#monty may be over a century old but he is still like a baby to me | Explore Tumblr posts and blogs

travllingbunny · 5 years ago

Text

The 100: 7x02 The Garden

I love this episode. Mostly for the beautiful and emotionally complex Octavia-centric flashback story, for all the exciting revelations about the nature of the Anomaly and time dilation and the overall story of this season (all the exposition was done in a surprisingly natural way and never bothered me), and the way the two timelines were interwoven. It says a lot that I wasn’t even bothered by the lack of Clarke or Bellamy - or the fact that this episode featured only 6 characters (plus some extras in suits), one of which was a deranged minor character we’ve never seen before. Episodes focused on a small number of characters and plots often feel more coherent.

Comparisons between The Garden and Eden are obvious, the two even have basically the same title, and many similarities and contrasts, so I rewatched Eden yesterday, and I’ll be writing a post about that episode soon, too. I rewatched the entire show just before season 7 started, but season 5 is the only one I’ve never written reviews of, so this seems like the right occasion. it will also be interesting to rewatch Red Queen after this.

One of the things that I noticed rewatching season 5 is how well the cinematography has been used in seasons 5, 6 and 7 and how it differentiates different worlds. The ruined Earth in season 5 was mostly in sepia, yellow and grey tones, looking like a gloomy desert - except for Eden, which had normal colors. Sanctum has bright colors - it’s beautiful, but a little too colorful, almost psychedelic, dangerous. Skyring in this episode mostly seen in soft light and blueish-green colors - a peaceful paradise.

Or is that a prison? A solitary/house arrest? I love this duality - it can be both. The most beautiful place can be a prison that drives you insane, if you’re all alone.

One garden, two serpents

Isolation is a theme we’ve seen on The 100 with many characters: Clarke was in a solitary for a year, distracting herself with drawings, then alone roaming around for 3 months, then forced to spend 6 years on a deserted planet, but she was only completely alone for the first 2 months, when she was fighting with nature and lack of food and water as much as with loneliness, and she was talking to Bellamy every day - who couldn’t even hear her - and hoping to see him again. Murphy was alone for 3 months in a fully stacked bunker on Becca’s island, but comfort is no help when you’re all alone, only have one and the same videos to watch and music to listen to, and you don’t know if you’re getting out. Octavia was the Girl Under the Floor for 16 years, and she had her mother and brother, but no one else; then she was locked up for a year; and after all the fighting, including the 6 years in the bunker with 1200 people she ruled over (which was maybe the time when she was more lonely than ever!), she ended up spending 10 years of her life on a planet with a family of two people - again - and no one else, and - just as when she was a child - with little hope that she will ever have a chance to meet anyone else. And here we see the effects of a prolonged isolation from everyone else, with poor Orlando (that’s what he’s called in the end credits), the prisoner who dug out dead bodies and used a creepy doll just to have an illusion of friends.

Unlike Clarke in 5x01, Octavia did not have to struggle with loneliness or fight to survive, but the paradise in which she had accidentally ended up in was also a prison of sorts, since she could not get out of it and was likely to spend all her life there, without ever seeing her brother or any other people, except for Diyoza and Hope. Like Clarke, Octavia found a family, and a child to take care of, but unlike Clarke, Octavia did not become a little girl’s adoptive or substitute mother.

The title evokes Diyoza’s line from 5x13: “One garden, two serpents. Eden never stood a chance.” Instead, they got to have their paradise here, until Octavia’s attempt to send her brother a message brought the Disciples from Bardo there to capture them. I’m not sure if that was a bad or a good thing - since that was probably their only way out of Skyring.

(There’s also a literal garden in the episode, and this was the first time we saw Octavia farm the land since 4x09, when she learned how to do it on Ilian’s farm. That was the last time Octavia tried to escape her darkness by having an idyllic farm life and a relationship, at least for a few days before the end of the world comes, but her past came back in the form of those people who recognized and attacked her - and she realized she wasn’t cut out for peace and rode into Polis looking for a war. She wasn’t ready at the time to give up violence. In season 5, she insisted that “Farmers won’t save the world, warriors will” - which Monty proved wrong. And now, Octavia has become a farmer.)

But Octavia’s paradise was forced on her, and it was clear that she and Diyoza didn’t really feel the same about living the rest of their lives on Skyring. The difference is, Diyoza doesn’t have anyone else in the world she cares about - everyone she once cared about has been dead for centuries. and she has given up on trying to change the world. She obviously wanted to do it once, when she was fighting “the fascist government who tried to take my home” and blowing up buildings, but she’s now tired of the violence, after being a terrorist/rebel, then a prisoner of a big corporation, again a rebel fighting against that corporation to save prisoners from being left to die just because they were deemed expendable, then she led another war - which ended with her baby-daddy destroying the Earth, and now she’s tired of the violence and wants to have a different life in peace with her daughter, who she didn’t even want to teach fighting of any kind. She’s also content to live without ever reuniting with the rest of the human race. Maybe partly because she was quite hurt to learn that she was supposedly in history books as one of the worst people ever. (Which she really shouldn’t have taken seriously - since it was Russell who said it, so these “history books” can only be Sanctum history books, written by Russell or his family members or other Primes. They left Earth around the time when Diyoza was just arrested, so it’s unlikely they even knew what history books said about her in the next few years - and even if those history books said so, they would be history books written under the same government Diyoza was fighting against.)

Octavia, on the other hand, still has other people she cares about in the world, most of all her brother. Not only did she leave a time when she knew Bellamy and others are likely to be in danger from the Primes - and she had no way of knowing they had learned the truth about the Primes by themselves - but they parted on bad terms and with unresolved issues and with no catharsis, and Bellamy would probably be left thinking she really died when he left her on Alpha - instead of learning that she did resolve her issues and find peace. She didn’t know that her attempts to get back the way she came, through the lake, would never work - if she had succeeded, she would have probably ended up on Bardo instead. Ironically, only when she made peace with the fact she couldn’t go back and sent a letter in a bottle, it ended up alerting the Disciples - but it all eventually resulted in Octavia ending up back on Sanctum in the same place she left (whether she escaped and came back from Bardo or through some other planet?), and got the chance to tell Bellamy in person that she understands him now.

There’s some ambiguity about Octavia’s relationships with Diyoza and Hope - at times it seems that Octavia is Hope’s co-parent: she lives with them and is closely involved in raising Hope, after all - not exactly like an aunt who just occasionally visits and plays with the kid. All three of them are shown as a close family unit. However, Octavia does not see herself as Hope’s mother - nor does Hope see her that way. She is “Aunty O”. Hope has a mother, and not an absent or inattentive one, but someone like Diyoza, fully focused on raising her daughter. Octavia and Diyoza may be seen as sisters - with “Aunty O” and Octavia telling Bellamy in the letter that she loves her like she loves him even though she’s a ‘pain in the ass’. Or they could look like “an old married couple”, as Diyoza called them back in season 6 when they were finishing each other sentences.

(But if we’re supposed to think that Octavia’s and Diyoza’s close relationship never got sexual in any way, in spite of the fact they lived together for 10 years without any other adults around and with almost no hope they would ever see another adult, then I guess one or both of them is really extremely heterosexual, real 0 on Kinsey’s scale. If we’re supposed to think that. Technically, we don’t know for sure.)

Anyway, this ambiguity of whether Octavia was a co-parent to Hope or not has caused some debate on Twitter about what degree of responsibility Octavia exactly had towards Hope and whether she was allowed to leave her. But even if Octavia is seen as a co-parent, I don’t subscribe to the idea that every adult, especially a woman, who comes into the situation of taking care of a child must immediately forget about all other relationships, concerns and desire and subjugate their entire life to taking care of that child. Especially when it also means that the child will be isolated from the world at large. I didn’t think it was healthy when Bellamy’s whole life revolved around protecting Octavia, either, or when Clarke, after escaping Polis in season 5, thought for a moment that her and Madi living all alone, as they did during those 6 years, would be an OK future for either of them.

Octavia may not have thought the whole time dilation through (yes, it’s quite likely Hope would be old or die before she returned from Sanctum with the other people, since she’d need time to find Bellamy and others, explain things to them and back them go back, but she still had hope (no pun intended) that both she and Hope could have more of life than and was still fighting to make contact with her people on the other side. Diyoza may have been right about the time dilation, but how did she imagine Hope’s life was going to be in the future? Yes, if Octavia left, Hope would end up alone after Diyoza died. But if Octavia stayed, Hope would still be left all alone after Diyoza and Octavia died, and never got a chance to meet anyone else, have any other kind of life, be a part of the human race.

One may argue Diyoza was being selfish, trying to keep Octavia there, and she certainly did take away Octavia’s choice and forced her to stay. Though, in her defense, she thought she was saving her life - but it was still was one of those “I’m making choices for you because I know what’s best for you”. And it wasn’t her whole motivation - it was mostly about wanting to keep Octavia there as a part of their family unit. Octavia called her out on the fact that it wasn’t all about Hope, it was about their relationship, too. Which certainly seemed emotionally intense, with Diyoza being hurt and sort of jealous at the thought that Octavia would leave her and Hope and that she may love her less than she loves her brother.

The episode played a lot with the parallels between Octavia and Bellamy, with O using what she had learned from Bellamy to take care of young Hope the same way. And the parallel between Octavia and Hope as “Girls Under the Floor” were even more obvious, even before Hope literally had to go under the floor to hide from the Disciples. That would put Diyoza in Aurora’s role and Octavia in Bellamy’s. It’s not a perfect parallel, as Bellamy didn’t have any other strong attachments to anyone or any other family while Aurora was alive. But, while Aurora seemed to have no other vision for the future except focusing fully on hiding Octavia, Bellamy tried to give his sister an opportunity to meet other people and live a life - by taking her to the dance - and Octavia was similarly the one who wished to bring other people to Skyring and was giving Hope the hope (!) she would meet them.

The Three Stooges and the Anomaly

(Thanks @jeanie205 for that moniker LOL) The one thing that brings down this episode (I’m taking away half the point from it) is the very unlikely degree of plot-induced incompetence that the trio of Hope, Echo and Gabriel displayed throughout this episode - so they could get stuck on Skyring, maybe for 5 years:

Hope knew the bridge was under the lake - she should have known the note could get washed up!

How come Hope didn’t know there was more than one door to the cabin? Or if Orlando built the other door, or someone else who was there while she was away, how come none of the trio noticed that other door?

Even the windows looked big enough for someone to come in. Why didn’t at least one of them stand guard in the cabin? Or at least somewhere close where they could see what’s happening in the cabin? Why were they both sitting somewhere outside? They weren’t even close to the door. Did they think Orlando could only come into the cabin from one direction?

Why didn’t Gabriel take the memory viewer with him when he ran out? Come on, dude, that’s one of the most important things you have there, and you know there is a deranged guy outside, and you just leave it there?

Still, I enjoyed this part of the story, too, especially with all the new info we got - which got me speculating the whole week - see my theories here.

Gabriel is so adorable as an old man scientist in a young body and even the fact he is more interested in the Anomaly than in any living human is kind of endearing. We also got a glimpse of the nerdy young doctor who was once crushing on Becca before going to the mission and meeting Josephine.

Echo is finally starting to justify her main character billing this season, getting an actual storyline rather than tagging along around Bellamy, and she is already a much more enjoyable character. She hasn’t actually changed much yet - but she’s now put in the position as an audience surrogate, wondering what the heck is going and asking question like “Where is Bellamy?” while Hope and Gabriel spout exposition (they do it so well though that you don’t even mind it). It helps a lot that she’s not around any of the Spacekru, so we don’t have to deal with the forced “we’re all close family due to the 6 years off-screen, which we spent in utter boredom and without any actual dangers we’d have to deal with” dynamic. Instead, now a character she’s interacting with (Hope) and Echo’s own hallucinations are constantly calling her out on her past actions, which helps fix the issue that season 5 created - the impression that Echo is the one character who doesn’t have to deal with the consequences of her past actions, with her past being simply waved away with “they spent 6 years with her and she’s now one of the good guys” (Although, while I like Hope calling Echo out, Hope got it wrong - Echo didn’t kick Octavia over the cliff after stabbing her, Octavia tripped and fell. But that’s not the first time in the show the writers Octavia has misremembered an event.)

This will be the second time Echo is stuck somewhere in a peaceful place with just a few people for 6 5 years. How much of this will be off-screen? It certainly helps that we’ve already seen her interact with Hope and Gabriel in two episodes, and the dynamic between Hope and Echo is developing, with Echo starting to comfort Hope when Hope showed vulnerability behind her fast-talking snarky exterior.

Echo still doesn’t seem ready to “face her demons”, since her reaction to her own hallucination telling her she’s still just a killer and asking her who she is if she doesn’t have someone (Bellamy) to follow, was to ignore it and try to kill people and now swear she’ll kill everyone she needs to in order to get to Bellamy. But I assume this is just the beginning of her long overdue character development.

Was there significance to Echo plucking the flower and then looking at the sky? Was it simply her starting to appreciate the beauty of the planet? t It reminds me of how Clarke was touching the flowers in Eden in 5x01.

Other observations:

Technically, I guess this episode was really Hope-centric, since she was the only character in both timelines.

I’m not sure what exactly the scientific explanation is for Octavia’s arm healing the moment she got to Skyring. How does the whole temporal flare thing work?

"What is it about Bellamy that makes otherwise sensible women willing to die for him?” - I see what they did there. I bet this is a hint about what the focus of a lot of this season is. Hope meant Echo and Octavia, but we know that Clarke’s storyline will also soon become about looking for Bellamy “her missing people”, “her family”, “people she loves”. On the other hand, I’m not sure how much it makes sense for Hope to ask that - she must have heard Octavia’s stories about Bellamy, so she’d know what it is about him that’s so special - his devotion to those he loves and how ready he is to do anything for them. But maybe Hope felt some of that same jealousy Diyoza did, or her mom’s jealousy rubbed off on her, because Octavia kept trying to get back to her brother.

It’s interesting that Octavia named “Bellamy, Clarke and Madi” as the main people she wanted to bring here. She didn’t mention Raven or Miller (as she would if she was talking about the Delinquents as a family going back to season 1, or even her mentor Indra, or friend Niylah. Just Bellamy and Clarke and Madi - as a part of her family she wants to bring. There’s no reason why she’d see Madi as her family but not Indra, so this definitely seems like Clarke and Madi are seen as Bellamy’s family and a package deal in Octavia’s eyes. (And that’s before she even witnessed what happened in 6x10.) Not that surprising considering Octavia’s “another traitor who you love” comment from 5x08 and her dislike of Echo. Ironically, almost killed all three of them as Blodreina, which is maybe also a sign of how much she’s disconnecting from that role - even though she hasn’t gone through her 6x09 Face Your Demons hallucination yet.

It turns out Octavia was older than Bellamy in 6x09-6x13. The green box was probably her peaceful life on Skyring that she did not remember. But the red box was the unfinished business with her past. It seems that she was changed psychologically by her time on Skyring even without remembering it.

Hope is now the third child raised on stories about the Delinquents. Little Hope liked Murphy, just like Jordan did during his “rebellious phase”. Madi, however, was an Octavia fan.

I guess Orlando saw Hope’s name written on the door, since it doesn’t seem they ever met before. But where did the creepy doll come from?

If prisoners all end up insane as he did - and they probably do, after such long periods of complete isolation - that’s a really messed up way of making people into “true believers”, by breaking them completely. A solitary confinement that’s years long? Cruel.

The Bardo symbol (Phoenix) was seen in the bucket and bottle Octavia was using, which proves that the Bardo people had already been on the planet before Octavia and Diyoza ended up on it.

If Orlando had no one else to dig out, I guess they always make sure to bring the prisoners back after they’ve served their sentence. But they probably killed Dev. I hope we get the story about Dev and Hope in flashbacks. Seeing what his facial expression was at the time of death, that guy certainly didn’t die a natural death.

The Becca cameo was cool, and this was a whole new face of Becca, kind of cheeky and funny. But her comment that time dilation is “sexy as hell”... um, OK, Yeah, how lucky you get to “get to the future faster” and possibly die before getting a chance to ever reunite with anyone else you know? To be fair, she did not expect all the others in the mission to die and leave poor Colin on his own.

Gabriel “had to be sure she (Josephine) was really gone”. But maybe a part of him deep inside hoped she wasn’t..

So the Anomaly was already there when Colin Benson crashed on the planet. Hmm... that seems to go against my theory that the Anomaly Stones were made by humans at some point during the previous 230 years, but I’m still not giving up on it. Eligius 3 must have travelled longer to Skyring, if it is so far away from Earth and Sanctum, I don’t think that “Beta” meant that Skyring was the second stop of Eligius 3 - maybe the planets were graded by how good conditions they had for human life. Which would put Sanctum and Skyring at the top, but Sanctum was closer. And with all sorts of time shenanigans going around, maybe there’s some way that the Anomaly Stones could have been placed there by humans. I just can’t believe that it was really some alien race millions of years ago, especially with the Anomaly symbols looking like Greek letters, many of those used in physics or math, the gender symbols, and the infinity symbol is there, too.

This was one of the rare episodes of The 100 where no one died. Though we did learn about some people’s past deaths.

Rating: 9/10

#the 100 #the 100 7x02 #the garden #the 100 season 7 #octavia blake #charmaine diyoza #hope diyoza #gabriel santiago #octavia x diyoza #echo kom azgeda #bellamy blake #madi griffin

30 notes · View notes

confrontingbabble-on · 8 years ago

Photo

Every religious belief system...is a complete blasphemy...in the eyes of every other religious belief system...and all are a complete blasphemy in the eyes of rational unbelief...

For example, as outlined by Atheist Ireland ...

“Here are the 25 blasphemous quotes that we first published on 1 January 2010, along with the quotation that has caused the Irish police to investigate Stephen Fry.

1. Jesus Christ, when asked if he was the son of God, in Matthew 26:64: “Thou hast said: nevertheless I say unto you, Hereafter shall ye see the Son of man sitting on the right hand of power, and coming in the clouds of heaven.” According to the Christian Bible, the Jewish chief priests and elders and council deemed this statement by Jesus to be blasphemous, and they sentenced Jesus to death for saying it.

2. Jesus Christ, talking to Jews about their God, in John 8:44: “Ye are of your father the devil, and the lusts of your father ye will do. He was a murderer from the beginning, and abode not in the truth, because there is no truth in him.” This is one of several chapters in the Christian Bible that can give a scriptural foundation to Christian anti-Semitism. The first part of John 8, the story of “whoever is without sin cast the first stone”, was not in the original version, but was added centuries later. The original John 8 is a debate between Jesus and some Jews. In brief, Jesus calls the Jews who disbelieve him sons of the Devil, the Jews try to stone him, and Jesus runs away and hides.

3. Muhammad, quoted in Hadith of Bukhari, Vol 1 Book 8 Hadith 427: “May Allah curse the Jews and Christians for they built the places of worship at the graves of their prophets.” This quote is attributed to Muhammad on his death-bed as a warning to Muslims not to copy this practice of the Jews and Christians. It is one of several passages in the Koran and in Hadith that can give a scriptural foundation to Islamic anti-Semitism, including the assertion in Sura 5:60 that Allah cursed Jews and turned some of them into apes and swine.

4. Mark Twain, describing the Christian Bible in Letters from the Earth, 1909: “Also it has another name – The Word of God. For the Christian thinks every word of it was dictated by God. It is full of interest. It has noble poetry in it; and some clever fables; and some blood-drenched history; and some good morals; and a wealth of obscenity; and upwards of a thousand lies… But you notice that when the Lord God of Heaven and Earth, adored Father of Man, goes to war, there is no limit. He is totally without mercy — he, who is called the Fountain of Mercy. He slays, slays, slays! All the men, all the beasts, all the boys, all the babies; also all the women and all the girls, except those that have not been deflowered. He makes no distinction between innocent and guilty… What the insane Father required was blood and misery; he was indifferent as to who furnished it.” Twain’s book was published posthumously in 1939. His daughter, Clara Clemens, at first objected to it being published, but later changed her mind in 1960 when she believed that public opinion had grown more tolerant of the expression of such ideas. That was half a century before Fianna Fail and the Green Party imposed a new blasphemy law on the people of Ireland.

5. Tom Lehrer, The Vatican Rag, 1963: “Get in line in that processional, step into that small confessional. There, the guy who’s got religion’ll tell you if your sin’s original. If it is, try playing it safer, drink the wine and chew the wafer. Two, four, six, eight, time to transubstantiate!”

6. Randy Newman, God’s Song, 1972: “And the Lord said: I burn down your cities – how blind you must be. I take from you your children, and you say how blessed are we. You all must be crazy to put your faith in me. That’s why I love mankind.”

7. James Kirkup, The Love That Dares to Speak its Name, 1976: “While they prepared the tomb I kept guard over him. His mother and the Magdalen had gone to fetch clean linen to shroud his nakedness. I was alone with him… I laid my lips around the tip of that great cock, the instrument of our salvation, our eternal joy. The shaft, still throbbed, anointed with death’s final ejaculation.” This extract is from a poem that led to the last successful blasphemy prosecution in Britain, when Denis Lemon was given a suspended prison sentence after he published it in the now-defunct magazine Gay News. In 2002, a public reading of the poem, on the steps of St. Martin-in-the-Fields church in Trafalgar Square, failed to lead to any prosecution. In 2008, the British Parliament abolished the common law offences of blasphemy and blasphemous libel.

8. Matthias, son of Deuteronomy of Gath, in Monty Python’s Life of Brian, 1979: “Look, I had a lovely supper, and all I said to my wife was that piece of halibut was good enough for Jehovah.”

9. Rev Ian Paisley MEP to the Pope in the European Parliament, 1988: “I denounce you as the Antichrist.” Paisley’s website describes the Antichrist as being “a liar, the true son of the father of lies, the original liar from the beginning… he will imitate Christ, a diabolical imitation, Satan transformed into an angel of light, which will deceive the world.”

10. Conor Cruise O’Brien, 1989: “In the last century the Arab thinker Jamal al-Afghani wrote: ‘Every Muslim is sick and his only remedy is in the Koran.’ Unfortunately the sickness gets worse the more the remedy is taken.”

11. Frank Zappa, 1989: “If you want to get together in any exclusive situation and have people love you, fine – but to hang all this desperate sociology on the idea of The Cloud-Guy who has The Big Book, who knows if you’ve been bad or good – and cares about any of it – to hang it all on that, folks, is the chimpanzee part of the brain working.”

12. Salman Rushdie, 1990: “The idea of the sacred is quite simply one of the most conservative notions in any culture, because it seeks to turn other ideas – uncertainty, progress, change – into crimes.” In 1989, Ayatollah Khomeini of Iran issued a fatwa ordering Muslims to kill Rushdie because of blasphemous passages in Rushdie’s novel The Satanic Verses.

13. Bjork, 1995: “I do not believe in religion, but if I had to choose one it would be Buddhism. It seems more livable, closer to men… I’ve been reading about reincarnation, and the Buddhists say we come back as animals and they refer to them as lesser beings. Well, animals aren’t lesser beings, they’re just like us. So I say fuck the Buddhists.”

14. Amanda Donohoe on her role in the Ken Russell movie Lair of the White Worm, 1995: “Spitting on Christ was a great deal of fun. I can’t embrace a male god who has persecuted female sexuality throughout the ages, and that persecution still goes on today all over the world.”

15. George Carlin, 1999: “Religion easily has the greatest bullshit story ever told. Think about it. Religion has actually convinced people that there’s an invisible man living in the sky who watches everything you do, every minute of every day. And the invisible man has a special list of ten things he does not want you to do. And if you do any of these ten things, he has a special place, full of fire and smoke and burning and torture and anguish, where he will send you to live and suffer and burn and choke and scream and cry forever and ever ’til the end of time! But He loves you. He loves you, and He needs money! He always needs money! He’s all-powerful, all-perfect, all-knowing, and all-wise, somehow just can’t handle money! Religion takes in billions of dollars, they pay no taxes, and they always need a little more. Now, talk about a good bullshit story. Holy Shit!”

16. Paul Woodfull as Ding Dong Denny O’Reilly, The Ballad of Jaysus Christ, 2000: “He said me ma’s a virgin and sure no one disagreed, Cause they knew a lad who walks on water’s handy with his feet… Jaysus oh Jaysus, as cool as bleedin’ ice, With all the scrubbers in Israel he could not be enticed, Jaysus oh Jaysus, it’s funny you never rode, Cause it’s you I do be shoutin’ for each time I shoot me load.”

17. Jesus Christ, in Jerry Springer The Opera, 2003: “Actually, I’m a bit gay.” In 2005, the Christian Institute tried to bring a prosecution against the BBC for screening Jerry Springer the Opera, but the UK courts refused to issue a summons.

18. Tim Minchin, Ten-foot Cock and a Few Hundred Virgins, 2005: “So you’re gonna live in paradise, With a ten-foot cock and a few hundred virgins, So you’re gonna sacrifice your life, For a shot at the greener grass, And when the Lord comes down with his shiny rod of judgment, He’s gonna kick my heathen ass.”

19. Richard Dawkins in The God Delusion, 2006: “The God of the Old Testament is arguably the most unpleasant character in all fiction: jealous and proud of it; a petty, unjust, unforgiving control-freak; a vindictive, bloodthirsty ethnic cleanser; a misogynistic, homophobic, racist, infanticidal, genocidal, filicidal, pestilential, megalomaniacal, sadomasochistic, capriciously malevolent bully.” In 2007 Turkish publisher Erol Karaaslan was charged with the crime of insulting believers for publishing a Turkish translation of The God Delusion. He was acquitted in 2008, but another charge was brought in 2009. Karaaslan told the court that “it is a right to criticise religions and beliefs as part of the freedom of thought and expression.”

20. Pope Benedict XVI quoting a 14th century Byzantine emperor, 2006: “Show me just what Muhammad brought that was new and there you will find things only evil and inhuman, such as his command to spread by the sword the faith he preached.” This statement has already led to both outrage and condemnation of the outrage. The Organisation of the Islamic Conference, the world’s largest Muslim body, said it was a “character assassination of the prophet Muhammad”. The Malaysian Prime Minister said that “the Pope must not take lightly the spread of outrage that has been created.” Pakistan’s foreign Ministry spokesperson said that “anyone who describes Islam as a religion as intolerant encourages violence”. The European Commission said that “reactions which are disproportionate and which are tantamount to rejecting freedom of speech are unacceptable.”

21. Christopher Hitchens in God is not Great, 2007: “There is some question as to whether Islam is a separate religion at all… Islam when examined is not much more than a rather obvious and ill-arranged set of plagiarisms, helping itself from earlier books and traditions as occasion appeared to require… It makes immense claims for itself, invokes prostrate submission or ‘surrender’ as a maxim to its adherents, and demands deference and respect from nonbelievers into the bargain. There is nothing—absolutely nothing—in its teachings that can even begin to justify such arrogance and presumption.”

22. Ian O’Doherty, 2009: “(If defamation of religion was illegal) it would be a crime for me to say that the notion of transubstantiation is so ridiculous that even a small child should be able to see the insanity and utter physical impossibility of a piece of bread and some wine somehow taking on corporeal form. It would be a crime for me to say that Islam is a backward desert superstition that has no place in modern, enlightened Europe and it would be a crime to point out that Jewish settlers in Israel who believe they have a God given right to take the land are, frankly, mad. All the above assertions will, no doubt, offend someone or other.”

23. Cardinal Cormac Murphy-O’Connor, 2009: “Whether a person is atheist or any other, there is in fact in my view something not totally human if they leave out the transcendent… we call it God… I think that if you leave that out you are not fully human.” Because atheism is not a religion, the Irish blasphemy law does not protect atheists from abusive and insulting statements about their fundamental beliefs. While atheists are not seeking such protection, we include the statement here to point out that it is discriminatory that this law does not hold all citizens equal.

24. Dermot Ahern, Irish Minister for Justice, introducing his blasphemy law at an Oireachtas Justice Committee meeting, 2009, and referring to comments made about him personally: “They are blasphemous.” Deputy Pat Rabbitte replied: “Given the Minister’s self-image, it could very well be that we are blaspheming,” and Minister Ahern replied: “Deputy Rabbitte says that I am close to the baby Jesus, I am so pure.” So here we have an Irish Justice Minister joking about himself being blasphemed, at a parliamentary Justice Committee discussing his own blasphemy law, that could make his own jokes illegal.

25. As a bonus, Micheal Martin, Irish Minister for Foreign Affairs, opposing attempts by Islamic States to make defamation of religion a crime at UN level, 2009: “We believe that the concept of defamation of religion is not consistent with the promotion and protection of human rights. It can be used to justify arbitrary limitations on, or the denial of, freedom of expression. Indeed, Ireland considers that freedom of expression is a key and inherent element in the manifestation of freedom of thought and conscience and as such is complementary to freedom of religion or belief.” Just months after Minister Martin made this comment, his colleague Dermot Ahern introduced Ireland’s new blasphemy law.

26. Finally, here is the quote that has caused the Irish police to investigate Stephen Fry for blasphemy. Asked by Gay Byrne on RTE what he would say if he was confronted by God, Fry replied: “How dare you create a world in which there is such misery that is not our fault. It’s not right. It’s utterly, utterly evil. Why should I respect a capricious, mean-minded, stupid God who creates a world which is so full of injustice and pain?” Questioned on how he would react if he was locked outside the pearly gates, he responded: “I would say, ‘Bone cancer in children? What’s that about?’ Because the God who created this universe, if it was created by God, is quite clearly a maniac, utter maniac. Totally selfish. We have to spend our life on our knees thanking him? What kind of God would do that?””

https://atheist.ie/2017/05/25-blasphemous-quotes-in-solidarity-with-stephen-fry/

#atheist #agnostic #secular humanist #skeptic #Religion #Christianity #religious insanity

17 notes · View notes

mrmichaelchadler · 6 years ago

Text

Duck Soup at 85: Make Freedonia Great Again

The people believe the government has been mismanaged and demand it be placed in the new hands of a progressive fearless leader. Newly installed, the president presides over his first executive meeting, during which he blithely insults all of his cabinet directors. “I spend all my time and energy to my duties and what do I get?” one pushes back. “You get awfully tiresome after awhile,” the president responds.

This is not “fake news” coming from the current White House. This is real comedy courtesy of director Leo McCarey, the credited screenwriters Bert Kalmar, Harry Ruby, Arthur Sheekman and Nat Perrin and four Marx brothers, with invaluable support from Margaret Dumont, Edward Kennedy, Louis Calhern and Raquel Torres. The film was—is—“Duck Soup” and it recently celebrated its 85th anniversary.

In 2000, the American Film Institute ranked “Duck Soup” the fifth funniest comedy of the 20th century. We’ll leave for another time whether it is actually funnier than “Some Like It Hot” (No. 1), “Tootsie” (No. 2), “Dr. Strangelove” (No. 3) or “Annie Hall” (you do the math). But it is generally considered by Marx Brothers purists to be the team’s funniest, with no dead spots, gratuitous romantic side plots or even harp and piano solos by Harpo and Chico. It’s non-stop anarchy that was rediscovered and embraced by college-aged Baby Boomers during the Vietnam War, “don’t trust anybody over 30” and Watergate eras.

It has been almost 50 years since that last Marx Brothers revival. At a time of seemingly unprecedented dysfunction in our nation’s capital and public confidence in its lawmakers at an all-time low, is it time for “Duck Soup,” with its farcical take on government, to go viral?

Directed by Leo McCarey (“The Awful Truth,” “Ruggles of Red Gap,” various Laurel and Hardy films), “Duck Soup” is set in the mythological kingdom of Freedonia, where Groucho’s Rufus T. Firefly has been installed as leader by the country’s largest (and don’t think Firefly doesn’t comment on that) financial backer, Mrs. Teasdale (Dumont), Harpo and Chico play two spies hired by Ambassador Trentino (Calhern) of neighboring Sylvania to gather information that would undermine Firefly. Plan B is to gain control of Freedonia is to romance Mrs. Teasdale himself or start a war; whichever comes first. Zeppo plays Firefly’s secretary (he would depart the team following this film).

In adding “Duck Soup” to his pantheon of “Great Movies”, Roger Ebert noted, “‘A Night at the Opera’... contains some of their best work, yes, but in watching it I fast-forward over the sappy interludes involving Kitty Carlisle and Allan Jones. In ‘Duck Soup’ there are no sequences I can skip; the movie is funny from beginning to end.”

“Duck Soup” was the movie that gave Woody Allen’s suicidal character in “Hannah and Her Sisters” a new lease on life. Monty Python was surely playing homage during Holy Grail’s musical number, “Knights of the Round Table” with the knights’ helmets being played like a xylophone as the Marxes did during “Duck Soup”’s “This Country’s Going to War” spectacular. It is perhaps most famous for its mirror scene, an uncharacteristic bit of silent comedy between Groucho and Harpo. (Here’s Lucy and Harpo’s recreation from "I Love Lucy").

There’s no question “Duck Soup” is still funny. But is it still relevant? For those who are not fans of the current president, it is hard not to think of him when Rufus T. Firefly, laying down the laws of his administration, sings, “The last man nearly ruined this place/He didn’t know what to do with it/If you think this country’s bad off now/Just wait ‘til I get through with it.”

It is true that Donald Trump shares Firefly’s thin skin; Firefly plunges his country into war when Trentino calls him an “upstart.” But that’s where the parallels end, according to Roy Blout, Jr., whose salute of the film, Hail, Hail Euphoria! is the literary equivalent to home video commentary. By email, he offered, “‘Duck Soup’ remains profoundly tonic in its take on what’s toxic.”

Conventional wisdom labels “Duck Soup” a scathing anti-war satire. Here’s the punchline: It was not intended as such. This according to Steve Stoliar, who as a college student at UCLA in the 1970s led the charge for the re-release of the long stuck in the vaults “Animal Crackers,” which helped revitalize interest in the Marx Brothers, and who chronicled his years as Groucho’s archivist in the memoir Raised Eyebrows: My Years Inside Groucho’s House.

“Groucho alternated between being amused and annoyed by people reading things into the films that were never intended,” he said in a phone interview. “He was the head of a hotel in ‘The Cocoanuts’ and the head of a college in ‘Horse Feathers.’ The writers thought, ‘Where else can we put Groucho where he doesn’t belong?’ and you can’t get loftier than the head of a mythological kingdom.”

During the heyday of the Marx Brothers revival, Groucho was often asked his favorites of their films. He invariably cited “A Night at the Opera” and “A Day at the Races,” which were made for MGM. “It was when the college students started embracing the Paramount films that Groucho started filtering in ‘Duck Soup,’” Stoliar said. “He didn’t think of “Duck Soup” for years because it marked the end of their Paramount contract (the film had received mixed reviews at the time and, while not a bomb, was not as big at the box office as their previous films). Then [legendary producer Irving Thalberg] brings them into the wonderland of MGM and makes two big moneymaking movies. Groucho felt 'Opera' and 'Races' were their best in terms of story and production values, but in terms of funniness, 'Duck Soup' is the obvious winner. You get out of it that war is not good and that countries start wars over seemingly trivial things. That’s fine, but in terms of the artists’ intentions—it may sound simplistic—but Groucho said, ‘We were just trying to be funny.’”

Still, Benito Mussolini took offense and reportedly banned the film in Italy. And radicalized American college kids related to the brothers’ irreverence and thumbing their noses at authority.

So where does that leave us? Will a new generation that has unprecedented access to movies and TV series be moved to re-discover an 85-year-old movie, in black and white, no less? If you count yourself a comedy geek and you haven’t seen it, what are you waiting for? (When you do see it, be sure to let us know what you think!)

By the way, about that title: several were in play before “Duck Soup,” including “Cracked Ice,” “Firecrackers” and “Grasshoppers.” “Duck Soup” was the title of a 1927 Laurel and Hardy short. But what does it mean? Groucho had this explanation for an interviewer: “Take two turkeys, one goose, four cabbages, but no duck, and mix them together. After one taste, you'll duck soup for the rest of your life."

(Thanks to Matthew Coniam, author of several books about the Marx Brothers, founder of the Marx Brothers Council Facebook community and with Bob Gassel, and Noah Diamond, co-host of the Marx Brothers Council Podcast, for background on the film)

from All Content http://bit.ly/2QlEuUK

0 notes

itsiotrecords-blog · 7 years ago

Link

http://ift.tt/2uDjoL2

Who doesn’t know all about the 140 character goodness of Twitter these days? Originally, the 140 character limit was designed to allow users to send a single “tweet” through a single SMS text message. With over 300 million active monthly Twitter users, it’s hard to imagine a time when people weren’t using this social media giant! If we zap back into reality though, the service has only been a part of our lives for just over a decade. This has us all remembering a time when celebrities, politicians and billionaires were just discovering Twitter. At first, it was just a fun little pop sensation that kept them all current, but soon they realized that it was a powerful requirement to staying relevant! So in researching some of the most active celebrities and Twitter users these days, it is interesting that just like every person’s first words as a baby, we each get one shot at our first tweet! Some make the most of it, tweeting a profound statement or making a hilarious entry, while others have a very anti-climactic debut to the twitter-verse. Amazingly, there is one instance where someone has thousands of followers despite not having ever sent a tweet! While sifting through countless celebrity accounts, I have identified 15 of the best, funniest and most interesting “first tweets” put out to the world.

#1 Donald Trump Way back in 2009, when Donald Trump was some ordinary celebrity billionaire with a reality television series, he (or rather his people) decided to try this Twitter thing. Over 33 million followers, a Presidential election and daily news media discussion concerning his personal tweeting later and The Donald has so much social media power that the mere mention of a company or industry in a single tweet can create a change in the stock market! But waaaay back in 2009 when it all started for him, his epic first tweet was asking people to tune in to watch “him” do the David Letterman Top Ten list. At that point, other people obviously handled his tweeting for him. He wasn’t even a candidate at that point, but perhaps his old tweeting habits would serve him better than the personal touches he has added now.

#2 Katy Perry With over 100.5 million Twitter followers, Katy Perry is the number one account with the most followers in the world. That is such an amazingly impressive number that she could literally stop performing and recording music and just work her Twitter presence and still generate millions of dollars every year! But the monster that is her Twitter following all got started back on February 20, 2009 when she decided to tweet out that she had just arrived in Berlin and that she was feeling better (she was apparently a little under the weather). She also excitedly acknowledged her new Twitter presence and called herself a “follower.” Well Katy, with over 100 million “followers” to your account, we think the tables have turned. Who is the follower now Miss Perry?

#3 Cashmeousside Girl Danielle Bregoli, more commonly known as “Cashmeousside Girl” is known for her terrible behavior toward…well, everyone! She rocked the world when she went on Dr. Phil and showed off. Since then, she’s become one of the most viral memes of all time, has been on a variety of web shows and commands (and gets) big bucks to make personal appearances and say her famous catchphrase “cashmeousside, how bou dat?” But this has all been at the age of 13 when she was young and dumb. She’s now at the mature age of 14 and seems to be growing up. So what was her first tweet almost five long months ago? It doesn’t make much sense to anyone that doesn’t know what on earth she’s talking about. Calling some girl a hoe and referring to a butt pad. Way to keep your twitter entrance classy Danielle.

#4 Justin Bieber While Katy Perry is solidly in first place when it comes to Twitter followers, Justin Bieber is at an impressive second place. Bieber has had his ups and downs as a celebrity, going from cute kid singing his heart out on YouTube to international sensation, to self-absorbed douchebag celebrity to back on top and a little more classy. Through it all, his loyal fans (Beliebers) have kept the faith in him. His Twitter following has climbed and climbed since his first tweet in May of 2009. His first tweet was nothing ceremonial, except to promote “One Time” on his myspace page. If he knew then that his Twitter following would be as substantial as it has become, he likely would have said something more clever. But then again… this is Justin Bieber we’re talking about.

#5 Kris Jenner March 10, 2009 is a day that will live in infamy. Why? Because it’s the day Kris Jenner announced herself to the Twitter world and confessed that she invited all of her kids to join Twitter as well. I wonder if Kris realized the Pandora’s Box she was opening with those invites?! Truthfully, they probably would have found Twitter anyway, as it has obviously become a force that just couldn’t be stopped. Kris has managed to keep her fame and fame of her children going well past the typical fifteen minutes they deserve. She is still a hot reality star and a household name that most everyone recognizes. So sure enough, she’s been tweeting up a storm ever since that fateful day and hasn’t looked back. Thanks for nothing Kris.

#6 Kim Kardashian West One of those kids Kris Jenner invited to Twitter was her oldest daughter Kim Kardashian West. We all have come to know and tolerate Kim for so many different reasons. She is best known as being famous for being famous. Kim has done modeling, but it was the reality television show Keeping Up With the Kardashians that really made her “career” take off. So what was Kim’s first tweet and when? Well, it was a whole 11 days after her mother’s invitation to join (I guess she had to do some research) and Kim said to the world that she was on Twitter and while there were some fakes, this was the real one. A likely story for any posers out there. Of course, this was before Twitter had “verified” accounts.

#7 Oprah In April of 2009, her royal highness, Oprah Winfrey herself graced the Twitter world with her presence for the first time! Oprah today has one of the most followed accounts on the whole platform, but at the time, she very humbly said hello and acknowledged that she was a little late to the Twitter party by saying that she was feeling “really 21st century.” Oprah also said hello to the “Twitters.” This has us really wondering…considering that the term for those using Twitter tends to be questionable. Universally though, we are pretty sure that the term “Twitters” never took off. Tweeps, Tweeple and others have picked up some steam, but there isn’t just one word for users of the site. Sorry Oprah, but you don’t get to claim that one.

#8 John Cleese Some of the funniest things ever said didn’t actually use a whole lot of words, or require an extensive setup. John Cleese is known for his work with “Monty Python” and he has had a very prosperous and successful acting career. He is also one of the funniest British actors of his generation. He is also 77 years old, leaving us to think that perhaps he may not have the most to say on Twitter. True, his account isn’t at the top of the most followed list, but he does have 5.5 million followers. His first tweet was way back in December of 2007 when the platform was still very new. His profound entry into the world of Twitter was to say “ i am still alive” (all in lowercase with no punctuation). Nuff said I suppose John. Well done.

#9 CNN CNN has among the highest followings on Twitter. They have embraced the notion of using social media to expand their mission of delivering information and breaking news beautifully. Coming into the world of Twitter in early 2007 was a brilliant early move and they have reaped the rewards of being the news source with the highest following. So what amazing statement did they make as their first mark on the world of social media via Twitter? It was to announce the death of Anna Nicole Smith at age 39. While this was truly a sad event that no one would mock, it does seem somewhat odd that this is the first thing CNN decided to post. Either way, welcome to the tweeting world CNN, we’re glad you were one of the first to the party.

#10 Conan O’Brien Spending years as NBC’s show after the Tonight Show, Conan O’Brien established himself as funny, personable and one of the greats in late night television. Conan briefly took the reins of The Tonight Show but was quickly let go. Not one to run away with his tail between his legs, Conan went over to TBS and introduced their first step into late night. His show Conan has been extremely popular and well received by fans. Conan has been on Twitter for awhile now and looking back to his first tweet, we are not at all disappointed to see how funny he was from the beginning. He tweeted that he interviewed a squirrel in his backyard and then threw to commercial. This was in early 2010 in between his work at NBC and TBS. I think he was trying to tell us something with this tweet.

#11 Bill Clinton Former President of the United States Bill Clinton really needs to introduction. He spent eight years living in The White House and sincerely believed that he would be living there for four more at least. Bill didn’t have the luxury or burden (depending upon how you look at it) of Twitter during his two terms, but he did decide to join the party in April of 2013. He was a little late, but decided to get on board anyway. I guess he figured he’d better get all setup with social media before the 2016 election. Stephen Colbert gets the honor of being the topic of his first tweet. Clinton asked if he was sane? Then he said that he was cool. He even added a hashtag at the end of the tweet…#cgiu. Look at you being all modern Bill!

#12 Evan Spiegel Evan Spiegel is known as the youngest billionaire in the world. He is the CEO and co-founder of Snapchat. Sure, all these social media platforms are kind of indirectly competing with one another, but they still all use each of the other’s platform (even if it’s a secret account). Evan Spiegel has a verified Twitter account, meaning that it is the REAL him. He only has 58,000 followers though, which seems insanely low for such a high profile guy. He joined Twitter in 2010, so what gives? Well, you may notice that he has never…not once sent a tweet! Evan apparently has nothing to tweet about…but plenty to snapchat about I guess. It is kind of interesting though that 58,000 people follow an account that says absolutely nothing. The silence is deafening.

#13 Jerry Seinfeld Jerry Seinfeld is one of the most respected comedians in the world. Heck…at this point, he is one of the most respected comedians in history! He has carved out his place in history for sure. Best known for his “show about nothing” called Seinfeld back in the 90s, when Jerry speaks, everyone listens. So in 2013, when he opted to join Twitter, he said “hello Tweetarians” (that’s a new one) and acknowledged that this could be his last tweet. Well thankfully, it wasn’t his last tweet. He has tweeted out nearly 1,500 times and is followed by almost 5 million people! Surely he realized quickly that this was a pretty great way to communicate with fans and promote the work he does. Good thinking Jerry and we’re glad you decided to stick around.

#14 Kate Upton Model and actress Kate Upton may get the award for most hilarious first tweet. We have got to give her a lot of credit for coming up with something so witty to introduce herself to the world of Twitter. Back in October of 2010, she tweeted out: “I am trying to figure out how to make the background a picture of my boobs.” While this is surely something many slack jawed gawkers would absolutely love (anyone that has seen Kate Upton will get the point), Twitter wouldn’t stand for it I’m sure. She now has a couple of million followers, which clearly indicates that she doesn’t take building her social media presence all that seriously. Either way…she has a verified account and a few thousand tweets under her belt.

#15 First Tweet Ever…Jack Dorsey (CEO of Twitter) We really couldn’t have a list like this without posting the first official tweet ever sent out into the vast expanse of the Twitter-verse. Jack Dorsey, the CEO of Twitter established his account, @jack in March of 2006. What did he say you may ask? “Just setting up my twttr.” That’s kind of a let down when it comes to a historic event like the first tweet. Heck…he didn’t even spell out the word “Twitter.” He wasn’t even close to the 140 character limit! To paraphrase Forrest Gump: “If I had known that would be the first tweet I sent the world…I’d have thought of something better to say.” Nevertheless, when you need a conversation starter, here is a little nugget of information for you…the first tweet in history.

Source: TheRichest

#IoTRecords

0 notes

caredogstips · 7 years ago

Text

How ‘Harry Potter’ Saved Young Adult Fiction

What would the children’s notebook world look like if” Harry Potter” had never popped into J.K. Rowling’s head, as she’s described it, fully formed? Hypotheticals are never easy, but a “Harry Potter” -less world — well, that’s just about impossible to imagine.

By the same token, elucidating Rowling’s influence from the greater arc of children’s literature during the past two decades is a fraught assignment. Her “Potter” tale invigorated frenzied freeing parties, floundering numbers of pre-orders, millions of words of fan story and, as it stands now, nine feature film: It’s an easy assumption that this seminal sequence fundamentally changed middle-grade and YA fiction.

And it surely did. The sell for this type of volumes, especially fantasy, explosion during the course of its early aughts, as” Harry Potter” took off. Not exactly lightweight line like” The Baby-Sitters Club” or one-offs like The Fault in Our Stars , either; publishers embarked offering teenagers blockbuster succession like” The Hunger Recreation ,” ” Twilight ,” and “Divergent.” Then again, spate of writers were already offering well-crafted fantasy and realism for young readers. What can really be laid to Rowling’s account?

PA Wire/ PA Images

Twenty years after Harry first went into the world with the initial booklet of Harry Potter and the Philosopher’s Stone , we’re still amazing what the phenomenon has really meant for girls works and the publishing world at large, and where we would be without it. “Harry Potter” activated a cult that seemed totally unprecedented in the world of children’s literature. The books themselves, though — not much about them was absolutely unprecedented.

Aside from the whole magic aspect, tales of Hogwarts fall firmly into the beloved tradition of volumes about kids away at academy.” Obviously it was improving not on precisely fantasy but the boarding school works ,” Peter Glassman, founder of the children’s bookshop Books of Wonder, told HuffPost. Tom Brown’s School Days , The Little Princess , Daddy-Long-Legs , Malory Towers and other boarding school volumes free up their youthful boosters for escapade by separating them from parents and family obligations, residence them in a location where the relations with other children, and their round-the-clock hijinks, can take center stage.

The boarding school has proven to be a perfect mounting for a imagination novel throughout the past century.” The mystical wizarding academy had been did before ,” pointed out Joe Monti, the editorial director of Saga Press and a longtime participate in the children’s literature arena, in an email to HuffPost. He specifically praised Ursula K. Le Guin’s classic series “Earthsea” and Diana Wynne Jones’s ” Chrestomanci ” heptalogy, but it was a much more permeating trope than we are able to realize in a post- “Potter” nature. ( Now, when you Google” wizarding school ,” the featured snippet and nine of the 10 first-page results are specifically about Rowling’s fictional schools, which include Hogwarts and other non-British schools she has identified, such as Beauxbatons and Ilvermorny. The 10 th is the Wikipedia page for fictional wizarding schools, which prominently boasts the “Harry Potter” universe .)

Before Hogwarts, there were a number of wizarding schools that featured a number of aspects of Rowling’s hit. In Jane Yolen’s 1991 Wizard’s Hall , an 11 -year-old boy named Henry ascertains himself reading incantations in a mystical school where decorates express. Jill Murphy’s” Worst Witch” series, initially begun in the 1970 s, featured the inept Mildred Hubble, a student at Miss Cackle’s Academy for Witches, who has two well-meaning friends and one nasty, aristocratic rival. Tamora Pierce wrote her” Circle of Magic” quadruplet, which also firstly published in 1997, about four fledgling mages who find themselves at Winding Circle, a synagogue community, and learn magic from expert dedicates who live there. Set against this backdrop, Hogwarts seems like only another observe in a familiar tune.

No one is totally original. Everyone builds on everyone else’s stories. Peter Glassman, founder of Books of Wonder

In an email interview with HuffPost, Pierce have also pointed out that the wizarding academy was only one of numerous tropes revisited by “Harry Potter.” ” The battlefield at the time ,” she wrote,” already had teenagers fighting through tough readings and unfair coaches; something strange going on at academy; hateful step-parents; boy heroes marked for Destiny with kill-crazy foes; boy heroes with a expand flubsy son crony and a super-smart girl crony; boy heroes with kindly mentors; boy heroes with pets; boy hero surprisingly good at athletics; son heroes with super influences/ magical/ artilleries; seemingly unkillable Big Bads with zillions of evil minions .”

Not that this should be the degree. Rowling may well be the first fantasy author some children read, or Hogwarts the first mystical academy some fallen in love with — but even if she wasn’t actually the first, so what?” No one is totally original ,” replied Glassman.” Everyone built around everyone else’s narrations. So originality isn’t the thing .”

Besides, Pierce added, the world of Hogwarts did furnish new revels.” Hidden school passageways and chambers in which children get into real bother( Hogwarts is the most unsafe institution ever !); a teach who physically tortures the boy hero; consistent law-breaking and’ right provided’ which rectifies nothing at all ,” she registered — those, along with the athletic of Quidditch, brought forward brand-new, or at the least newly popular, topics in children’s literature.

In our devastating eagerness to fete J.K. Rowling, though, it’s worth taking time to explore the full nature of children’s fiction and to recognize is not simply her forebears but her contemporaries and those who followed in her paces.” I think sometimes what get lost in the interference is the accomplishment of all those other scribes ,” Glassman articulated.” Yes, what[ Rowling] did was phenomenal. But a lot of other columnists are doing wonderful things — and I sometimes feel like, hey, what about them? And the ones who returned before ?”

mark peterson via Getty Images

Children standing online for a new “Harry Potter” journal at Glassman’s Books of Wonder, which has been devoted to children’s volumes, specially fantasy and fairy tales, since it opened in 1980.

Once Rowling — whom Glassman said he’s heard described as” a publisher’s dreaming “; good-looking, adept at being interviewed in any format, and a gifted author — embroiled onto the stage, it was quickly impossible for any other author to keep pace with her fame, force and acclaim. Children’s book columnists, specially fantasy scribes, who were once the masters of their realm discovered themselves ignored in media coverage and discussions among” Harry Potter .”

Pierce, “whove been” writing fantasize for boys for years by then, said she ever realise it” a spot of dignity never to be jealous of another generator .” Still, she found that” the bare mention of Harry or his scribe made me sulky .” For novelists “whove been” generating inventive, obliging imagination works for young readers for years, it must have been at least a little bit infuriating to interpret a brand-new writer scope in and garner all the recognition for introducing kids to the magical of decipher, and reading about magical. Then, Pierce alleged, she, along with other with YA writers and experts, participated in a board exclusively devoted to the popularity of the three then-published” Harry Potter” works. What was the secret sauce?

” By the time the members of the commission was over, I was free ,” she remembered.” Nobody knew . No one there could point to a determining factor that became the books popular .”

All of these components that girls seemed to latch onto in the sequence had been done before, they concluded. Rowling hadn’t detected some new formula or conception that had captivated a starved population of readers — she’d exploited known elements of children’s literature to write the right works at the right time for the right readers.

That doesn’t mean Rowling wasn’t extremely creative, from her absurdly fascinating wizarding vocabulary to the complex seven-book-long whodunit arc she crafted. In detail, her most massive innovation might well the present middle-grade and young adult fiction marketplace. If we think of favourite pre-Rowling authors as big fish in a small pond, they may now look like smaller fish for purposes of comparison — but the pond has become a Great Lake.

Harry Potter prepared the careers of numerous writers possible. Joe Monti, Editorial Director of Saga Press

The ” Potter ” furor, told Monti,” proliferated the market exponentially .” And when market expect originates, there are more a chance for the person or persons realizing the make — in such a case, that would be middle-grade and YA authors.” Harry Potter ,” he pronounced,” prepared the careers of numerous writers possible .” With minors( and, yes, adults) clamoring for something to read in the longer months and years between Rowling liberates, publishers had a lawful demand to meet: Fantasy sagas geared towards younger readers, and eventually any kind of myth written for middle-grade and young adult readers.

” When’ HP’ first strike[ the U.S .] in’ 98, it surely made an impact ,” responded Glassman. In his iconic children’s storage, Books of Wonder, he noticed that” parties were looking for books like that, because there was nothing else … “were in” selling a lot of Lloyd Alexander, E. Nesbit, plainly the “Narnia” volumes, The Hobbit , L.M. Boston .” Meanwhile, the publishing industry’s paraphernaliums were swerving. It takes a couple of years, Glassman pointed out, to jump on a brand-new, sudden publishing tendency. Editors and agents have to find people writing similar notebooks, acquire them, revise them and publish them , nothing of which can be accomplished overnight.

Eventually, though, it wasn’t just classics that were benefiting from the “Potter” mania. New generators were getting possibilities, more. Over the ensuing years, the sheer amount of volumes published for girls seems to have bagged; in 2011, The Atlantic reported that the number of YA journals had increased by a factor of 10 between 1997 and 2009. Those precise quantities have been feuded, but it’s not the only statistic. Year after year, annual sales statistics show that rising demand for children’s notebooks is bolstering the entire publishing industry.

Though realist writers like John Green have also prospered in” Harry Potter’s” wake, the effect seems to have been particularly potent for genre columnists. Gail Carson Levine, the Newbery Award-winning author of middle-grade fantasy tales, recalled that when she embarked paying close attention to the market in the 1990 s, most volumes for younger readers were general myth. After” Harry Potter ,” which debuted in the U.K. the same year that Carson Levine publicized her beloved fairy tale novel Ella Enchanted , she noticed that” there came to be more imagination. It was very good for fantasy because it was a market that parties knew existed .”

You can attract a dotted text to the mainstreaming of geek culture through ‘Harry Potter.’ Joe Monti

Glassman noted that some of the books that followed in Harry‘s paces may have been strictly simulated, but the enduring request the series had uncovered for fiction in young readers permitted ability in the category to flourish. Notebooks came out by fantasize authors who were encouraged by the Potter success, generators who might have thought to themselves,” I ever wanted to write like that but didn’t think I could sell them ,” he added.

It’s easy to forget, Monti clarified,” truly how disparaged fantasy was, as a category, in children’s and YA literature — a bias that intersected into adult as well. The information that’ Harry Potter’ midnight secrete parties were the contest to go to as a teen was altogether extraordinary in geek culture. You can draw a dotted route to the mainstreaming of geek culture through’ Harry Potter .'”

Pierce, who was already publishing high fantasize chronicles for girls when the” Potter” craze impressed, saluted this change.” Speaking as someone who was trashed to the dogs and back for speaking’ that rubbish’ and writing it ,” she said,” I am pleased about this .”

” It wasn’t a cult; we’re not going back ,” Monti read.” Fantasy is mainstream .”

Actually,” Harry Potter” blended several calibers that publishers previously thought didn’t appeal much to girls: The reasonably nerdy category of fantasize, particularly thick-skulled books, and a long serial with an overarching narrative arc that challenged you start at the beginning and read the whole way through. All of these occasions may have existed in middle-grade and YA markets before “Potter,” but the conventional wisdom was that they were indebtedness or ill-suited for the age group.

Carson Levine was, she speaks now, “astonished” at” how long [‘ Harry Potter’] was and how willing boys were to read that length. When I started, I was told at children’s volume meetings that you had to stay under 200 pages .” Though she acknowledges she didn’t stay under that target, service industries promise was clear.

Pierce reiterated that the” most major” affect of” Harry Potter” success was that it persuaded parties that children would read longer books.” I would have thought that the notoriety of Brian Jacques” Redwall’ books, beginning in the mid-1 980 s, would have reassured publishers kids required longer volumes, but it took’ Harry Potter ,'” she told.

Middle-grade and YA were once dominated by one-off volumes and by episodic line that seemed to have no inaugurating or dissolve –” Nancy Drew ,”” Sweet Valley High ,” “Baby-Sitters Club.” With the demand for Potter-esque dealerships, Carson Levine pointed out, succeeded an embrace of a different kind of YA brand. No longer did publishers assume that teenagers didn’t have the perseverance or notice distance for a single search split across two or more books. Grandiose sagas for children with” that very big tale arc ,” Carson Levine did –” Hunger Games ,” ” Twilight ,” “Divergent,” ” The Red Queen” — became popular.

Michael Hurcomb via Getty Images

After “Harry Potter, ” blockbuster Y.A. succession like “The Hunger Games became the new normal.

“Harry Potter” also did something both necessary, because of its length and massive fanbase, and risky, because it makes it difficult for new readers to binge-read the whole line. It embarked as a middle-grade serial, then originated steadily darker, longer and more challenging. By the time Deathly Hallows , the final notebook in the succession, produced, the series had clearly leveled up to young adults. The the main theme of budding virility, battlegrounds strewn with fatalities and ultimate self-sacrifice seem geared more toward boys than toward 10 -year-olds. Of track, the series’ initial followers got to grow up with the books and encounter out the whodunit that had hooked them from the beginning. But it’s a ticklish pattern for children’s literature; whereas you are able to read as many “Baby-Sitters Club” notebooks as you like for as long as you are in the target age scope and then stop, a tale like” Harry Potter” that evolves to span multiple age ranges stirs it more challenging for anyone to read the entire series within one year.

Despite the challenges posed by Harry’s, and the “Harry Potter” volumes ‘, coming of age, Jonathan Alexander, Chancellor’s Professor of English at the University of California, Irvine, interprets it as one of the line’ most powerful derives.” You don’t get a lot of those series such that the readers are growing up with the specific characteristics ,” he pointed out. There is precedent, of course; he quoth Anne of Green Gables , which was published over 100 years ago, and follows a spunky orphan from childhood into adulthood. Narratives about young men who come of age over the course of the toil have often, historically, been favourite — they’ve just been marketed toward adults. Even the serialized quality of the bildungsroman arc isn’t new.” It’s not at all dissimilar from David Copperfield , in which Dickens lays out […] the story of David Copperfield that you could follow over age, and watch him develop to adulthood ,” he pronounced.” That was pitched mainly to adults .”

Alexander argued that there’s a universal infatuation with growing up, even though works specifically about young people are frequently viewed as best suited for children.” I think we’re mesmerized by the development process ,” he told.” It’s not just for young readers to have a model, but for older readers themselves to meditate on how we grow up .” No wonder, then, that the” Potter” journals determined an anxious adult audience. As the line derived, it became more and more same to works that have, in the past, been sold to grown-ups: tales of young person discovering to make their road in a frightening and erratic macrocosm. The post-” Potter” Y.A. world-wide, Alexander recommended, has skewed more towards the sort of sophisticated, complex coming-of-age tales that have always appealed to adults — and adults and young adults alike are relishing them.

A health component of the brand-new popularity of young adult story can be attributed to these enthusiastic adult readers, but it seems that the” Harry Potter” phenomenon has also reinvigorated reading among young people. In 2011, McSweeney’s noted that according to the NEA, between 1982 and 2002, the number of young adults who speak literature had dropped by 20 percent. In 2009, the NEA found that this stat had rebounded — between 2002 and 2008, young adult readership had risen 21 percent.

Numbers can be tricky, though. We simply don’t know for sure how much of such an increase can be immediately find to “Harry Potter.” Much like Harry himself — an extraordinary hero whose victory over dark supernaturals likely depended on a legion of less-famous heroes, from Hermione and Ron to Neville Longbottom and Mrs. Weasley — the books are often singled out as the sole savior of YA, but it’s unlikely they alone built the abundant children’s literary landscape we have today. Perhaps the children’s journal world-wide was waiting for a savior, and Rowling just happened to arrive with the sword of Gryffindor. Perhaps the “Potter” phenomenon simply intensified an unavoidable raise in the sector.

” Speaking as someone who was trashed to the dogs and back for reading’ that garbage’ and writing[ fantasy ], I am pleased about this .” Tamora Pierce

With a health and prospering middle-grade and YA market, fortunes are we’ll never again see something like “Harry Potter”: A children’s book saga that captures the imagery of the whole world and leaves us forever changed. Inside the YA world, scribes and professionals who spoke to HuffPost replied parties aren’t expecting to find another ” Harry Potter .” Superstars, pointed out Glassman, “re coming out” specific circumstances.” Babe Ruth was just the right time to be the lore he was, ” he illustrated — and so was Rowling.” There’s never going to be another J.K. Rowling ,” Glassman replied.

Instead, today’s YA generators are playing inside a much greater sandbox, working for a known audience and pushing borders in other paths.” We’re lastly publicizing more fantasy — and specially science fiction — from express that have been marginalized in the past ,” suggested Monti. In Rowling’s notebooks, and in many past imagination ten-strikes, the central references were grey, straight, cisgender and able-bodied. Though the literary macrocosm remains far more grey, columnists like Sabaa Tahir ( An Ember in the Ashes ), Ellen Oh ( Prophecy ), and general story writer Angie Thomas ( The Hate U Give ) have begun to make inroads with most diverse exponents.” This pattern needs to keep ripening ,” Monti alleged,” because the idea that LGBTQ and brown kids don’t speak or sell is a rear opening scene .”

“Harry Potter” blew the roof off of children’s literature. But that doesn’t mean the work is done — for YA authors, it precisely entails more scope for the imagination.

From June 1 to 30, HuffPost is celebrating the 20 th commemoration of the very first” Harry Potter” book by reminiscing about all things Hogwarts. Accio childhood remembers .