#romanticising the subject

[spamton-addison]

if i ever learn how to properly use literatures on toyhouse i think that would be bad

[gregmarriage]

thought about having a gf again *sighs*

[capaldiera]

i started reading this fucking out of character thick of it fanfic like a week ago bc even tho i could tell from first glance it was going to be ooc i was just curious and it sounded kind of funny slash tragic. (how are you tagging grief child death domestic violence attempted suicide on a ttoi fic hello?) and i dooo like complaining And for the most part if it weren't supposed to be about those guys it would just be pretty good so im not Regretting it? but i didn't realise how many stories were in the series and im probably 150k words in. and not much more than halfway through

[thesilverlady]

Hi! So I've been thinking about this for some time now, it seems to me like GRRM often exagerates the misogyny women suffered in medieval times.

It's not that women were happy and living in utopia but from reading about different historical societies and time periods in comparison to what he is writing it looks super exaggerated and women often suffer a lot more than what it would be like in comparison to real life.

Maybe it's just me and I don't want to sound mean..but it's starting to feel weird...for example there's a lot of women that have died from the birthing bed, a big number and although it happened it wasn't like every hour a woman died giving birth to a child. Another thing that bothers me it's when really young characters start having sex (Aemma, Daenerys, Viserys II....) It's super bizarre since yes of course women tended to be younger but and I'm pretty sure that no one was advising to have sex with a 13 year old child (there are cases I'm sure but normally it was frowned upon). Even politically women are more restrained ... I don't know maybe I'm seeing gohsts where there are none ���.

it's definitely a valid subject to criticize and it's been something I've been conflicted over myself.

grrm is generally a. fantastic author; he knows how to write characters, worldbuilding, dialogue and how to play with themes.

With that being said, I can totally understand your feelings on the subject.

On the one hand, you're right, the whole "died in childbirth" is. just a very convenient, easy way to get rid off a female character while adding a tragedy to the mix. On the other hand.... some of these characters were simply not meant to be around.

I think he has definitely tried to add some elements around childbirth death to make it slightly different each time. Like, in f&b the difference between Alyssa Velaryon and Daella Targaryen who both died in childbirth is that Alyssa was at a quite old age and had complications from her pregnancy and her husband and maesters completely disregarded her health and basically sacrificed her to get that child out (for context: her dead was basically what Aemma had in the show. they copied it from that part of the story) In her tragic death, we see how shitty her husband was and the power maesters have over life. We do get her other daughter, Rhaena, rightfully calling out Rogar Baratheon's callous actions.

With Daella her death., while similar is a bit different because her issue was that she was waaay too young. Her mother, Alysanne felt guilty after her death and even wondered if it would have been so much for Daella to stay a child a while longer before pushing her to marry.

Both fall.victims to the patriarchy that is established in Westeros, in the belief that a woman's duty is to be a wife and a mother and a childbirth death while sad is noble. I won't analyze each childbirth death we see 'cause that would take forever - but I do think they all kinda serve a theme that has been existing all throughout the asoiaf series.

As for the age.... listen, i know it's uncomfortable for everyone but I think that's purposely done. Later in the series dany does think. of her old 13 yo self as a child so George doesn't pretend that she wasn't.

Were her descriptions in the first book oversexualized? Sure

But as for the age factor, I study history and cultures at uni and you'd be surprised at the age range young girls were thought to be suited for marriage and childbirth. You gotta consider multiple ethinicies, cultures, social norms, and not to mention life expectancy which played a huge factor in this.

George takes inspiration for all of this. The series is not meant to be a realistic portrayal.

And while I constantly think about the pro and cons about the way George writes his female characters, i don't see enough prase nowadays about how he writes the vulnerability of girlhood, or motherly love, or the caging feeling of being a woman who lives in such a restraining society.

As a man George does a surprisingly amazing job at describing these feelings. And while, I definitely think we should be objective and consider the good, the bad and the ugly with how he writes woman, the good heavily outweigh the bad

[notedchampagne]

no i get why ppl were pissed about the fanon davekat content before because when i look at sakuatsu and seriei content now im shocked at literally the exact same dynamics repurposed for characters with different personalities.

i do get that people have a taste for certain tropes and dynamics but there is a difference between headcanons and interpretations that influence a certain perception of a character due to personal tastes and like, reducing complex and meaningful characters down to their most consumable archetypes to mass produce another artwork of twinks kissing

[tyrannuspitch]

hot take time don't shoot me. ppl in fandom absolutely love to say "depiction is not endorsement", which is, like, fine, but then... every tagging system i've ever seen makes it damn near impossible to differentiate between depictions that are framed like endorsements and depictions that aren't?

there are a lot of topics that i'm in theory not opposed to reading about but i'm probably never gonna read in a fandom context because there is literally no practical way to filter out things that by genre convention rely on the reader rooting *for* the bad stuff and not against it. why does anti-shipping have to mean discourse and not "i really want to get these characters the hell away from each other". why are "healing from this fucked up situation", "in this fucked up situation but it being fucked up is the point" and "in this fucked up situation but the writer is going to pretend it's wonderful and #wholesome" all the exact same tag...

[head-ache]

sitting in bed with my cat asleep next to me, listening to cocteau twins & drinking iced coffee while finishing an assignment for my favourite subject.. life is sweet sometimes

[malusokay]

becoming a better student ₊˚⊹♡

Prepare for your classes ˚୨୧⋆｡˚ ⋆

Wake up on time. We don't want to be stressed first thing in the morning, right?

Eat breakfast. So you will be able to better focus in class.

Assigned reading and homework. Make sure you are prepared for your classes!! :)

Review your notes. Going through some of your flashcards before class is really helpful.

Check your bag and charge your devices. Ensure you have everything you need: Books, homework, chargers, pens, water...

In Class ˚୨୧⋆｡˚ ⋆

Listen and pay attention. You can save yourself a lot of trouble by simply paying attention, trust me.

Take notes. My favourite note-taking method is the Cornell method; I can make a separate post on that!! <3

"Quick notes." If you struggle with note-taking, try taking quick and messy notes. You can clean them up once you get home!!

Engage. If you have any questions or don't understand something, make sure to ask!! Most teachers really appreciate students who speak up. :)

No distractions. Turn off your phone, no chatting, you'll be glad...

After class ˚୨୧⋆｡˚ ⋆

Finish your assignments as soon as you can. Go home, put on a cosy outfit, have a snack, and get working!! <3

Prepare flash cards. A great way of reviewing your notes, too... :)

Update your Study schedule. Write down any assignment and due dates, reading you must do, upcoming tests, etc...

Clean up your notes. Review them, highlight the important parts, and maybe even make them look cute!! :)

Don't avoid topics/Subjects you dislike. I know it is tempting, but you can't avoid them forever, so you might as well get them done

Structure and routine ˚୨୧⋆｡˚ ⋆

Goals and Priorities. Keep them realistic and manageable.

Time management. Having a set schedule makes studying less overwhelming; it takes some discipline but is so worth it!! <3

Develop a routine. Figure out what works best for you; I prefer studying in the morning or at night.

No "zero days". Even if you can only do a bit, do it!! NO. ZERO. DAYS.

Remember your goals. Dreams will keep you motivated; remind yourself of what you're working for!! <3

Self-care and balance ˚୨୧⋆｡˚ ⋆

Don't forget about your hobbies. You need to do things that make you happy, so make time for those things!!

Maintain a balanced diet. I know chocolates and junk are tempting, especially when you are busy studying all day, but you're not doing yourself any favours.

Sleep. Sleep. Sleep. 8 Hours. Non-negotiable.

Exercise regularly. Even if it's just a walk, put on some headphones, listen to music, and give yourself a break. <3

Care for your social life. Reach out to your friends, make plans, and keep in touch; a good work-life balance is critical!!

Romanticising ˚୨୧⋆｡˚ ⋆

Study dates. Meet up with your friends at a cosy cafe, discuss your work, and have some fun!! Studying doesn't have to be all serious all the time ;)

Silly Pinterest boards. Visualising your goals will help you find motivation!!

Music to set the mood. I have a bunch of playlists on my Spotify that might help!! <3

Cosy sweater and candles. The cosy Rory Gilmore vibes haha...

Getting a coffee before class. A little treat before things get serious... Simple pleasures, you know? :)

Babes, The hiatus is OVER, and I'm finally back!! I got a lot of asks on studying, burnout, and school in general, so I thought, why not start off with a little student guide?? I Hope October has been kind to you, and school hasn't been too overwhelming (though I know it, unfortunately, has been for many of you), and I'm glad to finally be back!! <33

As always, Please feel free to add your own suggestions and tips in the comments!!

✩‧₊*:・love ya ･:*₊‧✩

[venuzia0]

your mercury sign and how you should study

Aries/1st house: Pretend to be a professor giving a lecture. Move around ,articulate with your hands. Explaining the subject to other people also helps with memory.

Taurus/2nd house: Giving yourself treats after you successfully studied something or finished paperwork can help with motivation. You’re an auditory learner, so pay attention in lectures/classes or make a voice memo, where you revise the subject and listen to it intently.

Gemini/3rd house: Do excessive research on your topic and write it down. Make study sheets and visit learn groups or zoom meetings, where you can study with other people. Share your knowledge and ask lots of questions.

Cancer/4th house: You study best at home. Avoid libraries or going out. Make your study space as comfortable as possible. Light a candle, get the vibe. Focus on making breaks, don’t overwork your brain. Spaced repetition is key here.

Leo/5th house: Here you should learn in groups. Meet up with friends in the library or in a cafe and get into the study flow. Try to explain the topic to your friends, till you feel confident.

Virgo/6th house: Make a study plan and go after it. Organisation is key. Your notes should be clean and well-written. Make study sheets and write down your subject.

Libra/7th house: Romanticise studying. Wear a cute outfit, go to a cute cafe or library, sip on your coffee and get into the flow. Here you should also study with friends and let them explain the topic to you.

Scorpio/8th house: Make excessive research. Obsessively studying in longer periods of time and less breaks, actually enhances your focus here. Dive deeper into the topic, meaning, research things that you don’t necessarily have to study, but are relevant to the topic.

Sagittarius/9th house: Whatever your topic may be, visit a place that fits its theme. For example if you’re studying law, visit a court. If you’re studying arts, visit a museum, etc. You’re a visual and kinaesthetic learner. So first hand experience gets you farther, than just listening to the lecture.

Capricorn/10th house: Making PowerPoints and mind maps helps you internalise the subject. Use self-made diagrams and organised study sheets to study and pretend to be a professor in a lecture hall.

Aquarius/11th house: Study groups are a great way to study, but also doing excessive research on the internet, watching YouTube videos, reading articles and doing online quizzes helps you out much more, than just listening to a lecture.

Pisces/12th house: Spaced repetition is key here. You should quickly look through your sheets and try to see how much you memorised. Subconsciously you learn the best. So either make a voice memo or listen to lectures constantly.

That’s it, tell me what y’all think

[sleepy-vix]

I want to be a romantic but how is that possible in such a literacy deprived world? Am i supposed to romanticise shit talking and sleep deprivation and going on your phone 24/7 and tiktok dances?

[deepestdelulu]

Becoming a better student ₊˚⊹♡

Honestly I´ve never been an A student, but I always try to do my best, and I´m very proud of myself, at least in this area of my life. So here I let you know my tips for studying, not getting bored (at all) and having great marks.

Prepare for your classes ˚୨୧⋆｡˚ ⋆

Wake up on time. We don't want to be stressed first thing in the morning, right?

Eat breakfast. So you will be able to better focus in class.

Assigned reading and homework. Make sure you are prepared for your classes!! :)

Review your notes. Going through some of your flashcards before class is really helpful.

Check your bag and charge your devices. Ensure you have everything you need: Books, homework, chargers, pens, water...

In Class ˚୨୧⋆｡˚ ⋆

Listen and pay attention. You can save yourself a lot of trouble by simply paying attention, trust me.

Take notes. My favourite note-taking method is the Cornell method; I can make a separate post on that!! <3

"Quick notes." If you struggle with note-taking, try taking quick and messy notes. You can clean them up once you get home!!

Engage. If you have any questions or don't understand something, make sure to ask!! Most teachers really appreciate students who speak up. :) And remember you can always go talk to them privately.

No distractions. Turn off your phone, no chatting, you'll be glad...

After class ˚୨୧⋆｡˚ ⋆

Finish your assignments as soon as you can. Go home, put on a cosy outfit, have a snack, and get working!! <3

Prepare flash cards. A great way of reviewing your notes, too... :)

Update your Study schedule. Write down any assignment and due dates, reading you must do, upcoming tests, etc...

Clean up your notes. Review them, highlight the important parts, and maybe even make them look cute!! :)

Don't avoid topics/Subjects you dislike. I know it is tempting, but you can't avoid them forever, so you might as well get them done.

Structure and routine ˚୨୧⋆｡˚ ⋆

Goals and Priorities. Keep them realistic and manageable.

Time management. Having a set schedule makes studying less overwhelming; it takes some discipline but is so worth it!! <3

Develop a routine. Figure out what works best for you; I prefer studying in the morning or at night.

No "zero days". Even if you can only do a bit, do it!! NO. ZERO. DAYS.

Remember your goals. Dreams will keep you motivated; remind yourself of what you're working for!! <3

Self-care and balance ˚୨୧⋆｡˚ ⋆

Don't forget about your hobbies. You need to do things that make you happy, so make time for those things!!

Maintain a balanced diet. I know chocolates and junk are tempting, especially when you are busy studying all day, but you're not doing yourself any favours.

Sleep. Sleep. Sleep. 8 Hours. Non-negotiable.

Exercise regularly. Even if it's just a walk, put on some headphones, listen to music, and give yourself a break. <3

Care for your social life. Reach out to your friends, make plans, and keep in touch; a good work-life balance is critical!!

Romanticising ˚୨୧⋆｡˚ ⋆

Study dates. Meet up with your friends at a cosy cafe, discuss your work, and have some fun!! Studying doesn't have to be all serious all the time ;)

Silly Pinterest boards. Visualising your goals will help you find motivation!!

Music to set the mood. Make a playlist to study with, I have lots of them :)

Cosy sweater and candles. The cosy Rory Gilmore vibes haha...

Getting a coffee before class. A little treat before things get serious... Simple pleasures, you know? :)

As always, Please feel free to add your own suggestions and tips in the comments!!

✩‧₊*:・love ya ･:*₊‧✩

[psychotrenny]

It’s fucking insane to me how normal Yankee Liberals are about Hawaii. As in like the way they just treat it as an unremarkable fact that their nation controls the island. Like the annexation of Hawaii wasn’t just any old example of Settler-Colonialism, the subjugation of a decentralised non-urbanised people that could be just dismissed as mere “tribes” or what have you. Not to say that such forms of “typical” Settler Colonialism are any less abhorrent or disgusting, just easier to justify from a Liberal point of view. Easier to claim that they weren’t *really* using the land properly or that they were an hopelessly and eternally backwards who only really benefitted from their conquest or that they were doomed and dying anyway and their fate was a mere tragic inevitability not worth dwelling on or… Point is all these arguments are all wrong and stupid and cruel but they can serve well enough to downplay or justify such atrocities in the eyes of Imperial Core Liberals.

But like with Hawaii you don’t have that. The Kingdom of Hawai’i was a sovereign state that was internationally recognised as such by the Great Powers of Europe even at the very height of Western Imperialism. Literacy rates were high and compulsory education was introduced in 1841 (pre-dating the US by 77 years), healthcare was given to all Hawai’ian subjects free of charge, Christianity was dominant (so even the most ardent Imperialist couldn’t claim that the people were in the thrall of some “barbaric superstition” that necessitated the “civilising influence” of empire) and it had a well-developed Capitalist economy dominated by Sugar production.  Like even if we take the Western model of statehood as the be all end all of what separates the civilised from the savage (to be clear hear you really fucking shouldn’t, but many people do so for a second that’s the frame of reference we’ll employ) then Hawai’i was very much unambiguously the former.  But that didn’t stop the US from shamelessly interfering it’s politics Indeed those aformentioned markers of Western-Style “civilisation” and “development” came with the price of allow US missionaries and investors to settler in the islands and become very wealthy and influential. For decades the US used the threat of force to influence the policy decisions of the kingdom, going as far as to regularly send warships in a classic display of “gunboat diplomacy”. In 1887 a US settler militia called the First Honolulu Rifles staged a coup where they forced Kalākaua to accept a new Constitution that heavily favoured the interests of USamerican settlers who had grown very wealthy through their investment in sugar production on the island.  It stripped the Monarchy of much of its power and introducing requirements for voting that heavily favoured US settlers; re-introducing wealth/property requirements that were now higher than even, allowing resident aliens to vote and just outright banning any Asian immigrants from voting (which at that point had as much to do with plain racial hatred as it did to any acting threat they might have posed). This wasn’t enough for the Yanks and 6 years later a group of 13 US settlers known as the “Committee of Safety” outright overthrew the newly crowned Queen Liliʻuokalani when she refused to co-operate. It existed briefly as an “Independent” USamerican dominated republic before the US government decided to official annex it in 1898 (similar to what you saw with Texas or California).

While incredibly controversial at the time due to both strategic concerns with the annexation of ultramarine territories and some level of outrage at the shameless take-over of a sovereign nation (hence the time gap between the coup and the actual annexation), nowadays Yanks enjoy their control over the island without the slightest care in the world. They even turned it into a tourist destination, a heavily romanticised one that not only receives many millions of visitors every year but is constantly mentioned in the popular culture the US then proceeds to export all over the world, literally revelling in their land that is by literally any definition (even the most nakedly pro-imperialist) stolen. The land itself is severely exploited to the point of significant ecological damage, the indigenous peoples too are exploited as many of them live in poverty while US investors grow wealthy from their land and labour. Even their very culture is stolen and monetised, the most marketable parts bastardised into cheap kitsch and the rest of it left to rot, only kept alive through over a century of continued resistance from the indigenous peoples. It’s a very common story of course, but I think it stands out with how utterly ghoulish it is even under the most Liberal of consistently applied worldviews. It would be like if in say 2007 someone set up Disneyland in Bagdad. And yet by the vast majority of the US (and by extension the vassals states whose view of the situation is filtered through the lens of US media and propaganda) it isn’t seen that way. Hawaii is just the 50th state, the only state outside North America and in the tropics (hahaha ain’t that a neat little fact. Geography is so fun J), an island paradise perfect to visit with the whole family and yet still as American as Apple Pie. Even many self-described “progressives” talk about it in this way, at most mentioning the plight of the indigenous Hawaiians with minimal though as to how this situation came about. Like while the story of Hawaii is far from unique; even in terms of the US doing colonialism to Westernised peoples you examples such as the ethnic cleansing of the Five Civilised Tribes from the Eastern USA, it still stands out to me with the sheer level of international recognition and Western-style development that the Kingdom of Hawai’i possessed. Like it’s just such an obvious example of the naked greed at the heart of the USamerican empire, and how utterly bullshit talk of a “civilising mission” and “spreading democracy” is. No matter what they may claim, no matter what excuses they may trot out, Imperialist rapacity has no limits.

[koishua]

𝐒𝐄𝐂𝐎𝐍𝐃 𝐃𝐄𝐀𝐓𝐇 ━━━ 𝐋𝐄𝐄 𝐇𝐄𝐄𝐒𝐄𝐔𝐍𝐆

genre: angst.

length: less than 0.600k words

caution: a take on grief and loss of someone close to you.

synopsis: he dies twice, yet his heart still beats painfully.

special thanks to my beloved, the sexc sexc talented incredible brilliant showstopping user @torhues for biting the bullet and taste testing this for me!! mayhaps my brain twin, despite our opposing opinions on hee's suffering. confirmed this is the only genre i can write

feedback and reblogs are desperately craved <3

lee heeseung has died twice in the long and arduous twenty-two years of his life. once, he had died when he'd lost his voice, abandoned and left stranded in a world where all people ever expected from him was that exact thing. the second time— the second thing he'd lost— had been the greater piece of his being.

his first death was somehow less painful than the second. it had been quicker to mellow out, the pain easier to soothe when you were there. heeseung experienced his first death with you by his side, holding his hand and sharing his tears. dreams he'd built, the work of what seemed to be his entire life. his first death felt much like a bullet did. 

it burned, seared, bled and struck him faster than he could blink. the death of an artist's ability to create should have crippled him, and yet, it hadn't. you'd been right by him, held his wound and breathed air into him. you were his second life.

and you were, subsequently, his second death.

this one had hurt much more than the first. heeseung would come to describe this as the moment his heart and flesh had been ripped away from him, his soul following suit. that, however, would not be enough to describe how it truly felt. the second time was so, so much more than just a death.

this one, this one was not as merciful as the quick bullet that was the loss of his most beloved possession and passion. this death was a loss of his entire reason for living. this time, the pain hadn't ebbed away as easily. this time, the pain had settled deep inside his chest, an ache damned to stay there for as long as the heart buried inside of him would beat, no matter how cold and blue the blood that ran in his veins seemed. this pain would leave him paralyzed, the fight in him lost, not even bothering to claw for the air and oxygen his lungs desperately craved. 

his second death had suffocated him from inside out. still, his blood, cold and blue, continued to run through his veins and somehow still functioning heart. you were his second attempt at life and you were his second death. you still haunt the corners of his mind, still hold a hand on his throat, each thought of you making your ghostly grip on him tighten to the point where he nears the edge of no return (he doesn't fight you back— doesn't have the heart to, when all he wants is to follow where you've gone to).

lee heeseung had died twice in the twenty-two years of his life, but had never been able to live for the third time. how could he? he'd lost himself in the waves right after you'd left. years would pass by and he'd still wonder if up was down and down was up. he was a man, once with eyes that shone as bright as the stars you'd point out to him at night, who'd been reduced into someone you'd be heartbroken to see if you were around. lost between a plane where nothing but your touch, your lips, your smile, and your laugh existed and the colourless world that his body continued it's daily affairs in. eyes unseeing, skin unfeeling, ears unhearing— his second death took something much, much more precious to him than his life.

lee heeseung's second death had taken away his soul; you were so cruel for doing that to him.

[familyabolisher]

you said that you don’t take lines of questioning / thought about “romanticizing” dark topics (SA, incest, etc.) seriously. would you mind elaborating on that? what does it mean, if anything, to romanticize? i think i get why it’s a fundamentally reactionary (or just silly?) thing to be concerned about, but would you mind elaborating on why?

thanks! your posts have been very illuminating on this sort of thing.

okay so let's talk about "romanticise" as a literary discourse for a second because there are a handful of things happening with its usage:

is the assumption that there exists a state of non-'romantic' discursive matter from which something 'romantic' is being created, and the content of the text in question is the process by which that creation is happening;

is the use of 'romantic' to describe something that appears to the viewer as desirable and attractive, thus obscuring the ways in which it is harmful/abusive/violent/&c.;

is the idea that this 'romantic' state represents something morally odious due to the ideas it might impress upon the audience about the nature of the discursive matter made 'romantic' in question.

i think it's worth breaking each of these assumptions down because i don't believe that any of them actually hold water, and i find that they in fact telegraph some pretty reactionary paradigms around literary criticism.

first is the idea that there exists discursive matter that is not "romantic," here to mean suffused with cultural narratives that render it desirable, and that the matter in question only takes on these desirable qualities after undergoing this process of "romanticisation." by this logic, the matter is in fact prediscursive; the onus of constructing a “romantic” discourse lies solely with the cultural response. when in practice, normative cultural assumptions and the media that interacts with them exist in a feedback loop relative to one another, and it surely makes more productive sense to engage with the apparently objectionable material not as an object that creates or even necessarily reifies a normative cultural standard, but that interfaces with that standard in what could potentially be any number of variant forms. this widens the scope of our response as an audience—we might well say that a depiction of XYZ was tasteless, clichéd, voyeuristic, lacked interest in the interiority of its subjects, &c. &c., just as easily as we might say that it engaged with extant cultural narratives in compelling, thoughtful, meaningful ways. we're not taking the cultural object as the didactic “creation” of a social norm—we're situating it within the norms from which it already emerged.

the second is the idea that this ‘romantic,’ aesthetically desirable construction must necessarily obscure the ways in which the subject matter is harmful (however we define ‘harmful’). i find this position v condescending, towards creator and audience alike—one way of crafting horror that can be really exceptional when done right is the total sealing-off of the narrative from any didactic intervention, any suggestion that what's being depicted is morally “wrong.” the dissonance between subject matter and audience—and/or between subject matter and creator—can be brilliant when you can have faith that that dissonance exists. audiences aren't little babies who learn our morals from our media; we're prepared to critically engage with and respond to a discourse presented to us. as i said above, doing away with this whole “romantic” sheen as an obfuscator of violence opens us up to new, more precise, more compelling readings.

the third – and imo, the most damnatory – is the suggestion that the narrative itself represents a potential site of harm due to the underlying ideology that it imposes on those who engage with it. like, we're still adopting this approach whereby we construct and engage with narratives for instructive purposes; if we see a depiction of sexual abuse that renders the abuse pleasurable, aesthetically pleasing, desirable, then we absorb this idea that sexual abuse is pleasurable and aesthetically pleasing and desirable and thus covet the position of the subject in question. i don't think this is necessarily true! i'm obviously not suggesting that we don't absorb and reproduce our cultural narratives in media – as i said in the first point, there exists a feedback loop between the two – but i think we as audiences and critics ought to think more highly of ourselves than to imagine that we are incapable of seeing some fucked up shit given an aesthetic gloss without asking why the aesthetic gloss is being used, how the creator is making use of perspective, how we might respond to it, etc. and i just don't think narratives ought to be instructive or didactic; nor do i think creators bear responsibility for how their work is received to the extent that they are obliged to orient their discourse towards a presumed impressionable individual for whom every action or aesthetic contrivance is a categorical imperative. this is the oldest and honestly the most boring debate in the book; the question of "moralism" in fiction has been done half to death by now, and i don't see any use in rehashing it to any significant extent. suffice it to say that the “moralist” approach is stultified and limited and intellectually dull.

note that nowhere in this did i say that there are never narratives that ought to be called into question for their depiction of X, Y, or Z; just that i think we need better, more precise language to defer to do when we do so. simply put, i think it's possible to make a piece of art that holds these “romantic” qualities, and doesn't have a guy walk in midway through and go “by the way, abuse is Bad/age gaps are Problematic/mental illness is Unsexy,” &c., and still greatly compel me wrt its subject matter. & that is a statement which exists in straightforward contradiction to the idea that the term “romanticise” communicates anything necessarily and inherently condemnatory about a text, so, i don't use it.

[altcvnningham]

what’s in a name?

alluded to it in my last adlerbell rot post but i have such a complex over adler naming bell and i find it difficult to put into words. so here’s a very lengthy attempt:

most of the symbolism behind bell’s name is obvious and doesn’t need much stating: it’s indicative of adler’s ownership of bell, literally naming them like a pet, his property. obvious also that a bell was used in their conditioning; as well as a reference to the study of classical conditioning itself by pavlov, who similarly used a bell to condition behavioural responses in the test subject: a dog (hence the myriad dog imagery/symbolism in adlerbell fics… it’s like crack to me)

but the obvious aside it always hits me deepest as part of the “it wasn’t personal” narrative. it’s insanely personal- it’s intimate. i think i put adlerbell on a little bit of a pedestal to view everything about them through a vaguely romanticised lens, but to me it really is- in the most horrifically tragic and sickening way- romantic.

like, you’re bell, right? you trust this man, bell. he is your friend. you witnessed some of the worst atrocities of mankind and survived hell with him and he is your friend. he calls your name through the smoke and gunfire, as a bullet zips past your ear you hear it amidst the splitting of shrapnel, the tearing of screams silenced for but a moment. each time he extends his arm to pick you up, he calls you, bell. every time he directs you to a point of interest, he beckons you, bell. when he nudges you out of your cot in camp haskins, it’s your name he laughs, bell. when he praises you, and smiles at you in that wry, almost boyish way, and tells you how good of a job you’ve done, how we couldn’t have done it without you, how they should be thanking you- it’s your name, bookended, every time, a fondness notched into the welding that stamps you both together inseparably. bell. every single association you have to your name is whenever he pulls you close, helps you, praises you, saves you. your name alone a positive association- to the respect and affection he has for you. bell.

and it’s to the point. adler says their name at any given moment he can. he says it so often it’s infuriating. like deadass take a shot every time. it’s practically a trope in any fic featuring the two, that he utters their name every other line of dialogue. it’s the first thing he says to them at the start of the game- walking into the safehouse at west berlin- not a word, but their name. sure, obviously isn’t the first time he’s spoken to bell, knowing what came before- but it’s presumably bell’s first time walking around freely since mk ultra. that coupled with the trigger phrase must make for a very pliant response- when he says their name, it’s the same man, as far as bell knows, who fought with them back to back in vietnam. something thicker even than blood.

and i reckon adler likes it. mk ultra was a joint effort but bell’s past is based on his choosing, his memories. by no means did he have to pick their name, but he did. he chose to name the thing he’s helped create. it’s almost sick that the ‘closeness’ bell feels towards adler is really only partially synthetic- over a span of months adler really was there, every day, talking for hours and conditioning them over and over and over again. of course he’d name them. something something don’t name an animal you don’t want to get attached to. but it’s his animal. it’s his dog. they’re his bell.

and there’s something just so sickening and so adler that he could have named them anything else in the world- maybe something inconspicuous and plain, like john or jane; something sweet, something that reminds him of someone else, a song he likes, a nickname, an insult, or even something downright cruel. but i don’t think anything could be more cruel and tragically appropriate than calling them by the name of the instrument you used to condition them. to call them by the tool you used to enslave their mind. the very thing that reset their entire being to zero. a bell. not just their name- but the sound, ever ringing, in the back of their mind. the thing that echoes in the empty inside them, to remind them why it’s empty in the first place, its sole purpose to keep them chained in their loyalty to adler. bell.

like i said, i do really think adler likes it. for whatever reason. ownership, spite, just a way to rub salt in the wound any chance he gets, a small victory only he gets to revel in, right in their face. but bell is his. bell belongs to him. when he says their name, it’s the one he chose. time and patience came alongside that bell that rang perpetual in that lab. he’s said that name as many times as he rang it. maybe a part of adler’s as attached to that instrument as much as he is the person he named after it. i’m sure adler hears it chiming in the recesses of his own mind more than he’d care to admit. he’d been around to hear it as long as bell has, hadn’t he? maybe part of him has grown conditioned in his attachment to that instrument too.

but there must be a semblance of pride when he says it. really, to be able to beckon your dog by the name you chose for it. i wonder if a swell of maddened joy tugs at his blackened heart whenever he sees bell’s head perk up at the sound of their name, the one he chose, as implicit and unthinking, automatic, as though it truly were their own. since birth.

and like it couldn’t be enough that he took everything from them. and most importantly that he took them away from perseus- that he stole perseus’ most precious comrade right out from under him, and turned them to an unflinching loyal pup for himself. this isn’t about you, this isn’t about me, this is about millions of other fucking people. is it? when you croon and tut their name between every sentence, are you sure you don’t just like the satisfaction of saying it, knowing how deeply it disarms them? knowing how they are wholly yours, to their very core? to the name they introduce themselves as? to the one they flinch and come running whenever you say it?

ugh. it’s just- a name is so integral to one’s identity. it shapes their life. their personhood. and he didn’t just erase theirs, but he gave them a new one and made sure they’d like it. a conditioned response of pleasure whenever he’d say it. isn’t that intimate?

he took everything. every single shred of who they were. that not even their name is their own. that even their name, their name, belongs entirely to him.

this didn’t make sense, i wrote this mostly for myself, congrats if u read this far. i just wanted to have every single thought and feeling i had about it jotted in one place and file it away ajshsjksjsjsjs

[transmutationisms]

i think literary discourses about glorifying / romanticising / glamourising are so tired partly because they elide the broader cultural context that makes it possible for the subject in question to be received as glorious / romantic / glamorous in the first place. like is the problem here actually that the manner of depiction is insufficiently condemnatory or is it that you perceive (rightly or wrongly ) that the topic is already widely embraced or celebrated and you are trying to counter that by arguing over some specific artistic output