#on a slightly related note i should reread In His Own Image

[light-wrath-paradise]

Yeah anyway so remember how in SCP Foundation there was a (pretty significant) character named Dr. Bright who, upon his death, would basically possess the body of whoever touched the amulet his soul is in last, and the only way to change hosts was to kill the person he was inhabiting at the moment? Was that incredibly fucked up or what?

[kiragecko]

Reviews of Christian Allegorical FANTASY

Note: Christianity is a broad, varied thing. I can only write from my perspective, and it’s hard to describe that perspective to an international audience. Words have different meanings in different countries. But this is what I think about the various Christian allegorical fiction I’ve read, measured by writing quality, allegorical quality, and ability to make me happy. Your perspective may vary.

 Chronicles of Narnia, by C.S. Lewis –

Writing: Y’all know this guy is good.

Allegory: Shockingly strong for something with such mass appeal. And deeper than you thought as a kid. Never sidelines the story, because he’s integrated the two so well.

Problems: So, you don’t notice the colonialism, racism, classism, sexism, and mild ableism as a kid. Dude was a white British man during the early and mid 1900s. He does not entirely rise above his culture. Some of the dehumanization of species/cultures that are obvious stand-ins for real world cultures horrified me during my latest reread. And it’s subtle enough that it’s hard to point out to kids.

Story: The story is great. I’ve read ‘The Horse And His Boy’ so many times that my papa’s copy is held together with tape. He wouldn’t let me take them when I moved out. Had to buy my own. It was tragic.

 The Archives of Anthropos, by John White –

Writing: Reminds me of Terry Brooks, a little. In that the writing is servicable, and some of the fantasy is pretty derivative, but it’s definitely not bad. The roots are strong, but he didn’t have enough experience to cut all the weaker bits and ruthlessly rewrite.

Allegory: Solid. Not tacked on, not super deep. Really good for a Narnia imitation.

Problems: Not sure, haven’t reread in a while. Pika didn’t like a battle near the beginning, so we had to stop.

Story: It’s set in Winnipeg!!! Unashamed about being heavily inspired by Narnia, this series is a delight. Not as good as it’s inspiration, of course, but it feels like a heartfelt fan letter. Some of the ideas are REALLY cool. This series is worth reading, you guys! Especially the first 2 books.

 The Circle (Black, Red, and White), by Ted Dekker –

Writing: Readable. Slick. Masculine.

Allegory: Lacked both the desired subtly and the necessary depth. Felt like it was written for fantasy fans that felt guilty about reading secular books, rather than to say something important.

Story: Don’t like Narnia-esque books aimed at adults. Allegories shouldn’t be trying to be cool. Not a fan. (But please note that these opinions were formed 15-20 years ago. I may have been missing something.)

 The Space Trilogy, by C.S. Lewis –

Writing: Again, this is C.S. Lewis. He’s good at writing.

Allegory: A little weird, for me. But I struggle with allegory for adults. One of the books is Adam and Eve on Venus, with original sin working slightly differently? I don’t get it.

Problems: My problem is that I don’t like it! Sometimes it reads like Douglas Adams, but not funny. That makes no sense!

Story: Don’t like Narnia-esque books aimed at adults, even if they’re written by the authour of Narnia. This is Sci-Fi. There is romance. Really not for me.

 The Story of the Other Wise Man, by Henry Van Dyke –

Writing: Good, if I remember correctly. Feels dated and classic, like it should be from Victorian times. (I just checked, it’s from 1895.)

Allegory: Like most morality from more than a century ago, it reads a bit weird. Just, life was a lot harsher then. Nice clear simple message, just taught from a mindset I don’t totally understand.

Story: As a kid, this one made me SAD! He loses everything and feels like a failure! Does have a good message, teaching is sound, good storytelling, but it wasn’t fun enough to make the lesson stick.

 Left Behind, by Tim Lahaye and Jerry B. Jenkins -

Writing: I remember the writing being fine. They read like thrillers, which isn’t a bad thing. I’ve enjoyed some thrillers.

Allegory: Revelations is ALREADY an allegory. This is just an uninspired expansion.

Problems: Everything.

Story: I hate apocalyptic/post-apocalyptic stories. This series wasn’t written by someone who was bothered by the suffering of everyone who made ‘wrong’ choices, and that makes it hollow and awful. ‘We’re so good and smart and better than other people!’ NO. That is not Christianity.

 A Wrinkle In Time, by Madeleine L’Engle –

I still don’t get how this series is Christian?? Really freaked me out as a kid. Had quite a few nightmares.

After a little research, it turns out that she has a very different understanding of Christianity then me. You’ll have to get a review from someone who can see from that perspective.

 Duncton Wood, by William Horwood –

Writing: Extremely good. Heavy and beautiful. Kept me reading as I got more and more weirded out.

Allegory: Not a Christian allegory. And yet Christian enough, in a weird Anglican(??) way, to make it difficult to interpret as non-Christian. There’s a Jesus figure who gets martyred. There are schisms. It’s weird.

Problems: Almost certainly shouldn’t be on this list, yet I spent half an hour searching for it because I was so sure it was supposed to be on this list.

Story: Moles and their experiences with religion. There are similarities to Watership Down and Redwall, Narnia and Lord of the Rings. (The last mostly in language/writing style). If it wasn’t so close to Christian allegory as to be in the uncanny valley, I would have loved it! As it is, I would have prefered LESS Christ.

 Christian ALLEGORICAL Fantasy

The Pilgrim’s Progress, by Paul Bunyan –

Writing: (Note: I’ve only read versions rewritten for kids. At least one was heavily abridged.) This was written in 1678. That is a LONG time ago. The worldview is really different from ours. Also, the versions I read were not inspired updates.

Allegory: This was written only 100 years after the Protestant Reformation. Punishments are incredibly disproportionate. Rich people have completely different rules than the poor, and this is seen as Godly. It’s been over 20 years since I read this book, and I don’t remember much, but it’s a weird read if you’re expecting modern concepts of right and wrong.

Story: Fascinating! Did not enjoy. Might as an adult. Reading an allegory that you can’t relate to at all is a weird experience.

 Hind’s Feet On High Places, by Hannah Hunnard -

Writing: (Note: I’ve only read the version rewritten for kids.) Writing is really good.

Allegory: Names that are just English words have always annoyed me. Other than that pet peeve, this is extremely good. Straight-forward enough to be read to a 7 year old, complex enough for me to reference when I’m trying to describe my experiences to my husband. Solid Christianity, with enough hard stuff to challenge you, while still managing to be fun.

Problems: We’ve got some nasty ableism baked into the setting (disability as metaphor for sin and bondage), and the images are painfully white.

Story: I love this book! This is a Pilgrim’s Progress that actually matches with Christianity as I understand it. If you’re looking for a fun fantasy with a good message, this isn’t it. If you’re looking for a distillation of Christianity, told as a story because that makes it more accessible – this is a good one.

 The Divine Comedy, by Dante Alighieri –

Haven’t read it.

 Tales of the Kingdom, by David and Karen Mains -

Writing: The first collection of stories is really strong. The next 2 get weaker. Short stories read differently than novels, and the writing style works well for that format.

Allegory: TOO strong. Some of the stories still make me mad to think about, because the messages are HARD. (Also, names that are just English words still annoy me, no matter now much I love the series.)

Problems: Ableism – true selves don’t have disabilities and are always beautiful. Art is not 100% white, but all the most beautiful people seem to be. And I love lizards far too much to handle the dragon story.

Story: These stories mean a lot to me. They are very much not something a non-believer is going to enjoy. They tend to focus on the parts of Christianity that are hard, uncomfortable, and/or different from mainstream culture. They also stick with you for decades. Narnia is my favourite series on this list to read, but Tales of the Kingdom might be the best for exploring your faith. Highly, highly recommend.

[princesssarisa]

Disney MBTI: Belle as an INFP vs. Belle as an INFJ or ENFJ (warning: long)

As I’ve explored the Myers-Briggs Type Indicator and plunged into the world of fictional character typing, I’ve noticed one inescapable thing: that different people assign different personality types to the same character.

For example, let’s look at a character we all know is a favorite of mine: Belle from Disney’s Beauty and the Beast. Almost every MBTI source online types her as an INFP. But I’ve sometimes seen her typed as an INFJ too. I’ve also occasionally seen her typed as an INTJ or an ISFJ, though I definitely don’t agree with either. (Unless I’m mistaken, Funkymbtifiction used to have her typed as an ISFJ, but has since retyped her as an INFP.) Meanwhile, A Little Bit of Personality, which technically isn’t MBTI but a unique typing system derived from Jung, Briggs and Briggs-Myers’ work (and which in some ways I prefer to mainstream MBTI) doesn’t even type her as an Introvert, but as an ENFJ!

As believable as the traditional INFP typing is for Belle, the more I think about it, the more valid it feels to type her as an INFJ or ENFJ instead. Not more valid than INFP, but just as valid. Below I’ve analyzed Belle from the perspective of every MBTI cognitive function, observing how each might be seen to manifest in her. The two main cases I present are for the popular “Belle as INFP” vs. A Little Bit of Personality’s “Belle as ENFJ.” This makes for an easy comparison, because INFP and ENFJ have zero cognitive functions in common, and yet their types of functions appear in the same order: Feeling, Intuition, Sensing and Thinking. An INFP uses Introverted Feeling and Sensing, Extraverted Intuition and Thinking, while an ENFJ uses Extraverted Feeling and Sensing, Introverted Intuition and Thinking. Of course if you think she’s definitely not an ENFJ, then the same functions could be used to type her as an INFJ, just in the INFJ’s slightly different order.

(Note: This analysis only applies to the original 1991 animated Belle and the 1994 stage musical Belle. The 2017 live-action Belle is too different a character to add to the equation: I’d probably type her either as an INFP, an INTP or an INTJ, but definitely not as an INFJ or ENFJ.)

The case for Belle as an Fi user (Introverted Feeling) This is an easy argument. First of all, Belle is a social introvert, “never part of any crowd,” “with a dreamy, far-off look and her nose stuck in a book.” More importantly, she’s always authentically herself and lets no one else dictate her life. Despite being a friendless misfit, she makes no attempt to fit in with her neighbors, but prefers to withdraw into stories of romance and adventure. The iconic image of her wandering through the village absorbed in her book, seemingly oblivious to the townspeople singing about her, speaks for itself, as do the “odd” little things she does, like hitching a ride on the back of someone else’s wagon or talking to sheep. We might also argue that we see stereotypical Fi in her attempt to tell the baker about “Jack and the Beanstalk,” prattling on about a subject that excites her without noticing that he has no interest until he cuts her off. Nor, as the Beast learns, does she feel any need to obey authority if she doesn’t want to. But most importantly of all, she has strong internal values that no one can sway, even when no one else in her society shares them. Besides being kind, loving, selfless and honorable herself, she only opens up to people who treat her with utmost kindness and respect, as the Beast and Gaston both learn quickly. If others don’t live up to her inner values, then she wants nothing to do with those people, no matter how powerful, handsome or popular they might be. She craves a deep emotional connection and shared interests with friends and romantic partners alike, far beyond shallow physical attraction or small talk about everyday work. If she can’t find a connection that matches that idealistic vision, she’d rather just bury herself in her books and her dreams. Yet even when she does find that deep bond with the Beast, she doesn’t talk to him or anyone else about her growing feelings for him, but only ponders them to herself, as shown in “Something There.” Likewise, even though her dreams of adventure and “more than this provincial life” mean the world to her, she only voices those dreams in private rather than sharing them with anyone else. For all these reasons, she’s definitely an easy heroine for INFP viewers to relate to.

The case for Belle as an Fe user (Extraverted Feeling) It’s a stereotype to say that Fe users always go along with the crowd. In its purest form, Fe arguably isn’t about social skills or even harmony; it’s about attunement and responding to external cues in an emotionally meaningful way. Social skills just correlate with it because they’re a type of meaningful response, and regardless of her social life, Belle always responds to others with quick, decisive, emotionally meaningful action. Gaston proposes marriage? Out the door he goes. The Beast imprisons her father? She’ll take his place, no questions asked. The Beast’s rage scares her? Away she runs… and so on. Indeed, her one real flaw is impulsiveness, both in actions (e.g. sneaking into the West Wing, or revealing the Beast to the villagers) and in her initial negative judgment of the Beast (“I don’t want to get to know him!”). Yet she changes her view of the Beast just as quickly in response to his positive actions. For anyone who sees her as a Judging type, her quick actions and decisions are the best support for it. She’s not prone to the constant inner processing or analysis of most Perceivers. Furthermore, she cares very much about manners and social graces; she herself is neat, ladylike, and unfailingly polite unless she’s treated rudely, and part of what makes her “different” is that she lets no one be exempt from those social rules, regardless of their status, looks, gender or circumstances. She dislikes Gaston because he’s rude and inconsiderate; ditto for the Beast at first. Her most ENFJ-like, least INFP-like line is an important one: “And you should learn to control your temper!” While an INFP would also call the Beast out on his bad behavior, she’d be less likely to tell him to suppress his authentic emotions. Nor is Belle a contented loner; she wants friends. Yes, her scene with the baker can be viewed as showing Fi, but it can also be seen as showing Fe, as she tries to strike up a friendly conversation and share a story she thinks the man will like, only to be rudely brushed aside. She’s also less oblivious to her neighbors’ criticism than she seems at first (“Papa, do you think I’m odd?”). The case for Belle as an Fe user is a surprisingly solid one.

The case for Belle as an Ne user (Extraverted Intuition) From the start Belle dreams of “more than this provincial life,” imagining possibilities never even thought of by her neighbors. She craves stories about magic, adventure and exiting far-off places: things she’s never seen, but which just might exist out in the “great wide somewhere.” We also see her use her creativity in small practical ways, as when she hitches her ride on the wagon to get to the bookshop faster, or when she quickly figures out how to send Gaston plummeting into the mud when he proposes to her. Last but not least, after the Beast saves her life, she sees potential in him that others might not have seen. Even though he’s still angry and unpleasant back at the castle, she loses her fear of him and sees the possibility of goodness in him. Her ability to look past appearances, in every sense of the word, creates the happy ending.

The case for Belle as an Ni user (Introverted Intuition) Belle’s dreams are simple and abstract. We don’t see her thinking of different places she wants to go (though admittedly, Linda Woolverton wanted to show her doing that; the animators cut it) or different kinds of adventures she wants to have. We just see a simple, streamlined yearning for “adventure” and “more.” She never examines situations with different possible viewpoints either; this iron-willed heroine sticks to her own viewpoint and never questions it unless she sees clear proof that she was wrong. Equally ironclad is her inner concept of how people should treat each other, which the Beast learns to live up to but Gaston never does. While of course we can attribute this trait to Fi (see above), we can also attribute it to the narrowed-down vision associated with Ni: to a strong fundamental concept both of what is and of what should be.

The case for Belle as a Si user (Introverted Sensing) The main argument I’ve seen for this is that until Maurice goes missing, Belle never tries to leave the village or change her life. As much as she yearns for more, she arguably finds some comfort in her familiar surroundings and routine that keeps her from actively pursuing her dreams. Or at least she’s kept in place by her duty to take care of her father; dutifulness is another classic Si trait. (Of course it could also be simple poverty that keeps her there.) She enjoys nostalgia, rereading the same favorite books over and over again and relishing the familiar details, and it’s arguably her keen memories of the fairy-tales she’s read that lets her adjust so easily to living in an enchanted castle. Also, particularly in the stage musical (and the 2017 film), she empathizes with the Beast’s loneliness and feeling of otherness because of her own experience as a village misfit. That’s how INFPs empathize: by using their Fi and Si to “mirror” others’ feelings.

The case for Belle as a Se user (Extraverted Sensing) The first thing we see Belle doing is observing her little town in all its smallness, quietness and eternal sameness. Dissatisfied with her surroundings, yes, but still acutely observing them, not lost in her dreams. Nor, even while reading, is she as “dazed and distracted” as her neighbors think, as she neatly avoids tripping, bumping into anything or getting splashed with water. Dreamer though she is, she’s adept at living in the moment too. Consider her interactions with the Beast: the way she feels about him and responds to him is always in direct proportion to how he treats her. She refuses to consider any potential good in him as long as she’s seen only bad, but holds no grudge against him once she sees kindness and good deeds. She doesn’t need to weigh what she sees against her inner knowledge (not in this version, anyway); she accepts what comes to her.

The case for Belle as a Te user (Extraverted Thinking) Belle’s quick, decisive actions and impulsiveness, which the “Fe user” argument attributes to her Feeling function, can be attributed to her Thinking function in the INFP argument. Whether sending Gaston plummeting out the door, or trading her freedom to the Beast for her father’s, or running away from the Beast’s rage, or revealing his existence to the villagers to prove her father’s sanity, she’ll immediately take whatever practical action is needed to protect either herself or her loved ones. But (theoretically) because an INFP’s Te is her weakest function, those actions aren’t always as practical as they should be. She doesn’t consider that the woods are full of wolves, or that humiliating Gaston will make him more of a threat than ever, or that the villagers will react badly to seeing the Beast, etc. It’s easy to see both the positive traits of Te and the pitfalls of its underdevelopment in her.

The case for Belle as a Ti user (Introverted Thinking) Belle’s overly impulsive actions can also be attributed not to underdeveloped Te, but to underdeveloped Ti: logical analysis of data. It’s not that her action function itself is weak (just the opposite), but that she doesn’t think through the details of each situation to determine which action will be the wisest or safest. This can also be seen in her initial snap judgment of the Beast: in her righteous anger at his bad behavior, she overlooks the details that hint at his better nature, such as his giving her a comfortable room and his look of guilt at seeing her cry. But whether weak or strong, she still (theoretically) uses Ti, so her general grasp of details is a sound one. Overlooked nuances aside, her assessments of both the Beast and Gaston are basically correct, even when the rest of the world says otherwise. This is thanks to her inner logic’s conclusions about their actions.

As we can see, it’s hard to type Belle definitively. A solid case can be made for her being INFP, an INFJ or an ENFJ. Her INFP-like traits are definitely strong. But the ENFJ argument is a surprisingly convincing one too. Especially where the Beast is concerned: their early interactions have the definite vibe of an Fe user (her) clashing with an unhealthy Fi user (him) until the latter improves his manners and social skills. Yet how, I think to myself, could a dominant Fe-user, or even an auxiliary Fe-user, be a misfit like Belle who doesn’t even try to fit in with the crowd? Even if she failed to fit in, wouldn’t she at least try?

Is this difficulty in typing Belle proof that MBTI is a “pseudoscience” and not really useful for evaluating people? Or does it just show that fictional characters are hard to type because their actions can be interpreted in different ways? I’m not sure. But at any rate, it shows that to definitively type a fictional character, or a real person for that matter, we need clear definitions of each cognitive function. Uncertain definitions are what lead to uncertain typing.

[murasaki-murasame]

So earlier today I decided to bring in some boxes of my old childhood books I had stored away, to see once and for all what stuff I want to keep and what stuff I want to donate.

It’s such a weird feeling to get a concentrated dose of nostalgia like this. Wow. I’d kinda forgotten about a lot of these books, and honestly I don’t think these are even the entirety of what I read as a kid. It makes me kinda sad that I fell out of reading for so long, and then kinda fall back out of it yet again at the start of this year. I’ve at least gotten into reading manga though.

Anyway this is gonna get long and rambly so I’m gonna put it under a cut. I kinda wonder if I should even bother posting this, but I guess it’d be good to write down my feelings on at least some of them, for posterity.

I’m not gonna go over EVERYTHING I found, at least not in much detail, since there’s like two or three boxes full of books.

There’s only two series I decided to keep, for now, since I genuinely want to reread them eventually even if I know they won’t hold up. Those being the Deltora Quest series, and the Keys to the Kingdom series. I remember really enjoying both of them, though I’m not sure if I ever even finished the latter. Maybe I’ll finally get around to that. I’m kinda surprised I have the complete collections of both of them. I thought some of them were missing. I can’t really explain why exactly I want to reread them, but I do. I want to at least reread SOME of my childhood books.

I’m almost surprised at how many action-y, adventure-y books I read as a kid. Statistically speaking most of the books in general were probably fantasy, but I also had stuff like the Cherub series, which was all about young teenagers doing surprisingly dark, adult stuff as part of some sort of undercover spy/military organization, and some stuff by Anthony Horowitz. I think I always gravitated more towards fantasy, but I guess I also enjoyed those sorts of books too. Huh.

There were also some old kid’s mystery books, and some weird D&D-esque RPG book things that I think were things my dad had from his own childhood that he gave to me. I never really enjoyed them.

I also had a surprising amount of comedy book things that probably had lots of gross humour in them. I’d need to look over them again, but I can’t remember if they were a series of actual novels, or if they were short story collections. I remember having at least one short story collection as a kid that had some surprisingly good and memorable stuff in them, but I don’t know if that’s the same thing or something entirely different I don’t have anymore.

Apparently I had some weird phase as a kid where I tried to get into Twilight and apparently gave up after book two, so that’s . . . interesting. Huh.

Looks like I also tried to get into Eragon at one point. I don’t think I even got through the first book of that, lol.

I found like three random Narnia books not not any of the others so who even knows if I ever had the full set of that. I don’t really intend on rereading it, though, even if I do.

I forgot I had a few random kid’s books set in or involving New Zealand. Huh. I think there’s some I read as a kid but never owned. I wish I’d read more books like that. It’s sorta depressing how few books I’ve read that are actually set in the country I live in. I feel like I’m so used to consuming media set in either America, Europe, or Japan, that something set in my own home country would somehow feel MORE foreign than those ones.

I completely forgot that I actually have one of those first-edition versions of Percy Jackson and the Lightning Thief with the stupid, ugly cover. That goddamn winged shoe and the gaudy gold patterns and the stormy background image will haunt my nightmares forever. I can’t even remember if I liked the book itself when I read it, but I think the cover probably put me off reading any more. Which is a bit funny to consider, given that a few years ago I got REALLY into the series and binge-read the first two main series in a row, and now I’m a bit of a diehard Rick Riordan fan. I wonder what would have happened if I had have stuck with the series from the very start. Would I have been part of it’s fandom since the beginning??? That’s a weird thought. I’m not even involved in the fandom NOW. Well, mostly because I haven’t gotten around to reading the last few books that have come out, but still.

On the note of Rick Riordan, it doesn’t have to do with the boxes of stuff I bought in since these are already on my shelves in my room, but he also made the 39 Clues, which was basically one of the first few things where I actually got involved in the fandom for it, and even did my own weird self-insert fan-fic things on internet forums back when I was like 10. So in a lot of ways, Rick Riordan was one of the things that got me into fandom culture in the first place. It’s weird to consider. If only I had positive memories of that series that weren’t irreparably tainted by the godawful cash grab second series they put out. That sure would be great. I think that was my first ever experience with feeling viscerally disappointed and enraged at a franchise.

This is getting into slightly more embarrassing territory, but I was also into some REALLY ‘girly’ things when I was a kid. Probably closer to seven or eight or so, though. Like, I must have had some period of time of being REALLY into Care Bears as a franchise, since I have, like, several DVDs related to the cartoon franchise of it they had. I’ve also had basically a billion plushies of them over the years. Mostly as a kid, but I still keep one of my giant ones at the corner of my bed. I never really bothered to get rid of it, I guess, since it doesn’t really get in my way, and nobody goes in my room anyway. I think I’ve owned my giant one, and one little one I guess, for over a decade now. And to further put into perspective how obsessed I was with them as a kid, one of the photos of me as a kid that’s on display in our living room is of me sitting in a pile of all the Care Bears I had at the time. I’d completely forgotten that photo existed and now I’m kinda horrified about how many people who’ve visited my house might have seen it.

And then right next to the giant one I have on my bed, I have a Scalemate plushie, which I guess goes a long way to represent one of my more recent fandoms, lol.

God I have an absurd amount of Homestuck merchandise, come to think of it. It mostly comes from one single session of buying tons of stuff, though. Off the top of my head, I think I have two posters [which I think are still in storage and may have been thrown away], a Scalamte plushie, a John figurine, a deck of themed tarot cards, a Cancer sign necklace, a Breath t-shirt, a Hope hoodie, and a custom-made Breath windsock hoodie that I had a family friend made for me. I might not have ever gone out in public with it, but I have my own shitty home-made John Egbert cosplay get-up so that sure is something I can say about myself. I’m also probably going to buy Hiveswap as it comes out, and I’ll probably buy the Homestuck books as Viz puts them out, because in the end I will never truly be free of Homestuck.

Oh, and I almost forgot, I also have my original UK editions of Harry Potter, which are all super beat up and ugly now. For some reason I remember disliking the series as a child, and yet I read all of it, saw most of the movies, and I remember dressing up as Harry once or twice for Halloween. I also played a surprising amount of the video games for it. But even my mum can confirm that I was never super into it. It’s weird. I have no idea how I felt about it as a kid. It’s just a mystery now, I guess.