in despair, Neil kills himself.  At the moment where the film should end, it doesn’t.

Because the movie isn’t about Neil.  It’s about Todd.

Like I mentioned in the story article, the plot may be driven by Neil for the first two thirds, but the real protagonist of Dead Poets Society is Todd.  It is his story as he learns to speak up, to gain confidence and to be his own man, not living in his brother’s shadow and not allowing Keating to leave the school to take the blame.

This is Todd’s coming-of-age story.  He is growing and changing, learning not just academics, but how to function in the world he is going into.  It is his growth that Dead Poets Society is telling us about, and showing us, and in that, the ending is rendered a little lighter.

Todd gets the message to Keating: it wasn’t his fault, and his lessons won’t be forgotten.  He stands on his desk, and that matters, not because it’s a grand, symbolic gesture, but because it means something to Todd.  It doesn’t take too much imagining to picture Neil doing it, if he were still alive, or even Charlie.  But Todd?

Shy, quiet Todd, who can’t read aloud in class?

For him to start it off, for him to burst out and make it right, for him to tell Keating in his own way that his students will not remain unchanged by what he’s taught them means something.  It means that there’s still hope, that their lives aren’t ruined.  It’s the light at the end of a dark tunnel.

It’s what makes this film a coming-of-age story.  Because it’s Todd’s story.  As a result, Dead Poets Society is, at heart, a dramatic tale about growing up in a world that’s trying to mold you to a form you don’t fit, and what to do about it.  The story held weight in a culture still remembering the 1950s, and it still holds weight today, and will continue to do so as long as kids continue to ‘come of age’, to grow up.  It is for that reason that this film has endured as a classic for over thirty years, and will continue to endure as both a cautionary warning, and a beacon of hope.

Don’t forget to leave a comment, like, or some other form of love if you enjoyed it, and follow for more articles like this.  Thanks so much for reading, and I hope to see you in the next article.

[philosophiums]

about the tentative andreil prompt suggestions i took some from the hozier prompt generator that can hopefully be ambiguous enough to inspire something because your writing takes my heart and pushes it through a meat grinder

thank you so much i scrambled to write something for “i’ll crawl home” and incorporated a bit of “innocence died screaming” as well

There’s something about the steady drip and pull of an open wound that makes Neil feel twelve years old again. He’s not sure if that’s a bad thing; he seemed to have better survival instincts as a twelve year old, but he was also still so afraid of every little rush of noise in the dark, waiting for the ax-wielding boogeyman to gut him, until sometimes he was too afraid to even breathe. He’s not afraid anymore, but he’s also bleeding, so....

Maybe personal growth lends itself to stupidity. Or maybe he’s always been stupid. That’s what Andrew would say, at least.

Neil wobbles his feet under himself, as unsure of his legs as a newborn fawn and as eager to get up as one, too. On the ground he’s an easy target, but if he’s on his feet he can run - should run - away, but he’s without his mother’s encouragement hissing in his ear, using fear and pain to make him move faster, always walking that tightrope of pushing him too far and keeping him alive. He sways when he’s upright but manages to keep his balance, one hand covering the wound and the other braced out to catch himself if he does fall.

He’s been here before, as a boy named Blake. He was too young to really understand how to fit into a disguise, so he looked more like an impressionist painting of a pre-teen boy with blonde hair and grey eyes and too much leg to know what to do with - all the pieces were there, but they didn’t seem to know what to do with each other. He wasn’t a cohesive person, bits of Nathaniel and his other disguises always leaking around the seems. He was constantly drawing more attention to himself than he was diverting gazes, and it drove his mother mad. But he was so easily spooked back then that it was harder to get the drop on him. Somehow, people still managed.

Neil takes a step forward, remembering how to steady himself through a pooling stab wound, his body picking up muscle memory that Neil has let himself forget in his new life. He winces, wondering for the first time if there really is a heaven or something similar and if his mother has gained a favor from whoever’s in charge, because this seems like just the type of thing she could be behind to knock sense into him, even if she’s years late to make a difference or change his mind.

When he was Blake, fearful and bleeding and screaming in a damp narrow alley in Lyon, made into a horror hall by the faded lamplight of the world after midnight, he had thought something similar. He never found out if the stabbing then was arranged by his mother - a cruel way to make her son realize just how serious this was - but neither of his attackers died, and he was left shaking and crying in that alley for over an hour before his mother collected him and stitched him up in their hotel room.

It’s not as bad now, as Neil. He can move. He’s older. He’s been hurt enough times that he knows what the tipping point between bad and needs the hospital feels like, and he’s not there yet. It’s just a lot of blood, he thinks, and more pain than he’s felt since his father died. He balls up the loose material of his oversized running shirt and presses the bunch into his wound - a move that exposes some of his scars, but those are a little more acceptable in polite society than a lot of blood.

He retraces his running route - walking, this time - until he finds himself at home. He has to let go of the wound to fish his keys from his pocket, and blood trickles past his waistband to the floor. “Andrew,” he calls, plugging up the wound again and bottling up his ghosts as he closes the door behind him.

Andrew appears when Neil’s in the middle of taking off his shoes, and either Andrew’s getting worse about hiding his feelings, or Neil’s getting a bit smarter about reading him, because worry and panic spill out of Andrew like too much fizz from a shaken can of Coke - it makes the floor sticky with feeling, and Neil can’t move as Andrew comes closer, ripping the bunched-up shirt from his hands to get a good look at the wound.

“Why didn’t you call?” Andrew asks, tense, which is miles better than hollow or angry. Neil blinks, and the weight of his cellphone in his pocket suddenly unavoidable. A lifeline that used to be a death sentence. He’d entirely forgotten it was there, because when he was Blake, when he was bleeding out in a forgotten alley in France, he had had nothing. There was no phone, no Andrew, just a mother who had told him to stay and then disappeared. Andrew’s face tightens as if Neil had spoken that memory out loud, but Neil knows he doesn’t need to - his life before Andrew was just surviving one tragedy after another, knowing that one day it would be a similar tragedy that would kill him. “You’re an idiot,” Andrew says, and that’s becoming more clearly true the longer Neil stays alive.

They improvise their way to the bathroom, both of them holding onto the wound, tight like they don’t want it to escape. Andrew sits Neil down on the closed lid of the toilet and discards Neil’s shirt in the bathtub. He’s a force of nature - a firm gust of wind and the inescapable weight of a landslide - but he’s not sharp or sudden like Mary used to be.

Years ago, Andrew asked Aaron to teach him how to stitch up a wound. Years ago, Neil taught Andrew how to determine which wounds need a professional and which ones aren’t worth the medical debt. It’s about depth, and whether the edge of the wound is jagged, and whether the bleeding looks like a popped water balloon or a leaking garden hose. Andrew digs out the first aide kit, and Neil settles in.

“I was just running,” he says, because Andrew looks like he wants answers but isn’t sure how to get them without choking them into the open.

“Be more honest,” Andrew says, because he knows that Neil doesn’t lie to him anymore, but sometimes the whole truth hides in the back of his throat until it’s too late to be relevant.

“Okay.” Neil braces for the first push of the needle and grunts through it, eyes up at the ceiling, knuckles white on the counter and the crease of his shorts. Years ago, Andrew asked about a numbing agent, and Neil told him the pain of the shot wasn’t worth the relief that came later, that vodka is a good enough substitute. Too bad Kevin drank their last bottle Tuesday night. “I interrupted a fight. Thought I had a better chance than the kid they were beating up.” He’s always been a martyr for the people important to him, but Andrew’s influence has deepened his pool - especially for kids.

Andrew doesn’t stop stitching. The wound should only need four knots. “You’ve gotten slow.”

“Didn’t see it.”

“That’s what I mean.”

Neil hums, even though his wound really doesn’t want him to. Andrew’s right, of course; Neil doesn’t notice things about people as quickly anymore, because his life is no longer a broken bird cradled in his hands. He can live and be as normal as his past and his nightmares and his mild fame allow him, without having to look over his shoulders and be ready to drop his persona at any moment. He’s let his survival instincts slough off like a shedded skin, and replaced them with birthdays and anniversaries, with his family’s favorite foods, with directions to the five nearest exy courts.

“Is that really such a bad thing?” he asks, looking down at Andrew’s fingers, at the blood and the thread and the bold lack of armbands.

Andrew cuts the thread and meets his gaze, as solid and fierce as the first time Andrew put his fist through a window and promised to keep Neil safe. “It is if you’re going to keep running into every knife held out at you.” Which means no, but be more careful.

Neil smiles, slow and lazy from the pain, still wishing he was even a little drunk right now. “Will you go buy me some vodka when you’re done?” he asks as Andrew gets to his feet and pulls Neil with him.

“Go buy it yourself.” Which means yes.

Which means he’s home.

[tlbodine]

How to Love Revision

A lot of you lovely folks are doing Nanowrimo right now. 

Which means that, in a few weeks, you will have a steaming pile of pages. A rough draft. A word-baby, if you will. And you might, at some point, want to turn that messy jumble into a real book, perhaps something to send to a publisher or publish yourself or just share with people. 

I see a lot of writing advice about finishing first drafts -- and a whole lot of it is in the vein of “Just write it! Fix it in post! Finished is better than perfect!” which is great advice for pushing through, but does tend to leave future-you -- the editor you-- with problems. 

Lucky for you, I happen to love editing (really! it’s my favorite part!) so I am here to give you some advice on how to turn those pages into a proper story without ripping all of your hair out or screaming into the void (but if you need to scream, it’s OK, I won’t judge you.) 

First Off: Credit Where It’s Due 

My current revision process draws heavily from Holly Lisle’s One-Pass Revision technique: https://hollylisle.com/one-pass-manuscript-revision-from-first-draft-to-last-in-one-cycle/

Her writing guides are golden, and I heartily recommend reading them all, starting with that one up there. 

I don’t do one-pass revisions, but her ethos really helped me. Before I found her advice, I would get caught in the endless revise/rewrite cycle. I was going through 9+ drafts of every story and it kept morphing into something new and sprouting new problems, hydra-style, every time I tried to redo it. So nothing was ever finished, nothing was ever satisfying, and I hated it. 

So I found a better way! And it freed me! I’ve written six books since then, four of them published (one Wattpad-exclusive) and I learned to look forward to the second draft. 

So how does this magic work? Let me show you! 

Step One: Put the Damn Thing Away 

Editing requires intellectual and emotional distance. So finish your story, and set it aside for a while. Stop thinking about it. Actively put it out of your mind. Work on something else for a while. Read a book. Catch up on all the TV you missed. Whatever. The point is -- you don’t want to come back to revise your story until you can look at it with fresh eyes. 

How long this will take depends on you, of course. It’s a very personal thing. It could be weeks. It could be months. For me, a good guideline is to wait until I can no longer quote whole passages from memory. 

Now then. Let’s do some triage. 

Before you can start editing, you need to know your goals. If you’re a planner, this might be easy because you have an outline you can compare against. If you’re a discovery writer like me, well, this is the time to figure out what exactly it is that you discovered. Grab a notebook (or a notepad file, if you’re a digital native) and follow this process: 

Write a one-sentence elevator pitch that roughly encapsulates the concept of the story. It doesn’t have to be pretty -- you’re not showing this to anyone but yourself -- but it does have to be honest. My one-sentence pitch for River of Souls was “Self-aware zombies struggle for equal rights, but the medication they rely on to retain their humanity doesn’t work as advertised.” My pitch for The Hound was “Lesbian thrift shop owners invite the devil into their home after buying a cursed taxidermied dog.” 

Write down your theme(s). In the draft, themes might take the form of questions. In this draft, you’ll want some answers. What do you want the reader to feel when they’re done? What is the message you’re trying to tell? When I wrote Nezumi’s Children, I knew it was a story about religion -- “What should we put our faith into?” In the end, I decided the answer was, “We should put our faith in each other.” That dictated the ending. (I also wanted to be careful not to inadvertently support abandoning your pets -- so I couldn’t let the rats be happily feral at the end. A happy ending for them meant being owned and cared for). 

Write a 250-word synopsis of the story. Again, it doesn’t have to be pretty. It just has to introduce the characters, the world, and the general shape of the story arc -- the inciting incident, the escalating stakes, and how the character changed at the end. 

You may find that you struggle with this part, and that is totally find (and honestly to be expected). You may discover, for example, that your character doesn’t actually change, or that there isn’t a core conflict. That’s okay! That’s what you’re here to fix! I have absolutely, definitely written a book and then discovered 80,000 words later that it didn’t have a plot. It’s OK though, because you’ll fix that problem in the next step. 

If you do indeed have a plot and escalating stakes and characters who go through developmental arcs, you’re ahead of the game. Now you’ve got the skeleton of an elevator pitch and the makings of a query letter (or a jacket blurb). 

Next: Map Out Everything 

When I was in elementary school, I had to start writing my first essays. I was supposed to make an outline, then write the paper to follow the outline. I wasn’t very good at doing it that way, so instead I would write the paper, then hastily draw up the outline to match what I said. Oops. Nothing has changed, honestly. 

With your trusty notebook (or blank text document), compile the following: 

Write out a list of scenes. Just a couple words describing the events of what happens. Now - are all of those scenes necessary? Are any redundant? Do you need to add foreshadowing or establish something earlier in the story to make sense of it? Are the scenes in the wrong order? Does every scene do some work to advance the plot, deepen the character, flesh out the world? Does the ending resonate with the theme? Re-write the scene list in the correct order, with scenes added or removed as necessary to tell the proper story. Now your scene list is a handy dandy roadmap/outline for your revision! 

List out all of the characters in the story. Write down their role in the story. Does every major character have a goal? Do motivations make sense? Does each one change in some way during the story? Are all of your walk-on roles necessary? Are there characters who don’t really do much, and could you combine them?

Fixing plot holes on your scene list is a lot easier than fixing them in the manuscript itself. Keep tweaking your scenes until the story feels like it works. Make sure there’s a logical flow between events -- cause and effect, escalating stakes. Consult structure guides like the Hero’s Journey or the Three-Act Structure if you need some help with your plot. 

Here’s a part that’s really important so it’s going in all caps: THE SCENE LIST IS FINAL. Make all the adjustments you need to the plot while you do the scene list, but do not -- DO NOT -- deviate from the story once you move on to the next step. You don’t stop modifying your scene list until you’re happy with the story, and once you’re happy, THAT is the story you’re writing. Get new ideas for things that can happen? Great, save ‘em for the next book. 

Now Roll Your Sleeves Up And Get Dirty 

Some people like to print their manuscript off and do edits in pen, but I don’t have reliable printer access most of the time and hate wasting paper. So instead, I pull up the rough draft and adjust it so it takes up one half of my monitor. Then I pull up a fresh, empty file and put that on the other half of the screen. 

Now, using my scene list as a guide, I pull up the rough draft and rewrite it, scene by scene. Yes, that means re-typing every word. You’ll find that when you do this, you’ll fix a lot of language mistakes without even realizing it. I’m an under-writer, so my drafts usually double in length during this process because I spend more time lingering on sensory details, adding scenes, teasing out character dynamics, etc. etc. etc. Just let yourself go, get immersed into the scene. If you forget what you were doing, just refer back to your outline and original draft to get back on track. 

I find this process works best if you can do it quickly. Try not to let the story get cold. Ideally, work on this every single day, or even set aside a long weekend to just hammer it all out. 

Finally: Make a Second Pass 

Now that you’ve got a second draft under your belt, it’s time to celebrate! Set the book aside. If you have beta readers or an editor, now is the time to send this to them. Hang out for a bit. Figure out who you’re querying, if you’re doing that. Find a kick-ass cover, if you’re self-publishing. Build yourself a Lego mansion. Whatever. Just sit on your draft for a little bit. 

Now that a couple weeks have passed, it’s time to make a final pass. Gather all of the feedback you’ve gotten from beta readers and editors and decide what advice you should take and what you can ignore. Here’s a guideline: If someone says something and you think, “oh, yeah! that’s exactly it!” then you take the suggestion. If they say something and you think “uh, well, no, that’s not really the story I was trying to write....” or something similar, you can ignore the feedback. Good feedback will always feel true in the “duh, why didn’t I think of that” way. 

Open up your new draft and, starting at page one, just read the damn thing. Make adjustments to the writing as necessary: 

Correct any misspellings and typos you come across. 

Eliminate weak words and phrases and replace them with stronger ones. 

Add some variation to sentence structure if you notice that it’s become repetitive. 

Eliminate redundancy. Fix your metaphors. Fix your symbolism. Keep your poetic language on-theme. In The Hound, I replaced a ton of random metaphors with dog imagery. It’s subtle, but it lends thematic cohesion. 

Some people use things like Grammarly or Hemmingway App to help with this. I’ve never used them, so I can’t speak to their effectiveness. But if you find that they help, awesome! Use them! 

Here’s a really important point: This step can ONLY come AFTER the rewriting stage. There is no point at all in tweaking sentences and fixing up the language in a story that has no plot. Fix your structural issues FIRST, and be sure they are AIR TIGHT, before you start dicking around with the words. Ok? Ok. (Someone go back in time 15 years and tell this to young me please) 

And now...you are done! 

Spend some time tweaking your elevator pitch and query letter at this point, if necessary. But no matter what, you do not go back into this document and change ANYTHING unless an editor tells you to. The book is DONE. Maybe give it a final proofread before you self-publish it (but honestly, you’re better off hiring someone to do it at that point, you’re going to be too zorched to notice the typos you missed) but otherwise don’t touch it. Don’t think about it. Write the next book. 

And that’s it! That’s my mostly painless revision process! 

Obviously every person is different, your mileage may vary, etc. But I hope this serves as a helpful jumping off point. I am more than happy to answer any questions or provide clarification on things -- just drop me a line :) 

[maydaymemer]

Steam vs. Sledgehammer

Yep it’s time to review two songs in one. My favourite song ever: Steam (yes, Steam), as well as one of the iconic songs of the ‘80s: Sledgehammer. Both by Peter Gabriel, both heavily influenced by funk and both with music videos directed by the late Stephen R. Johnson.

Sledgehammer needs no introduction for anyone over 40, which means it does need an introduction here. The song is the lead single from Peter Gabriel’s 1986 pop opus “So”, and is his only American #1 (it only got to #4 in the UK, which makes me more ashamed to be from here than ever). It’s known for its pioneering stop-motion animated music video which is still well regarded today, heck it kickstarted Aardman’s career before they made Wallace and Gromit. The song is a loving tribute to Gabriel’s favourite funk and Motown songs he listened to in his youth, there’s even a funny anecodote a read about Gabriel in his early days going to a soul cafe or something and being the only white guy there. To be a fly on the wall on that day. Methinks he was there to pick up chicks, not just listen to the music, which only makes me love the guy even more to be honest.

Steam on the other hand I don’t think anyone who isn’t a Gabriel fan remembers. Sure, when it was released in 1992 it was a hit but was generally seen as a Sledgehammer II: Sledge Harder, and didn’t set anyone’s world alight. Plus, people weren’t listening to Peter Gabriel in ‘92, they were bumping Nirvana and Tupac. On the bright side we did get a fucking insane music video which I love showing to people to get a reaction out of them.

One of them highly acclaimed and the other mostly maligned, but both are typically overshadowed by their music videos. I’m here to dig into what makes both these songs great, and why they’re both intelligent, finely crafted pop songs. I’m also going to note the similarities between the two, and why I think Steam was a more than worthy follow up.

Let’s get down to the start of both songs. Sledgehammer begins with a synthesised flute that goes on for about 15 seconds, before launching into an opening tune that knocks you right off your seat like, well a sledgehammer. This sets up an appropriate atmosphere for a song that combines the clever soul with the sexy sounds of the ‘80s to create a song that transcends past dated into just a banging tune that holds up today. The song has an excellent bassline and feels simply big. Then we get Gabriel coming in with a prolonged “Heeeeeeey” followed up with a more muffled “tell me how have you been?” to take us into the first verse. The song sets a mood and it sets it well, this is bouncy and fun Peter Gabriel, not weird psycho Peter Gabriel (which is pretty much his default).

Steam, on the other hand, doesn’t introduce itself. The song just abruptly bursts into your door after a short bassline with the distinct drum and bassline with all sorts of sounds flung at you. Horns, electric guitar, you name it. Gabriel yells “Stand back! Stand back!” And you almost think “yeah maybe I should I shouldn’t really argue with Peter Gabriel”, especially in the video where he’s wearing a pimp suit to accompany this. He continues, shouting “what are these dogs doing sniffing at my feet? / They’re onto something picking up / picking up / this heat”. I still have no idea what this intro means, but then we transition into the abolsutely magnificent instrumented chorus as Peter sings “Give me Steam / and how you feel can make it real / real as anything you’ve seen / get a life / with the dreamer’s dream”. I’ve heard reviewers call this song overproduced, and I would agree the song is very maximal in terms of production, but I wouldn’t remove one instrument. The song’s various mood changes from chorus to verse to pre-and-post choruses take me where the song wants me to go emotionally every time. I find the “Give me Steam” part specifically to be rather exciting and really impressed me the first time I listened to this song, last year I believe, and it still impresses me now.

This is where we take a look at the verse structure of both songs, which are pretty much the same not just within the songs but between them. The first verses of both set up two metaphors:

“You could have a steam train / if you just lay down your tracks

You could have an aeroplane flying / if you bring your blue sky back” - From Sledgehammer

“You know your culture from your trash

You know your plastic from your cash” - From Steam

Peter then connects these to the message of the song at the end of the verse:

“All you do is call me

I’ll be anything you need” - Sledge

“Whenever heavens doors are shut / you get* them open but / I know you” - Steam (alright I’m cheating here, that’s three metaphors, but this illustrates my point better)

So as you can see this is where the two songs split off. Sure both include Peter’s patented silly sex puns, a Sledgehammer is long and hard while Steam is hot and wet, but the meanings of each song is different.

For Sledgehammer the song is about how sex can be used to communicate and brighten up the mood of someone where words simply can’t help. The philosophy of the song is that sometimes you just need some fuck. I imagine a narrative where maybe Peter and this lady friend he’s talking to through the song have just broken off some long term relationship, and they’re very good friends so they spend some time together playing with her bumper cars and his big dipper to take their minds off it. The song isn’t really about love, it’s about having fun, but as I illustrated with my interpretation it’s not about sex with someone you don’t love it’s about sex with someone you’re not IN love with. So kind of a FWB/rebound kind of thing, though not a romcom version where they get together in the third act. It’s a very different approach to an ‘Intercourse with You’ song and told in a very fun way. The song has a bounce to it and a sort of mature naivety, Peter comes across as genuinely joyful to the woman he’s narrating too, they aren’t using eachother but they’re not in a serious relationship either. Good stuff, Pete.

Steam on the other hand is about the relationship, it’s about that spark and connection with someone. Specifically it’s about a relationship where the woman is cultured, sophisticated and generally a classy lady but Peter isn’t. He’s talking himself down, except for one subject: when it comes to the lady, he knows her better than she does and that’s the most important thing of all. Maybe he knows how to please her, maybe he knows her deepest depths, maybe it’s both but the songwriting illustrates that Peter is just in awe of this woman and she might not be in awe of herself just yet. I always interpreted this as Peter writing about a relationship between classes, but in a smarter way than say Billy Joel. Peter grew up middle class but in this song it’s like he’s putting himself in the shoes of a working class guy who’s in a relationship with someone who should be out of his league, but perhaps because of those virtues have led to him knowing how to socialise he can get the depths of her heart better jan a thousand potential rich suitors and their relationship just works. I’m being a bit old school with the picture I’m painting but a genuinely smart way of basically writing Opposites Attract but without the cartoon cat (instead we get a CGI Peter Gabriel Chair, perhaps that’s not the best trade off). That’s why I love it so much, it writes a geniunely smart love song about a relationship working despite the differences which a lot of songs do but they never go into why they work together. Peter explains that while he can’t know a lot about art or money he does know a lot about humanity (and sex, as Sledge shows).

The rest of the verses follow this same formula, I’ll close the review by pointing out how the finales of both songs basically are the same again.

With the finale of Sledgehammer Gabriel refers to “shedding his skin”. He then says “this is the new stuff”, which probably sounds like a birthday suit reference to you but I have a more indirect interpretation. What I love about the line is that in a way it’s Gabriel saying “I’m the shit!”, predicting that the song will become ‘the new stuff’ as it did. Which is why it’s one of the things I do prefer over Steam, which goes for a more obvious orgasm innuendo:

“Roomshake, earthquake

Find a way to stay awake

It’s gonna blow, it’s gonna break

This is more than I can take!”

Tho back to praising Steam, it is my favourite song after all, I think that song does pace itself better. Steam is a minute longer and has way more variety, with a lot of change ups with an occasional pre-chorus peppered in. It’s a longer song that feels shorter and endlessly replayable. Granted a listen to both of these songs an unhealthy amount of times, so I wouldn’t recommend any of you reading this skip out on them. Listen to them however you can, they’re a great time. Heck, buy the albums they come from because the rest of the songs on there are great too.

Thanks for reading this review. It’s a very quick one drafter of hopefully many that I’m posting to sharpen my writing skills. Hope you enjoyed and I’ll make sure to improve these over time. I have ideas for little bite size and more cohesive reviews of the following songs: Uh Huh, Girl, Babooshka

*note: thought he sung “kick” but apparently not. Personally I think “kick” has a better kick to it, funny enough, in terms of annunciation.

[mittensmorgul]

Aah, one of the Great Unresolved Plot Arcs of s10, burned and abandoned by the roadside when Carver had to slam on the brakes and detour into a random blind alley to walk back most of what he set up in s10′s mytharc.

S10 has so many beautiful episodes, even AFTER the mytharc slash and burn at midseason, they just don’t work as one cohesive whole. And I will eternally despise this whole season because of it.

The most HILARIOUS bit about it is now, with the big reveal of Chuck’s overarching supervillainy in 14.20, we can look back at s10-- and the fallout from all of Metatron’s s8 and s9 machinations from the fracture of heaven and the angel fall event, bringing Abaddon back into the story after she’d already been defeated in 8.12, from the smashing of the angel tablet to Dean having taken the mark of cain in the first place, to demon Dean, to slaughtering of Cain first and then Death, and the unlocking of the Mark of Cain and freeing the Darkness... ALL of it can be chalked up as Chuck’s narrative failures. And Metatron was foil, the fall guy, this time around in Chuck’s Plot-Go-Round. He was Chuck’s scapegoat.

As a demon, Dean behaved exactly the way Chuck expected s15 Dean to behave. Chuck threw the pretty blonde victim in his path and expected Dean to play knight in shining armor and give in to the woman’s seduction. Maybe if Dean had been a demon, he wouldn’t have cared and would’ve taken advantage of a victim nearly half his age, like he did with Ann Marie in 10.01, but that is not who Dean is, no matter how much Chuck might want him to be that guy for the purposes of his story.

There’s so much in 10.01 about the intended development of Cas’s arc that never came to pass in s10, and it looks so horrifyingly similar thematically to Cas’s final confrontation with himself, his motives, his guilt, and his understanding of himself, humanity, and free will.

In 10.01:

HANNAH: And you, Castiel? You're feeling well? CASTIEL: Oh, yes. Like a million dollars. HANNAH: That's not true. CASTIEL: It's my truth. HANNAH: When you left heaven, your borrowed Grace was failing. By the looks of you, you've only gotten worse. CASTIEL: I'm fine. HANNAH: You're dying, Castiel. You need more Grace. CASTIEL: And we have a mission in front of us that supersedes my needs -- all of our needs. Don't you agree? You're a good soldier, Hannah... And one of the best. Metatron certainly could not have been brought to heel without your bravery. HANNAH: Or yours. You must take care of yourself, Castiel. CASTIEL [lashing out]: And another angel should die so that I can be saved?! Is this really that hard to understand?

For comparison’s sake, we saw Lucifer-- aka the villain-- do this with impunity in s13, not caring about what he destroyed in his quest for personal restoration to his former glory. But Cas had to be force-fed grace by Crowley in 10.03 to keep the plot from folding in on itself, to keep Cas from “burning out.” Because Cas wouldn’t sacrifice anyone else in his place. Everything else in his life was structured around “the mission,” and his duty to fix what he blames himself from having broken. Early s10 shows his completely divided loyalty-- between saving Heaven and the Angels as penance from having played a role in the devastation that’s brought it to this point, and his duty to the Winchesters and his mission to save Dean at all costs. First, the angels:

HANNAH: Perhaps it is you who has failed to get the message? All of us serve at heaven's command. DANIEL: I suppose. But that was before the fall, wasn't it? HANNAH: You are an angel, once and forever. DANIEL: Dropped unwillingly...Unknowingly...Into a strange land, a land that, as it turns out, celebrates the free, the individual. For the first time in thousands of years, I have choices. And with each choice... I begin to discover who I really am. HANNAH: This is nonsense. DANIEL: Because they don't teach you this in heaven? Perhaps they should. Then you would understand why it's worth fighting for.

Cas is... torn. He’s both sides of this conversation. He wishes he could just abandon heaven the way Daniel and Adina tried, but that sense of duty bound him to “do the right thing,” and “follow orders” and do what he could to remedy his own past mistakes. He willingly sacrifices his own happiness and choices thinking that in doing so at least he can correct some of his mistakes and restore a measure of peace to the Winchesters. And... the system was always rigged against him.

In s15, this fundamental lack of understanding (which we will gain in s13 during Dean’s period of grief over Cas’s death) of his importance to Dean’s ongoing peace and happiness, viewing himself as a disposable tool for achieving what he believes is his “mission,” his reason he was resurrected from the Empty, becomes explicit in 15.02. It plays out in his mission to save Dean in 10.03, and then immediately returning to his Heaven Mission with Hannah the moment he believes Dean doesn’t need him anymore. It leaves Dean feeling like he’s nothing but a burden to Cas, a distraction from his “more important” duties, like Dean has no right to put a further emotional burden on Cas by asking him to just STAY, by forcing his apparently unrequited feelings on Cas. This is now the sole issue standing between them. It’s a complicated tangle of years of failures to communicate their actual wants and needs outside of their respective cosmically-enforced duties. 

SAM [walking down a rural road]: You need to get to Beulah, North Dakota -- now. CASTIEL: I do? SAM: Yes. Crowley and Dean were there. We got to pick up their trail. CASTIEL: Good. Great. SAM: Yeah, um...not so much. Cas...Dean's a demon. CASTIEL: Dean's a demon? How? SAM: The Mark --I-I guess it --it just messed him up. I don't know. CASTIEL: That is a vast understatement. SAM: Right. Now, Cas, listen. I know you're not feeling so hot, but this is kind of an “all hands on deck” situation here, so... CASTIEL: So... I'll meet you there.

The horror of it all, Cas is needed to help save Dean, and yet he’s practically human-- sleeping, weak and unable to even heal himself, and back then he had Hannah bargaining with Metatron to restore his grace. And in 15.02, Dean just wanted Cas to side with HIM for once. But:

CASTIEL: You're angry. DEAN: Yes, I am angry. At everything. All of it. CASTIEL: All of it? DEAN: This mess... all the messes. It turns out that we're just hamsters running in a wheel our whole lives. What do we have to show for it, huh? Tell me you don't feel conned. God's been lying to you, Cas, forever. You bought into the biggest scam in history. CASTIEL: You don't think I'm angry? After what Chuck did? After what he took from me? He killed Jack. But that doesn't mean it was all a lie. DEAN: Really? Chuck is all-knowing. He knew the truth, he... he just kept it to himself. Well, now that his cover's blown, everything that we've done is for what? Nothing?

to Dean, it appears as if Cas’s anger is entirely and only about Chuck having taken Jack from him. Dean doesn’t understand what Jack symbolized to Cas. This is EXACTLY what Zerbe was saying the other day in this post:

https://mittensmorgul.tumblr.com/post/189063380030/wait-dead-lover-as-in-either-cas-or-dean-is

lol just go read that instead so I can spare myself having to type anymore today. 

[douchebagbrainwaves]

STARTUP IN FOUNDERS TO MAKE WEALTH

Would it be useful to have an explicit belief in change. And I think that's ok. Mihalko seemed like he actually wanted to be our friend. Grad school is the other end of the humanities. Indirectly, but they pay attention.1 US, its effects lasted longer. Together you talk about some hard problem, probably getting nowhere.

Informal language is the athletic clothing of ideas. Why? They got to have expense account lunches at the best restaurants and fly around on the company's Gulfstreams. Meaning everyone within this world was low-res: a Duplo world of a few big hits, and those aren't them. It's not true that those who teach can't do. Or is it?2 I think much of the company.

Part of the reason is prestige. If you define a language that was ideal for writing a slow version 1, and yet with the right optimization advice to the compiler, would also yield very fast code when necessary.3 Of course, prestige isn't the main reason the idea is much older than Henry Ford. The right way to get it. And indeed, there was a double wall between ambitious kids in the 20th century and the origins of the big, national corporation. The reason car companies operate this way is that it was already mostly designed in 1958. Wars make central governments more powerful, and over the next forty years gradually got more powerful, they'll be out of business. And this too tended to produce both social and economic cohesion. The first microcomputers were dismissed as toys.4 This won't be a very powerful feature. Lisp paper.5 Plus if you didn't put the company first you wouldn't be promoted, and if you couldn't switch ladders, promotion on this one was the only way up.

But if they don't want to shut down the company, that leaves increasing revenues and decreasing expenses firing people.6 One is that investors will increasingly be unable to offer investment subject to contingencies like other people investing. I understood their work. Which in turn means the variation in the amount of wealth people can create has not only been increasing, but accelerating.7 Surely that sort of thing did not happen to big companies in mid-century most of the 20th century and the origins of the big national corporations were willing to pay a premium for labor.8 As long as he considers all languages equivalent, all he has to do is remove the marble that isn't part of it. I had a few other teachers who were smart, but I never have. And it turns out that was all you needed to solve the problem. You have certain mental gestures you've learned in your work, and when you're not paying attention, you keep making these same gestures, but somewhat randomly.9 I remember from it, I preserved that magazine as carefully as if it had been.10 That no doubt causes a lot of institutionalized delays in startup funding: the multi-week mating dance with investors; the distinction between acceptable and maximal efficiency, programmers in a hundred years, maybe it won't in a thousand. Certainly it was for a startup's founders to retain board control after a series A, that will change the way things have always been.

Which inevitably, if unions had been doing their job tended to be lower. They did as employers too. I worry about the power Apple could have with this force behind them. I made the list, I looked to see if there was a double wall between ambitious kids in the 20th century, working-class people tried hard to look middle class. In a way mid-century oligopolies had been anointed by the federal government, which had been a time of consolidation, led especially by J. Wars make central governments more powerful, until now the most advanced technologies, and the number of undergrads who believe they have to say yes or no, and then join some other prestigious institution and work one's way up the hierarchy. Locally, all the news was bad. Close, but they are still missing a few things. Not entirely bad though. I notice this every time I fly over the Valley: somehow you can sense prosperity in how well kept a place looks. Another way to burn up cycles is to have many layers of software between the application and the hardware. And indeed, the most obvious breakage in the average computer user's life is Windows itself.

Investors don't need weeks to make up their minds anyway. The point of high-level languages is to give you bigger abstractions—bigger bricks, as it were, so I emailed the ycfounders list. They traversed idea space as gingerly as a very old person traverses the physical world. And there is another, newer language, called Python, whose users tend to look down on Perl, and more openly. At the time it seemed the future. What happens in that shower? You can't reproduce mid-century model was already starting to get old.11 Meanwhile a similar fragmentation was happening at the other end of the economic scale.12 But the advantage is that it works better.

Most really good startup ideas look like bad ideas at first, and many of those look bad specifically because some change in the world just switched them from bad to good.13 There's good waste, and bad waste. A rounds. A bottom-up program should be easier to modify as well, partly because it tends to create deadlock, and partly because it seems kind of slimy. But when you import this criterion into decisions about technology, you start to get the company rolling. It would have been unbearable. Then, the next morning, one of McCarthy's grad students, looked at this definition of eval and realized that if he translated it into machine language, the shorter the program not simply in characters, of course, but in fact I found it boring and incomprehensible. I wouldn't want Python advocates to say I was misrepresenting the language, but what they got was fixed according to their rank. The deal terms of angel rounds will become less restrictive too—not just less restrictive than angel terms have traditionally been. If it is, it will be a minority squared.

If 98% of the time, just like they do to startups everywhere. Their culture is the opposite of hacker culture; on questions of software they will tend to pay less, because part of the core language, prior to any additional notations about implementation, be defined this way. That's what a metaphor is: a function applied to an argument of the wrong type.14 Now we'd give a different answer.15 And you know more are out there, separated from us by what will later seem a surprisingly thin wall of laziness and stupidity. There have probably been other people who did this as well as Newton, for their time, but Newton is my model of this kind of thought. I'd be very curious to see it, but Rabin was spectacularly explicit. Betting on people over ideas saved me countless times as an investor.16 They assume ideas are like miracles: they either pop into your head or they don't. I was pretty much assembly language with math. Whereas if you ask for it explicitly, but ordinarily not used. A couple days ago an interviewer asked me if founders having more power would be better or worse for the world.

Notes

The reason we quote statistics about fundraising is so hard to prevent shoplifting because in their early twenties. Auto-retrieving filters will have a definite commitment.

It will seem like noise.

It's one of the world. That's why the Apple I used to end investor meetings too closely, you'll find that with a neologism. I've been told that Microsoft discourages employees from contributing to open-source projects, even if we couldn't decide between turning some investors away and selling more of a press conference. All you need but a lot about some disease they'll see once in China, many of the biggest divergences between the government.

Mozilla is open-source projects, even if they pay a lot of time. If they agreed among themselves never to do that. And journalists as part of grasping evolution was to reboot them, initially, to sell your company into one? Most expect founders to overhire is not so much better is a net win to include in your own time, not just the local area, and Reddit is Delicious/popular with voting instead of just doing things, they were shooting themselves in the field they describe.

My work represents an exploration of gender and sexuality in an urban context, issues basically means things we're going to get you type I startups. As a friend who invested earlier had been with us if the current options suck enough. MITE Corp.

The top VCs and Micro-VCs. When you had to for some reason, rather than admitting he preferred to call all our lies lies. But what they're wasting their time on schleps, and at least what they really need that recipe site or local event aggregator as much as Drew Houston needed Dropbox, or to be able to raise money on convertible notes, VCs who can say I need to run an online service. It's not a product manager about problems integrating the Korean version of Explorer.

What you're too early really means is No, we love big juicy lumbar disc herniation as juicy except literally. In either case the implications are similar. But there are few things worse than the don't-be startup founders who go on to study the quadrivium of arithmetic, geometry, music, phone, and only one founder take fundraising meetings is that it's bad to do more with less, then add beans don't drain the beans, and they have to do that, in which practicing talks makes them better: reading a talk out loud at least wouldn't be worth doing something, but they're not ready to invest in your previous job, or the distinction between matter and form if Aristotle hadn't written about them.

Philadelphia is a net loss of productivity. As a rule, if the growth is genuine. Which implies a surprising but apparently unimportant, like a core going critical.

In practice the first year or so. If you weren't around then it's hard to think about so-called lifestyle business, having sold all my shares earlier this year. Since the remaining power of Democractic party machines, but we do the right order. They're an administrative convenience.

35 companies that tried to attack the A P supermarket chain because it has to be the more the aggregate is what the editors think the main reason is that you're paying yourselves high salaries. What is Mathematics? Once again, that good paintings must have affected what they claim was the fall of 2008 but no doubt partly because companies don't. Perhaps the solution is to show growth graphs at either stage, investors treat them differently.

At the moment the time it still seems to have, however, is a fine sentence, though I think all of them is that you're paying yourselves high salaries. We thought software was all that matters to us. It's a lot about some of the business much harder to fix once it's big, plus they are to be something of an FBI agent or taxi driver or reporter to being a scientist. Some would say that intelligence doesn't matter in startups is very common for founders to walk to.

In fact, we try to be a special recipient of favour, being a scientist.

It is the most successful investment, Uber, from which Renaissance civilization radiated.

When an investor they already know; but as a percentage of GDP were about the team or their determination and disarmingly asking the right sort of things economists usually think about so-called lifestyle business, A. Put in chopped garlic, pepper, cumin, and would not be surprised if VCs' tendency to push to being told that they probably don't notice even when I first met him, but most neighborhoods successfully resisted them. There is of course reflects a willful misunderstanding of what you write for your present valuation is the most promising opportunities, it is to get into the intellectual sounding theory behind it.

Innosight, February 2012. Ashgate, 1998. So it is less than a Web terminal.

This is why we can't figure out the same ones. Trevor Blackwell, who had been able to. We didn't let him off, either as an example of applied empathy. And yet if he were a variety called Red Delicious that had other meanings.

[that-ari-blogger]

Illusions, A Case Study In Theming

One of the problems with writing magic into a story is working it into the plot. it is hard to link the three and make them feel cohesive and consequential.

There is also the matter of theming. The power progression and the magic itself. The best good example of this is early DragonBall, in which the story is about defeating more powerful opponents with skill and tactics, and the best bad example is late DragonBall, where power creep is a real problem.

But this blog isn't about DragonBall. This is about the Owl House, specifically how illusion magic is used to emphasise the theme of self-honesty in Something Ventured, Someone Framed.

Let me explain.

SPOILERS AHEAD

So, what do I mean by self-honesty?

I mean accepting one's mistakes, not just acknowledging them. And this episode does this in two storylines. Eda and Bump, and Gus and Matt.

Gus and Matt are identical characters. Well, not identical, but pretty similar in actions and motivations. They both want glory and acceptance, and have sought out the Human Appreciation Society as a means of doing so. And both are using lies and deceptions to get what they want. I understand that there are nuances in the differences between the two, but the similarities draw out their differences, and those nuances are the whole point of Gus' arc in this episode.

This episode actually does a bit of a bait and switch with its themes. It presents itself as an episode about honesty to everyone else, with Gus lying to not just Luz, but to the teachers with his illusions, and to others with his general demeanour. Gus doesn't know as much about humans as he presents, and he uses his sheer force of charisma to bluff his way through that. But then the episode gives us Matt's revelation.

"I... have something to say. I'm new here at Hexside. M-making friends has been hard, so I lied. They're all fakes. I thought if I was important enough, people would like me. But I've caused enough drama. So, I'll go. I'm sorry."

Jorge Diaz (Matt's Voice Actor) nails this line. The guilt, the hesitation, the sadness, the frustration, everything in this line is on point. Combine that with the posturing of the character and the camera framing him in its centre, and Matt is being genuine here, he's being vulnerable in front of people he has alienated, and that's excedingly difficult. Even knowing what happens next, this doesn't strike me as a lie.

But what happens next is important as well. Matt calls the authorities as a power grab, walking back everything he has said. And here is where the real theming comes through. Because at this point, both Gus and Matt have been found out, they have given up the lie. But they think that that is that. Matt immediately goes back on his word, he regresses because despite everything, that crown is still more important to him than anything else, because of the acceptance it gives.

Both of these characters need to learn to confront their mistakes and take accountability. They need to be honest to themselves, and while Gus learns that in this episode, Matt learns this over the course of the rest of the show.

But I mentioned illusions, and this is an episode with relatively few actual spells cast. So, what do I mean?

Take a look at how illusions work in this series. Yes, they are intangible, but they are also very much real and have extreme side effects. If the kid pictured above had been trying this spell without the help of a teacher, they would probably have died.

This works with the conclusion of the episode, in which illusions are used to save everyone. In this world, instead of an illusion being maligned, an illusion is a tool. To lie, you need to understand the repercussions of your actions, but more than that, you need to take accountability. This episode doesn't associate illusions with deception, but with consequences, both good and bad.

Eda doesn't have the illusions motif, but she does fit into the theme of self-honesty rather well. Put simply, to get Luz into school, she needs to remedy some of her own mistakes, confronting her past. She doesn't change, but she accepts that actions have consequences and... you get the point.

Final Thoughts:

Something Ventured, Someone Framed is one of those episodes that I personally looked back on with a considerable amount of distaste. But upon rewatch, I was pleasantly surprised by how well this is written. The animation is stellar as is usual for the Owl House, but the standout is the detention room. I just think that colour combination is cool.

The illusions are framed differently to how most other media depicts the concept, and the acting on the entire cast is really compelling, which I really like. Matt and Gus are the most notable example of how the final season being cut short ended up with certain characters being left comparatively underdeveloped. I would have liked to have seen more of these two.

Next week I will be covering Escape Of The Palisman, so stick around if that interests you.

Previous - Next

[beansthembo]

I need to do a bit of a vent about the new Star Wars movie. Spoilers below.

I’m having some trouble processing what happened. If you’re reading this, you probably are interested in my opinion on it, and you probably also know that I was a big fan of The Last Jedi. By no means was it a perfect movie, but it took the chance of distancing itself from the rest of the series by springing off of what was established in TFA and building something new. A lot of people weren’t too pleased by this, and there are plenty of legitimate criticisms, but being completely transparent, I can’t listen to most critics of it because most of the people I know in real life who didn’t like it are racist or misogynistic.

TLJ tried to introduce people to the idea that, in reference to the new canon, just because it’s new and different, doesn’t mean that it’s bad. Kylo’s/Ben’s line, “Let the past die. Kill it, if you have to,” finds meaning in this, though a bit extreme. TLJ was going to learn from the past films and move on, for better or worse. TROS is determined to wallow in its past. As a lifetime fan of Star Wars, I can’t bring myself to hate it outright, like many vocal critics of TLJ, but I find myself severely disappointed by the decisions made in it.

I’ve honestly spent too much time composing those last paragraphs, as if I’m a legit critic or reviewer. I’m just kind of going to present my nitpicks and criticisms as they come to me.

So, first a few nitpicks:

-The opening crawl seems... poorly composed to me. The first line is “The dead speak!” Correct me if I’m wrong, but they don’t usually use exclamations in the opening crawls. I know I just spent the last couple of paragraphs defending new ideas, but the opening crawl always seemed as though they were meant to present information formally from a neutral perspective. Not a major criticism, but it did bother me a bit.

-What happened to Kyle’s TIE Silencer? I mean, it could’ve been destroyed in the previous movie, but I don’t really remember that happening. Either way, it seemed to me that they made the decision to make his ship more similar to the Interceptor, as, like, a ‘safer’ choice, but I don’t see why they couldn’t have just had the same ship.

-The Falcon has a round dish again? You know, now that I’m thinking of it, the dish may have been blasted off in TLJ. I just was surprised by that.

I may add to that list later. the actual problems I had were:

-Rey is sort of obsessed with ‘earning’ Luke’s (and Anakin’s) old lightsaber. Which has been repaired, by the way. She doesn’t actually ‘own’ it, even though she’s been using it for the past two movies, she’s just been borrowing it from Leia. I was really looking forward to seeing her make her own (or already have her own) lightsaber, which she does, but she waits until the end of the movie to show it off. And it’s rad as hell! Wtf? why couldn’t she have been using that the whole time! It’s one of my favorite lightsaber designs now and they show it for a whole two seconds!

-They finally give Snoke a backstory, and it’s... that he was Palpatine’s puppet the whole time. I’m gonna say, not the worst backstory they could have done, but they really tried to make him just not matter at all. I mean, yeah, the way he was done off with in TLJ was pretty unceremonious, but I always felt that meant that the real big bad was meant to be Kyle all along. Instead, the Skywalker saga becomes the Palpatine saga. I’m not opposed to the concept of Palpatine surviving and attempting to resurrect the Sith, but that’s something I’d expect from a novel, not the main story of the final movie in the franchise. And, honestly, regardless of whether or not Snoke was secretly Plagueis, I always thought he was supposed to be some other ye olde sith master, not just some sort of failed clone(?)

-Kyle rebuilds his fuUcking helmet. Why? What purpose does it serve? He doesn’t even wear it most of the time. The longest period he wears it is when the First Order officers comment on it. He’s just being dramatic. Which, I suppose, would be in character, but after the scene in which he shatters it in TLJ, it seems pointless.

-Another nitpick, but when they expand upon Rey and Kyle’s ability to connect through the force, it seems a little... disjointed. I do like that they took the time to expand upon that, even though I thought Rey closing the Falcon’s ramp on him at the end of TLJ was symbolic of her cutting him off, the way they presented it seemed, well, off. Like, it makes sense if you take it at face value, but if you start to think about it at all, it sort of... weird. I dunno how to describe it. Like, they interact with each other’s environments, but can’t see what they can interact with until they interact with it, and they can trade items, and... yeah.

-The big one... Rey’s a Palpatine. Her father was Sheev’s son. (When did that happen, huh? Who’d want to get with that wrinkly mess?) Why the everloving fuck couldn’t Rey just have been Rey? Why did she have to be related to someone existing in the franchise already? JJ’s going around saying that this was his plan the whole time, which is bull fucking shit, because otherwise they would have communicated this to Ryan, and I’m pretty sure TROS was originally going to have another director in the first place, and ALSO I’m pretty sure JJ did say at some point that Rey’s parents only mattered to her. While I’m on the topic of fan theories and origins, nobody in the movies was ever concerned about who Snoke really was. They knew who he was-the Bad Guy. Nobody ever cared who the Emperor really was in 1983, so why was Snoke’s death and non-explained origins such a big deal? I have more conflicted thoughts than I can even put down, so i’m gonna move on.

-Oh, before I forget, they just completely write off Rose. She’s present, but they minimize her screen time. I get that a lot of people didn’t like her, and there are some valid criticisms of her that aren’t completely rooted in racism and misogyny, but I never found any problem with her. I actually felt she was pretty relatable. She meets a hero, trips over her own words, and then learns why you should never meet your heroes. Disillusioned, she’s about to turn him in but they come up with another plan, and together they visit a world full of people she joined the Resistance to get away from. I’ve got that same feeling about those sorts of things-while I do enjoy a decent amount of privilege, I still, you know, fight against the system that gave it to me. And I can’t stand to see people abuse others just because they don’t have that privilege, so hearing her speech about wanting to punch a hole through that city did mean a lot at some level. Then, at the end, when she’s like, “this is how we win. Not by fighting what we hate, but saving what we love,” I can even relate to that. It’s when, like, you explain to a kid how you hate something, and they jump on the bandwagon, and get real angsty, and then you’re like, “no no no that’s not what I wanted you to learn!” It’s hard to describe it with my rapidly deteriorating attention, but I never thought she was a bad character.

-DJ wasn’t in it! I mean, he wasn’t the most important character, but I still wanted to see him again.

-They have this fake out where they pretend Chewie was dead for a whole 20 seconds. I totally called it, too-the ship he was supposedly in blew up (or rather, Rey blew it up with force lightning accidentally), but since he didn’t die on screen in front of us, I knew it had to be a fake out. And it seems like the only reason for that was so they can find out that Hugs was the traitor, who is only betraying the First Order to see Kyle lose, which I mean fair, but then he’s unceremoniously killed off by the new big officer guy who we’ve never seen before but was supposedly one of the Emperor’s top men. I don’t think his name was even mentioned in the movie-or if it was, it had zero staying power. Also, they have this part where Threepio had his memory erased for a while before being backed up by Artoo. The lead up to it was very dramatic- Threepio’s generally been a comic relief character up to this point, and now he’s got to give his life for the cause (He had a translation of some Sith runes in his memory, but his programming prevented him from saying the translation aloud, and his memory needed to be wiped in order to access it), but as soon as his memory is wiped they do not give two shits that one of their best friends basically died right in front of them. Then Artoo brings him back and still no one cares.

-Poe and Finn do have a nice dynamic in the movie, but then we find one of Poe’s exes and he starts flirting with her and its like no Poe your husband’s right tHERE POE DON’T DO IT (and don’t dismiss this as shipper nonsense because John Boyega and Oscar Isaac both wanted FinnPoe to be a thing and acted through the movies like it was already don’t you say this is the first you’re hearing of this)

-The way that Rey defeats Palpatine is by crossing lightsabers in front of him to deflect his lightning?

-Reylo is canon NOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO (Insert the gif of Vader yelling no at the end of ROTS)

-Also why does it always have to be a planet destroying superweapon? I know legends did that a lot but there doesn’t always have to be one for there to be stakes.

I think there was other stuff, but my brain is too scattered at this point to make any more cohesive thoughts. I mean, there was a lot of stuff I did like about it- Lando’s back! And i think Wedge is too, but he was on screen for about a second and a half, so I couldn’t tell. It was confirmed that Leia had force training, and even had a lightsaber! And I do like that they’re taking some inspiration from Legends, but I’m pretty sure Dark Empire was not one of the most popular series’ from it. I also did like Ben seeing a vision of Han; It’s not entirely clear if it was a force ghost thing (I am of the belief that Han was at leas a little force sensitive) or if it was just Ben sort of coming to terms with his actions, but the scene was pretty well done in my opinion. Also, Rey taking the name Skywalker at the end. That was nice, like she chose her family.

Now I just remembered a couple of things-Finn was basically confirmed to be force sensitive, but the way they did it felt very ham-fisted. Like, they weren’t like “he felt a disturbance wink wink nudge nudge,” they were like “HERE IS SOME SUBTEXT THAT ISN’T ACTUALLY SUBTEXT SEE HERE” like they never outright say it but it would have been less insulting if they did. Also, they introduced a force healing thing, which has been a more of a thing in the games, but we’ve never seen it on screen before. But like, Rey dies at the end and Ben brings her back and then [REDACTED] and then he dies, even though, like, a lot of things. I don’t know I’ve been typing for way too long I need off.

Anyway, it felt good to vent, thanks for reading if you did. I give TROS 6.5/10.

[script-a-world]

age

I’m doing a historical story and having trouble with, well, ages. I mean people don’t live long, but there is actual real life people who do live long, like say Genghis Khan who died at 65. Then of course with his status he had to have the best medical care. When I think of it, many fictional stories set in the past tend to often have elderly characters, white haired grandparents, as if it were modern day, and mostly ignore all the infant/child deaths. Thinking again, many of these stories also have fantasy/magicial elements. You know, like Merlin. I’ve also seen a lot of Asian movies and they tend to have elderly kung fu masters that can ‘fly’ to an extent and more. But then in these stories, even regular people tend to lead long lives as well. So, if my story is free of these fantasy/magical elements, I definitely should not have too many of these elderly characters, especially if the character isn’t the ruler or part of the royal family but just regular common people?

Saphira: There is an easy solution. Disconnect the concept of "elderly" from the age itself and treat it as a relative concept. This allows the tropes and representation, while painting depth in the cultural perception of lifespan.

Feral:

Okay, let’s math.

Life Expectancy is typically given as the mean age of death from birth of a cohort (people born in the same year). As you may remember, the mean is the type of average where you add up all the numbers and divide by the number of numbers you added. So,

The mean of {1, 2, 2, 4, 7, 7, 7, 7, 11} is 5.33

There are two other types of averages, though, median and mode. Median is best understood as the middle number in the sequence, and mode is the most often repeated number in the sequence.

So, the median of the same set of numbers is 4, and the mode is 7.

Mean is best used when you have an even spread of data without an exceptional difference between the highest and lowest value. Median is best used when you are looking at frequency in a particular data set. Mode is best used when you have nominal data, which is not relevant so we’re gonna ignore it.

Now, there is a really big problem with using the mean age when you include “from birth.” Infant mortality rates! They used to be pretty high. Let’s take a look at a fictitious sample set.

I have 100 commoners in my fantasy world that are a perfectly representative sample of the people who were all born in the same year in the same or very similar environment. Infant mortality (expanded to include children up to age 10) is at 20% (80% of that 20% are ages 1 or 2), maternal mortality (between 18 & 25) is 20% of the female population and 10% of the general population, and the likelihood you will die of war, disease, or famine between 11 years old and 44 years old is also 20%. 50% of the population lives between 45 years old 80 years old. What’s the average life expectancy?

~39 years old.

Here is the number set I used, randomly generated per demographic under the given conditions:

10 deaths at age 1, 6 at age 2, 1 at age 3, 2 at age 5, 1 at age 8, 4 at 12, 5 at 15, 5 at age 18, 2 at age 19, 1 at 21, 2 at 23, 1 at 25, 6 at 30, 2 at 35, 1 at 37, 1 at 41, 1 at 45, 1 at 46, 2 at 47, 2 at 49, 1 at 50, 1 at 51, 1 at 52, 2 at 53, 2 at 54, 1 at 55, 1 at 57, 1 at 58, 2 at 59, 1 at 60, 1 at 62, 4 at 63, 1 at 64, 1 at 65, 1 at 66, 2 at 67, 1 at 68, 5 at 69, 2 at 70, 1 at 73, 2 at 74, 3 at 75, 2 at 76, 1 at 77, 1 at 78, 2 at 79, 1 at 80.

The median age of death of these 100 people is 47 years old, which is the number to consider when looking at frequencies. Although the average life expectancy is 40 years old, people most frequently die around age 47.

Infant mortality is important when talking about the health of a nation, but not so much to your world building question, so let’s take them out.

Our sample set is now: 4 at 12, 5 at 15, 5 at age 18, 2 at age 19, 1 at 21, 2 at 23, 1 at 25, 6 at 30, 2 at 35, 1 at 37, 1 at 41, 1 at 45, 1 at 46, 2 at 47, 2 at 49, 1 at 50, 1 at 51, 1 at 52, 2 at 53, 2 at 54, 1 at 55, 1 at 57, 1 at 58, 2 at 59, 1 at 60, 1 at 62, 4 at 63, 1 at 64, 1 at 65, 1 at 66, 2 at 67, 1 at 68, 5 at 69, 2 at 70, 1 at 73, 2 at 74, 3 at 75, 2 at 76, 1 at 77, 1 at 78, 2 at 79, 1 at 80.

The average life expectancy if you can survive to adolescence is now 48 years old. The median age is 53. But 47.5% of the over-10 population exceeds 53 years old!

All this to say, the Life Expectancy from Birth, or LEB, is not helpful to you on your quest. Or at least, it’s not the whole picture. The standard deviation of life expectancy is huge. In my first sample set it was about 27 years, and in my second sample set it was about 22 years. For comparison, the modern SD in the USA is still 15 years.

Now, you are planning a historical novel, so you’ll be using real world statistical data, or as close as you can depending on the specific period. Start here [ Life Expectancy ] and work your way through the numbers.

Constablewrites: Simplified version: If you survive infancy, you've got a pretty good shot at living long enough to have children. If you survive the stuff that can kill young adults (war/childbirth/accidents), you'll likely live long enough to see your grandchildren. It's not that it was impossible to live as long as people do now, it's just that fewer people did. So while it would be unrealistic to assume that every household in the village has multiple living grandparents, it's not unreasonable to think that several of them would have at least one.

Tex: Death kills humans, yes, but how one arrives at death varies - there are a few constants that consistently mow down a population: disease, strife, famine, and lack of hygiene.

Famine you can't really do much about - if the rains don't come, there's not much you can do but wait it out. Famine can also come from strife, as cutting off food sources are a popular method of conquering a population (even if it backfires), as well as poor management of the lands (something in which lack of hygiene factors). Famine can also show in the form of malnourishment and malnutrition. Children require a very healthy, well-balanced diet, otherwise they're more susceptible to infections and in general are less robust in surviving daily life (Unicef's articles on child malnutrition and generalized). The elderly often have the same issues (HealthXchange), so along with children are often the first to go when food resources deplete. There's debates on which end of the lifespan is more fragile, but as the elderly have greater opportunity to self-defend and be ambulatory, I would argue that they're more capable of surviving longer in a famine than infants and small children.

Disease is, typically, a function of hygiene. We can look to the spread of infectious diseases such as the Bubonic Plague and Spanish Influenza as examples, and much of a disease's spread can be mitigated by doing such things as boiling drinking water (PDF) and washing your hands. While humans are already built with proactive immune systems that can fight off most diseases accumulated from daily living, hygiene is a habit that allows a species to not only survive, but allow its members to enjoy greater lifespans past age of reproduction.

A lack of hygiene among a population will inevitably skew its longevity downward, especially since some diseases can be so debilitating it that it can damage the DNA of subsequent generations when one's immune system hadn't sufficiently adapted to the disease (and this is if the damage doesn't become an evolutionary advantage).

Strife is, some argue, a human condition - an integral, irrevocable part of our psyche that we must actively work to thwart, as otherwise it would ruin us as individuals and bring down our society. Of a great many terrible things that come through strife, there are societal benefits. Political scientist Jeffrey Herbst argued that war was integral to the creation of strong states, particularly within Europe, and the Sierra Leone government found that there was greater societal cohesion in war-torn areas. With a stronger, more unified society, there is often more resources diverted to thriving as opposed to merely surviving - culture becomes important, history in the form of the elderly are paid more care, and more members of a society work toward non-strife related advancements such as STEM and the arts. Happy people are long-lived people, or rather - the unhappy tend to die at a younger age (Social Indicators Research journal). Happiness, much like strife, is psychological in nature, and a happy person does tend to survive both diseases and strife (PDF) better.

TL;DR Mentally-resilient people who practice good hygiene and have reasonably good access to a balanced diet will potentially live for a very long time.

[callumhumphreys]

INTERVIEW: BRYAN SHUTMAAT FOR TRESPASSER

Callum Humphreys: Hi Bryan, firstly, thanks for taking the time to speak with me. Can you start by giving anyone who’s reading an overview of Trespasser?

Bryan Schutmaat: Trespasser is a small, independent art book publisher based in Austin, Texas that was founded in 2017 by Matthew Genitempo, Cody Haltom, and me, Bryan Schutmaat.

CH: What inspired you to start Trespasser?

BS: Before launching Trespasser, Matthew and I had talked for a couple years about starting an imprint together. He and I have really similar taste and passions, and we wanted to see books made that might have less of a chance to be made with established art book publishers. When the opportunity arose to publish my short book, Good Goddamn, we decided to make the imprint a reality, and we recruited Cody Haltom, a brilliant designer, to join us on the endeavour.

CH: I come from a graphic design background and one thing that instantly jumps out to me is the construction of your books. They mix DIY / zine elements like staple binding, with high-end offset printing and foil stamping. Do you think these design decisions enrich the experience or enhance the books narrative?

BS: Yes, that’s our hope. The design, materials, and all further considerations put into our books are meant to reflect the narrative, meaning, and emotional atmospheres within. As objects, we think photobooks need to honor the images and the stories we’re telling as best as possible. Regarding some of the stylistic choices you mention, Matthew and I grew up skating and listening to punk, which might account for the DIY/zine elements - maybe an outlook and aesthetic that stayed with us after youth Cody compliments that with what he brings forth in terms of layout, typography, an acute attention to detail, and so on. I think it amounts to books that feel somewhat against the grain yet don’t sacrifice great printing and overall quality.

CH: Congratulations on your newest publication ‘Polar Night’ (Mark Mahaney 2019) it seems to have been met with universal praise. Polar night, similar to many books in your back catalogue seems to touch upon themes of isolation, anxiety and the interaction we have within our landscape. This type of ‘documentary’ photography has almost become a genre in itself. Is this the kind of work you are actively seeking to publish through Trespasser?

BS: I don’t think we’re trying to push that kind of work necessarily. We’ve only collaborated with close friends on our projects so far, and perhaps the themes you notice might just be shared interests among a small friend/artist group. I like that all of our publications up to now have a sense of cohesion, but we’re also eager to branch out and tell different stories.

CH: In an age where sharing work, ideas and opinion is instantaneous, what role do you think the photobook plays in modern photography?

BS: I have a bit of spiel about this. I think photobooks are the saviours of photographic meaning in an era when we are constantly bombarded by the ubiquity of images and digital media. There’s a torrent of content everywhere we look, and most of it adds no significance or benefit to our lives, aside from being momentarily stimulating. They quickly disintegrate into the abyss. But a good photobook can transcend this meaninglessness and function like work of literature. A book is physical and lasting. It slows you down. It can convey profound concepts, engaging narratives, and unique points of view.

CH: Can narratives or ideas be shared in the same way on social media as they can in photobooks?

BS: No, I don’t think so. On this topic, I often reference a great video of David Lynch, which can be found on Youtube, talking about how sad it is that people think they’ve seen a film when they’ve watched it on an iPhone. “You'll think you have experienced it, but you'll be cheated,” he says, “It's such a sadness that you think you've seen a film on your fucking telephone. Get real.” I think it’s the same with photobooks. There’s no way the attributes of photobooks - their tactile characteristics, mechanics, poetic nature, etc - can be equalled on a computer screen, especially a tiny mobile device with a three-inch screen. There are some interesting ways media is evolving on bigger screens - desk/lap tops and iPads, etc - but I still think books win out every time.

CH: Do you think the resurgence in the popularity of film, and its tactile nature, has played a role in keeping physical prints and books alive?

BS: I think it goes hand in hand to some degree. These days, people spend so much of their lives in a digital world -- working, communicating, shopping, banking, etc -- that I think a part of us yearns for something tangible. To me, this explains why photographic film is resurging, as well as music on vinyl, photobooks, and other things analog. Digital tech has conquered a lot of our lives, but for some people, maintaining a relationship with physical objects has value.

CH: Is there any advice you can give to someone who is interested in publishing a long-term body of work in book form - For example, knowing when to draw a line in the sand and consider it ‘finished’ (if there is such a thing)?

BS: It’s important to keep in mind that great photos are what make great photobooks, so it’s crucial for photographers to put their energy into their body of work foremost. The photobook is the reward for the work after completion.

The question about when to consider a project finished was recently asked of me in the recent released Aperture book, Photo Work, edited by Sasha Wolf. I hope you won’t mind if I recycle that answer: “What’s the cliché? A work of art is never finished, only abandoned. With the kind of work I do, I could shoot forever, trying to improve the photos or tweak the edit or just fuck with things endlessly. But life is short, and at some point you have to say, ‘Ok, this is enough.’ If you feel the subject matter isn’t thoroughly explored after the completion of a project, then you can always go shoot the same kind of stuff in the future.”

CH: Do you have 3 book recommendations that helped shape you as a photographer, whether classics or more recent works.

BS: It’s so obvious, but The Americans by Robert Frank is the godfather of photobooks and sort of touches everything that comes after it, so it has shaped me without question. Truck Stop by Marc F Wise is a much lesser known book, but I came across early on and it helped to ignited my interest in everyday America and the subject matter I came to shoot. Laura McPhee’s River of No Return is a book I fell in love with early on as well, and it probably shaped my vision in untold ways in terms of its content and the sensitive, poetic way she conveys her subjects.

That said, I like these books because of the astonishing photos inside, not necessarily because of what the books are themselves as aesthetic objects. I think a new standard has been set in recent years in regard to design and physical characteristics of photobooks, so if I were to choose books that have shaped me as a publisher, it would be a different selection.

CH: Thanks for taking the time to speak with me, is there anything else you would like the readers to know about Trespasser?

BS: We don’t do a newsletter at this time or have much of an online presence outside Instagram, so that’s the best way to keep up with us, @trespasserbooks. 

See more of trespassers work here:https://www.instagram.com/trespasserbooks/

Bryan Shutmaat here: https://www.instagram.com/bryanschutmaat/?hl=en