#modern western media has lost its way

[ackermental]

I swear to God, if original SW trilogy came out today, Luke would make peace with the Emperor and surrender to the not so subtle allegory for nazis, because of "nobody wins in a war", "if you do this, the cycle of violence will never stop" bullshit.

[needanaccount2readarcaneposts]

every time i read a post about how, "silco kept fighting relentlessly for a free zaun because it's what fELiCiA wOuLd hAvE wAnTed," i add another name to my kill list (in minecraft).

we'll never fucking undo the damage s2 has done to his characterisation.

let people believe in things bigger than themselves without needing some secret twist reason. let people fight for something because they observed an injustice in the world and decided to fucking do something about it, without needing a personal motivation tied to a tragic dead friend/family member/lover/whatever.

it is one thing for s1 to acknowledge that, while silco was always a true believer, his trauma at vander's hands is responsible for informing his view on the need for unflinching ruthlessness; for excising weakness. but s2 is now vander-ifying silco and fandom is eating it right up; making him 'more sympathetic' by suggesting that his determination to keep fighting in the first place was in some way tied to a lost loved one. because in a liberal media framework that serves the interest of capital, it is dangerous to suggest that someone can be motivated by purely ideological reasons and still be sympathetic. can still be right to want what they want, or do what they do.

i'm gonna make Outlaw Kings & Rebellion Chic required reading for everyone, and have included more extracts under the cut, but in summary:

Violence that does not proceed from personal injury requires no such breakdown. This kind of primarily ideological violence can be directed against a perfectly functional system - functional, at least, for the perpetrator - simply because it appears the ‘just’ thing to do. No wonder, then, that in our mass media, the characters practising ideological violence are cast as morally unsound. If normality is not self-evident but a site of contention, then it problematises easy narratives of rebels vs tyrants. And if dispute over the political system is enough to justify force, then that implies violence against the modern Western state, even its violent overthrow, could be justifiable. This is understandably concerning for many writers, who tend to come from backgrounds closer to the Lannisters than the ‘smallfolk’.

If a person can commit violence simply because they believe it’s right, without any hidden ambition, then nothing stops us from acting to change the world.

Separately, there is in screenwriting a kind of uncodified rule: villains act, heroes react. The hero, according to traditional Hollywood structure, can’t fulfil their destiny until an extraordinary event drags them out of the world they know. More often than not, that event begins with the villain. Harry Potter is only the Chosen One because Lord Voldemort killed his parents. Luke Skywalker would have stayed on Tatooine dreaming of adventure, until Darth Vader’s attack on a rebel ship sends a secret message to his farm. Frodo would be safe and happy in Hobbiton if not for Sauron. Heroes rarely set out to change the world. Villains want change, and heroes run to keep up. [...] Many of these characters live with occupation, oppression, and state brutality as part of their daily lives, but they don’t turn to violent resistance until their families are directly threatened or killed. When heroes commit political violence, it must be to avenge a personal injury. This is supposed to be substantively different from political violence committed for ideological reasons, which receives a much less sympathetic treatment. [...] When we see violent characters who kill for primarily political reasons, they are often anti-heroes at best, outright villains at worst. The idea of the full circle revolution - of the secret dictator hiding in the throat of every rebel leader, waiting to leap out and betray the non-ideological hero - is utterly pervasive. It appears in videogames, where good old-fashioned all-American heroes like Jim Raynor of Starcraft or Booker DeWitt of Bioshock Infinite are betrayed by villainous revolutionaries Arcturus Mengsk and Daisy Fitzroy (and after all they’ve done for them!). It is common in films, from supervillains like Magneto and Killmonger, liberationists written as would-be conquerors, to the rebels of The Hunger Games, who vote to continue the games as soon as they’re in power, except with the children of the dethroned elite rather than the children of the poor. The same reversal is mentioned in A Song of Ice and Fire, where rebel slaves, once liberated, enslave their former masters; in the TV version, an evil fundamentalist visits the kind of cruelty on the King’s Landing nobility that they visited on others. In all these examples we see an echo of the primal fear of every oppressive class, the nightmare at the heart of modern white supremacy: what if someone did to us what we’ve done to them? Liberation is re-imagined as the world turned not so much upside-down but mirrored. [...]

Rensin attributes the hatred of the High Sparrow to his hypocrisy, but I don’t think that’s quite right. What is terrible about the High Sparrow is that he has no personal grievance. He didn’t see his father killed by the ‘good guys’, like Killmonger. His family weren’t murdered by his oppressors, like Magneto. By his own account the High Sparrow was a cobbler who became disillusioned, found religion, and now, thanks to the vagaries of a civil war among the elite, finds himself in a position to overturn the social order. The feudal system of Westeros never injured him personally. He simply came to believe it should be torn down, and acted accordingly.

We seem to find this faintly repellent. We are so used to looking for an ulterior motive that, when we can’t find one, we grow uncomfortable. If a good person can commit violence simply because they believe it’s right, without any hidden ambition, then nothing stops us from acting to change the world. [...] Violence that does not proceed from personal injury requires no such breakdown. This kind of primarily ideological violence can be directed against a perfectly functional system - functional, at least, for the perpetrator - simply because it appears the ‘just’ thing to do. No wonder, then, that in our mass media, the characters practising ideological violence are cast as morally unsound. If normality is not self-evident but a site of contention, then it problematises easy narratives of rebels vs tyrants. And if dispute over the political system is enough to justify force, then that implies violence against the modern Western state, even its violent overthrow, could be justifiable. This is understandably concerning for many writers, who tend to come from backgrounds closer to the Lannisters than the ‘smallfolk’.

[luxxsolaris]

The issues (and non-issues) of bimbocore

This little discussion is coming off the back of a thought (rant) I shared on another blog a few weeks ago, largely where reinvented bimbo started compared to where it is now and why is everyone blaming Chrissy Chlapecka?

the resurgence of the 'bimbo' aesthetic in the early 2020s embarked as a movement of reclamation, a way to assert that there was actually nothing demeaning about a barbie-esque appearance and to remove the power from stereotypes used against us, essentially centring the Bimbo in a queer, left-wing ideology.

If you were to ask a modern Bimbo why hot pink? Why bedazzled? Why perform this exaggerated caricature of femininity? You might end up in a seemingly unrelated discussion about the modern Western political landscape. Bimbo culture has essentially emerged upon the heels of the controversies surrounding feminine experiences and bodily autonomy across the United States- women feeling that they are being confined to a specific performance of femininity, that the government is regulating their femininity, may tell you that the idea of bimbo culture is a satirical backlash to the ideas of what a modern Western woman should be and what she is expected to be. She is nothing more than a doll to the culture that surrounds her and her response is to take what is expected of her and make it a performance a juxtaposition of what she is expected to be and what she is and make them hate her for the femininity she is presenting. And thats exactly what Lauren Pantin said in her short update newsletter - ' If you’re going to punish me for being a woman anyway, I’m going to be the silliest, brattiest, potty-mouthed no-no of a woman you’ve ever seen. I’ll be the dumbest bitch on earth! Where’s my crown!"

Ask another bimbo and she'll tell you that her bimboism stems from the movement to satirise consumerist culture and misogyny, aiming to remove the stigmas around hyper-femininity. Essentially, allowing women to empower themselves through their femininity (rather than the popular idea of in spite of their femininity cough cough inlog cough) and giving women ownership over their sexuality and their body in ways that actively combat the misogynistic standards held against them- oftentimes gearing it towards queer people. It's a new-wave feminist movement designed to avert the male gaze through women appearing as these caricatures of traditional femininity whilst emphasising their own dominance and independence as support for women's right movements.

So it's a kind of sartorial rebellion against oppressive politics and culture? Well, it was at first. And to many it still is, however, as with all trends rooted in a sartorial culture the meaning tends to get lost in the shares and reposts as it expands across social media. Those who just happen across the culture or see nothing but images of it scattered across the internet arent likely to understand that this aesthetic is also a political performance, it will become a bimbo resurgence!... but not effectively hold the same weight and meaning that the movement was intended to hold.

One way to look at this is the trend of " girl [activity]" . Trends like girl maths, girl dinner, explaining things to the girlies. Now let me get it straight theres nothing wrong in finding a little fun in these trends- girl dinner was cute, as someone who loves cooking I loved seeing what everyone was making for their dinner until it got overrun by the 'I only had iced coffee today' brigade. Sometimes I'll see a girl maths video about how if I pay in cash its basically free since the number on my bank account didn't change and I laugh because thats logic I have applied to purchases before. There's little funny things and behaviours that people will have in common, and they're being labelled as 'girl [blank]' because it is predominantly groups of women discussing them and finding a little fun in it. But again, as trends reach a wider audience their initial intention becomes lost along the way and generalisations start to set in. TV shows and radio hosts have entire segments explaining girl maths, it has become cute and quirky to explain political landscapes in terms of shopping and makeup, and bimbo culture has become less of a satirical performance and instead commonly assumed as a Karen Smith- esque personality reminiscent of the 'dumb blondes' of the early 2000s.

Removing this sartorial protest from its context can be seem as damaging, especially in the way that social media currently presents aesthetics surrounding sexuality to young people. As bimbo culture reaches a wider audience it's likely to fall into the hands of young people who are, let's face it, not going to care about the deeper meaning. Young people are likely to see celebrities, tiktok personalities, attractive people in general donning their hot pink promiscuous outfits and feel inclined to join in on what is presented to them as nothing more than the newest fashion trend.

One of the key movements of bimboisim is to embrace feminine sexuality and overcome the stigmas about women expressing their sex and sexuality and sartorially this is represented by the micro mini skirt and the skimpy shirt. Society has had no difficulty pushing teenage girls to grow up rather quickly by presenting them with teen magazines in the y2k era talking about how to get a bigger bust or butt, social media promoting the attractive body type the attractive face the attractive makeup the attractive style of clothing that will settle their pubescent insecurities and validate them in the eyes of a society run by men. Young women are ridiculed for their bodies not being developed enough at 15, for not being sexually active at 16, must have lived the life experiences of drugs and alcohol and sex and heartbreak at 17 and are then turned into high school girl fucks random guy porn at 18. Removed-bimboism has become part of the problem in which young girls not only feel the need to dress promiscuously and express a sexuality that they still haven't fully explored in order to feel validated as an active part of society but also have to present themselves as stupid in order to seem funny cute and quirky. The idea that women are only able to understand complex theories if they are presented in terms of fashion and shopping and makeup is a stereotype enforced by tv and movie comedy that women have worked endlessly to overcome, and the reclamation of bimbo culture should not actively counteract the progress of feminist activity. You don't have to be smart to be a modern bimbo by any means, in terms of intelligence the movement is centred around a more relaxed approach to success that counters the ideology of the girl boss movement- you don't HAVE to be a huge success or overwork yourself to hell and back to validate who you are as a woman.

Modern bimboism set out with the comfort of knowing there is no pressure to understand everything, you might need something explained in your own terms, you might just be a little fucking stupid sometimes but there is no active harm in not always understanding. That, however, has been twisted through these trends discussed prior to make it seem like all bimbos (and by misogynistic extension, all women) are just not as smart as men. Which, as we know, is likely to be emulated by young people as it reaches a wider audience.

So it's understandable why there is concern over bimboism. But at what point does critique of bimboism begin to drift into the right wing? Blaming women who dress provocatively simply for being women who dress provocatively is not the answer, in my opinion, to the issues with the bimbo culture. There is (to the chagrin of many) nothing wrong with an adult women expressing the ownership of the sexuality that she was granted the right to express through the liberation of women, sex and queerness.

Tensions have been rising within more radical groups, or groups who are of the tendency to reject feminine presentation in regard to what they perceive as an active threat to the reputation of women. There has been a desire expressed across social media sites by these women that 'all women' should refrain from direct expressions of femininity and reject all social norms expected of women under the assertion that it 'makes us all look bad'. There is a lot to be said about the ways in which misogyny utilises stereotypes and generalisations of what is considered 'feminine behaviour' to degrade women, however, it is highly pretentious and internally misogynistic a notion that the very idea of feminine expression is to be at fault. The ideology begins to attack individual women, expressing that their online content is to blame for the ways in which men treat women, or that children have become so oversexualised.

In a way this reflects the puritan standards of online censorship frequently weaponised by the right wing in order to oppress further marginalised groups. 'Think of the Children' has been used time and time again as a way to bastardise protests of queerness, of sexual liberation of racial equity and it is being weaponised now again just as it was across the 70s against women who dare to be 'immodest' . It goes without saying that people who create content online are not responsible for the actions of teenagers who in the midst of discovering their sexuality, may seek out more mature content- not just for sexual gratification, but a newfound interest into how adults express their sexuality as a way to help them navigate expression themselves. To place limits on how women are allowed to dress or express sexuality is to revert to the ideas of puritanism that existed prior to the (well, partial) liberation of the marginalised people.

Is bimbo culture perfect? No, it's been washed out as a mimicry of early 2000s internalised misogyny. Is it worth hating on random women? No, there issue is more centred to how misgyny is so deeply rooted in our society that we are happier to blame women for the stereotypes forced upon them than to actually comment on how society cultivates these ideas.

[golvio]

I’ve been digesting the video essay Orientalism & the Gerudo over the past couple of days. The first half of the video is a basic, consolidated summary of arguments I’ve seen people make about SWANA representation and Black representation regarding the Gerudo that also includes more academic sources to try to explain to newcomers or people unfamiliar with the term “Orientalism” where these points came from. I’m hoping this opens up some discussions across the wider fandom.

My only criticism is that, sometimes, the points can meander a bit between each other without clear boundaries between which talking point is which, leading to occasional moments of “Huh? How did we get here?” or “Wait, what about that other point you just made?” However, I think that’s a symptom of there being just so much to talk about regarding the broader umbrella topic that this video is trying to cover that it’s hard to know when/how to fit stuff in. You could make a whole essay about only how Arab men are depicted as aggressively misogynistic threats menacing Arab women to justify modern imperialist invasions of the Middle East by Western powers and how that ties in to the way Nintendo refuses to show Ganon having a more humanized, complex relationship with his own people. Even after a whole hour it feels like we’ve only just scratched the surface.

However, I also don’t think this “meandering” is necessarily negative because it sometimes ended up leading to great points that I hadn’t considered before. For example, I was initially confused about why the essay started focusing on Rauru and the plot of TotK after the halfway point, but it ended up not just being a useful example of how Japan reproduces Western tropes from pop cultural influences for fans who weren’t quite convinced about the essay’s arguments in the first half because they assumed Japan was in a cultural vacuum where racism doesn’t exist, but also gave me a totally new perspective about Rauru’s character beyond my initial Shintoist reading of his role as a divine ancestor that legitimized the royal family’s rule.

Rauru and Mineru’s designs and backstory borrow visual and literary tropes from depictions of indigenous peoples in American media to legitimize him as “indigenous to Hyrule” and therefore an important founding figure in its revised origin myth, but these tropes reproduced without awareness of their original cultural context also serve to “unperson” him as a character within the story. He’s sequestered into a distant past where he can’t really interact with characters in the present, not even truly “owning” the kingdom he founded, which instead passes to the Hylians, who coopted his legacy of unification for their own ends but completely forgot about him. He and his sister are treated more like “resources” for Link/the player to take advantage of to achieve their goals than characters in their own right. And, emotionally, the Zonai siblings are so distanced from the main cast and each other by being treated more like concepts of “nativeness” than people in their own right that their own descendant feels like a stranger visiting an exotic land instead of long-lost family reconnecting with her roots.

Like…it’s a really clever way to introduce two equally complex points that people should keep in mind when examining the Gerudo. First, that you can’t really treat Japan’s depictions as the exact same as Western depictions, because while Japan isn’t “the West,” it has its own complicated history with racism and imperialism born out of the “pan-Asian” nationalism of the early 20th century. At the same time, Japan doesn’t exist in a hermetically sealed cultural vacuum totally isolated from Western influences that makes Japanese creators incapable of learning about cultural nuances regarding racism, despite what fashy weebs personally invested in the myth of Japan being a magical exotic fairyland where “woke” doesn’t exist want you to believe.

I hope this video essay inspires other people to look into this topic further and maybe contribute their own works to the discussion.

[stillunusual]

Little pooty's big Polish tantrum…. On 21st July 2023, in a typically deranged rant, Muscovy's fascist dictator Vladimir Putin "reminded" Poland that its western territories were a "gift from Stalin" (among numerous other lies).

He began this particular outpouring of anti-Polish verbal vomit with some unsubstantiated claims that Poland was "hatching revanchist plans" to take territory from Ukraine and Belarus….

Claiming that Poland has ambitions to annex western Ukraine and Belarus, which before the Second World War (and for hundreds of years before the partitions of Poland) were part of the Polish state - and scaring the Russian population into believing that this could happen at any moment - has been a staple of the Kremlin's propaganda for a long time (and is frequently repeated by mindless vatniks and tankies all over social media). However, Russia has no evidence whatsoever to back up these baseless and nonsensical claims. It's true that Poland boosted security at the Polish-Belarusian border in July 2023, but this was in response to the arrival of Wagner Group mercenaries in Belarus, following their short-lived rebellion in Russia (after which their leader was killed in a mysterious plane crash, which I'm sure was a complete coincidence). Putin then went on to claim that Poland "took advantage" of the Russian civil war to "annex some historical Russian provinces"….

Not surprisingly, this was also lie. What actually happened is that after the First World War, newly independent Poland managed to reclaim some of the territory that was stolen by Prussia, Austria and Russia during the partitions of Poland at the end of the 18th century - and that included the aforementioned areas of Ukraine and Belarus, which were historically more Polish than Russian.

Much of what is now western Ukraine has been periodically incorporated into the Polish state ever since the beginning of the 11th century, at the time of the Kievan Rus. And the lands of present day Belarus and Ukraine were part of the Grand Duchy of Lithuania when it was united with Poland towards the end of the 14th century. The entire territory of modern Belarus and most of Ukraine remained as part of the Polish-Lithuanian state until the end of the 18th century. Eastern Ukraine was ceded to Russia in the second half of the 17th century and Russia subsequently stole most of the territory of the Polish-Lithuanian state at the end of the 18th century when it conspired with Prussia and Austria to wipe Poland off the map (just like Hitler and Stalin did 150 years later). As well as most of the lands of present day Poland, Russia acquired all of what is now Belarus and more of Ukraine. The area of western Ukraine that was re-claimed by Poland after the First World War became part of Austria and was therefore never in Russia - let alone a "historical Russian province".

Today's Russian propagandists like to claim that Belarus, Ukraine and Russia have always been one nation, but the reality is that although all three had common origins in the Kievan Rus, they subsequently underwent hundreds of years of separate development before Belarus and Ukraine were incorporated into the Russian empire and subjected to prolonged periods of forced russification.

After regaining its independence and defeating the Soviets in the Polish-Soviet war, Poland and the newly formed Soviet state ended up dividing Ukraine and Belarus between them. The Treaty of Riga, which was signed in 1921, defined Poland's eastern border about half way between where the Polish-Russian border had been prior to the partitions of Poland and where Poland's eastern border is today. Poland basically managed to reclaim some of what it had previously lost. The Soviets renounced their claims to all territory to the west of the new border, but nevertheless they invaded and occupied it two decades later in 1939. Putin then started hypocritically whining about "Polonisation" policies in eastern Poland during the 1920s and 1930s….

Kremlin propagandists like to use tensions between Poland, Ukraine and Belarus over this historical period to create division. Poland had emerged from over a century of foreign rule by the partitioning powers, during which Prussia and Russia had done their best destroy the Polish language, culture and identity in the territories they stole from Poland, by adopting policies of forced germanisation and russification. So it's not surprising that the new Polish government wanted to reassert Polish identity after decades of struggle to regain national independence, which inevitably led to conflicts with Poland's minority populations. However, interwar Poland, for all its faults, was a relatively liberal society compared to its tyrannical neighbours, Nazi Germany and the Soviet Union. Those Ukrainians and Belarusians who found themselves on the Polish side of the border with the USSR missed out on such delightful aspects of Soviet life as forced collectivisation, dekulakisation, the holodomor, the gulags, the Yezhovshchina (purges), the crippling poverty and backwardness, the brutal suppression of their religious and community life and the total lack of freedom. They may not have been overjoyed about living in Poland, but it was paradise in comparison.

Likewise, Poland's minorities were also much better off than, for example, Britain's colonial subjects all over the world and the USA's black and native American minorities. Putin then repeated his previous lies about Poland's "aggressive policy" in the interwar period causing the Second World War….

This is typical Kremlin historical revisionism, as well as being complete bullshit. In 1939, Hitler gifted eastern Poland to his ally Joseph Stalin in the secret protocols of the Molotov-Ribbentrop Pact, which was presented to the world as a simple non-aggression treaty, but was really a plan to carve up Europe between Germany and the USSR - involving the mutual invasion and partition of Poland, a free hand for Hitler to attack Western Europe and for Stalin to annex the Baltic states, Bessarabia and Northern Bukovina, and to attack Finland. The Molotov-Ribbentrop Pact led directly to the outbreak of the Second World War almost immediately after it was signed, and was also the first step in a continuum of collaboration between Nazi Germany and the Soviet Union that lasted for the next two years, until Hitler broke the pact by launching Operation Barbarossa in 1941. Putin also claimed that Poland's "independence and statehood was restored thanks to the Soviet Union"….

This was a bit of a stretch, to put it mildly.

The USSR's occupation of eastern Poland was accompanied by mass looting, rape and murder. This territory had a mixed ethnic and religious population (mainly Polish, Ukrainian, Belarusian and Jewish) which had existed for hundreds of years - until World War 2 - when Stalin and his collaborators killed or ethnically cleansed the Polish population (with a little help from Ukrainian fascists) and Hitler and his collaborators exterminated the Jews.

Between February 1940 and June 1941, Stalin deported hundreds of thousands of Polish citizens to Soviet camps, collective farms, exile villages and various outposts of the gulag system. In 1940 the NKVD carried out the Katyn massacre of 22,000 Polish army officers, police officers, university lecturers, teachers, doctors, lawyers, civic leaders, politicians, government officials, priests and other members of the “bourgeoisie”. Approximately 500,000 Polish citizens dubbed "enemies of the people" were also imprisoned without crime.

The imposition of Soviet rule was accompanied by a campaign of cultural genocide - monuments were destroyed, street names changed, libraries burned, bookshops closed and publishers shut down. The Soviet authorities replaced native teachers with Soviet teachers, introduced communist ideology into schools, forced pupils to learn Russian, limited instruction in Polish and banned the teaching of Polish history.

After the launch of Operation Barbarossa on 22nd June 1941, the NKVD executed thousands of prisoners en masse before running away from the invading Germans.

Nazi Germany's attack on the USSR initially went well, forcing a desperate Stalin to switch sides and join the alliance against Hitler, but the Soviets eventually prevailed (with a lot of help from the capitalist west) and drove the Germans all the way back to Berlin. However, in doing so they didn't restore Polish independence.

The USSR's re-occupation of Poland was accompanied by more looting, rape and murder (and this time the rapes were so extensive that they caused an epidemic of STDs). After the war Poland was trapped behind the iron curtain, subjected to a decade of Stalinist terror and a total of 45 years of Soviet-imposed communist rule. These were wasted years that left Poland bankrupt, destitute and decades behind the countries of western Europe by the time the Polish people were finally able to overthrow Moscow's puppet regime and restore their independence and statehood at the end of the 1980s. As for "reminding" Poland that its western territories were a "gift from Stalin"….

Putin seems to forget that Stalin gifted western Poland to his ally Adolf Hitler in the secret protocols of the Molotov-Ribbentrop pact, after which Nazi Germany invaded Poland from the west and the Soviet Union invaded Poland from the east, in September 1939.

What actually happened at the end of the Second World War is that Stalin turned Poland into a Soviet puppet state and redrew the borders between Germany, Poland and the USSR, incorporating eastern Polish lands (which he'd initially acquired as a result of the Molotov-Ribbentrop Pact) into the Soviet Union and a smaller area of eastern German lands into Poland, as "compensation". Almost the entire German population of what was now western Poland was then ethnically cleansed and sent to the newly formed Soviet puppet state of East Germany, after which the remaining Polish population living to the east of Poland's new border with the USSR was ethnically cleansed and sent to replace the departed Germans in the west. Apparently, being kicked out of your home after your country has been stolen, and then being forced to go and live in a destroyed and depopulated wasteland hundreds of miles away, is a "gift".

There's a reason why Poland and other countries that Russia invaded and plundered over the centuries, and were also invaded and plundered by the USSR during the Second World War (after which they were forced to live under Soviet occupation for the next half century), rushed to join NATO as soon as they could after overthrowing Soviet rule. It's because ever since the collapse of the USSR, Russia has repeatedly shown that it doesn't respect their right to exist, and it's clear that there can be no long term peace and stability in Europe while Russia still threatens its neighbours and harbours imperialistic ambitions to restore its former empire.

NATO is the main obstacle that prevents Russia from achieving this goal.

NATO poses no threat to Russia's internationally recognised borders, but it does - quite rightly - stand in the way of Russia's desire to expand them.

[mariacallous]

From September 1, Russian college students will be required to take a state-approved ideological course, “Fundamentals of Russian Statehood.” Course creators have made films to serve as a guide — intended as an easy way to prepare students for seminars and tests on the material. In the new videos, students are told about “Russia in the World and in the Modern World System” “The Backbone of the Nation: The Russian Constitution,” and “Self-Sacrifice for the People.”

A ‘reliable partner’ against Western domination

The “World System” film begins by reminding the audience that Russia “unites Europe and Asia, facilitates the interaction of various cultures, and tries to preserve a multipolar and just world.”

Students learn that after World War II, the international order became “based on a new balance of power,” dominated by the USSR and the United States, which “in terms of the totality of their military, political, and ideological capabilities, as well as their potential for cultural influence, rapidly surpassed other countries.” The “cultural influence” of the U.S. is illustrated on the screen by shots of sex shops — that of the USSR by footage of Soviet ballet.

The film does admit that the Cold War order “was not ideal,” but emphasizes that it “allowed peace to be preserved and the use of nuclear weapons to be avoided” (naturally, there is no mention of the Cuban Missile Crisis, when the world was on the brink of nuclear war).

Following the lead of Vladimir Putin, the video proclaims the collapse of the USSR “the biggest geopolitical catastrophe,” not only for the people of the country itself but also for the entire world, which lost its “balance and collapsed.” “Russia is still the largest country in the world, but its geopolitical influence has significantly decreased. The West interpreted the collapse of the USSR as a victory in the Cold War. This allowed the U.S. to return to the idea of world domination.”

The film also lays out “rules” by which the U.S. is allegedly trying to “build the world”:

The access-to-technology rule: "By allowing or not allowing a particular technology to be sold to a country, the U.S. determines who will be an unskilled worker and who will be a banker."

The dollar rule: "Wherever you live, you have to exchange your national currency for dollars to buy goods around the world. Every time, you pay a commission."

The Hollywood rule: "Movies shape behavior, slip in values, and create certain images, archetypes, and frameworks."

The international-media rule: "The international media determines which places are good and which are evil."

The U.S. Navy rule: "If the international media declares you a villain, the U.S. Navy machine will be used against you."

Shortly after that, the screen shows footage of protests in the former Soviet Union with a large inscription in capital letters: “U.S. INTERVENTION IS ALWAYS NEGATIVE.”

However, the film immediately reassures viewers that Russia has “destroyed U.S. plans to create a unipolar world” and prevented the States from “turning into a world dictator.” This, apparently, is thanks to “the strengthening of Russia’s position in the international arena and the growth of its military-political and economic potential.” How exactly Russia “destroyed the plans” of the United States and how much Russia’s “potential has grown” remain unspecified.

The video “study guide” also makes mention of Russia’s invasion of Ukraine, calling it “measures to protect [Russia’s] vital interests with regards to Ukraine,” which Western countries then supposedly used as a “pretext for escalating longstanding anti-Russian policy” and “unleashing hybrid warfare against Russia.”

Freshmen will be told that these “measures to protect vital interests” are part of Russia's “mission” to “preserve stability in the world.” The country has already won a “number of geopolitical victories,” related to this, the film emphasizes — particularly, by engaging in open military conflict with Georgia and occupying Ukrainian territories, the annexation of which is referred to as “the return of territories lost during the collapse of the USSR.”

“Countries in Africa, Asia, and Latin America perceive Russia as a reliable partner and a natural ally in the fight against Western neocolonialism. A growing number of countries seek cooperation with Russia,” asserts the video’s narrator.

A 'progressive' constitution

The Russian Constitution gets a whole “guide” to itself, where viewers are immediately informed that it guarantees “the absence of chaos and the preservation of unity,” and that every update to the Constitution (such as amendments) only makes it “more socially oriented” and “progressive.”

Stalin’s 1936 Constitution gave the USSR, among other things, “universally fair, direct, and secret-ballot elections” and “free religion.” The video makes no mention of Stalin’s Great Purge (including against clergy and believers).

The terms of Russia’s 1993 Constitution, however, are referred to as “colonial.” To footage of the first Russian president Boris Yeltsin’s speech saying the constitution provides “solid foundations for the construction of a democratic state,” the voiceover categorically states that “in fact, the firm foundations turned out to be a reflection of Western elites’ expectations toward Russia," adding that in the early 1990s, the country “had to give up some sovereignty in exchange” for funding reforms. “Now this situation has been overcome,” the voice reassures the viewer.

Heroism as Russia’s 'historical code'

The video devoted to “self-sacrifice,” supposedly one of the key Russian traits, will tell students about WWII soldiers who stopped enemy troops at the cost of their own lives, as well as about medical staff who worked in hospital red zones during the Covid pandemic. Denis Protsenko, a head physician who was one of the top five United Russia candidates in the 2021 Russian State Duma election yet turned down a position, gets special recognition.

The film offers no detailed accounts of Russians’ actions in the war against Ukraine. There is, however, a main conclusion, summarized as such: “Heroism, fearlessness before the last battle for the future of the country, lives in each of us. This is our nation’s historical code. And we will not allow anyone to erase or break it.”

[thevisibilityarchives]

Dune: Part Two (2024), Denis Villeneuve

BIPOC

Dune: Part Two and the Discussion of MENA Representation

Review Link: https://www.rottentomatoes.com/profiles/ratings/WYdFQDHR9tGJf9wiWXh8ZFR8iGGCaLHwBhawIZ0ubbCexiapiJVTWOFeeCzdIpjhmXFp4u11CYNTl4fOPSWQfkWC6bIb6SyBFVXfO4TZzc4m/movie

Following its much-anticipated release, the long-awaited second installation of Denis Villeneuve’s Dune adaptation has proven itself a sci-fi spectacle that must be experienced to be believed. 

It’s an outrageous combination of awe-inspiring cinematography, adept writing, and the talents of an all-star cast topped off by a score by veteran composer Hans Zimmer. The result: a feast for the senses that presents the stark realization that films on a scale this epic only come around once or twice a generation.

For those unfamiliar with the source material, the full extent of how truly epic this is may be lost. Part of the beauty of Dune is that Villeneuve simplified the story in such a way that it can be understood by moviegoers with no connection whatsoever to author Frank Herbert’s novel, or ever-having-seen the adaptations by David Lynch or SyFy (f/k/a Sci Fi). Within this simplification, the story of Dune doesn’t become reductive, nor are essential plot points lost. Like all adaptations, there are components lost, however even compared to Peter Jackson’s Lord of the Rings it can be argued that fewer creative liberties have been taken, and the ones that have been are worthy of discussion. 

Some of these changes are adaptations inherent to the modernization of source material written by a white man in the 1960s. While science fiction has arguably been a haven for progressive ideas, it still faces the limitations of the author's society and the popular sentiments of their time. 

Environmentalism, non-traditional relationships, the loss of innocence, and the power of femininity are all topics brought to life by Frank Herbert in his original novel–adeptly at times, sloppily in others. Decades later, Villeneuve irons out some of the flaws: the white savior narrative, the depiction of women, and the dreadful attempts to depict witch children.

These changes along with the skillful dedication to a remarkable piece of science fiction create what will undoubtedly be looked upon as a classic in due time, yet has been met with some degree of controversy for its depiction���or lack thereof of one group. 

Created in their image, the Fremen were shaped after those of the Middle East and North Africa (MENA), with the Islamic faith making up aspects of their religion and the Middle East serving as the very essence of Arrakis. Yet in casting, MENA actors were notably absent from these roles, and the focus on much of the Fremen culture was notably absent, leaving many to question why.

Dune’s Roots in the Middle East

Written in 1965, Dune is considered one of the most remarkable science-fiction books of all time. Part of this significance is because, in 1965, it was a book that attained popularity while being so fervently against the cliches present in normal bestsellers: moral absolutes, Eurocentrism, and Western imperialism. 

For over a decade, we have now come to cherish and normalize media that centers around morally gray and ambiguous characters. We actively seek out things that de-center white, straight, and cisgender narratives. Yet in 1965, a world wherein the United States had barely de-segregated, homosexuality was outlawed across most of the world, and Christian colonialism efforts still ran rampant across many nations? A book challenging the status quo was impactful. 

The representation of MENA culture is intrinsic to everything that Dune is, from its language to its scenery to the music present in Villeneuve’s adaptations. Set primarily on the desert world of Arrakis, Herbert based the topography of the planet on regions of the Pacific Northwestern United States, yet its allegorical implications are clear. 

Arrakis is home to melange or “spice”, a heavily-coveted resource that grants extended longevity, bestows metaphysical abilities, and fuels interstellar travel. The latter is perhaps the most commercially beneficial of the three, and drives colonization of Arrakis, as well as the oppression and subsequent eradication of its Indigenous peoples.  

Within his writing, Herbert created a clear mirror of our own world: a desert region, plagued by war, aggression, and despoilment of the environment all for the sake of natural resources. In our own world, that resource is oil, and our Arrakis is the Middle East. 

Arriving just as environmental advocacy began to take off in the 1970s, The History Channel states “Many environmentalists interpreted Dune as a critique of the oil industry, with Herbert’s friend Willis E. McNelly writing that the empire’s reliance on spice can “be construed as a thinly veiled allegory of our world’s insatiable appetite for oil and other petroleum products” (Greenspan 2024). Perhaps more salient are the linguistics of Dune, which are directly composed of Arabic words. Throughout the book, both the Fremen, the Indigenous peoples of Arrakis as well as other factions of the world are described using Arabic language. Manvar Singh writes:

“The language with the greatest influence in “Dune” is Arabic. In the novel, the Fremen use at least eighty terms with clear Arabic origins, many of them tied to Islam. The Fremen follow istislah (“natural law”) and ilm (“theology”). They respect karama (“miracle”) and ijaz (“prophecy”), and are attentive to ayat (“signs”) and burhan (“proof”) of life. They quote the Kitab al-Ibar, or “Book of Lessons,” an allusion to the encyclopedia of world history penned by the fourteenth-century Arab historian Ibn Khaldun. Central characters are dignified with Arabic names. The colossal sandworms are called shai-hulud (“thing of eternity”). Paul Atreides’s sister is Alia (“exalted”). Paul himself is known as Muad’Dib, an epithet that resembles the Arabic word for teacher (mu’addib), and he is fabled to be the Lisan al-Gaib, translated in the book as “Voice of the Outer World” but which, in modern Arabic, means something closer to “Tongue of the Unseen.”

Then of course comes the music, composed by industry titan Hans Zimmer who broke his longstanding alliance with director Christopher Nolan to focus on Dune and Dune: Part Two. In creating his score, Zimmer explored a full range of instruments in a way he claimed he had not since scoring The Lion King. Utilizing vocalists, an array of culturally diverse instruments, and spending ample time listening to the sounds of the desert, he synthesized the music together to intentionally create a soundtrack intended to mimic the experience of a spice-induced trip in a desert sandstorm, embraced by the energy of the divine feminine. 

An Absence of MENA

With the depth of these roots in Middle Eastern culture, it would stand to reason that Dune would feature a sizeable cast. In addition to the Arabic language, Fremen religion heavily mirrors Islam, and while there are certainly Caucasian converts–we are focusing on a war for Arrakis and its Indigenous peoples.

Upon first glance at the Fremen in the first installation of Dune, we see a spattering of brown and black faces. Most notable are actress Zendaya who is biracial, and Javier Bardem, who is Spanish. Further introduction to the rest of the Fremen reveals similar casting choices among billed actors. 

It’s straightforward: “Despite the film's obvious inspirations, there are no leading actors of Middle Eastern or North African heritage.” (Shah, 2024) 

And why does this matter? When we beg the question of the difference between appropriation and appreciation, the deliberation includes questions about participation. Without the participation of the cultures involved, representation warps into fetishization at best, and appropriation at worst. 

Dune is a tale that warns us about the harms of colonialism, environmental despoilment, and religious extremism. Villeneuve’s version takes care to approach the topic of colonialism with extra caution, approaching painting the Fremen not as a singular unit that can easily be converted by the right white savior, but as a multitude of people with different beliefs. Some fundamentalists believe deeply in their faith and follow the direction of Paul and the prophecy instilled (falsely) by the Bene Gessirit. Then there are the detractors like Chani who have seen attempts at colonialism before, and who shy away from religion for that exact region. They reject Paul’s so-called place as the Chosen One–and any outsider who should lead them. 

To make these changes shows consideration on Villeneuve’s part. To fail to recognize the importance of casting actors of Middle Eastern and North African descent in a story directly inspired by a culture based on the Middle East and North Africa shows a distinct lack of it. 

A New Decade of MENA Representation

So, why such a prolific absence of MENA representation when it would truly make an impact? We need to examine two factors 1.) the overall distancing from Islamic culture within Villeneuve’s adaptation, and 2.) how filmmaking in a post 9/11 world has changed the representation of Islamic characters. 

As an adaptation of Herbert’s novel, Villeneuve takes the traditional liberties with the source material that a director is known for in bringing a book to the big screen. The core tenants remain, and many of the most important phrases and elements are retained. Yet to make the adaptation accessible to audiences unfamiliar with previous adaptations or the book it has been simplified. 

This simplification allows Villeneuve to pour energy into enhancing other aspects of the film. He drastically expands upon the female characters within the film, giving them purpose outside of appeasing Paul, bewitching men, or narrating his life.

With adaptation comes a loss of the “finer details”. In addition to the distinct lack of MENA actors, there is a drastic reduction in the language, and of course, scenes depicting Fremen's way of life and culture. These include rites of inheritance, polygyny (not to be confused with polyamory), and the decidedly not-Islamic-inspired ritual orgy that occurs following Jessica’s confirmation as the new Mother Superior of the tribe. 

These departures (the orgy notwithstanding, undoubtedly shed without a thought to maintain the film's PG-13 rating) are but a few of the cultural aspects sanitized from a story showcasing Arabic inspiration. Though it’s impossible to diminish it completely. Looking back through Villeneuve’s background, we can speculate on his reasons for this and perhaps consider whether it was done with intent. 

Following the September 11th attacks, Hollywood faced years of missteps in the representation of MENA characters onscreen, who were then stereotyped in the roles of jihadists, an imminent threat to the West for years to come. It didn’t matter whether the film took place in the past or present, the ideals were functionally the same. 

A notable example is Zack Snyder’s 300, adapted from Frank Miller’s graphic novel of the same name. Published in 1998, Snyder brought the film to life in 2006, where it received mixed critical reviews, and uproar internationally for its depiction of Iranians in the Spartan and Persian Battle at Thermopylae.

Brazilian actor Rodrigo Santoro portrays the antagonist King Xerxes as an effeminate gold-painted and pompous self-proclaimed God-king who seeks to drive forward a kingdom of sexual slavery. Leonidus, portrayed by Gerard Butler and his 300 men stand fierce to beat back Xerxes' soldiers and defend the good people of Sparta from slavery, the injustice of war, and the bleakness of what Xerxes promises. 

Yet the historical inaccuracy is ripe, and rewritten to appeal to Western notions of glory and sentiment. Historian Gary Leupp of Tufts challenged the film, explaining” In short: 300's depiction of the battle of Thermopylae is not merely inaccurate, as any film adaptation of a graphic novel has the perfect right to be. It's what the Iranians say it is: racist and insulting. It pits the glorious Greeks with whom the audience must sympathize against a "mystical" and "tyrannical" culture posing an imminent existential threat. It is, de facto, an anti-Persian/anti-Iranian propaganda film” (2007). In his statement, he explicitly breaks down the inaccuracies regarding the history of Xerxes and Persia versus the representation seen onscreen, which can be found in the citations link below. 

300 was but one example on the big screen. The late ‘00s/early ‘10s was the period of high-stakes television and as well. Shows like Homeland brought A-list performers like Claire Danes onscreen and normalized Islamophobia. Numerous forms of media following the attacks have depicted Muslims as “extremists, barbaric, insidious, and untrustworthy”. 

What many of us forget about is the very simple passage of time and the birth of new generations. Within a few short years, Gen Z has arisen, all but forgetting the pain and anxiety born of the September 11th attacks and seemingly everything that came with it–after all, none of them can even remember the day. 

In addition to that they are a generation born amidst an era of rapid information cycling and trend generation, and place an importance on publicly presenting their morality on their sleeve. All of this combined means the lessons, hardships, and mistakes of the past–can be forgotten quicker than we can imagine, and expectations to adhere to newly defined ideals of what is politically correct are defined seemingly overnight. 

It can be hard to keep up with. Especially if one is still concerned with the trials that seemed so important–and still are–ten years ago. Given the thought Villeneuve put into expanding upon aspects of Dune, it is difficult to imagine he didn’t put thought into how issues of problematic representation of MENA could arise. 

Ali-Karjoo Ravary writing for Al Jazeera pointed out during the release of the first installation of the film that the brand marketing changed up some of the wording of the film, stating “a crusade is coming” which marked an intentional difference from the book’s statement of “a jihad is coming”. Wording matters, as “Herbert’s nuanced understanding of jihad shows in his narrative. He did not aim to present jihad as simply a “bad” or “good” thing. Instead, he uses it to show how the messianic impulse, together with the apocalyptic violence that sometimes accompanies it, changes the world in uncontrollable and unpredictable ways.” (2020)

Of course, Herbert’s interpretation is an empathetic view and not one shared by many people with biases against those who pray to any god without white skin. While he tries, Paul ultimately succumbs to his will and manipulates the Fremen into following his aims to declare war on the galaxy. As the Fremen are proven to be some of the most formidable fighters we have seen and Paul’s manipulations are aided thanks to religious seeds planted by his mother’s order, this becomes a jihad in every way. He is the prophet. They are his holy avengers.

To cast MENA actors in these roles would once again fill slots of extreme religious fundamentalists, and this time, ones following a white man–no matter how nuanced the film has been made. Granted, as actors, they have a choice. Choosing representation is better than having none, however, if they had the conversation would likely then become “Dune: Part Two is a stereotype of MENA actors”. 

Is there a middle ground? There is of course, and this is where we notice the overt failure of casting directors in Hollywood. Following the criticism of the first film, Part Two touted its hiring of Swiss actress Souheila Yacoub who is of Tunisian descent. She played the role of one of the Northern Fremen, who stand against Paul’s attempts to co-opt their culture. Yet from the beginning, why not more featured characters? Why not Stilgar, Chani, Jamis, or even a surprise role similar to the one Anya-Taylor Joy played? 

While post-9/11 Islamophobia may have ebbed before the War on Gaza, we’ve entered a time where even the Hollywood excuse for “star power” fails when we remember the global world we now live in. Whether they are stars in their land or Americans with parents or religious heritage, there’s little to no excuse for the continued erasure and diminishment of culture onscreen–and in time Hollywood will come to know it. 

Citations: https://www.rottentomatoes.com/profiles/ratings/WYdFQDHR9tGJf9wiWXh8ZFR8iGGCaLHwBhawIZ0ubbCexiapiJVTWOFeeCzdIpjhmXFp4u11CYNTl4fOPSWQfkWC6bIb6SyBFVXfO4TZzc4m/movie

1. Maxwell D. Post-colonial Christianity in Africa. In: McLeod H, ed. The Cambridge History of Christianity. Cambridge History of Christianity. Cambridge University Press; 2006:401-421.

[robotlyra]

I saw your post about how the characters in Trigun were basically reduced to tropeified versions of themselves in Trigun Stampede, and it just made me think of something that’s been rattling around in my brain since it first started airing; it seems as though with reworking different elements for TriStamp, almost every effort was taken to conform it to generic anime tropes as possible to make it more digestible to a modern anime audience, using whatever’s popular among the mainstream anime scene right now. Which is especially feasible since in its first run Trigun flopped in Japan but became a cult hit in the west.

The reduction of the Christian symbolism and the spaghetti western aesthetic to go for a much more sci-fi angle, the “generification” if you will, of the characters and their dynamics like making Vash a stock sad softboi protagonist, Wolfwood a typical edgy tsundere, Meryl the token cutesy uwu waifu whose main job is to look cute and fawn over the protagonist like a schoolgirl (despite being, what, 23? barf), Knives being a yandere obsessed with his brother, Elendira being turned into one of the worst anime tropes in existence, turning Rem into the classic dead mom trope, etc etc…

It all feels like it deliberately panders to whatever Studio Orange must feel like modern anime audiences are looking for, especially when it comes to the shipping side, with Vash and Wolfwood’s dynamic being reduced to a teenage Yaoi shippers bad fanfic(honestly, that scene where Vash makes goo-goo eyes at Wolfwood is a textbook yaoi fanfic scene), and whatever is going on with Vash and Knives. It’s no coincidence that the amount incest fanart of Vash and Knives has skyrocketed since TriStamp premiered.

To me it also speaks to a larger issue e in anime; homogeny. Many mainstream anime in the modern anime scene are becoming increasingly bland and samey while unique, nuanced stories are either being swept under the rug or becoming sleeper hits and relegated to the “underrated” category because they aaren’t as hyped up as more mainstream fare.

It ultimately makes me sad because Trigun and everything that makes it unique among anime combined with Orange’s animation could have made for something truly unique among the anime scene, but every effort was made to homogenise it and water it down to the point where it feels like just another sci-fi anime.

Yeah, Trigun Stampede very much feels like "We're going to remake this so it's a POPULAR anime" and the fact that large groups of people are so defensive of it kind of speaks to how successful it was at that task. Part of me doesn't want to be TOO antagonistic towards it, cuz after years of watching anime dancing non-comittally around "should we REALLY care about fangirls as an audience," every piece of media that DOES go hard in for "yeah we're going to give them exactly what they want" feels like a long-in-coming feast. But at the same time, even though I do enjoy shipping characters in Trigun, making them into flattened, tropey versions of themselves to do it feels way less enjoyable. The biggest tell for me was how many instances of fanart I saw comparing Tristamp Wolfwood's threats towards Vash to the scene in Princess Mononoke where San threatens Ashitaka but all he can do is call her beautiful. That a more nuanced Vashwood ship of differing philosophies but steadfast friendship turning into a romance just gets turned into a standard tsundere/taming of the shrew type pairing feels like something was lost in the quest for an easier, more popular shipping dynamic.

[website-com]

heres my thing i wrote specifically because my teacher wrote a huge paragraph about this exhibition on historical mens fashion (sorry to link a vogue article, i do so only for the photo i need) specifically the following photo;

in which she discussed the dress on the left at LENGTH, around 200 or so words at least, talking about how revolutionary it was for harry styles to wear this dress on vogue. not mentioning ONCE even in passing the dress on the right worn by billie porter a full year prior that kicked up its own media frenzy a year prior.

this pissed me off to no end so i submitted the following for one of my module essays, sorry some of the citations are so lame and there are so few they had to be from coursework. and sorry i couldnt discuss more i only had 500 words give or take

skip the first two paragraphs if you only want to see the rant.

Module 2

2.2 How has masculine dress changed throughout history?

A great quote to describe the history of western masculine fashion ideals comes from a symposium by Dr. Valerie Steele on the colour pink and its history, when she discussed how the colour officially became feminine in the west she said; “The reason pink became feminised, that colour became feminized, was that it left the masculine wardrobe.” (1:23- 1:30). This quote quickly encapsules a reoccurring trend in attitude toward fashion trends that is repeated throughout history in regard to what clothing is considered to be ‘masculine’. The item is masculine until it is considered feminine. 

Another example of this rule of this given in the High Heels, Wigs, and Beauty lecture is the feminine appearance of a heel or a high boot. Both of these attributes originally were associated with masculinity because they were practical (as most modern masculine fashion is, anything impractical is feminine), their length protected the leg and the heel could be used to anchor a horse rider’s foot to the stirrup, giving them better control. As well as aesthetic achievements of the heel increasing the wearers height, a masculine ideal.

Women originally adopted heels into their wardrobe to add masculinity to their style, and once they started to do so it was observed that the heel could serve to enhance the appearance of the wearer’s legs and rear end the style was quickly sexualised and lost all staying power in the masculine wardrobe. While there are ways for men to dress in an erotically evocative style the heel became synonymous with a sensual sexuality, that is not compatible with a strong masculine sexual energy. And as a result, heels left the masculine wardrobe in the west. 

The fashion cycle has been trending more androgynous for quite some time now, and with the revitalised memory of historical queer, androgynous male icons such as Prince and David Bowie coming back into the public conscious with their deaths, as a contrast to the heavy heterosexual masculinity of the early 2000’s, androgynous male fashion is coming back into style. Coming off of the backs of black, queer American men such as the dress displayed at the end of the LACMA’s collection Reigning men, worn by black, gay, androgynous champion and icon Billy Porter to a 2019 red carpet event, who has worn many dresses to events before and since. That same exhibition also highlights how feminine fashions have even been adopted by white cishet men such as Harry Styles on the cover of Vouge, which at the time kicked up a huge media frenzy. Him being an excellent contrast to Billy Porter, who dresses the way he does as a product of his pride in his identity, as Harry Styles, as an ex-boyband member, is someone happy to mold himself to fit whatever aesthetic is most marketable, even if to outsiders his choice is a perceived risk the amount of backing he received from his core audience is undeniable evidence in the shift on public opinions of masculinity that have been built by queer people for the past few decades. 

But ultimately, as is often the case, he reaped all the benefits and cultural relevance from left leaning media built off of a history of androgyny built and fought for by queer black people while their efforts are quietly forgotten. While his iconic cover is an example of a shift in public opinion, attaching him to the head of the movement is wholly attributed to the wrong source.

Steele, Valerie (19 Oct, 2018) “Pink: The history of a Color” The museum at FIT www.YouTube.com. Last Accessed 24/10/2022

King, Emerald (2022) “High Heels, Wigs and Beauty” HAF234, Masculinities, University of Tasmania, Tasmania

https://www.lacma.org/art/exhibition/reigning-men-fashion-menswear-1715-2015 2016, Los Angeles County Museum of Art, 5905 Wilshire Blvd, Los Angeles, CA 90036

i recommend the pink: history of color video, its very fun and interesting.

given more time and space i wouldve explored the neutralisation of mens bodies and fashion and the power this holds, the relationships race and sexuality play and butchness in non-men i think. my other 3 essays all included butch and stud women though so dont be sad. the rant also left no room for a conclusion but this was not an essay it was a short response, feel free to look up my lecturer whos name is included in my citations to see her cosplay which she advertised in every class she taught. also feel free to notice that she only cosplays japanese characters in traditional edo or earlier clothing. i think thats weird for no reason other than i do not like her

[orwoshop]

How ORWO Shop is Reviving Classic Film Techniques for Modern Photographers

ORWO Shop is at the forefront of the revival of classic film techniques that appeal to both veterans and newcomers. ORWO Film Shop offers a carefully selected range of high-quality films and expert guidance, allowing photographers to explore traditional methods such as darkroom development and manual exposure settings. This blog post peels into the ways these ageless techniques are reemerging today in modern photography, really bringing a personal connection to the profession and encouraging creative freedom in fast-paced digital realms.

This shop originally known as Original Wolfen, has its history etched since early 20th century. Founded in 1909 in Wolfen, Germany, as a subsidiary of the AGFA film company, ORWO has been one of the leaders in the film business for over a century. It became prominent during the post-war period, especially in East Germany, when it started producing quality black and white films at cheaper rates than its Western competitors like Kodak and Ilford. This historical context enriches the story of modern revival efforts.

 ORWO Shop stocks a wide variety of photo films suitable for professional and amateur photographers. Among its most outstanding products is black and white films with different ISO ratings. Such film gives photographers the chance to play with different exposures and grain textures. The NP-7 and NP-55 films are especially praised for their individual characteristics. Photographers using these films often describe their experience as a journey filled with surprises—each roll yields distinct results that reflect the unpredictable nature of analog photography. 

One of the most compelling aspects of shooting with photographic films is its ability to evoke emotion through imagery. In an age dominated by digital perfection, many photographers are drawn to the imperfections inherent in film. The graininess, contrast, and color rendition of films create a sense of nostalgia and authenticity that resonates deeply with viewers. This emotional connection is something digital photography often struggles to replicate. By choosing ORWO, photographers tap into a tradition that values artistic expression over technical precision.

Moreover, this commitment to innovation complements its rich heritage. Color cine films, based on the legendary Agfa stocks, are used in some of the best films, such as "Out of Africa." This synergy between old and new allows for innovation on the part of the photographer while remaining faithful to older techniques. With so much interest already being exhibited among enthusiasts for preorders on these new products, there can be no doubt that this is the shop that will dominate the field of contemporary photography. 

This Shop also restores old film techniques in line with a greater movement of creatives seeking a way out of digital media. More artists are adopting analog ways and, in doing so, becoming part of a community that believes in the value of handcrafted and individual work. Film photography instills patience and intentionality; qualities sometimes lost in the digital world of snapping on the fly. By engaging with these products, photographers not only master their craft but also take part in a larger movement that respects the artistry behind every shot.

Amateur photographers shoot films and share their stories through social media, creating an atmosphere of excitement around photography that captures unique moments. Social networks often play the role of virtual exhibitions: they are a place for posting photos, discussing with each other how to get something in the development process right, and talking about difficulties shooting with film. This way, both experienced professionals and newbies can enjoy photography much more.

As ORWO continually diversifies and innovates more about film photography, so has it extended an invitation to present generations of photographers to rediscover its magic with analog techniques? Its approach, whereby the touching nature of the film has mixed with anticipation in the process of developing rolls in a darkroom, cannot be created using digital photography. All snaps are intended acts accompanied with creativity and passion, being taken out of the clicking buttons.

In conclusion, ORWO Shop is not only reviving classic film techniques but is also reinvigorating an entire culture around analog photography for modern creators. With high-quality products steeped in history yet embracing contemporary innovations, ORWO gives photographers tools that inspire creativity and foster connection. As more people turn away from digital dominance in search of authenticity, ORWO stands ready to support them on this artistic journey—one roll at a time.

[sa7abnews]

Washington’s web of lies is backfiring over Venezuela

New Post has been published on https://sa7ab.info/2024/08/16/washingtons-web-of-lies-is-backfiring-over-venezuela/

Washington’s web of lies is backfiring over Venezuela

Even if Maduro stole the election, no one would believe the US anyway

The 2024 presidential election in Venezuela, held on July 28, has stirred international concern – much like the preceding elections in the Caribbean state. A clear divide has emerged, with the United States and its allies supporting the opposition, while countries in the emerging multipolar world order are backing President Nicolas Maduro. In much the same way that the US and its allies have disputed the legitimacy of Maduro’s presidency since the 2018 election, spurring an artificial “presidential crisis” with former opposition leader Juan Guaido recognized by Washington as the “legitimate” president, the West is doing this again with former diplomat Edmundo Gonzalez. The opposition has released copies of official tally sheets collected by poll watchers from most of the nation’s polling centers. The sheets show an apparent landslide victory of 80% for Gonzalez, a claim that is now being widely circulated and amplified by the Western press. Meanwhile, the results released by the National Electoral Council showed a narrow victory for Maduro with 52%, resulting in opposition protests. The Venezuelan government has criminalized such demonstrations and moved to stamp down opposition leaders.

Read more

US recognizes Venezuelan election runner-up as winner

Given the state of the Venezuelan economy and widespread poverty, it is not outside the realm of basic reason that Maduro could have actually lost. Researchers, including Steve Levitsky, an expert on democracy at Harvard University, have also noted how improbable the official results are. He told the New York Times that this recent vote is “one of the most egregious electoral frauds in modern Latin American history.” But others disagree. Denis Rogatyuk, a reporter with El Ciudadano who covered the election for the independent media platform, told RT: “The days preceding the election showed a monumental advantage that Nicolas Maduro and the PSUV had over the opposition in terms of manpower and the sheer strength of its electoral mobilization.” “The closing rallies for President Maduro drew in crowds six to seven times larger than those of Gonzalez and Machado. And the second bulletin released by the CNE on August 2nd, showing 6,408,844 votes for Maduro, aligns perfectly with this notion, and the fact that the combined membership of the PSUV and its allied parties is just over 6 million as well,” he concluded.  However, the more interesting dynamic with regard to the situation in Venezuela is the fact that the US is failing to garner the requisite support needed to apply the pressure it wants on Caracas. It shows a dwindling of American soft power in what was once considered the empire’s backyard. For example, the situation in Bolivia in 2019, in which former President Evo Morales was forced to resign in the wake of widespread pressure from the police and military after international interference, has clearly left a sour taste in Latin Americans’ collective mouths.

Read more

Venezuela opens probe into opposition over ‘insurrection’ attempts 

The three most prominent countries in the region – Brazil, Mexico, and Colombia – have not condemned Maduro. In fact, the Organization of American States (OAS), which had previously passed a resolution against Morales in 2019, failed to pass a resolution over the situation in Venezuela. While 17 members voted to condemn Maduro, 11 abstained – including Brazil and Colombia – and five delegations, including Mexico, skipped the session altogether. The OAS needed 18 votes to pass it. Even the European Union has failed to muster support after Hungary blocked a joint statement by the bloc that would have cited “flaws and irregularities” in the election, forcing EU foreign policy chief Josep Borrell to publish it in a personal capacity. What we see here is a classic case of the boy who cried wolf. The US has continually cried wolf over alleged breakdowns of democracy in Latin America, using its soft power to thwart independent governments through international forums and mafia diplomacy. It has spawned coup after coup, leaving nothing but destruction and destitution in its wake. People in the hemisphere – and indeed the world – are sick of injustice and maltreatment. This time, Washington may have actually been right. It could be the case that Maduro lost in this election. It could also not be the case, and that is well-established by the fact that the US and its henchmen are pathological liars. In any case, wherever objective truth may lie, no one believes Uncle Sam’s claims anymore, evidently because he has abused his power for too long in his cynical pursuit of domination.

[thekhoei]

my friend just introduced me into this recently. ive not dig in very much of Nixonverse but i have to talk about how Jesus in Vietnam grasps me

i peak in history classes when i learn about two modern wars in Vietnam during 1919-1975. the invasion of France in three lands of Indochina (we dont even bring up other places that is also colonized) and the infamous lost in that war crime game the USA played on the land of Ho Chi Minh. the big countries have been going to small lands, the "third world countries" and trying to kill, to assimilate us smaller nation as their modern-day slaves for centuries and centuries. and the fact that it still occurs today, tomorrow and no one knows when will this shit ended. Vietnam got out of the war only around 50 years ago (2025 is the 50th anniversary of our win against the US), and there are still people believe that it's Vietnam civil war, or this is communist propaganda (where the fuck are some people's sympathy anyway?). rumors about the third world war are on the verge of becoming true, although it's predicted to happen in one more millennia. shit being called "natural selection". my favorite thing to learn about history is how history is shaped to fit one's belief of a government, and in history classes, i love studying about revolution the most. not about Hitler, or any US president, not even Stalin (bad bitch i always heard shit abt you), but about smaller voices getting louder and louder, and how their fights mean to human rights. im talking like im belong to leftism or sth but no honestly, sometimes i have doubt about my so called "communist" government, too much that i do fear to be in jail if i try to crack one more joke about how shitty they act sometimes. more than a half of Vietnamese population are mad at our government too, i hear them talking sour everyday. from the early days of the existence of humanity til now, four horses of apocalypse have been wandering around, makes me shiver about how vague the concept of death is, yet the way its so significant in daily life.

i talked too much about war stuff above that i forgot the second big topic in the title "Jesus" and religion. im not a big fan of believing in any entity, although i dont deny their existence at all. i do follow Buddhism's belief everyday bc it has been a tradition in Vietnam, but ig its an exception because bro isn't qualified as God. Buddhism is considered as a atheism religion as i read somewhere. anyway talking about Jesus he is the ambiguous concept i learn through tv, books, western medias from younger ages, that sometimes i pray to him although i get scolded for acting offensively to a religion i do not belong too. besides that other thing relevant to him that i learn about is cults, and that shit is wild 💀 i still remember my teacher talking about how France used Portuguese pastors to get Vietnamese people believe in the theory "God allows me to invade your homeland 😜", and how Christians Vietnamese fight against them (my grandfather once joined the Vietnamese Christian to exchange info for the VC (Việt Cộng lmao)). wildest thing i ever learn in secondary school (we learn it in 7th grade which is the second year of secondary school in Vietnam and its around the age of 13) that got me into reddit posts about Jesus when i googled to learn more about the topic. im glad i pay attention to class because i did not know i would be too much invested in Vietnam history back in the day. Jesus is believed to be a propaganda of the US, and when i learn more about this God, it's a cultural shock for me. US government turned out to be the biggest cult in my eye (i love my American friends but honestly im against yall's government and i know yall do too)

anyway i think John Lennon would be invested into this idk

[liesmyteachertoldme]

The Empire Doesn’t Hide Its Worst Deeds, It Just Manipulates How People Think About Them

The worst actions of your government happen not in secrecy, but right out in the open under the narrative cover of mass media propaganda. The western empire doesn’t hide its worst deeds, it just manipulates the way people think about them.

Tomorrow we could unearth rock-solid proof that the US government knowingly orchestrated 9/11, and that crime in and of itself still wouldn’t be as bad as what the US government is facilitating in Gaza right now, in plain view of the entire world. And even if such a revelation did occur, the imperial media would probably either ignore it or spin it so that its impact is dulled into impotence.

The empire’s worst atrocities happen in the open because the empire’s worst atrocities involve butchering and starving huge numbers of people, which is impossible to do in secret. They can assassinate a government official here and sign a malignant secret agreement there without needing to do it openly, but murder at mass scale isn’t something you can conceal in the information age.

The US-centralized globe-spanning power structure therefore relies heavily on its historically unprecedented ability to psychologically manipulate global populations when carrying out such atrocities. The empire has invested more heavily in soft power than any empire or government in human history, and the science of modern propaganda has been advancing under this investment at least as rapidly as military technology has been.

That’s why you can have the most damning information imaginable about the people who rule over us sitting right out in the open, and you won’t see anywhere remotely close to the public outrage and backlash you ought to see. The US government can literally back a genocide without hiding any part of it, and the political-media class will simply manipulate public psychology into getting lost in a bunch of hogwash about self-defense and human shields and difficulties delivering food and medical supplies and hey Biden is working hard to do the right thing here and it’s all very complicated and everything bad that happens in Gaza can be blamed on Hamas anyway.

It’s a truly astonishing power that would inspire awe if it wasn’t so evil. Power is controlling what happens, but real power is controlling what people think about what happens.

Whistleblowers and investigative journalists provide an invaluable service to humanity for which we should all be grateful, but what this civilization needs more than anything right now is not so much new information about what the powerful are doing, but rather the ability to lucidly perceive the information that’s already been made public. We need people clearly seeing what’s already right in front of them, without the lens of distortion and obfuscation that the powerful have placed over their eyes.

Until we find a way to snap a critical mass of people out of the propaganda-induced coma the empire has placed them in, they’ll be able to get away with any evil they need to commit in order to secure their interests and advance their agendas. We can work on this front by doing everything we can to get people looking at the reality of what our rulers are doing at every opportunity, in as creative and interesting a way as we can come up with. The more eyes open to the truth, the more lucid perceivers there will be to help open the eyes of others.

[centrally-unplanned]

(Ash mentioned! <3) Endorsed, I think this nails his place on the spectrum of politics in multiple ways. I will toss in a few thoughts:

-- I am on the record somewhere as a "liberal Gunbuster" truther, so no surprise here from me, but yeah I think the Gunbuster case tends to be overblown and is imo the source for most of the "right wing" discourse. It's a bit tough for westerners to see the ways Japan sees WW2; apocalyptic in outcome but typical in stakes. Using iconography from Ghengis Khan or Napoleon is fine for us, because while awful human beings it was in that typical "war is always awful" way, it isn't a poisoned well. WW2 is not that for us, but the typical Japanese person is likely to see it through that kind of lens. As such all the Gunbuster homages to the Battle of Okinawa, Japan annexing Hawaii, etc, are all just the touches of the genre of Space Opera and military otaku things. Putting a space lesbian in a steampunk Napoleon uniform a la modern YA books doesn't imply the author endorses the Confederation of the Rhine or anything; and meanwhile Gunbuster's actual setting is UN-on-Steroids international liberalism, it is not apologia for the East Asian Co-Prosperity Sphere. The imagery just doesn't carry the same implications. (IMO this perception of WW2 is wrong, Japan was in fact atypically awful? And this is tied up with a whole bunch of cultural-political stuff in Japan. But Anno/Gainax as creators aren't water-carriers for all of that, just downstream of it)

-- Anno is definitely in that post-Anpo "apolitical otaku" generation, but I think if you move a bit past the left-right binary you can find a lot of politics in there. They are in a way "anti-left" in the sense of wanting to remove what they see as overbearing political content from media, but it isn't just so they can play with their toys in peace. Anno has lost faith in politics as a solution to societal problems:

--In Gundam, the main character, Amuro Ray, has a clear enemy and a clear political structure that encourages his growth, but "Eva" doesn't have that. Anno: From a generational point of view, I myself don't have that concept anymore. I don't trust politics or society. I can't create works that adopt what is not there.

(Interview: STUDIO VOICE October 1996)

“…For [my generation, after the political failures of the previous], there was nothing to speak of but what was within the ‘magic box’ (television). It’s pathetic, but we had no other options. I think admitting that is a start.”

(A Dream World That Hasn't Forfeited its Goal, ~August 1996)

And you see more of this whenever he discusses things like the Aum Shinrikyo cult/Tokyo Sarin Gas attacks (which occurred during the airing of Eva); he will see them as case of extreme involution, obsession with the self & disconnected from society; a problem that political orgs are now incapable of fixing or addressing. And otaku are a calmer-but-still-troubled side of that same coin, a response to capital-M Modernity. That is a deeply political stance, right? It just isn't one that lends itself to voting for this or that party.

This was a pretty big ~vibe in the 90's all over, honestly, and at the time I would say it was still pretty left coded? But it had its sources on the right as well (horseshoe theory continuing to bat a hundred), and fell out of favor in the West at least - idk maybe something happened in American in the 2000's to distract from the ennui, couldn't say. It lasted longer in Japan, and I think you can trace an arc from many anime creators being actively political in the 1970's/1980's, to a new gen being intentionally anti-political as its own politics in the 1980's-1990's, to anime being dominated by truly apolitical creators starting in the 2000's. Anno is part of that middle wave. But it is all by degrees of course.

-- Finally; Anno is in his mid-60's, his politics have changed! He definitely doesn't discuss them that much - but like you can't look at Shin Godzilla and say "yeah this guy has no thoughts on the Fukushima Nuclear Disaster", its a film clearly dealing with the bureaucratic limitations of any system being able to "contain" the mess of reality. He didn't have those opinions before because Fukushima hadn't happened. I know this one quote from these rountables Anno did with a bunch of high school students during the production of Kare Kano? Which, btw, were printed with this logo:

"Anno Hideaki X Highschool Boys & Girls" lovely, 10 out of 10, no notes. But anyway, he goes off at one point about the US & Japan and international relations.

Anno: Asia is where it’s at now. We’d best get in good with our neighbors. The previous generation is with America. Those currently in their 50’s typically think in terms of America. In reaction to losing the War to America, they all want to live the American lifestyle. Like all going to Europe, that sort of thing.

And idk I bet that the past 20+ years of declining relations with and rising bellicosity from China has soured him on this! I don't have a money quote, but i'd be shocked if he stands by this off-hand comment from the 90's. People do this a lot, you see an interview with someone, they say something, Miyazaki will tell you Humanity is Doomed or some shit, and that becomes their canon opinion. Which is understandable because it's printed, but maybe they were just shooting the shit, and maybe they believed for ~5 years or something. Maybe they never believed it, who knows right? They are artists, not politicians or academics, so they aren't normally in the business of making their political evolutions robustly explicit. And this generation of creators in Japan loved to run their mouths.

So I think, like many people, you can't say Anno over the course of ~50 years of having opinions on politics, is going to fit on one side or the other that neatly.

--- How many Left Points does Anno get for making fujoshi gayboy flagship Kaworu and leaning into that so goddamn hard in the mid 90's? Guy did a 30-page interview for JUNE, the oldest yaoi magazine around! That has to get you at least 10 Ikuhara-blazoned gold stars right?

Do you think Hideaki Anno is right-wing or is it too difficult to tell from his works?

Haha that's a question.

I'll focus on nationalism rather than trying to get into, say, gender politics here, since that's the accusation that most seems to follow Anno around.

Anno's politics are... hard to pin down from his work alone, I think. He's like... a prototypical case of that generation of 'apolitical' otaku that followed after the Anpo generation, with Eva pretty much the definitive statement of the 90s psychological turn. But that said... I can definitely see the argument that there are nationalist themes in some of his works like Gunbuster, though I definitely don't buy every reading in this series (lots of dubious kanji reading). He definitely has that otaku fascination with war machinery and war media (apparently he's a big fan of The Battle for Okinawa and watched it over 100 times), which can easily blend into imperialist ideology.

But there's complications here. For example, the Animekritik series cites the setting of Gunbuster in Okinawa as something formative to the nationalist ideology they are trying to illustrate - in part in relation to the ongoing controversy over American military bases in Okinawa. Anno has at least been on record as saying he's disinterested in Western culture, and I can see the reading of Jung-Freud as an external Other who is shown up by the Japanese girls, somehow simultaneously representing the USSR, Europe and the States. But anti-Americanism in Japan can come in both left and right wing flavours (c.f. Anpo). Communists want the Americans out too! Portraying Okinawa as a military training camp in a Japan-led military coalition certainly comes across as a more nationalist take on that whole matter, but I feel like it's got about the same level of serious nationalist commitment as Doctor Who putting random British people all over space.

When Gainax has played around with nationalist imagery it's usually been in a kind of ironic sendup way - see Ash's writeup about the Aikoku Sentai Dai Nippon controversy, in which Daicon Film staff were disdainful at the accusation that their goofy toku film reflected a genuine nationalist sentiment. While Imaishi takes it further, a lot of Anno's work is also about playfully reappropriating past works. In Anno's case a lot of that is classic tokusatsu, Ultraman in particular, and also Leiji Matsumoto's scifi, notably Space Battleship Yamato, which, well... you know the deal there lol. But it's not so simple to go from that to 'Anno is a nationalist'.

Eva doesn't tend to attract these accusations, but I recall the controversy came back around with Shin Godzilla, though to my mind it's hard to find a straightforwardly nationalist reading of that movie. (It's a film about the experience of the earthquake and Fukushima nuclear plant meltdown, and it's critical of Japan's bureaucracy, but equally one where the JSDF repeatedly get their shit handed to them and civilian infrastructure is what actually stops Godzilla - not to mention Godzilla is painted as quite a tragic figure here!) It all feels pretty tenuous.

I haven't seen as many of Anno's live action films as I'd like, so I can't comment as much on the more recent Shin films, Love & Pop, Shiki-Jitsu etc. And it's always possible for subtler allusions to slip by the anglophone viewer. Still, I don't personally think Anno's post-Gunbuster work is particularly nationalist in outlook. I certainly haven't seen any evidence of him favouring, say, war crime denial, anti-Korean sentiment, remilitarisation, etc etc. - he's definitely not as dubious a figure as someone like Hajime Isayama. But it's not like, anti-nationalist either! It's just kind of hard to read in those terms.

So I lean towards your second option, I'm not convinced he's a nationalist or particularly right wing. He happily associates with Hayao Miyazaki, who's definitely not a right wing guy. But Anno'll also let hilariously cooked stuff like whatever On A Gloomy Night was supposed to be into the Animator Expo. So I don't think he's particularly left wing either, he's no Ikuni! But Anno's fiction is very individual focused, full of psychoanalytic themes and internal conflict. He can vividly portray trauma and complex power dynamics. There's a lot to appreciate in works like Eva from a left-wing angle. I don't really know why this association of nationalism follows him around.

Idk, maybe there's a bunch of interviews I'm missing! Presumably you have a reason for asking this question...

[edgepunk]

The Witcher Netflix Rant from your local frustrated Slav I cannot tell you how tired and frustrated I am by TWN and its treatment of Slavic people. An actual Polish man has pitched the show to Netflix, multiple other producers of Slavic descent have been alienated and felt like they didn't belong there because of how they have been treated, then ultimately left the production that has been handed over to a literal Karen that doesn't give a shit about it. The show has removed every instance of Slavic(mainly Polish)/other European (Germanic, Nordic) influences, cultural significance and turned it into an uninspired, boring, muddy fantasy. Hell, I have tons of criticisms about the games, but at least they kept the Central-Eastern European influences and, despite TW being a dark fantasy, weren't scared to make the games look bright and colorful. You'd think that Girlboss Lauren and her posse would put some effort into representing the cultural influences since the games pretty much got the series popular with the blend of different Central-Eastern European (mainly Polish, obviously) cultures and the usage of Slavic folk music thanks to Percival. A lot of the themes in the books draw from Poland's history, which also have been lost in the show (here is a post that's written by an actual Polish person and explains it better than I could since I'm not actually Polish, ya know). All of that has been lost, both the writing and aesthetics lack the cultural and historical significance that has influenced the world of The Witcher, because the showrunners are a bunch of Brits and USAmericans who aren't willing to put any effort into trying to understand the history and culture. They just want to make the next GoT, which,, huh? GoT ended up like it did, but to give them some credit, in the beginning the writers mostly stuck to the books instead of making a badly written Wattpad fanfiction from the get-go.

And it's possible for a western person to try to understand the circumstances, look at Craig Mazin, the man who directed HBO Chernobyl. Of course it's dramatized, of course they added some things that didn't actually happen and a few things were inconsistent. But you can clearly see in the production of the show that they put a lot of effort and interviewed people from Ukraine. Not sure if it's true, but I've seen somewhere (or was it a podcast?) that they gave the scripts to some Ukrainian people who were alive during the Soviet Union and asked them to correct the dialogues to make them sound more authentic, closer to how people adressed each other during the USSR (and how Eastern Slavs adress each other since it's a little different than western people do, including us Western Slavs, here is a nifty post explaining it if you're interested).

Can't speak for all Slavs, but the overall reaction has been positive from the people I talked to and my older family member. Note that a lot of "older" people here have been born pre '89 (that's when the USSR fell apart, the disaster happened in April '86), so the majority of them lived through the disaster. The biggest criticism people had that they turned Dyatlov into too much of a villain. when in reality he was way calmer during the night the disaster happened. Not to mention Mazin had it more difficult since he was adapting a story from real life that affected thousands upon thousands people. Mazin is a westener, he could've just shrugged it off and said "eh who cares about these filthy Eastern Euro people" but he and his team went out of their way to actually approach the victims, read several books written by people who actually lived through the disaster, that affected them and their families to make the story more authentic and respectful. Now, why can't Miss Lauren and her posse do it with a fantasy setting? Because they don't care. The only instance of "Slavic influence" (using that term very loosely) in the show is during the Striga episode when they mention a "vukodlak" which literally translates to "werewolf" so like,,, eh. It's still a werewolf, just a different version. I'm sure the writers were patting themselves on the back for including that word they found on the werewolf Wiki page. It would've been so nice to see a Slavic piece of media make it to Hollywood, but you see how that ended up. We barely get any recognition and if there is a Slavic character in a western production they're always: an assassin, gopnik, Seksi Female Spy that falls in love with the American, thief, mob boss, and I could go on. They never get the language right, because all Slavs speak botched Russian, right? All of us are named Anton, Ivan, Nikita, Natasha or Svetlana. And there are other mythical creatures besides Baba Yaga which Hollywood can't get right either. And it bleeds into the fandom too, all the modern AUs take place in the US or the UK. When other Slavic people criticize the show for its westernization they are told by westerners to shup up or they're "haters" (I do actually hate the show and the corpo bullshit Netflix is trying to pull here so,,, you can come at me all you want lol) tl;dr: The Witcher was the perfect opportunity for Slavs to have something positive in Hollywood, but it got doomed the moment it was handed to an USAmerican woman who doesn't understand the cultural influences and has zero interest in doing proper research. I probably would've forgiven her and her team if they actually tried, but they didn't. But seeing how other cultures that aren't USAmerican are being treated in movies and TV shows it shouldn't surprise me. Also I feel like I have to clarify - this has nothing to do with the actors, this is purely on the writers, the background and costume designers that put zero effort into researching the different cultures (not just Slavic, but I am Slavic so I wrote this from my perspective) that influenced The Witcher universe.

[whiterosebrian]

Letter To Democrats

I felt the need to do something besides raising awareness of environmental, indigenous, and socio-economic issues. I’ve decided to compose and then mail multiple printed copies of a letter to multiple politicians across the USA. I did wonder if I should copy-and-paste the letter to social media profiles like I did for the one that I wrote to President Biden. Ultimately, I decided that posting the letter would serve two purposes. First, I wanted to let indigenous activists know that they have another willing accomplice. Second, this could provide a decent template for anyone who also feels a need to write to political leaders and put pressure on them to take much-needed action. Without any further ado…

Greetings,

I am writing a generic letter to send to assorted politicians across the United States. For reasons that I will articulate over the course of this letter, I felt a serious need to address as many members of the American political leadership as possible. I do not intend to call you out personally. If you do take it as a personal callout, please consider why you feel that way.

The reports of wildfires, heat waves, and floods have filled many, many observers with existential terror. Some have even expressed utter despair over whether the world will be inhabitable by any form of life. At times I have been tempted to join the despair, to give up hope of ever leaving a beautiful legacy for future generations. For the sake of all the people of the world, I must fight that temptation. I need to do my part to fight for the future.

There are a large number of activists trying to protect the environment. However, they need help from people who have the power to make really concrete changes. That is why I am writing to you and other Democratic politicians. That does sound very partisan, but the sad fact is that the Republican party is almost a lost cause at this point. I wish to be proven wrong about that. The fact is that it already engaged in brutal obstruction during the Obama administration. A sinister side to the base already started emerging during that time as well. With the rise of Donald Trump, the much of its leadership and nearly all of its electoral base have become increasingly unwilling to offer the kind of compromise needed for a functional democracy.

The Democratic party as a whole has been criticized as very weak in opposing the radicalizing Republican Party. The current President has spoken of a desire for restoring national unity. That desire is certainly laudable in itself when Trump blatantly stoked resentment and division. Again, however, the Republican party and its core supporters have shown a complete unwillingness to work with any opponents in any way. They view their opponents as subversive enemies that need to be crushed underfoot. The Republican party has inched towards neo-fascism at a time when neo-fascism is mainstreaming around the world. The Republican party has also already been beholden to the selfish interests of major corporations for decades. It even seeks to magnify the already dire influence of corporations chiefly responsible for pollution. Its propaganda outlets outright deny pollution and mislead millions of people.

Some Democratic politicians have also been criticized as going along with corporate interests and watering down legislation meant to oppose corporate influence. By now it has become clear that corporate elites do not have the safety of the world and its human and nonhuman denizens in mind. By now it has become clear that they must be reined in for the greater good. The only language that major corporations even comprehend is money. Here I arrive at the first main point of this letter: I urge you to work with other Democratic leaders to divest from major corporations and their executives, especially those most directly responsible for polluting the Earth. I’ve also seen proposals that corporations be forced to contribute to removing as much pollution as possible. Quickening the transition away from fossil fuels is crucial.

However, alternate energy sources are not enough. Switching from gas-powered cars to electric cars is not enough. Building solar or wind farms in place of coal-burning power plants is not enough. Extraction and consumption cause their own serious problems. The problem of environmental degradation has roots that are far too deep and complicated to address here, though I will touch upon one later. Going hand-in-hand with corporate influence are the bad social and urban infrastructures that do not encourage sustainable lifestyles. I barely even know where to begin in this regard. Cities are too often built for cars and not people. Most people have to drive carbon-spewing cars to work at jobs that are not well-suited to their needs in order to pay their bills and feed their families. Too many people are left in poverty or near-poverty, some people are more-or-less isolated in suburbs, and a tiny handful are virtually untouchable in their wealth and privilege. Healthy food is not always accessible, and even when it is, it often has to be shipped very far from the source.

My second main point is this: in addition to transitioning to cleaner energy, the very infrastructure of our society needs to reformed. Local communities need to be lifted up so that they can better care for themselves without the need for distant figures constantly having to provide for them through convoluted supply chains. It’s true that right-wingers speak of “small government” with the unspoken agenda of leaving corporate oligarchs and ultra-conservative clergy to rule over ordinary human beings. Nonetheless, I believe that, at this point, government needs to assist in rebuilding communities so that they can eventually leave denizens to stand on their feet and care for each other. The pandemic, along with the poor responses of many local officials, has shown the need for communities to engage in mutual care.

I will confess that this exhortation is the vaguest one in this letter. I lack in-depth education on such matters. I bring it up in order to further nudge you in a direction that would be far better for the Earth and its people. I can offer one example of what must be done that is slightly clearer: helping communities establish gardens and small-scale farms to better feed themselves.

On a very important side note, this nation needs to divest from the military as well. The largest and most powerful military in history is known to be among the largest polluters on earth. Too many politicians seem to ignore how massive the military already is an insist on subsidizing it at the cost of actually building a peaceful and prosperous society.

I further wish to discuss the need to center indigenous peoples in renewing our society. No, I am no indigenous myself. I simply wish to point to their wisdom. Yes, the sagely magical Indian who is one with Mother Earth is a crude stereotype, and I have no intention of reinforcing it. With that said, I follow a number of indigenous writers, activists, spiritualists, and influencers on social media. I learned about how many indigenous people are attempting to reconnect to previously outlawed and hidden heritages. The stereotype could be rooted in reality.

In most cases, those heritages include animistic spiritualities, in which aspects of the natural world, from plants to animals to waters to stones, are seen as having spirits. Furthermore, these aspects of the natural world are seen as relatives to humans. I should note how some well-meaning white people, wishing to bond with the earth instead of submitting to organized religion, appropriate these indigenous spiritualties and associated practices. Indigenous writers will encourage such people to instead delve into their own pre-Christian heritages, which have similar animistic philosophies, however obscured by time they may be. I have actually been doing just that—though I won’t elaborate because I don’t want to center myself.

You may be asking, what is the relevance said common thread of the spiritualities of indigenous peoples? That animism seems to go hand-in-hand with methods of land care that developed over generations of trial and error, along with the principles behind those methods. With the subjugation and expulsion (and worse) of the land’s original caretakers, though, these practices fell into obscurity. The most dramatic example, perhaps, is the suppression of controlled burnings on the western coastline leading to the wildfires that we have seen in recent years. Indeed, the different lands of different indigenous nations need their own subtly distinct approaches, based on ecosystems, geographies, local histories, and general senses of place. Indigenous activists and figureheads are calling upon governments to heed their words on not only conservation but also regeneration.

One of the main demands that indigenous activists make is for the return of their lands, full sovereignty over them, and the facilitation of cultural revival. Yes, that is a very simple manner of justice and righting a historic wrong. It has become evident that their wisdom is a crucial piece of the puzzle of solving environmental problems as well. Simple “colorblind” or “globalized” liberalism won’t suffice when working for social or environmental justice. Indigenous activists argue that colonialism is at the root of so many of our world’s problems. Many of them even outright state that the “colonial state” in itself is a problem. I can see how colonialism has promoted the rise of an all-devouring capitalism and perpetuated it. The grim historical fact of how the enslavement of Black people and the elimination of indigenous peoples contributed to building this nation remains a grim historical fact.

I myself am figuring out the world and learning many truths, but I am sympathetic to people who have borne the brunt of colonialism. I welcome the humanistic achievements of modernity and utterly oppose fundamentalism and fascism, I assure you, but I’ve come to accept that the modern world is broken. Simple progress won’t heal the world. “Big government” certainly has a role to play in mobilizing the needed social changes, such as what I’ve alluded to above, but the “colonial state” needs to ultimately divest its own power.

I’ll try to summarize my points now. Major corporations and economic elites need to be drastically reined in and disempowered (along with the military). The transition to renewable energies needs to be quickened—but also needs to be accompanied by drastic changes to infrastructures and supply chains so as to result in less extraction and consumption. Localized communities need to be empowered so they can better care for themselves without much out faraway aid. Indigenous peoples need to be given their lands back, be elevated to leadership roles in caring for and regenerating said lands, and be empowered so they can rebuild their cultures. Settlers should learn from them as well. In the end, the state and the socio-economic system that it has upheld need to recede—not for billionaires or grand inquisitors or dictators, but for ordinary people and the earth. In truth, humans are meant to be a part of nature, and the generational challenge is for humanity to reconcile with the rest of nature.

This all may sound idealistic or radical. This past summer has shown us that we shouldn’t settle for anything less than radical social change. This nation, which has been a major world power for over a century, needs to be radically reimagined. This all may sound vague as well. I have little education in politics and governance apart from what I’ve tried to learn for myself across the internet. That is all the more reason for people like you—people with more real-world power than I—to push along radical social change. This letter is meant to raise awareness of your duty as a leader. A leader is meant to be a guide, not a dominator. There’s a chance that you could be recorded in history as a leader who did what was necessary to make the world’s healing and renewal possible.

Thank you.

You may call me Brian Solomon Whiterose.