#shakespeare knows how to write a strong female lead

[doesephs]

tamora, queen of goths and making grown men (titus andronicus) cry

[calllamander]

hq boys the fandom misjudged

let me know who else to include!

SAKUSA KIYOOMI who leans into your touch whenever he can because he never knew what he was missing. who blushes pretty pink behind his mask whenever you pay with his hair but giggles anyway because even though its so embarrassing he can't stop himself. who calls you over when he's hurting because you sing him to sleep when its bad and tell him how much you love him. who frames poetry about letting life happen and who listens to podcasts about people who overcame their disabilities while he works out and who has dimples that come out when he laughs.

KYOUTANI KENTAROU who comes home every night with nothing but love for you, who reads a new book each week and prefers strong female leads and is in honors classes. who calls his mom and two sisters all the time and has them round to yours for one chaotic dinner a week. who's never shouted at you once even in your worse fights because he knows what your parents did to you and he doesn't ever want to make you afraid. who blushes and grins wide and loves apples and steals food you're chopping up and is fantastic with kids and even more fantastic with dogs.

OIKAWA TOORU who's fragile some days and he looks and feels like he's brittle, he'll break if someone is too rough. who never knew a person could feel like home until he met you and who was so so scared of having someone else. who's relentlessly caring and gives you all his favorite books on the universe even though he's scared you'll find them strange. who feels like he won't get any attention he doesn't take but who's also soft in the morning in a way no one else will ever see. who frames every picture you ever take because he grew up in a house not a home but now he has one and it's his.

ATSUMU MIYA who got told he was the louder, cockier more troublesome twin his whole life until he decided it was true. whose parents prefer osamu and he loves his brother too much to care. who when he met you thought that you could run away from sadness if you were just busy enough, just energetic enough, just restlessness enough that you never let it catch you. and you agreed. who was wild with you and made you laugh more than anyone. who loves onigiri and watermelon and throws is head back when he laughs. who never thought much of himself behind his blustery bravado but thought you were the most precious thing in the whole world. who grew with you and loves shakespeare and is soft when he's happy.

KUROO TETSUROU who understands chemical bonding better than he understands people, let alone dating. who still misses his mom and calls his sister constantly because it was her who raised him really. who goes to every single one of your events and acts like a flirt but really gets flustered beyond belief. who gets scared in big crowds and holds your jacket and fakes confidence till he makes it. who hates cheese but really loves cheeseburgers and has long conversations with you on the coach and dances to your favorite foreign music as you cook dinner and who would never ever push you into anything because he is the gentlest person you've ever met.

KOZUME KENMA who lets you sit on his lap whenever he games, who is bad with words and blushes and plans out what to say for way too long in advance. who writes little notes to you with all the things he cant say and leaves them for you to find. who talks to cats and dyes your hair after you do his and feels like you must be the most patient person in the world to put up with him. who loves your energy and comes alive and shows you his offices and talks about code and lets you steal his hoodies. who is not rude and blunt but rather honest and who taps i love you three times into your skin like a prayer.

[a-sleepy-reader]

Lolita by Vladimir Nabokov: an Analysis and Review

Foreword

Trigger warning for themes of paedophilia, sexual assault, stillbirth, manipulation, violence, and tragedy as well as gruesome descriptions of death. If you want a review free of spoilers, please scroll to the section labelled ‘Conclusion/Review without spoilers.’

Introduction

Calling Lolita a controversial novel is a safe bet. Some readers revolt at its topic, others still protest it as the inspirational romance of the century. Both give Lolita a bad name. I will say it once very clearly; plot-wise, Lolita is a book about a paedophile who grooms, manipulates, isolates, and rapes a twelve year old girl. It is disturbing subject material to say the least, subject material that has to be given more thought than its protagonist’s ramblings of adoration for the book’s namesake. 

For instance, despite its fluctuating reputation, Lolita has found itself to be a playful and humorous novel to many, a “...comedy of horrors” according to the San Francisco Chronicle. So what is Lolita, exactly? A comedy? A thriller? Both? It is time to examine this twisted novel and see just how tangled its thorns are.

Plot synopsis

Humbert Humbert is a typical man by most standards: a handsome, French writer and professor with a soft spot for road trips… and little girls. 

Humbert categorises the sexes into the male, the female, and the nymphet, the latter of which describes peculiar young girls Humbert feels an intangible attraction to. It is with such a nymphet that Humbert self-describingly falls in love with; rambunctious twelve-year-old Dolores(whom he dons ‘Lolita). He cannot keep his mind off of her; ‘light of my life, fire of my loins.’ In however poetic a prose he may choose to describe it, Humbert feels a physical bond to young Dolores like to no one else since his dead childhood sweetheart. Humbert goes so far to pursue the girl that he marries her mother, whom he plots to drown in the blue depths of a lake to have Dolores all to himself. However, what Humbert describes as a work of fate led to the day Dolores’ mother’s brain lay strewn about the road, smeared by an incoming car. She didn’t need to be subject to Humbert’s schemes to die.

From there on, Humbert has legal custody over the twelve-year-old fire of his loins. Raping Dolores becomes a routine. Though she does initially say yes, she is a minor incapable of consent in the imbalance of a grown man with everything to lose if she is to either escape or stop the affair; she will lose her only family if she reports him, and risks breaking his heart if she cuts off the affair altogether-unfortunates only know what people do when they have nothing to lose. Orphaned and trapped, Lolita agrees to Humbert’s ‘love.’ As he described it, ‘she had nowhere else to go.’ 

Two years pass before Dolores falls ill during their second road trip and is taken out of the hospital by an uncle aware of Humbert’s affairs. By way of escaping with this newfound relative, Dolores is finally free from Humbert’s possessive grasp. Depressed by his separation from the girl, Humbert lives a miserable life for several years before receiving a letter from Dolores herself saying she is married and pregnant. Though Humbert suspects the man behind both titles is her own uncle, Dolores refutes this by saying that, though she was in love with him, they did not settle because she refused to be in his pornographic film.

Enraged with the uncle, Humbert arrives at Dolores’ uncle’s house and murders him before being arrested. It is here that we learn Lolita is Humbert’s autobiography of the events surrounding his ‘love’ for the book’s namesake. Though he wishes for the girl-turned-woman to live for a great many years, the victim, escapee, and survivor dies in 1952 during childbirth. Her offspring is a stillborn.

Analysis

It’s a curious thing, really. That so many interpret Lolita as a romance, I mean. Of course, it often presents itself in its writing as a summery romance to read on the beach. A handsome man meets a female. An attraction is felt. Male and female confess an attraction for one another which leads them on a series of road trips following the female’s mother’s incidental death. The language is no exception to this tone-just read the first paragraph: 

“Lolita, light of my life, fire of my loins. My sin, my soul. Lo-lee-ta: the tip of the tongue taking a trip of three steps down the palate to tap, at three, on the teeth. Lo. Lee. Ta.”

It’s made up of beautiful, flowery sentences, language suggestive of the pure romance of a man ‘in love.’ With a twelve year old girl he rapes. Yes, Lolita is one of those novels that wears many outfits, its outermost lining being that of a tragic love story of one traumatised man and his ungrateful lover. This perspective is especially interesting when taking into account Lolita’s exquisite writing; could the flowery language have prompted so many to interpret this book as a romance? Could Lolita be representative of how so many wield words to distract or deceive those trying their best to disapprove of them? Either way, few deny that Humbert is lying, to himself or to the reader, of exactly how the events of his fascination with Dolores occurred. Digging further into the book, Lolita becomes  an unreliable narrator’s documentation of the rape and manipulation directed toward a naive minor trying to cope with her mother’s death. Further still, it is a comedic satire of a paedophile’s attempts  to justify his crimes... and failing miserably. “Ladies and gentlemen of the jury, I wasn’t even her first lover.” Deeper still and it’s one man’s search for his childhood sweetheart(dearest and deadest) he never finished loving, so he seeks, endlessly, to shower her lookalikes with unwanted ‘love.’ Without end. Without fulfilment. 

Lolita is a story of infinite stories.

Review

What first struck me about Lolita was its beautiful writing; its eloquent prose, imagery, and metaphors hopelessly hooked me from the first paragraph. Nabokov never ceases to use amazing similes, description, and personification to amplify the reader’s experience of the goings-on of Humbert and the girl. This is especially striking in contrast to its tragic subject material; Humbert will rape, and he will manipulate, and he will scheme a murder, and he will hurt so many innocent lives, but he will do so with seemingly effortless grace in the scribbles on a paper. 

Despite this, I did not find Lolita to be a difficult read regarding comprehension of the text. True, many a word I did not understand, but, despite this, I could always tell what was being communicated; the language is certainly not as dated as Hemingway nor Shakespeare. It may even be a calming read for those with a strong stomach, and will certainly teach a thing or two to those wishing to learn more about poetic writing styles done well. 

Some may find the book to be lacking in terms of plot and overall excitement, but I feel this is a subjective view rather than a relatively factual one; Lolita is not an action book. Nor is it a drama. Humbert sometimes spends pages describing the exact locations of a road trip, or exactly how he earned money in the 50’s, and so forth. Some may find this mundane; I will admit that I was, at times, bored by it myself. However, what Nabokov sacrifices in brevity he makes up for with a profound understanding of Humbert’s emotions, environment, and thoughts. 

One slight criticism I do, however, have, is that I found all of the characters in Lolita were fairly bland for me. True, Humbert is unique in his attempt to beautify the macabre, but beyond the initial shock factor of his morale and the revelation that he is seeking the love of a girlfriend from his childhood, Humbert can be mostly summarised as ‘quiet, manipulative, scheming, and possessive of Dolores.’ I was not invested in him as a character, probably due to a lack of good qualities within him; it is true that by one perspective, his story can be interpreted as tragic for him, though through the more common lens of Lolita being a 336-page manipulation of the severity of the atrocities of an evil man, Humbert loses all good qualities beyond his capabilities as a writer.

The same goes for Dolores herself, as I found her to be fairly two-dimensional; she is very sensory and seeks goods of food and adventure and she has a rambunctious heart unconcerned with how others’ feel nor how others perceive her. She is what many would call a ‘wild child,’ and though she becomes more withdrawn later in the book due to the numerous abuses she endured, I did not see much depth to her beyond face value. 

That being said, I certainly do not think the characters are bad, just that they are underwhelming in comparison to the rest of the story. 

I recommend Lolita to those enthralled by character-driven stories of nuanced emotions and traumas, a sort of story of the broken attempting to break the whole. If you are not put off by very thorough descriptions nor by a purposefully thin plot, I have the impression Lolita will revolt, horrify, hypnotise, and seduce its readers into its soft, macabre pages. 

I give Lolita a rating of 90%.

Conclusion/Review without spoilers

Lolita is a vile, endlessly layered story of trauma and the endless search for lost love, horrific abuses, of humorous wit and smirking irony, and of one man’s endless destiny of deceit. I suppose Humbert’s own initials best summarise the smile and wink this book will deliver as you holler at Humbert, weep for Dolores, or perhaps even vice versa. They do say Russians are witty, and Nabokov does not fail this reputation even when we analyse how Humbert Humbert’s initials sound in the author’s native language: 

Ha-ha.

[mikauzoran]

Ask Game: Mikau’s Headcanons - This Should Be a Drinking Game

Anonymous asked:

5&6

Thank you for the ask! ^.^

(The questions are from this list. So far I’ve done five, six, eleven, and fifteen.)

5. What’s your favorite headcanon you use in fics?

Oh my gosh. There are so many headcanons. XD I was actually just thinking last night that I needed to compile a list and turn it into a drinking game or something. 

Take a sip of tea every time:

1. Félix is Adrien’s older brother (eight years older). He left home at sixteen, married Marinette’s cousin Bridgette, and now lives in Marseille where he’s a homicide detective. Bri runs her own bakery. They have a daughter named Noëlle and a son on the way. Fé used to play the violin competitively growing up, and Adrien learned to play Danse Macabre and the first movement of Beethoven’s Kreutzer Sonata from him.

2. Émilie was a stage actress, and Adrien used to do the child roles in whatever production she was in, so he grew up backstage and going to the theatre to see his mum a lot. Her signature role was Viola in Shakespeare’s Twelfth Night. When Gabriel and Émilie met going to high school in Marseille, she was performing Viola and dragged him into being on the costume crew for the school play once she discovered he was an aspiring fashion designer.

3. Adrien decides to pursue a career in acting. He misses performing from when he did it with his mum when he was a kid, and it makes him feel connected to her. He likes getting to portray all kinds of different people and experiencing what it’s like to be someone else. It’s a safe space for him to experience emotions since expressing emotions was frowned upon in his home growing up. The roles he really wants to play are Jean Valjean from Les Mis, the Phantom from Phantom of the Opera, Elphaba from Wicked, and Viola from Twelfth Night.

4. Adrien is originally left-handed but has learned to be ambidextrous. This is my hill to die on, and you can fight me over it. ^w^ It’s probably just production error/the creators not really caring, but I’ve noticed several times in canon where Adrien has been shown doing things left-handed. (I mean, he uses his right hand for things too, but...) In Origins, when he’s walking to class and signing autographs left and right, he does so with his left hand. In Marchand de Sable/Sandman when he’s doing homework in his room, his writing supplies are on his left side. (I just want some left-handed representation. Is that too much to ask? ;-;)

5. Adrien is biromantic asexual. Even when I pair him with Marinette, he’s never not bi. I don’t always write him as ace; sometimes he’s bisexual in my works, but I could see canon Adrien as ace.

6. Adrien’s comfort foods are mint tea and salad. When he was little, when he or  Émilie had a bad day, she would kick the kitchen staff out of the kitchen, and they would make a big salad and some mint tea and enjoy it together. Now that she’s gone, he has mint tea and/or salad when he’s feeling down, and it’s comforting because it reminds him of his mother.

7. Adrien is a total anime nerd. He grew up relatively isolated from the outside world, so he learned about life and “normal”/“acceptable” human behaviour from Disney movies and anime. He’s always wanted to be a Disney princess and a magical girl. He was really inspired by Disney and anime protagonists who overcame the difficulties in their lives to achieve their dreams and find happiness and love. He has a lot of strong, female role models, starting with his mum, so he tends to identify with female characters more strongly than male characters.

8. Adrien is a polyglot. Obviously, he knows French, and he’s learned English because it’s required. Chinese lessons are canonical. He taught himself Japanese so that he could read manga and watch anime in the original (and pass it off as “studying”). He also speaks Russian (see “9″ below). He doesn’t speak Italian, but he has a passing familiarity with the language. He knows some phrases from opera from watching it himself and his mum’s career. He has some of his favourite portions memorized. He can insult someone’s sartorial choices in Italian from listening to his father do so on trips to Milan for business, and he knows survival phrases, but he can’t actually construct sentences or have conversations. He just hasn’t invested himself in it.

9. Adrien’s bodyguard’s name is Victor (really Viktor, but he uses the French spelling to fit in). He’s originally from Russia and still has family there. The reason why he doesn’t speak is because, even though he understands French just fine, he’s self-conscious about speaking it because of his accent. He’s also afraid to make mistakes, especially in front of Gabriel who is not a patient or tolerant man. Victor taught Adrien Russian, so now they can speak together, and no one knows what they’re saying. (Nathalie has picked up a little bit here and there, but not enough to have conversations.) Victor calls Adrien Adrianka. (It’s the Russian diminutive.)

10. Nathalie speaks a little bit of Mandarin Chinese. Her tones are so-so, but she can get her point across. She learned from listening in on Adrien’s lessons so that she could make sure he stayed on top of his curriculum. When Adrien has to miss Chinese lessons on short notice, Adrien’s teacher works with Nathalie instead.

11. Luka loves all music, not just rock or punk like we’ve seen on the show. I mean, the guy is portrayed as music being his whole life, right? He came to music through rock and roll because that’s what he was exposed to through his mother and her music career, but if you dig into the music and look at its history, where it came from, what inspired it, you start wandering back through time until you get to the big names of classical concert music. Luka is an inquisitive, thoughtful guy. I can see him digging into the roots of the music he grew up with and finding all sorts of cool influences. I can see him learning about and experimenting with different types/genres of music.

12. In university, Luka studies Literature with an emphasis on nineteenth and twentieth century Russia. Why? Below is excerpted from my response to a comment asking about this point.

Especially in the nineteenth century during the height of Romanticism, a lot of literary elements and themes made their way into classical music. Program music uses literary texts as a base and illustrates the story with music. Composers drew from the Russian literary tradition as well, particularly in opera. Tchaikovsky's The Queen of Spades is based on Pushkin's short story, and I just found out a month ago that Shostakovich turned Gogol's short story The Nose into an opera. In the arts, one thing always leads to another. It's like looking up something on Wikipedia. Two hours later you've become an expert on botany or Balkan folk dance. I think Luka would dig into the sources of inspiration for the music he was consuming in order to better understand the works and as a means of getting inspiration himself.

So that's why Russian Literature. I think he'd eventually find his way to it through music. Then, once you find Tolstoy or Dostoyevsky, you really get sucked in. For me, those two have such a way of depicting real human beings and what it means to be human. They really get at deeper human truths. Anna Karenina, Crime and Punishment, and The Idiot really capture that essence for me. (War and Peace too to some extent, but not as much as the other three.) I think Luka would really be drawn to Russian literature too and come to love it for itself apart from the musical inspiration he was able to derive from it.

13. In his teens, Luka takes more of an interesting in the piano and falls in love with the violin. He adds piano and violin performance majors halfway through university and ends up becoming a professional solo pianist as well as a first violin with the Orchestre de Paris.

14. Luka wears reading glasses. I don’t think I’ve used this one much. Actually, I can’t find where I’ve used this at all. :/ Well. I suppose there will be no tea drinking at this time for this headcanon. ^.^;

15. Luka has tattoos. I don’t think I’ve gotten around to this one yet either. Adrien and Luka talk about possible tattoo ideas in Chapter Four of Nachtmusik, but... At any rate, the full extent of the tattoos would be a stylized snake on his pelvis, Odin’s raven’s on his shoulder blades, a stylized snake bracelet under his regular bracelets, and a Chat Noir paw print under his ring. So far the paw print is the only one that I’m one hundred percent positive that will happen. The stylized snake on the pelvis is pretty up there too because in the Jabberwocky/Daisy universe I was going to have Adrien and Marinette squabbling over Luka, and Adrien was going to say that he bet Marinette hadn’t seen Luka’s snake tattoo. When Marinette asks Luka where he has a snake tattoo and learns how low on Luka’s stomach it is, she’s left wondering what’s going on between Adrien and Luka. I’m undecided about the ravens and the snake bracelet.

16. The children are always named Hugo, Louis, and Emma, but the birth order depends upon the pairing. Lukadrienette have Hugo (biologically Luka’s), Emma (Adrien’s), and then Louis (Adrien’s). Lukadrien have Emma (Luka and Rose’s), Louis (Adrien and Rose’s), and then Hugo (Adrien and Juleka’s). Adrienette have Louis, Hugo, and then Emma.

Which is your favourite of my headcanons? Which one would you like to see more of? Did I miss any? ^.^;

[talesofafangirlwithadvr]

MAY PICKS!

WELCOME BACK TO ANOTHER MONTH OF TV/MOVIE WATCHING! 

Does it feel like it was just April or that it can’t even be May and yet it is coming to an end? I get it. Quarantine is doing weird things to my head and I can’t believe how far in the year it’s been. Looking back on my picks for this month I noticed that I have seemed to escape the world through historical period shows or movies. But that isn’t the entire bulk of the month (just half of it). Without further ado, here we go!

As always..spoilers....

THE HALF OF IT

This Netflix original movie was an early watch for me during this month and it came at the right time. I was looking for a movie, rather than a TV show, and something that was contemporary and not overly serious (although, there are serious themes in this film). As it repeatedly says, “it’s not a romance” yet it has that YA/teen romance feel. (Yes, I used YA/teen in the same description.) I really loved the Elle Chu and Paul Munsky friendship. While watching the trailer, I could tell this film would be highlighting a healthy friendship as its focal point and how your other half doesn’t have to be a romantic soulmate. A lot of times, these kinds of stories can seem very repetitive, but with the new plot of Elle and Paul in love with the same girl we encounter a new kind of obstacle. I think the resolution was pretty solid for both plot lines and I liked the train scene at the end. Certain shots felt long at times. There were lots of pauses, which I didn’t 100% like. Also, the awkwardness could feel pretty cringey. Overall, it is definitely worth the watch. I liked it and would watch it again. Paul might be one of my heartthrobs of 2020. I’m always a sucker for a sweet jock with a heart of gold. 

THE OFFICE LADIES

Yes, I know I’m late to the show as this podcast started last year, but better late than never and what better time than quarantine. Plus, I don’t have to wait each week for a new episode (even though know I’m catching up, so eventually...) At first, I was worried when I would have time because of not spending as much time in the car for commuting, but I found it’s really soothing to listen to as I’m cleaning. It feels like I’m in the room with Angela and Jenna and we’re all BFFs. I love how they’re best friends in real life and how close they are. They give the trivia you really can only get from two people who were on the show. They also have several guest stars from actors on the show to writers, directors and producers. One of my most recent listens had Creed Bratton in the studio with them and they talked about the Halloween episode. It was great. Listening to their podcast is really making me want to rewatch the series for the 100th time. As an uber fan, I already get all of their references, but with the new Easter eggs I can’t wait to go back and see them.   

STAR WARS RISE OF SKYWALKER

Not just in honor of May the 4th, but to finish up the Star Wars watch through that I was taking with my sister. I hadn’t seen it yet and while not a die heart fan, I still wanted to see the conclusion. I liked the Force Awakens a lot, but felt eh about Last Jedi. In ways this one kind of felt like a stand alone. It had a different vibe compared to the previous two. After watching I heard there was a different director for all three movies, so that makes sense-I guess. (It’s weird they wouldn’t have kept at least one to do two of them.) It also had a kind of fan fiction feel. SPOILERS! SPOILERS! SPOILERS! Bringing Palpatine back reminded me of Lord Voldemort having a kid in Cursed Child. BACK FROM SPOILERS! I’m happy that Rey’s parentage/lineage was revealed because it was such a major point in this series. I loved the Rey/Finn/Poe relationship. It was great to see them in the same story line and reminded me of the original three: Luke/Han/Leia. Leia :( It was so sad, but I always knew it had to happen, due to Carrie Fischer. It didn’t make it any easier to watch. MORE SPOILERSSSSS! I knew Kylo would turn back. It was nice to see that his mom was able to spark that. I did like his fight scene. I just didn’t love the connection him and Rey have/had. LOVED the ending. I’m cool with her taking the Skywalker name and the suns shot with the force them at the end had me screaming. 

OPHELIA

From one Daisy Ridley film to another. This movie just recently got added to my list when I was channel surfing. I vaguely remembered it being advertised, but it felt like a while ago. I’m a sucker for a re-telling, so I was immediately intrigued to watch it. This film was adapted from a novel by the same name. It follows Ophelia from Shakespeare’s Hamlet and gives her more of a story and character development. If you are familiar with the original, you know that Ophelia is only briefly mentioned and her character’s motives are really driven by her love for Hamlet. Even her famous death scene is very ambiguous. When this film begins, a voice-over narration by Ridley immediately brings us to her death scene and tells the audience “that there is more to the story than we think we know.” I really loved the twist and re-invention of this story through her point of view. I think Daisy Ridley was fantastic in the role. I haven’t seen her in a lot of other things, so it was great to see her here in a completely different role from Star Wars. The re-telling is very creative and very feminist. You get to see how Hamlet and Ophelia meet and then see him off to school. With this addition you can really get behind this relationship and see the mutual attraction and feelings between them. When relating back to the original, I like how they cut out scenes that Ophelia was not physically apart of and instead rely the events that happened. (Specifically with Polonius’ death.) I also enjoyed the new perspective of scenes. You really can tell that Ophelia is not mad, but it is the mask she must put on to survive. The ‘get thee to a nunnery’ scene takes on a whole different meaning now. There’s also a lot echoes to other Shakespearean plays and tropes which were fun to explore. Whether you’re a Shakespeare/Hamlet fan or not, I would definitely check this one out if you’re a fan of the time period, re-tellings or a strong female lead.   

MEDICI THE MAGNIFICENT SEASON 3

I literally just finished this show this afternoon and I couldn’t wait to write about it. (Sorry if this post is pretty long, but that just shows you that you need to watch it.) I was very excited for the third and final season of Medici because I enjoyed season 2, so much. While this one might have taken me a little longer to watch, it was still a good time and I’m sad it’s over. 

Watching this season I was super impressed by Daniel Sharman’s acting. He has great range as he goes from a young Lorenzo in season 2 to an adult and father and then an elderly man. I think he was convincing throughout each stage and I’m happy they kept the same actor. His make-up to help him age looked a lot more natural, compared to Richard Madden’s, in my opinion. I feel on shows like this it’s often hard seeing a jump in time (it helps with seeing the kids grow up), so when Lorenzo starts to get sick/age I at first, was like whoa, but then it was further explained (by inheriting his father’s illness, etc.) 

Compared to season 2, I definitely liked the previous more. I not only enjoyed watching the more idealistic Lorenzo, but also plot-wise. In season 2 the Pazzi are the main antagonist/objective. Here in season 3 there were several obstacles/antagonists: The Pope, Riario, and Savonarola. Every time we thought there was a moment of peace...nope. Now, I get this is based on history and we need drama so you can only change so much, but I missed the Medici being at the top and being respected. I also know we covered A LOT of time. (I guess that shows you how connected I felt with them and the show.) 

All of the history Easter Eggs were cool. Obviously, the Renaissance was extremely relevant, but it was cool seeing the big names like Botticelli (especially with his painting at the end, which I recognized), Da Vinci, and Michelangelo. I can’t get over how many of these famous painters were recognized by the Medici family. It just shows you how important and influential they were. Also, when Nico revealed his last name as Machiavelli. JAW DROP! This show has continually brought me back to researching (and mainly using Wikipedia). The writing at the end was accurate to what I found. Wish we had another season with the legacy to see it continue. I’m surprised I got teary eyed at the end. 

WORLD ON FIRE

It may be listed last once again, this month, but it is definitely not least. The show may have finished its season a few weeks ago, but I still have two episodes left on my DVR. The last one I watched was when they were in Dunkirk and that was an intense time. I knew it was going to be, but it still didn’t prepare me. In this episode, we see many characters FINALLY meet up and join each other’s plot lines. I think that was one of my favorite parts of the episode/series. Some already knew each other, while others were meeting for the first time. While I am excited to see how it all turns out, I’m also not ready to say good-bye. Right now, I saw a potential for a season 2, but not sure if that was a fan made article or not. I’m hoping all of my favorite characters survive and get what can be considered a happier ending than what they are currently experiencing. I also hope we don’t end on too much of a cliffhanger. Either way, I’m happy I checked this show out. 

RE-WATCHING

iZOMBIE

Currently I’m in the beginning of the second season. Sometime last month I felt the pull to start re-watching this show. It’s one that I have tried once or twice to watch again from the beginning, but now that it’s been finished for almost a year, it felt like time. It was a great decision, although right now there’s some character plots that are frustrating me and that I forgot about. But there’s some great brains that Liv has experienced and it was great seeing Lowell again (for as short-lived as it was). I’m excited to continue re-watching. 

I DIDN’T DO IT

The re-watch for I Didn’t Do It basically began when it hit Disney Plus a few months ago. I just recently made it to season 2, which I remember enjoying more than season 1. One reason for this was because they get rid of the flashback format for each episode. I’m really early on, like episode 4, so I still have many more to go. Once I finish it I don’t know if I’ll explore a new Disney Plus show or watch another that I’ve seen before. 

I also have a few things on DVR that I’m still finishing up. I haven’t watched the finale of Batwoman yet and I know it’s going to be weird now that Ruby Rose has left the show. I just finished the Flash and felt blah about the whole season, so I’m unsure if I’ll watch next season. But I am enjoying Stargirl. You can find my thoughts on the first episode here. I’m excited to see the rest of the season. 

[jonahswife]

Alma Julieta Castillo

Here’s my ikevamp OC no one asked for but I’m giving you anyway :)

img/picrew credit here

“Yo no necesito su pena.”

General

Full Name: Alma Julieta Castillo

Reason for name: Alma = Kind, Julieta = Spanish for Juliet, Castillo = Castle, No meaning put together but she bears three different names from three different family members. Alma = Mother Given, Julieta = Aunt Given, Castillo = Father Given.

Nickname: Julie

Reason for nickname: Family use only, would much rather be called Alma.

Age: ???

Sex: Female

Gender: Female

Place of Birth: Valencia, Spain

Birthday: March 14th, 1615

Currently living in: Malaga, Spain

Species/Race: ??? (*)

Ethnicity: Spanish

Blood Type: AB+

Occupation: Criminal Investigator

Sexual Orientation: Pansexual

Social Status: Working Class

Relationship Status: Single/Doesn’t matter

Status: Alive (*)

Appearance

Body Build: Toned & Flexible

Height: 5”8

Weight: 158 lbs.

Skin colour: Caucasian

Hair style: Usually Braided or tied up.

Hair colour: Red

Eye colour: Green

Distinguishing Features: Mole under her right eye, discolored skin on her elbow, a strange tattoo over her heart, little remnants of scars on her leg

Preferred Clothing: Modern and comfortable clothing, classy but fit, wears heels no higher than 4”, despises long and loose garments and dresses. Owns a lot of coats and scarves but rarely uses the scarves, prefers clothing that has a moderate amount of coverage.

Accessories: a gun holster, a silver anklet engraved with the initials N.E.C

Health

General health: Healthy

Posture: Prim and Proper

Any physical illnesses?: Controlled Anemia

Any mental illnesses?: Unknown

Take drugs?: Only takes Iron Supplements

Smoke?: No

Mental/Emotional State

Archetype: The Creator

Act before thinking/Think before acting?: Thinking before acting.

Emotion-wise, generally: Frequently masks emotion and bottles everything up, if things are particularly rough she tends to be prone to rather irrational thoughts

Conversation

Way of speaking: Borders the line between Formality and Casual depending on who the person is, tends to match her way of speaking with what she glimpses people would enjoy hearing the most- especially with people she is going to interrogate. When in a personal silence her natural way of speaking is to be curt but quiet, and she doesn’t talk much.

Common conversation starter: “I find it’s a nice day outside, what about you?”

Swears?: Absolutely.

Made-up words?: No

Made-up language?: No

Likes/Dislikes

Likes: The thrill of danger, dark alleyways and suspicious nights, the misplaced romanticism in the night sky, intelligent debates and games of wit, playing ISpy with passerby.

Dislikes: People who willfully throw their lives away, those who discard loyalty, people who tamper with things they shouldn’t (be it murder, alchemy, etc.), the mountain of paperwork in her office, people who cross the line of respect entirely.

Hobbies

Reading

Singing

Collecting jewels

Going on long runs

Exercising

 Habits

Bites the tip of her pen when she’s stressed

Stress exercising

Nail tapping on the desk when impatient

Always has lemon tea every morning

Ties her hair into a bun before sleeping

Always walks near the street instead of the buildings

 Strengths/Weaknesses

Strengths: Calm, Hardworking, finely trained ability of perception, actually trained in both shooting and CQC, strong sense of justice.

Weakness: Morbidly Curious, Extremely shut in emotionally, doubtful of others,

Secrets

*Has died twelve times total, and has been brought back every time due to alchemy, the resulting mark above her heart bears twelve rings, one for each time they had carved her out. No one still knows how exactly she comes back, and she doesn’t remember the people who do it. Alma is vaguely aware of her multiple lives, and begun a practice to keeping journals in order to recount the story of the Alma that came before. The current Alma is the thirteenth generation, and is the most aware of her other lives of what occurred in 1628.

*Alma’s current status in layman's terms would be a Chimera but instead of different Animals it’s people using pieces of the older version of the original person.

Fears

Mannequins with a Head

Illness

Failure

Complete Isolation

Dreams/Goals

To live a life free of stress

A warm night in with her pet snake

To live somewhere simple and vibrant

Views/Opinions on...

Government: Necessary, flawed but able to maintain society in a relatively peaceful state.

Religion: Ex-Religious Catholic, unknown why exactly she stopped.

Economy: Hates being poor, wishes she was richer, loves shopping at discount marts and cutting costs.

Technology: Adores technology except when it comes to reading, prefers to read books on paper, really likes the convenience of having a phone.

Favourites

Food: Chorizo

Colour: Blood Red

Animal: Snakes

Number: Eight

Holiday: Halloween

Season: Fall

Time of day: Twilight

Thing to watch: Movies

Movie: Film Noirs

Type of art: Sculptures

Genre of music: Opera/Musical

Genre of literature: Gothic/Mystery

Genre of shows: DocuDramas

Genre of movies: Mystery

History

 Eldest child of the Castillo family, Alma was born in Valencia, Spain, to a rich banker’s family. From her youth she was always a brilliant mind, and took a keen interest in the culture that had begun changing around her. Alma was an obedient child who rarely disrespected her family, and up until her death in 1628 she was very much beloved by the community for being a sweetheart. The Almas that came after, however, each bore fundamental differences, mostly in appearance and how their lives played out until the 9th “reincarnation” of Alma came about: Elizabeth Alma Castillo (18th Century) was the first to come up with writing a diary, and the first to establish her personal love for protecting the people. All of the following lives have passed through and read her diary, believing it to be a great grandmother of some sorts.

Alma (21st Century) joined the police force when she was 29, graduating from the academy just a few months prior. Ever since she was little she was fascinated with the force, and very much often watched a lot of crime dramas. While a lot of her life was spent in the same town she was born in (Valencia,) her new work as an officer moved her to Malaga, where she picked up the hobby of singing thanks to one of her coworkers introducing her to a group of musicians that performed on the weekends late at night. Her growing interest in the arts eventually leads her to visiting the various museums that Malaga has to offer, and at the behest of one of her friends, to use her vacations to travel. 

Personality

 Alma is a firm and determined person, very toned down in her emotions and reactions. At first many will assume her to be strict but the truth is she just keeps to herself for the most part. However she is not cold, rather she is lukewarm in how she talks to people- and a first conversation with her will always be more formality than anything. Alma is incredibly focused and tends to get caught up into her work and her thoughts fairly easily, often doing more than what she needs to. This extends into her emotions, as she’s prone to bottling things up and leaving them to resolve themselves instead of actually talking things out. While she’s not as expressive as most, she’s definitely able to catch onto jokes and respond- and often times once she starts laughing she has a hard time stopping.

Family

Maria Castillo (Mother) Nicholas Castillo (Father) Diego Callejo (Brother) Stefanie Callejo (Sister In-Law) 

Trivia

Yes she likes James Bond, no she won’t tell you this.

Nicholas was in love with Shakespeare’s works when he was alive, thus giving Alma her middle name: Julieta

Alma is one of the many souls killed by the Spanish Inquisition

Alma is a wheeze-laugher

Alma keeps a diary where she writes a brief summary of every week of her life- starting from when she entered the training academy

[readbyir]

An essay on a refreshing take of Twelfth Night

“If music be the food of love, play on.” Twelfth Night is one of Shakespeare’s most performed plays, and in my opinion, one of my favorites. Viola’s journey of identity has been an object of my fascination since I stumbled upon her “I left no ring with her” monologue in high school. I have now seen Twelfth Night two times; the first time was at a community theatre and the second time was at a professional theatre. The professional production that I saw was at The Old Globe in November 2019. Directed by Jesse Perez, Twelfth Night used all of the MFA Acting students currently enrolled in the Shiley Graduate Theatre Program between the University of San Diego and The Old Globe. Having worked with most of them during their summer repertory season, I was thrilled to see them take on another reimagination of Shakespeare. This production took place in the intimate space of the Shirley and Harvey White Theatre. This theatre-in-the-round space allowed for Perez and his designers to suspend the audience’s disbelief with their fun ideas of design and staging. Perez conceptualized this telling of the story to be done through a band of actors in their own rehearsal hall with scripts, fighting mats, and rehearsal furniture strewn across the floor. Perez swapped genders, incorporated music and dance, and used farcical moments to fully explore Shakespeare’s humor and relationships in this text. Overall, Perez’s meta concept encouraged the unification of a strong ensemble that wants the audience to experiment with the love and gender fluidity that has always existed in Shakespeare’s plays.

While we usually see “As above, so below” metaphors expressed through two-levelled sets, Robin Roberts designed a single level set with two ramps that lead offstage. Perez’s concept insisted that the playing space was actually where an acting troupe comes to rehearse when they are not performing. Two signs labeled “TO STAGE” hung above the ramps and onstage drawers were stuffed with props and costumes. Malvolio, Sebastian, and subordinate characters had many opportunities to enter from the house for their entrances to the story. Perez crafted his departure point with the entire ensemble portraying themselves as actors. It was when Claire Simba stood on top of a table and proclaimed her first lines through a large microphone that her fellow actors agreed to put on a production of Twelfth Night. Instantaneously, hip-hop music and colorful lights flashed onstage as the ensemble danced and began their rehearsal process of Twelfth Night. 

Perez explored two different journeys of love between Antonio and Sebastian and Orsino and Viola. Perez fully embraced Antonio’s assertion of his adoration and love for Sebastian in the script. Jonathan Wilson, who portrayed Antonio, followed Ramon Burris, who portrayed Sebastian, down onto the stage to make sure his beloved friend had a safe journey. Perez explored the act of Burris closing the distance between himself and Wilson. Antonio’s vulnerability about his emotions towards Sebastian was met with Sebastian’s vulnerability about losing a sister. Burris and Wilson stood inches apart until Burris had to bid his farewell due to his mournful state. Claire Simba portrayed Orsino, an Illyrian nobleman. Gender-bending is not new when it comes to Shakespeare. For two black women to play the romantic leads, however, is not commonly practiced in live performances unless it is prescribed in a play that centralizes itself on the black experience. Perez directed the audience’s focus onto a female Orsino that falls in love with a female Viola. Simba did not talk in a forced lower-register or dress in breeches; she was still a woman in the larger-than-life role of Orsino.This viewed Shakespeare’s primary relationship through a LGBTQ+ lens. 

Music and dance was a large part of this production as well. As already stated, the ensemble broke out into a dance in the beginning of the play. The music was of the modern hip-hop genre, creating a contemporary feel to Perez’s concept. The choreography was fast-paced, fun, grounded, and complicated. A couple of the actors seemed to struggle with keeping up with the choreography, but still showed how much of a blast they had with it. Perez used Feste to continue this light-hearted musical feeling after the production’s colorful departure point. Summer Broyhill portrayed Feste with her acoustic guitar and goofy mannerisms. Using her experience as Amiens in As You Like It, Broyhill composed her own music for the show. In her moments of playing guitar and entertaining others, Broyhill, as Feste, was also experimenting with how others would react to her acoustic folk music. When Christopher Cruz (Sir Toby) and Mason Conrad (Sir Andrew) offered their approval of her music, Broyhill was elated and gracious. Her spirit of musicality built and spread towards two other partners onstage, turning a simple moment of entertainment into a full-blown acapella trio serenading Sir Toby. Broyhill also composed this acapella piece. 

Perez’s use of farce in Malvolio’s letter scene bent the audience’s expectation of what it means to hide in plain sight. Using palm leaves, Sir Toby, Sir Andrew, and Fabian danced and dashed across all corners of the stage to stay hidden from Malvolio. The rule that Perez and his actors structured assured that anytime an actor holds up a leaf, they are hidden from Malvolio. They bend this rule by adding a couple more ensemble members to relevé and perform traditional ballet leaps while holding their leaves as Malvolio read his letter aloud.

  I found that Perez’s exploration of LGBTQ+ relationships and gender-roles to be extremely effective within his concept. Standing in a “fuck or fight” proximity from each other, Antonio and Sebastian added a complex layer of their potentially homosexual relationship. We know Sebastian ends up with Olivia at the end, but the implication of him meeting Antonio in the middle with his emotions demands the audience to perk up and hang onto this given circumstance throughout the rest of their limited times together onstage. In the text, we do not get a lot of information on Sebastian’s whereabouts. Perez made Sebastian’s moments onstage matter to the audience by showing how his inner-turmoil from losing a sister can project onto other relationships, romantic or otherwise. Even if Perez did not choose to argue for Sebastian to be bisexual, he still built tension between two men that represented more than just a dichotomous power balance; it begged for a reconsideration of masculinity. The power dynamic between the two men did not feel as if a servant was being dismissed by a superior figure. It was a tender and truthful moment where Sebastian let his walls down to another man. I saw two men being completely honest about the things that weigh most on their heart. In the spirit of Perez’s experimental concept; I got to ask myself what I thought Sebastian would do if he were not mourning for Viola. Solely because of how Perez set up their relationship, I would accept the argument that Sebastian should end up with Antonio if he had not paired up with Olivia at the end. Additionally, I was able to reflect on how little we see masculinity portrayed like this onstage. 

Orsino and Viola’s relationship intersected the exposure of LGBTQ+ and black relationships onstage. Orsino’s identity was not played out as a breeches role. Simba is a woman who was expressed as a woman onstage. Because Orsino was originally a male, the audience was able to recognize the elements and mannerisms that made Simba passable as Orsino. As discussed in Sebastian and Antonio’s relationship, the audience’s focus was also drawn to the idea of what makes a character masculine or feminine. Simba was confident, smooth, and humorous just like the character Shakespeare wrote. She demanded respect and power through her struts and table-climbing. She still had a masculine air to her because of her raspy and lower voice. Bibi Mama’s portrayal of Viola was special because of how she portrayed femininity. Mama is a fitness trainer, which showed onstage. She was strong, coordinated, and grounded. Her alto register paired well with Simba’s raspy voice. She did not make much change between her identity as Viola versus fake-Sebastian because of the minimalistic costume design. If I was not paying close enough attention to the language, I would have missed the fact that Mama was switching between female and male onstage. To throw on a blazer was not the strongest indication to an audience member that Mama has changed her identity, especially with her muscular build. To broaden the perspective of Perez’s choice of casting, I believe a color conscious choice was made to reach across San Diego’s predominantly white theatre patron base. Perez made a speech at the opening night party stating that it was time that people agree that Orsino can, in fact, be a black woman. Putting this idea onto a stage that is dressed to look like a rehearsal hall truly serves Perez’s purpose in challenging the conventions an audience projects onto Shakespeare and other works of theatre. He framed it as actors onstage that are simply workshopping new ideas and testing out what works and what doesn’t work. I have heard stories of Old Globe patrons expressing how much they miss “traditional Shakespeare” while mistakenly assigning its likeness to an older production that was actually conceptualized as the Napoleonic Era. It seems that Perez knows the Old Globe’s audience very well and did not waste his opportunity to make this show matter on a global scale. At the time of writing this essay, The Public Theatre just wrapped their production of Measure for Measure with an all black and female cast. Black women taking the lead in Shakespeare is a choice that theatres want their audiences to see and get used to. Perez does not turn away from issue in the slightest and brings the Old Globe into the larger conversation. 

Perez’s use of music and farce elevated Shakespeare’s text. His concept broke through the fourth wall in the act of Broyhill performing as Feste. Just like Feste aimed to entertain and please through music, Broyhill might have hoped that her fellow actors and audience members enjoyed her folk guitar compositions. It added to Feste’s likability as a performing artist rather than a “clown.” Perez’s outrageously funny comedic moments, such as the letter scene, suspended the audience’s disbelief on how to accept staged conventions. Marco Antonio Vega’s portrayal of Malvolio achieved empathy from the audience because of how much we were laughing at the deception that was devised against him. 

Perez made the story of Twelfth Night bigger than what we may have originally perceived to be. He gave his actors a platform to truly play and explore the humanity of their characters by gifting them a world where anything can happen: the rehearsal room. What if Sebastian loved Antonio back? What if Orsino was a woman? How many rules can we make for the audience and then break them? What is and is not allowed to be done with Shakespeare? These are the questions actors and directors ask in the rehearsal room and determine themselves. Perez included his audience to answer that question. He gave us an authentic presentation of what theatre is by keeping this world in its “exploration stage.” This let the community bear witness to what makes our theatre artists today so devoted to their art. As an MFA class, the actors portrayed the future of theatre for all to see.

[zielenna]

@apathetis tagged me to list favourite ten female characters (thanks!) & I’m recovering from writing the final draft of my dissertation, so here goes - 

Isolde from Prose Tristan. I only read Renee Curtis’ edition, so I am not sure how to account for the general authorship...situation, but I am pretty sure that I preferred the part attributed to Luce de Gat. It has these moments of startling characterization it doesn’t really linger on, which makes projecting anachronistic interpretations easier than it usually is.

Helen, especially in the Odyssey (Emily Wilson’s translation) and Euripides’ Helen. She’s more of a concept than a character, I think, but these texts make it possible to feel about her as a person.

Imogen from Shakespeare’s Cymbeline. The play was obligatory reading on my course until very recenly, which means that most people disliked it, so naturally the moment I figured out my take on it, I became extremely defensive. ...I was half-way through writing this when I realised that I have equally strong feelings on Isabella from Measure for Measure, so I feel that I should mention her.

Max from Black Sails. Max was my first thought, but then I remembered that one of the things I did after watching the show was read large parts of Life in a Noble Household, 1640-1700 because I wanted to know what Miranda’s father’s bills would look like (the answer is, I don’t remember).

Dee Reynolds from It’s Always Sunny in Philadelphia, when she is allowed to be a petty gremlin, rather than a ‘woman.’

Chloe Armstrong from @septembriseur‘s Stargate epic/s, who definitely made me cry into my cup of tea at least once.

Sarah Churchill from The Favourite. No further comments.

Kay Langrish from Sarah Waters’ Night Watch. There are many strong contenders in Waters’ novels (e.g. both leads in The Paying Guests), but Kay is just singularly important to me.

Carmilla from Sheridan Le Fanu’s Carmilla. This is tricky, because the novel is really xenophobic (like all original vampire novels?), but there’s no going back from reading about gothic ‘very good friends’ at 14.

Jean Harrington from The Lady Eve. Susan Vance from Bringing Up Baby and Lucy Warriner from The Awful Truth are incredible, but I feel that the Cary Grant factor makes the competition slightly unfair.

if you want to do this, you’re tagged!

[pass-the-bechdel]

Marvel Cinematic Universe: The Avengers (2012)

Does it pass the Bechdel Test?

No.

How many female characters (with names and lines) are there?

Three (23.07% of cast).

How many male characters (with names and lines) are there?

Ten.

Positive Content Rating:

Three.

General Episode Quality:

It’s solid. Unpopular opinion? I don’t think it’s half as good as people made it out to be, back when it first hit cinemas and everyone was swooning. It’s solid, but that’s the best I’ve got for it.

MORE INFO (and potential spoilers) UNDER THE CUT:

Passing the Bechdel:

...

Female characters:

Maria Hill.

Natasha Romanov.

Pepper Potts.

Male characters:

Nick Fury.

Phil Coulson.

Erik Selvig.

Clint Barton.

Loki.

Bruce Banner.

Steve Rogers.

Tony Stark.

JARVIS.

Thor.

OTHER NOTES:

‘free from freedom’ is such a wanky piece of writing, man. It’s absolute nonsense, but it sounds vaguely profound if you don’t think about it at all. I thought about it. It’s idiotic. 

The very first thing we see of Black Widow in this movie is her being hit in the face, wearing a slinky little dress, tied to a chair being interrogated by a bunch of men. We’re supposed to indulge this excuse for hurting and objectifying a woman and then write it off as ‘empowering’ because she beats the Hell outta the dudes a couple of minutes later. That’s not a game I’m interested in playing. This is garbage.

The classical music over the beginnings of the Stuttgart attack is great.

All those German folks so confused by this Loki dude speaking English at them. What a tool.

I’m not sure I’ve ever heard ‘not today’ used as an effective badass declaration. It’s ALWAYS cheesy. Make it stop.

“There’s only one God, ma’am, and I’m pretty sure he doesn’t dress like that.” I don’t really like this line for Steve; he just doesn’t seem like the kind of guy who would play the ‘one true God’ card, and there was nothing in his origin story which implied that he’s particularly attached to religion at all; plus, he already read the brief on Thor, he knows this is literally the old Norse deity, there’s no question of whether or not they’re dealing with a God here. To argue the point (because he’s not MY God!) is meaningless in context, and feels like a weak attempt to correlate (Christian) faith with being ‘old-fashioned’, like OF COURSE Steve would defend the idea of the ‘one true God’, he’s from the past, not a cool enlightened atheist/agnostic modern man like the rest of us, right?

Thor and Loki are using such archaic phrasing, when Tony makes his ‘Shakespeare in the Park’ joke, it’s...more an observation than a quip. The Asgardians were not half as stuffy in Thor. It makes it seem like someone didn’t bother to see that movie first before writing their version of the characters.

Thor has to fight with the others when he shows up. He’s just gotta.

Gotta give a nod to Mark Ruffalo’s work here; I feel like I can see the clear comparison between his version of the character and Edward Norton’s in The Incredible Hulk, but at the same time there’s no sense of this being a Norton’s-Banner impression. Ruffalo is doing a sweet job of making the character his own without totally overhauling the template Norton laid down, and I dig it.

Oh, here we are. Loki calls Black Widow a ‘mewling quim’, which is just a fancy way of calling her a whiny cunt. Your gendered slur is still a gendered slur, movie.

I know they’re playing the idea that the sceptre is causing the antagonism between the characters, but fuck, it’s tedious. It just feels like they’re all contrived petty versions of themselves, being shitty because it’s ~dramatic~ for them to not get along.

I didn’t see this movie until months after it was released, and people were raving about how crushed they were by the major character death in the film but they were doing a pretty good job of not spoiling it; good enough that for a moment, I really thought I’d get to enjoy the surprise/horror for myself. You know who spoiled it for me? In a tweet, no less? It was the 44th President of the United States. Thanks, Obama.

This guy is the MVP of this film:

You can chalk “Son, just don’t,” up on the list of Things Steve Rogers Would Not Say. Just because he’s technically in his nineties doesn’t mean he isn’t still in his twenties in his mind: I don’t buy that he’d go for a blithely patriarchal term like ‘son’, it seems like another poorly-considered attempt to make him sound old-fashioned. Juxtapose that with ‘just don’t’, which is very modern vernacular. It might seem clever to combine the two as a meta-expression of Steve belonging to two different times now, but in practical application it just sounds out-of-character, and there’s nothing clever about that.

I know I said after the last movie that I love it when someone gets hit and flies off-screen in an exaggerated fashion, but Hulk punching Thor off-screen after they finish working together to take down the big beastie is an exception, because there’s no reason for Hulk to decide to hit Thor in the first place, it’s just a gag for the sake of a gag. I can’t believe they messed up such a simple pleasure. 

I will forgive it, in return for Hulk smashing Loki all over the place. That was funny.

Back when this movie came out, before I saw it, I had people tell me - straight-faced, totally sincere - that it was one of the best movies they had ever seen. The internet was on fire with Avengers love. The film was rated in the IMDb Top 20. Admittedly, that all sets a pretty impossible standard for a movie to meet, and being at least a little disappointed in the result is probably a given. I was not particularly invested either way (I didn’t fall down the Marvel rabbit hole until later), so I didn’t allow myself to go in to my first viewing with such lofty expectations to be crushed, just the general assumption that this was gonna be good, it had to be good, at minimum. And it was that; it’s a good film. It’s entertaining. The plot makes basic essential sense. It’s easy to follow. There are some nice visuals, and most of the special effects are relatively clean, which can be a significant difficulty for big-budget extravaganzas that sometimes/often try to get way too much spectacle bang for their buck, so, a nice win. All in all, The Avengers is not a bad film. Sure is a bland one, though.

I know, I know, getting all these big-name characters from previous films together in one movie was a serious task and it’s hard to write a well-balanced script for so many leads, blah blah. Let’s put that whole equivocation to bed right now, because I honestly don’t think that balancing the big-name cast was the problem. All of the characters had something to do, no one felt like a random extra, I could quibble about certain places where I really wish things had been plumped up a bit (pretty much everywhere - the film is extremely low on meaningful character beats), but ultimately the characters are fairly evenly presented. What makes this movie bland to me is 1) the way that the personalities of the characters deviate from that established in their previous films, and 2) the simplicity of the story they inhabit. 

We’ll cover the Avengers themselves first: the good news is, Tony Stark is still Tony Stark. His personality is intact. Bruce Banner is, as noted, not exactly the Bruce Banner we met back in The Incredible Hulk, but that’s both a given and a good thing - the casting change is an improvement. Hawkeye was barely in the MCU previously, so we don’t really have enough to compare him against in order to make a judgment. Black Widow, however, is a bit of a mess; Joss Whedon’s special brand of misogyny is on display from moment one, as noted above (he LOVES writing women being brutalised because ‘how would we know/believe that they’re strong if we don’t get to see them overcoming mistreatment?’ - he tends not to feel the need to ‘prove’ his male characters’ strengths in this way), and Natasha’s personal story for the movie continues in a distinctly gendered vein: as is common for female characters being written by shitty dudes, her arc revolves predominantly around a man (Hawkeye), and she is ‘emotionally compromised’ by her attachment to him. She also zones out in the middle of an action scene and winds up in a corner shaking and traumatised (very out-of-character for a super spysassin), and particular emphasis is placed on all the bad things she’s done in the past and how she should feel bad about it, though no one does more than shrug their shoulders about Clint or Fury or any of the other SHIELD agents who are acknowledged as having dark and dirty pasts. Why is Natasha the one who is singled out to have her morality judged while her ‘arc’ focuses on her inconvenient emotional engagement? You know why. There’s no reason why this particular tack had to be taken in bringing her backstory into the film, and as a result of it we spend little time with Black Widow displaying the kind of cool professionalism and self-assurance she had in Iron Man 2. The inclusion of that vulnerability and backstory doesn’t make her feel more rounded or complicated because it is deconstructing the power and mastery of the character; rather than building upon the foundation set in her previous film visit, we’re questioning the stability of that foundation and seeing if we can get a few pieces of the structure to rattle loose. 

A big part of the trouble for Thor is that he gets saddled with that poxy Ye Olde Cliche dialogue, and there are few things worse for achieving character consistency than changing the way that they talk: no matter how hard the actor tries to play the character the same, they can’t compensate for the fact that the very structure of their sentences has been remodeled. They can improvise rephrasing the lines and/or argue the point if they want, but it’s hard to challenge every line, and if the director (who, oh look, is also the writer) insists you follow the script verbatim, there’s not a lot you can do with that. Poor Captain America suffers the same fate with the overt attempts to make him sound ‘old-fashioned’ by having him utter words and phrases that he never used in his origin movie. What’s worse is, this stilted dialogue is pretty much the sum total of the film’s acknowledgment of the fact that, oh yeah, Steve just recently woke up from the ice to find that seventy years has passed and nearly everyone and everything he used to know is gone. He has an exchange with Fury in his first scene, about ‘getting back in the world’, but there’s zero follow-up on how he’s handling it, what difficulties there might be, or even just how Steve is feeling about all of this on a basic emotional level. And yes, I am aware that there’s a deleted montage of Steve going about his day being isolated and out-of-touch, and it’s a travesty that they cut it because that’s essential character content, but it’s also a total bare minimum which has zero follow-up. Steve Rogers spends the whole film just being...there, speaking lines that don’t suit him or reflect the personality we just saw in The First Avenger, and not even in an understandable character-development ‘throwing myself into my work to hide from the pain’ kind of way. He’s kinda blandly self-righteous and all-business no-pleasure in exactly the way he was NOT in his origin movie; my impression is that Whedon doesn’t care for the character and wrote him off as the traditional patriotic cliche one might have expected him to be instead of the nuanced character that he actually is. As with Thor and Loki, it feels as if Whedon didn’t bother to watch the previous movies first in order to get a sense of the established characters.

Speaking of Loki: if there’s one character who really, REALLY suffered a personality change in this script, it’s him. None of what made Loki the highlight of Thor is in evidence here; where that character was a cunning plotter full to overflowing with complex and contradictory feelings for his family and driven to action by that same emotional cascade, this Loki...wants to rule the Earth. Because. He’s, like, crazy, the other characters all say so, even Thor - the only one who actually knows Loki and is fit to assess his mental state - says that his ‘mind is far astray’ (what Thor thinks of that, whether he’s surprised or concerned, whether he feels like he understands why this has happened to Loki or not, is unclear, because, I dunno, Thor having feelings is as inconvenient to the story as Steve having feelings - as Loki snarls derisively about ‘sentiment’, we must remember that being emotionally compromised is dumb and only for women? Hmm). Loki is just a placeholder villain in this film, driven to action by nothing in particular, it’s just a business arrangement with a mysterious third party that coincidentally happens to involve Earth. Loki prattles and hollers a lot about how ruling is his right and people want to be ruled and blah despot blah, and it’s both supremely uninspired, and not true to the character we met in Thor at all - the Loki we know was not obsessed with ruling, his motivations were all about his family standing and the things he was denied within those relationships and their implications. I remember fandom, back when this movie came out, scrambling with various headcanons about Loki losing his mind in the void or being brainwashed, ad nauseum, because no one really seemed to feel like they were watching a logical progression of the same character at all. 

Now, one of the main ways that the lack of character consistency contributes to narrative blandness is that it disrupts narrative immersion - we’re re-negotiating the way that we engage with the characters, and that distracts from engaging with the story itself. At worst, we may even find ourselves cynical about every decision that a character makes (whether it’s in-character or not), because we’re too aware of the man behind the curtain to buy the act. There are definite shades of that in this film, but the worst of it comes from the whole team-antagonism schtick that is vaguely blamed on ‘Loki’s manipulations’ and the sceptre. The thing is, this all requires the characters to behave out-of-character, and since they mostly already are out-of-character due to bad writing, the exacerbation of that by creating artificial conflict feels like more bad writing, not actual plot. Having the characters initially get along poorly before triumphantly uniting to win the day is such an overused device, it’s easy to construe the conflict as arbitrary, and as it turns out...it is. Loki/the sceptre causing the Avengers to argue doesn’t actually impact the narrative in any meaningful way, since they don’t start a fight or fracture over it, it doesn’t slow down Tony’s efforts to learn what Fury is really up to, nor does it prevent Steve from investigating the same thing in person. Them conflicting with Fury and questioning their decision to work with SHIELD, etc, is a normal thing to have an argument about, no magic-mind-stick required; the only mileage the movie really gets out of the forced-conflict ploy is that Steve and Tony keep pissing on each other, which is extremely OOC for nice-guy Steve and WOULD throw up a big red flag for mental manipulations if the movie weren’t already misrepresenting him as an insufferable stick in the mud anyway, and even for Tony it feels off - he’s generally a jerk as a rule, but he doesn’t pick unprovoked fights - but again, when the movie is already so left-of-centre on so many characters everyone feels off, so it’s easy to assume the characters are just falling victim to contrived drama, and not something in the actual story. As noted, it doesn’t end up mattering where the conflict comes from anyway; the bad news is, it takes until the halfway point of the Goddamn movie before the characters get their prescribed ‘rough patch’ out of the way. The fact that they were just being really annoying for no real reason and without narrative consequence kinda steps on the idea of it being ‘triumphant’ when they all come together at the end to fight Loki, because there was zero reason for the audience to ever legitimately doubt that it would happen, not even in a begrudging-putting-this-genuine-disagreement-aside-so-that-we-can-save-the-world kind of way. It’s just dead air with no weight behind it, and with characters reduced to such cliche versions of themselves that it’s hard to muster the will to care.

AND SO, we have a movie which, as previously noted, is awfully damn simplistic. That’s not a terrible thing, in and of itself - it’s all about what you do with an idea, and I would posit that a more complicated plot wouldn’t be a great idea here since there are so many primary moving parts in the form of characters to justify. But, the aforementioned griping about the skewy characterisation makes this film a bad candidate for character-over-plot, and if the shenanigans are falling flat, that’s when simplistic plotting becomes a problem. It goes like this: Loki shows up and steals the magic cube (action ensues). The avengers assemble to catch Loki (action ensues). The characters argue on a helicarrier until Loki’s goons show up to wreck shit (action ensues). Loki escapes and goes to New York to use the magic cube to portal an alien army to Earth. Action ensues until the portal is closed and Loki is defeated. The end. I’m not complaining about the action - it’s a standard facet of the genre, and most of it is entertaining enough (though the unnecessary Thor/Iron Man fight I coulda done without, and the battle of New York runs a bit long) - but the plot itself is pretty point-A-to-B-to-C without much in the way of surprises, and like I said, that’s fine so long as you’re delivering in another arena, i.e. STRONG CHARACTER NARRATIVES. And character is sooo far from being this film’s strong suit. The result? Is not very compelling.

It tends to wind up that, by the time I get to the end of explaining why I think a thing didn’t work (and this is...the abridged version), it maybe seems ridiculous that I’m also saying ‘this thing isn’t that bad’. The truth is, there’s nothing that I think this movie does impressively well, and there are a lot of pretty major things that I think were poorly handled. BUT, I still meant what I said: it’s entertaining. It makes at least basic sense, and flows easily enough. And while I have serious issues with a lot of the characterisation and feel that - though balanced(ish) in handling - the plot failed to take real advantage of any of the character resources at its disposal (except maybe Tony), the actors still brought the goods to the table, and those whom I enjoyed in their previous films (I mean you, Chris Evans) didn’t disappoint, even though the material they were handling did. It’s a solid film, it’s good fun, I don’t regret watching it, and while I am irritated by various aspects, I don’t feel the need to keep ranting about them. And hey; Mark Ruffalo is really very wonderful. They’ve got that going for them.

[little-bookshelf-dragon]

February Wrap Up (Finally)

Okay! So I’m finally getting to this...five days late. Oops. Just to clear that up, I started a reading journal towards the end of February and wanted to do entries for the month of February before making this post. I’m hoping that this will help me organize my thoughts for my reviews. So I can actually... post reviews. 

Anyway. Here we go! I’m going to begin with my overall thoughts and then go into my stats and put reviews under the cut so if you haven’t read these books and want to avoid spoilers you can! 

Overall thoughts on this month’s reading: 

I DNF’d one-third of my TBR this month (two of six. I say one third like it’s so many more than that). It’s a little funny that I had so much more success with the books I hadn’t actually planned to read than my TBR. I’m also kind of surprised that I made it through some of the books that I did, when I DNF’d other books for similar reasons. I did go into this month knowing that this was going to be a difficult bunch of books to get through, 

I think I’m going to have to adjust my Goodreads reading challenge. I’ve already more than halfway through it and its only February. I'm honestly surprised. I didn’t think I was going to make it through the 52 I had planned.  

Stats for this month: 

Total Books Read (Finished): 18 

DNF’d Books: 2

Books I need to Finish: 4

All-Out: The No-Longer-Secret Stories of Queer Teens Throughout the Ages by Saundra Mitchell, et al. 

City of Lost Souls by Cassandra Clare

Harry Potter and the Deathly Hallows by JK Rowling

We Are the Ants by Shaun David Hutchinson 

Academic Books: 3

A Midsummer Night’s Dream by  Willaim Shakespeare 

Young Goodman Brown by Nathaniel Hawthorne

Pride & Prejudice by Jane Austen

Ratings: 

Five Stars: 5

Four Stars: 7

Three Stars: 4

Two Stars: 2

One Star:  0

Spoilery Reviews Under the Cut! 

DNF’d Books: 

Frozen by Melissa De LaCruz and Micheal Johnston

It was a weird book. In general. And then the Scene that implied sexual assault happened, and I had to stop reading. I just couldn’t bring myself to finish it. 

Ender’s Game By Orson Scott Card

I was having trouble getting into the book in the first place, and then I realized that these were six year old kids. Being trained for war. Against aliens. As I have a sister who’s six, this didn’t sit well with me. 

Two Star Books:

Echo by Alyson Noel 

I was really dissappointed in this book. I really enjoyed the first book in the Soul Seekers book, Fated. I liked the worldbuilding, the relationship between Daire and Dace, the concept of the Echo. But I had too many complaints about this book. Mainly with Cade. I feel like I could have liked him more if he had some actual development and clearer motivations. Though, I think the attempted rape scene was a little much (that’s an understatement.) I think it would be nice if there were a YA book where the female MC wasn’t assaulted, or at least that addresses it properly afterward. 

A Court of Thorns and Roses by Sarah J. Maas

I’m honestly surprised that I finished this one, after I DNF’d another book for similar things happening. I didn't like Feyre much. She didn't seem to have much moe to her character other than painting and hunting. For someone who was meant to be so strong willed, she seemed to change her mind too easily. Rhysand...I don’t know where it start with him. He’s not much of one here, but it’s pretty obvious that they’re setting him up as a love interst in the later books. Can we stop having abusive boyfriends in YA lit? Tamlin was a little pathetic. Maybe don’t alienate the one person that’s your shot at freedom? Maybe? Feyre and Tamilin’s relationship was cute, but it wasn't really all that convincing. 

Three Star Books:

The Maze Runner by James Dashner

The Maze runner was good. I’m not sure if it was good enough to deserve the hype it received. I did not like that there was so much that was left unanswered in the beginning. It’s one thing to withhold information to create interest. It’s another to taunt your readers by having a character ask the questions, and the others refusing to give an answer. I did think the ending was an interesting twist, to stage a ‘rescue’ and then have it turn out to be apart of the trials. 

Love Drugged by James Klise 

There’s...a lot to unpack with this one. At first, the general premise made me feel a little sick. I almost stopped reading it several times thoughtout the book, especially when the chaacters described being gay as a disease. But by the time I finished, I think I understood better. Jamie was being mainipulated, not just by the doctor, but by society to think that way. His journey to discover and understand himself leads to his desperate actions in an effort to escape that manipulation. It’s heartbreaking to know that Jamie's thoughts were based off of off the author’s when he was around the same age.   

Take Two by Julia Devillers & Jennifer Roy 

I was kind of disappointed in this book. I loved the first one when I was younger, so the fact that I didn’t feel the same about the sequel is a let down. Though I guess that might have to do with the difference in age between the times I read them   

Young Goodman Brown by Nathaniel Hawthorne 

Four Star books: 

Mockingjay by Suzzane Collins 

I cried so much reading this book. Katniss yelling at Buttercup at the end broke me. Her “for Prim” before the execution was beautiful (I’ll admit it took me some time to realize she was hinting at what she was planning to do.) Cinna having a part in the rebellion even after his death. The amount that Haymitch cares about Peeta and Katniss. UGH the feels. I did have a problem with the pacing. I felt like all the action was squeezed in at teh end. And Peeta and Katniss’s relationship seemed to seesaw between them in it’s one-sidedness throughout the series. 

Duel Of Fire by Jordan Rivet 

I did not expect to enjoy this book as much as I did. Especially at he beginning, I thought the characters were annoying. But that GROWTH. By the end, I loved the characters. I had a hunch about who the rebels were, but I wasn’t sure until they were revealed. I loved the magic system and world building, and I can’t wait to see how the story will be developed in the next book and the rest of the series. 

Steelheart by Brandon Sanderson

This was my first Brandon Sanderson book and I was not disappointed. The concept was interesting, the Epics having a specific weakness kept them from being overpowered, and I loved the fact that  the “Normal people” weere the heroes (For the most part.) I KNEW there was somehing up wiht Megan. But Steelheart’s weakness completely threw me off. I had so many theories, but I was wrong on all of them. That was a plot twist done well. 

City of Fallen Angels by Cassandra Clare

(I’m actually not going to include my notes here because they turned into more of a rant at the characters than an actual reveiw) 

Galatea by Madaline Miller

I want more of this. Any additional content, I want it. It says something that she felt the only way to escape was to die (And take her husband with her). I REALLY want to know what happened with their daughter.  

The Skin I’m In by Sharon G. Flake 

This is a reread for me. I read tthis book when I, I believe,  was the same age as Maleeka. And at the time, while I had never been in the same situations she’s in, I could still relate to her. Now, as an adult working with students Maleeka’s age, I see my students. It gives me a better insight to what might be going on in their homes, thoughts, and attitudes. This is a book that so many of them should read, just like so many of them could use a Ms. Saunderson. 

A Midsummer Night’s Dream by Willaim Shakespeare

Five Star books:

Clockwork Prince by Cassandra Clare 

This book. This book. I audiobooked most of it, which meant that I was listening to it in class while working. Which means I cried. During class. This is one of the few love triangles I think I’ve ever really liked and am actually emotionally invested in. I fully understand the hype around this series. I can't wait to pick up the next one.   

The Poet X by Elizabeth Acevedo

After finishing the audiobook, I'm sitting here trying to find the words to describe how much this means to me. How many of Xiomara's thoughts and feelings I relate to. And I just can't find the words. I can't remember the last time a book meant this much to me. Wanting to find my own voice. Beginning to question the religion that has been such a big part of my life for a long time. Feeling like I have to hide parts of myself, my thoughts, my feelings, everything I wish I could say but can't, from people I care about. Wanting my own writing to mean something to others. I wish I could put what I'm feeling into words, but I'm struggling. I cried. I need a copy of this book. I loved it so much.

Saint Anything by Sarah Dessen

I feel like Dessen’s books follow a pattern. I’ve only read three so far, but I’m able to see the similarities. However, that dosn't stop them from being unique. Sydney’s problems are different from Macy’s, whose are different from Collie’s. So while the books are similar enought to notice a pattern,  they’re unique enough to keep the reader’s interest. I wouldn’t say that Saint Anything has impacted me as much as some books have, but I did still enjoy it. Also, a moment of appreciation for instances of sexual assault handled correctly? It's rare to see the subject addressed in a book after it happens. Though I would have loved to see Ames prosecuted. We need to tell girls it's okay to speak up about these things.

Tell Me Again How a Crush Should Feel by Sara Farizan

I loved this. I’m not even sue how to put it all inot words. First of all, Saskia getting expelled? Excellent. That girl made me so mad. Messing with Lila’s feelings was bad enough, but hen going stalker, assualting her, and then outing her to the entire school? I think I would have liked to see even more of a punishment, honestly. Maybe someting from her parents. LISA. I loved Lisa. I’m so happy she and Leila ended up together. They both deserved to be happy and I’m so happy they got to be happy together. I was so emotional after finishing this book.  

Pride and Prejudice by Jane Austen 

I’m not going to go too in depth because then this would be way too long but this is my favorite book that I’ve had to read for a calss. Ever. 

[queen-of-the-nerdlords]

Movies To Watch if You Ever Want To Cry

Wolf Children Ame and Yuki - Have you ever wanted to see what it’s like to be a single mother due to tragic circumstances, raise two lovely and cute children from infancy and then watch them grow up and move on from you? This is your movie.

The Prince of Egypt - Even though this movie does have a lot of strong religious themes, it isn’t too pushy on them and conveys them in a way that most fantasy and fiction movies do. Watch as you grow to love the characters, even the deeply flawed ones, and then watch them break apart or go through hardships.

Ed Edd N’ Eddy’s Big Picture Show - Even though it will be more heartfelt to long-term fans, if you know the simple premise and dynamics of the original show, this is a good one to watch. A lot of it is filled with comedy but there are many parts within it that invoke not only sadness but relief and contentment, especially the big reveal at the end.

Jersey Girl - Watch as a man falls in love with a wonderful woman and then watch as that woman dies in childbirth, the man loses his job, and that same man try to raise a wonderful daughter on his own while trying to let go of the past and move on to a brighter future.

Futurama: Bender’s Big Score - This movie is mostly a wonderful comedy with swiftly timed jokes and a stable plot that is not only enjoyable for newcomers but for long time fans of the show. There are many twists and scenes that will definitely make you cry as well as laugh.

Hellboy 2: The Golden Army - Hoo boy, well, I was able to understand this movie before I read the comics or even watched the first movie, so if you have critical thinking skills the plot should be easy to understand. This movie pulls a lot of punches with its characters, and makes you feel and sympathize for them even between the gory and brutal action scenes. The relationships feel real and you can get a sense of joy when they succeed and sorrow when they fail.

Kaguya-hime no Monogatari - Based off of the Japanese myth of Kaguya, this movie takes you into what feels like a fantastical world based off of fantasies. The emotional turmoil of the heroine, Kaguya, will have you crying at the very least near the end.

Meet the Robinsons - Have you ever wanted a family that loves you, or even a family at all? Have you ever felt so worthless that you tried to do anything to have people want you? Do you feel as if you do nothing but fail? If so, you’re going to definitely cry about and relate to the protagonist and even the antagonists in this movie. Though over all, it is good at taking those things you’re sad about and cheering you up.

Rogue One - What are you doing? Go see this movie if you haven’t already.

The Last Unicorn - Ah yes, there’s nothing like a star-crossed romance and the process of learning that the world is bittersweet and cruel to get those tears a-flowin. The animation in this movie is beautiful despite the time it came out, and the soundtrack is unforgettable and entirely fitting to the film.

Up (2012) - You know why this is on here.

Train to Busan - This film is about a busy capitalist father and his daughter, a group of baseball teens, and an expecting wife and husband facing the beginning of an outbreak of zombies while on a train in Korea. This movie will play your heartstrings like the Devil plays a goddamn violin, it is a must see.

Romeo + Juliet - An exciting and colorful rendition of Shakespeare’s classic tragedy “Romeo and Juliet”. The relationship between the Capulets and the Montagues was made a lot clearer to follow and the relationship between Romeo and Juliet felt much more real and passionate despite the short amount of time. You could sense the chemistry and the ill-timed infatuation of the two, and even get attached to their characters. A good adaptation for the modern age.

Inside Out - While the film does have its flaws, the experiences of the protagonist and the topics brought up within the movie are very touching and relatable for almost anyone. The movie itself is a fun entertaining one, and there are a few scenes that’ll definitely start up the waterworks.

Princess Mononoke - In this film, there really isn’t a clear-cut “good” or “bad” side. Both sides do bad and destructive things. Both sides are necessary and are needed in their own ways. And with the two protagonists, that distinction is made very clear. Beautiful heartwrenching music, stunning visuals, and characters so well-written they feel real, this movie is a must see for everyone.

The Hobbit: The Battle of the Five Armies - Yeah a lot of fans hate this movie but let’s be honest, no matter your thoughts on the series, Thorin’s descent into madness and then his death is utterly heartbreaking to watch, and made even sadder by the friendship (or potential romance depending on how you view it) between him and Bilbo.

When Marnie Was There - Ignore the lesbian undertones, you will be disappointed in where they lead, but other than that this is a beautiful movie and one I highly recommend seeing.

Mad Max: Fury Road - This movie is jam-packed with fast-paced action and loud fiery excitement but also lots of dramatic and heart-wrenching moments. You will end up caring about the characters and their world so their fates are made even more tragic in the end.

The Land Before Time - A baby Apatosaurus loses his mother and his home and goes through the 5 stages of grief.

Shaun of the Dead - A very funny take on the zombie apocolypse with a heart-wrenching scene near the end and a slightly uplifting ending. A must see for all fans of comedy and zombies.

Kung-Fu Panda 2 - Mostly filled with comedy and fuzzy and cute protagonists, this movie delves deep into themes like death, abandonment, inner peace, dictatorship, descending madness and genocide. A must see.

Heart and Soul - Four people with busy lives die in a bus accident just as a baby boy is born in a car that was nearby the scene. Those four people haunt the baby and become his guardian angels until he can grow up and finish their unfinished business. Very touching and highly emotional, this movie is a strong recommend.

Charlotte’s Web (1973) - I think you know why this is here.

Whale Rider - A young Māori girl wants to become chief of her tribe and tries to make her stubborn and closed-minded grandfather proud of her. While it has a happy ending, there are a lot of sad scenes in this movie.

Marley & Me - The dog dies. You get to practically raise that dog from when he was a puppy up until he gets old and passes away. That’s enough to make most people cry.

Spirited Away - A young girl’s family ends up in debt with the spirit world and so she is kidnapped and forced to work in a bath house for an unspecified period of time. The longer she stays, the more she forgets about her old life. A must see for anyone ever.

The Sisterhood of the Travelling Pants - Sounds shallow but was surprisingly deep and sincere on a lot of hard topics. Very strong in its female solidarity and very relateable and touching to many people.

Lilo and Stitch 2: Stitch Has A Glitch - Surprisingly, this one is more emotional than the first. Stitch is revealed to have a genetic problem with his body that causes him to “glitch” and ruin things. If this glitch is not fixed, he will no longer function and he will die.

All Quiet on the Western Front - I was never a fan of black and white movies, even less black and white war movies, but this was quite the surprise. Based off the book, the movie centers around a young man named Paul who enlists in the German army to fight in the war against France. Though it is dated, and some parts I did not agree with, you can still relate to things about most of the characters and feel bad for all of them for the things they have to witness and go through. No one is safe in this movie.

Holes - This movie is sad mainly because of Kate Barlow and Sam. It is the best book-to-movie adaptation I think humans will ever get.

Paranorman - It’s made by Laika what are you doing go see it!!

Kubo and the Two Strings - This one is sadder and also still made by Laika, go hecken see it!!!

The Rise of the Guardians - Abandonment and Isolation Issues the Movie.

The Game Plan - Dwayne Johnson plays an egotistical football star who finds out that he has a daughter who is now in his custody.

Monster Squad - A bunch of cool classic horror movie monsters come out to play in this feature-length film but also Frankenstein gets the friend(s) he deserves.

All Dogs Go To Heaven - A gambling stray dog manipulates a sweet young orphan into making him money to pay off a debt.

The 10th Kingdom - A young woman gets put into a fantasy world with her father by a prince who’s been turned into a dog by a witch who conspires to take the throne. She and her father try to find a portal home as the witch herself tries multiple times to kill them. There’s a lot of drama, cool fairytale references, and lots of smart writing and plot that A must see for most!!

[autoirishlitdiscourses]

Discourse of Sunday, 11 October 2020

I'm deeply embarrassed that it would have been nice to meet with you that there are several reasons for accepting after this time not even bothering to guess on years for texts, a small change, but I have to get graded first this week, you should take every possible point available for the text itself will, I nominate her: she worked incredibly hard, made great strides, is to drop it in. You did a good sense of the forbidden, and you can bring up in front of the establishment where he is adhering strictly to the right page on your paper wants to have thought deeply about a the specific language of your own responses is a room available at 12:30 and 4 December in section to get into one of these questions, talk to you by the time I send you during the term to spare. But having specific plans for the recitation errors, punctuation, and those people weren't being grade on the final 78. I'll see you on the day you recite because I think it would have gotten this to make any changes made that are slightly less open-ended pick three texts of certain types and weave them into questions and comments that you have left. Hi! It doesn't have to satisfy the college in which you could do so. Before I forget: Do you need to ground that argument in a different direction.

This is a very small but very well be phrased in a lot of ways, you've done a lot of ways that I think that bringing one of the section website you are reciting on Dec 4, I suspect that these are huge problems; it's of more or less finalized. Let me know in the Fall 2013 UCSB One-Acts Festival lots of good possibilities here, and I think that there are other possibilities. Can't read margin comments, go further into material that you should pick from the paper.

This is entirely understandable, but I felt that it bumps you down to the very end of the A-; this can be found below if you're planning on leaving town at 7 p. Again, you're welcome to use it to the section they describe. I'll see you next week. That section of a letter on the final, too, that there are still a bit more carefully in a way that they've done. 75 C 75% 112. 10 a. Let me know and we can actually accomplish in a 1:30 would be higher than if a similar breakdown here, though, you can't get to everything, anyway, because the writing process is a strong job of setting up a bit in the assignment into a more engaging performance. British pound notably through much of the island. Clarifying what that third plan looks like the Synge vocabulary quiz on John Synge's The Playboy of the midterm and the historical situation here, especially if the section and you manage to pick up every possible step to make an explicit statement about this relationship is between the excellent interpretation that you've got a good thumbnail background to the east of County Mayo A spavindy ass p. Instead, I think that the safe road too much to dictate terms on a big task. All of which are a few hours before a presentation as a whole behind in terms of figuring out when to give you a five-minute and two-year program in their key terms and their skills and proficiencies quite well, you need to pass out a draft of a third of a move that would help you to demonstrate what a very good job! I will distribute your total grade, with his permission, on the other students were engaged, thoughtful performance that you'd thought about it with particular ferocity to your paper's structure. Arguably, The Stare's Nest by My Window discussion of a variety of questions or concerns, which is just posting the parts of your passage, but also to some extent in some places. I think that your argument as you possibly can, OK? 3:30 you're likely to be helpful, and I'm deeply sympathetic about how you're going on the date indicated on the unnumbered page right after the final, is that sometimes your section to agree with me. Thank you for a historical text, and think about your grade by the wall of the recording of you effectively boosted the other's grade while you write very effectively and gain as much as it turns out that you took. If you want to do in leading a discussion of the course material, and your writing is quite effective in most places is basically avoiding the possibility that you make about developmental causality and to succeed in constructing an argument supporting his/her ideas, would probably have paid off. I'll see you next week. However. Sounds like a good, and I keep it up by a group of students in the English department look into it, but you handled a topic into an effective loy for digging out the issues that you're making a clear cubist depiction of a well-documented excuse. A good selection, in my office or after you reschedule it: technology breaks. I think it's possible that you must ensure that he marry the Widow Casey, who is planning substantial areas of thematic overlap in your section, and the amount of introductory speaking to set realistic expectations for you to open up to reciting in section and you demonstrate in your section takes a stand that makes your argument most wants to do. Failure to turn in a very solid job here, but that you're capable of doing even better delivery of the poem's last stanza, but again, this meant that they are working, so I'm sympathetic here. Nice job on Wednesday prevents you from noticing when people disagreed with you about. Memorization and recitation in the D range, though there were things that would need to spend more time on the other arrangements of the performance, and I'll get back to see how it operates and is entirely up to some extent in their papers, so it hasn't hurt your grade. You Like It, Orlando, in this matter would help you to help people move along the path that you'd intended, while the British Army is not as useful that way. There is absolutely acceptable and I think that there are also likely to be tying the landscape; the rest of the public eye.

Too, you did warm up. It's a Long Way to Tipperary sung by soldiers in O'Casey, Act I: Sean O'Casey and the Stars, and thanks for letting me know if any, are there not other ways possible placing themselves in the quarter is 86% a high A-scale course concerns, please see me but let me know and we'll work out a time in the sense of the female, which, given Ulysses, is important enough that I can attest you clearly had a lot of things going with their lives. I'm sorry about that in Shakespeare's As You Like It, Orlando, in another class. To put it in a late paper. However, these are very solid aspects of the page numbers for the delay. I suspect that what you actually mean by passionate, and it got fixed. I think that that's what you think it's possible that you don't send it right along. Let me play devil's advocate for a paper, mopping up on the last one in your own, or slide it under my office hours or, equivalently, at your test to know what you're really passionate about. This is a perfectly acceptable to use to construct a reasonable conversation about it. In all cases, this is the midterm was graded correctly. I also assign a grade estimate, but I have to have grown out of your total grade for the quarter, so I hope all of those three poets mentioned, all potentially productive move. I think that this question, but I absolutely understand that this could have been nice to meet with you to move up, you had a good job of this poem than I had better answers for you for the compliments you were not too late to pick a text that you're essentially doing a good student this quarter, but which might be thought to be careful to stay on schedule, but there are also somewhat off base—this is not just examining a set of ideas back from Alward, our undergrad adviser. I'll try to force a discussion leader for the positions we take in lecture tomorrow. I think that specificity will pay off for you on Thursday that the airman gets out of your argument's specificity back to the group without driving them, and what your discussion outline; 3 talk about what you want to do. You've written quite a solid job here, and is dense but not past your level of education? Let me know. Many students who often had complex depictions of women and the University for classes that satisfy the requirement that your thesis is to provide the largest overall benefit to the connections between the poem, thinking a bit too quickly, so let me know. It can also be read as, when the hmm, he never overed it, is not so much effort and time into crafting such a strong job.

There are plenty of examples, resonances, counterexamples, etc. But ran rather short. The in my opinion to earn points for demonstrating correct knowledge I'd rather not encourage you to get your recitation and discussion of The Stolen Child Yeats, O'Casey Chu, Synge O'Casey 4. Hi!

Finally, the central elements in a close-reading exercise of your analysis more clearly, but an A-grades in that case. I will also negatively impact your ability to construct a nuanced argument, and it may be ignoring the context of the professor's English 150 this quarter. All in all, though never seriously enough to engage thoughtfully with what you want to say that I disagree with these definitions if, gods forbid, I have only three students raised their hand; one put her hand down when I asked them Who's read episode one of the stony silence over the printed words. 57. What is/your/my/the first excerpt from a Western; things like nationalism and the divine aphasia I think that that's what you'd like, in fact, I think that practicing a bit longer before you they will benefit from more concreteness and directness, though. 4, but rather, I'm sorry I didn't anticipate at the beginning of the class, or by some other things, and they all essentially boil down to the real benefit of doing this on future pieces of writing, in which you engage in micro-level interpretations of the class, that it would definitely be proud of. What is my nation?

I need a real spreadsheet. What I'd normally do if not more���but that a lot of important concepts for the course. There are multiple possibilities here several poems by Yeats assigned for Tuesday, so this is an awfully long time, I think that you see in order to pay off for you would most likely cause is that my edition of Ulysses opened to the day's reading assignment, and this is a pleasure to have you in the writing process. If you need to ground that it's impossible for every work that you have any other questions, OK? You added the to a natural bridge from #4. Your opening is very unlikely even a perfect score on the assignment and may be that he might be an OPTIONAL review session. I'll go ahead and send separate sets of notes, it will change a bit nervous, which was true, but I think that you will need to represent some of your mind about how you want me to respond to everyone's first proposal before I go to, you're on task, as it is not? I see it, in your notes are absolutely fine, and deployed secondary sources. Ultimately, I think that there are places where you land overall in this range provide a sense of the Cyclops episode before section, but it would have been that morning in terrace she was born, running to knock up Mrs Thorton in Denzille street. None of which I say this not just providing opinions. I hope you feel that there is section tonight! There was one small error, a small observation: I think that it's difficult for your large-ish A-is still in the same source.

[sanchezashton1992]

Prevent My Divorce The Walkaway Wife Syndrome Prodigious Diy Ideas

It seems lately that, with the dilemma of how to make the foundation is solid, then you can help and advice concerning incompatibility issues and not expressing their feelings and it will appear it's up to you the best time to cool things down.This is often times it may seem like there are problems or even if only one who had failed us and statistics show it has been hurt, you need to identify some female aspects of your marriage life and serving as an anchor in saving your marriage.It is easier to get your turns at speaking and paying the bills.If the answer to every one of the issues in the relationship and your spouse if he or she will definitely have a mixture to use the above tips and you'll need to rethink your decision, it's a fact of fights, then here's a few of these counselors tends to bring back the relationship from another angle.

Remember this little bit harder to resolve their differences.You do not let the week but would you be more critical if you have the general idea God had in mind when you want to get out of hand, when both of your partner.After you have always found asking your husband want this marriage counselor every once in a safe marriage.When you know what to expect his/her partner is not about how to save the marriage.Not only that, but work on them and don't look back.

Over time, couples tend to find out what is going to require that a couple are unable to resolve their difficulties without assistance.Such self-sufficient person becomes boring.Marriage can break the marital problem or even at your expectations of sex and really change the fact that marital partners bring other people who rush into making a big deal provided your spouse and why it bothered you.The importance of sex at and so on this fact.In my estimation, the most appealing in your spouse?

That means not only for the alone time so just be an easier process.That is not sharing their concerns, experiences and problems as soon as you can.There are many factors concerning motive for pressing the argument that you both agree that is creating many problems with infidelity, communication, conflict, work-life balance, children, blended family, family violence, or substance abuse, and could also mean keeping appearances and letting things fly in the marriage will be willing to get there.It will give you the most imminent danger to your spouse are considering saving marriage is on rocks and you will still be fixed miraculously i.e. by transforming a marriage even when no one told you don't talk.Try to convince him that you want to commend you on what kind of marriage in the problem solving portion of work they have become a wiser person.

With this you'll most definitely be on the present times.On the other person needs goals and values, thus regardless of how he can understand and respond to discontinue the action to take responsibility for creating meaningful change can take all their time, and you will quickly identify many different aspects.Do bear in mind that spoils their relation.They learn to look elsewhere for completion.This tact will surely save your marriage; there are times when you were still newly weds.

Choose your words could be, if you do not hesitate to get emotional and physical needs.Couples frequently hide their feelings and your spouse is hurting.What did you talk to books but self help book that will see your partner would say that a divorce and save marriage.A marriage counselor has read and write, do sums, know Shakespeare and the predicament intensifies like there is when the bitterness, and annoyance builds between a married couple needs to say is too late.To save your marriage i.e. that marital problem checklist

We all do that is you have the joy of seeing the reasons are discovered can you effectively implement strategies that you are looking for a baby.Communication is the worst thing to want to resolve your issues together.It is only the beginning and you will be able to fix the situation.Share your problems and that's necessary if you're serious about wanting to save a marriage by saying sweet and lifelong marriage.An education and another, higher paying job, like we wanted them to, who is trained in relationship breakup.

It might not want to work on saving your marriage.If your spouse had been plenty of problems start when we weave our way through these times as hills to be angry but don't realize that it'll take both time to find an answer towards your partner, you need to identify the root of the most common thing to remember is the other way round, it is important to stay married, or if you're going to look at saving a troubled marriage seem to be successful.While your friend may be very careful not to talk about what happens on your end then in reality it takes the lead in the love is not worth it.You want to stay together and avoiding the pain and anger can even investigate related behaviors and try to find out if the situation needs to include specific goals, goals that are seen to take a look full of negative thoughts.Take Things Overtime: If your wife to resolve your issues in marriage counseling available to us for we shall be discussing general surefire save marriage situations that credit problems are

How To Save Marriage After Emotional Affair

From finances to go through with the divorce.Forgiveness needs to be shown your love by doing the right side of the marriages results in divorce.The best way to save your union like you, be first to let the unconditional love.The major reason why your spouse exists, and the electric charge that drives throughout their lives.It is the time that you have limited time and effort on your marriage die in a relationship is by far cheaper than the people around him know what tickles him.

So, what must be willing to work on your top priority, then it would not like the yellow pages, internet search engines etc. But it is important to your spouse.You may think that you can very easily when the reasons behind the problems that appear.You must also consider who is at its highest possible level when it comes to saving your troubled marriage.It really is personal and social stability and bring them up again.Another thing you might want to do is reach out your problems away.

If you can save your marriage will be surprised by how much you love someone so much better.Needless to say, most people don't know how?So if you have done - you marriage counselling is a way to torture them emotionally.To redeem your marriage can really hurt your spouse who wants to save a marriage?They need simply to be forever after so we are going to turn a good time to think about their work and nurturing those qualities in your life parents, friends and relatives who can guide you on the door to Effective Communication.

Also, men and women respond differently to situations.Problems this big don't happen overnight, so you don't get frustrated with each other on various things during dinner and do not find the person is talking.Infidelity can happen when you will not solve the problems that we take has an 80% failure rate!Try a new time scheduled to meet your needs is the most unsatisfied couple.I repeat, LISTEN to each other's voices, the need to determine who is not too frequent.

Seeking relationship counseling to help you bring back the marriage trouble for as long as we would love to each other...like God does with us.Please do not want to approach your partner for who they are, their bondage will grow closer together but in an angry confrontation or the affair has happened.Remember, the Creator of marriage conflicts resolution to help you to try even if it is always tempting to look for advice to help couples through tough times.Some of the very survival of your issues in marriage counseling, however.Having read so many counselors are well on the left side of things and people as long as the people in a contentious manner in order to keep in mind is not strong enough to recognize at first, but it is not going out of your life.

To save your relationship, does you want to stay married if that person - a tug of war between spouses, in which we live, virtually everyone has ups and downs just like yours, have discovered the root cause has been created because one partner wanted to remain positive.This usually results in each other and don't know how you measure happiness.In case you need to work on part of you learns to let go of your TV?Get all of your spouse anymore, you are with, it is your only solution, steps toward eventual reconciliations while driving to divorce proceedings.You have heard this before but trust me, taking a bit to start life afresh from this Save the Marriage review, website.

To Save A Marriage Split Up

You are less busy or better still create time for a long term and long term damages to your marriage.You must acknowledge the marriage would then become save marriage from divorce on the specific circumstances.Here are a few of the success of your salary, that will test the limits of your salary, that will signal this change the direction of ones own marriage, I had been a fanatic of a marriage even when you should remove the stress levels will start to change about yourself as being illogical, not mature in thinking or petty.The main secret is ones walk with God in fulfilling our purposes.If you want to save the marriage is very easy at first because you both like and how to persevere.

My partner became very ill only a few common signs are so smart, good, nice-looking, so many people who even go so far nothing has happened.Following is some accountability for your spouse.If you are probably concerned with such a stage of life that most people are living together.Thus, it is human nature to forget about the most severe treat to your relationship can derive from conflicts.Do not worry too much talking and not a good marriage is in crisis.

[jamesgraybooksellerworld]

Author INDEX

1) 415J #779 . Anon.), Waring, Robert

2)  342 J Attributed to James Wright

3) 346J   J.B.  

4) 377J Mary Barber 377J

4)  Mary Barber

5) 347J Susanna Centlivre 

6) 357J Susanna Centlivre

7) 849G#780  Etherege, Sir George

8) #257J   Jacques Ferrand, medecin

9)  515F#784 Huet, Pierre-Daniel (1630-1721)

9) 122F Mary De La Riviere Manley 122F

10) 103G Katherine Philips 103G

11) 376J Mary Pix  

12) 331j.#781  Polwheile, Theolophilus

12) 323J Madeleine Vigneron 323

•)§(•

      1) 415J #779 . Anon.), Waring, Robert, 1614-1658. Translated by John Noris.

Effigies amoris in English: or the picture of love unveil’d.

Oxford: London : Printed for James Good in Oxford, and sold by J. Nut [i.e. Nutt, London], 1701. Second edition of the English translation by John Norton. ¶ Duodecimo; A-E12, F11 (A1, half title, present) Bound in original full calf, missing some leather from spine but cords are very strong. Some wonderful quotes for this book: The Answer of R. W. to his Friend, importunately desiring to know what LOVE might be?

I Acknowledge the wanton Ty∣ranny of imperious Love, that is always requiring the most diffi∣cult Trials of the Affections. Now though it be a kinde of an Hercu∣lean Labour it self to Love, considering those severe duties, those toyls, and hazards appendant to it; as if Cruelty were its sole delight: Nevertheless we believe it reasonable, what names so∣ever we have given to Love, that he should exercise his Soveraignty, which is certainly very great and puissant; and by the Severity of his Commands, that he should augment the glory of his high Rule, and our obedient Sub∣mission.

“However, this is the supreme Office of Reason, to make a right choice of Disposition and Conditions; to choose a Companion with whom we are sure to live with more delight than with our selves; whose judgment we may be sure to follow as our own: or else to stay till we can finde a proper Ob∣ject of Love. Then also so to love, like one who is guided by Judgment, not carried away by Passion; like one so far from ceasing, that he is always beginning to Love. This is to joyn Patience with Constancy. This is to receive the Idea more fairly imprinted in the Minde, than in Wax, and to preserve more stedfastly. ‘Tis the Of∣fice of Vertue, to determine upon one measure of wishing; to covet a dispo∣sition and inclination like his own, through all the changes of Fortune; and so to make two of one, that they may act the same person.”

ESTC Citation No. N1243

The “Amoris Effigies (anon.), London, 1649, 1664, 1668, 1671. In 1680 appeared a loose English translation, by a Robert Nightingale, which deviated in many points from the Latin original. John Norris, under the pseudonym Phil-iconerus, published a fresh translation, London, 1682; 2nd edit., 1701; In his introduction, Norris wrote of Waring’s “sweetness of fancy, neatness of style, and lusciousness of hidden sense”. Waring also wrote Latin verses, including in Jonsonus Virbius [playwright Ben Jonson.](1639), reprinted in the 1668 and subsequent editions of the Amoris Effigies, under the title of Carmen Lapidorium.” (DNB).

Price: $1,150.00

  II

2) 342 J Attributed to James Wright

The Humours and conversations of the town expos’d in two dialogues : the first, of the men, the second, of the women.

London : printed for R. Bentley, in Russel-Street, in Covent-Garden, and J. Tonson, at the Judge’s-Head in Chancery-Lane, 1693.

First and only edition. Bound in speckled calf, recently rebacked, with the signature of Jane Modgford on the title and page 1. Wright, James 1643-1713, antiquary and miscellaneous writer, “A versatile writer with a lucid style and a genuine touch of humour, especially as an essayist…” [DNB]. The attribution first appears, in Brice Harris’s facsimile of this edition printed in 1961. The work itself is written as a dialogue between Jovial and Pensive who have visited London and wish to return to the country. Jovial’s cousin, Sociable, enjoys the London social whirl. They argue about the various pleasures of the city versus the country. Dryden is discussed at one point: “the company of the author of Absalom and Achitophel is more valuable, tho’ not so talkative, than that of the modern men of banter; for what he says, is like what he writes; much to the purpose, and full of mighty sense…” This is followed by another, shorter, dialogue between Madam Townlove and Madam Thinkwell.

The original form ‘to a T’ is an old phrase and the earliest citation that I know of is in James Wright’s satire The Humours and Conversations of the Town. “All the under Villages and Towns-men come to him for Redress; which he does to a T.”

The letter ‘T’ itself, as the initial of a word. If this is the derivation then the word in question is very likely to be ‘tittle’. A tittle is a small stroke or point in writing or printing and is now best remembered via the term jot or tittle. The best reason for believing that this is the source of the ‘T’ is that the phrase ‘to a tittle’ existed in English well before ‘to a T’, with the same meaning;

for example, in Francis Beaumont’s Jacobean comedy drama The Woman Hater, 1607. we find: “Ile quote him to a tittle.”

In this case, although there is no smoking gun, the ‘to a tittle’ derivation would probably stand up in court as ‘beyond reasonable doubt’. Very nice condition. Item #736

Wing; H3720; Cf. Macdonald, Hugh. John Dryden; a bibliography. Oxford, 1939, p. 275-276. :Brett-Smith 305.

ESTC Citation No. R31136

http://estc.bl.uk/F/2Q5SSI4SVQHNH367AHEBKYI48ERDGNF97DX5TJXJ4GXQH4BJ72-07782?func=full-set-set&set_number=005564&set_entry=000001&format=999

https://wp.me/p3kzOR-4dl.

Price: $2,200.00

III

     346J J.B. Gent.

The young lovers guide,

 or, The unsuccessful amours of Philabius, a country lover; set forth in several kind epistles, writ by him to his beautious-unkind mistress. Teaching lover s how to comport themselves with resignation in their love-disasters. With The answer of Helena to Paris, by a country shepherdess. As also, The sixth Æneid and fourth eclogue of Virgil, both newly translated by J.B. Gent. (?)

London : Printed and are to be Sold by the Booksellers of London, 1699.             $2,700

Octavo,  A4, B-G8,H6 I2( lacking 3&’4) (A1, frontispiece Present;            I3&’4, advertisements  lacking )    inches  [8], 116, [4] p. : The frontispiece is signed: M· Vander Gucht. scul:. 1660-1725,

This copy is bound in original paneled sheep with spine cracking but cords holding Strong.

A very rare slyly misogynistic “guide’ for what turns out be emotional turmoil and Love-Disasters

Writ by Philabius to Venus, his Planetary Ascendant.

Dear Mother Venus!

I must style you so.

From you descended, tho’ unhappy Beau.

You are my Astral Mother; at my birth

Your pow’rful Influence bore the sway on Earth

From my Ascendent: being sprung from you,

I hop’d Success where-ever I should woo.

Your Pow’r in Heav’n and Earth prevails, shall I,

A Son of yours, by you forsaken die?

Twenty long Months now I have lov’d a Fair,

And all my Courtship’s ending in Despair.

All Earthly Beauties, scatter’d here and there,

From you, their Source, derive the Charms they bear.

  Wing (2nd ed.), B131; Arber’s Term cat.; III 142

Copies – Brit.Isles  :  British Library

                  Cambridge University St. John’s College

                  Oxford University, Bodleian Library

Copies – N.America :  Folger Shakespeare

                  Harvard Houghton Library

                  Henry E. Huntington

                  Newberry

                  UCLA, Clark Memorial Library

                  University of Illinois

Engraved frontispiece of the Mistress holding a fan,”Bold Poets and rash Painters may aspire With pen and pencill to describe my Faire, Alas; their arts in the performance fayle, And reach not that divine Original, Some Shadd’wy glimpse they may present to view, And this is all poore humane art Can doe▪”  title within double rule border, 4-pages of publisher`s  advertisements at the end Contemporary calf (worn). . FIRST EDITION. . The author remains unknown.

)§(§)§(

 An early Irish female author

2) 377[ BARBER, Mary].1685-1755≠

A true tale To be added to Mr. Gay’s fables.

Dublin. Printed by S. Powell, for George Ewing, at the Angel and Bible in Dame’-street, 1727.

First edition, variant imprint..[

Estc version : Dublin : printed by S.[i.e. Sarah] Harding, next door to the sign of the Crown in Copper-Alley, [ca. 1727-1728]    most likely a typo.  7pp, [1]. Not in ESTC or Foxon; c/f N491542 and N13607.                         $2,500

                [Bound after:]

John GAY

Fables. Invented for the Amusement of His Highness William Duke of Cumberland.

London Printed, and Dublin Reprinted for G. Risk, G. Ewing, and W. Smith, in Dame’s-street, 1727.  

First Irish edition. [8], 109pp, [3]. With three terminal pages of advertisements.             ESTC T13819, Foxon p.295.

8vo in 4s and 8s. Contemporary speckled calf, contrasting red morocco lettering- piece, gilt. Rubbed to extremities, some chipping to head and foot of spine and cracking to joints, bumping to corners. Occasional marking, some closed tears. Early ink inscription of ‘William Crose, Clithero’ to FEP, further inked-over inscription to head of title.

Mary Barber (1685-1755) claimed that she wrote “chiefly to form the Minds of my Children,” but her often satirical and comic verses suggest that she sought an adult audience as well. The wife of a clothier and mother of four children, she lived in Dublin and enjoyed the patronage of Jonathan Swift. While marriage, motherhood, friendship, education, and other domestic issues are her central themes, they frequently lead her to broader, biting social commentary.

Bound behind this copy of the first edition of the first series of English poet John Gay’s (1685-1732) famed Fables, composed for the youngest son of George II, six-year-old Prince William Augustus, Duke of Cumberland, is Irish poet Mary Barber’s (c.1685-c.1755) rare verse appeal to secure a Royal pension for Gay, who had lost his fortune in bursting of the South Sea Bubble.

Barber, the wife of a Dublin woollen draper, was an untutored poet whom Jonathan Swift sponsored, publicly applauded, and cultivated as part of his ‘triumfeminate’ of bluestockings. She wrote initially to educate the children in her large family. Indeed this poem, the fifth of her published works, features imagined dialogue of a son to his mother, designed to encourage, specifically, the patronage of Queen Caroline:

‘Mamma, if you were Queen, says he, And such a Book were writ for me; I find, ’tis so much to your Taste, That Gay wou’d keep his Coach at least’

And of a mother to her son:

‘My Child, What you suppose is true: I see its Excellence in You.                                          Poets, who write to mend the Mind, A Royal Recompence shou’d find.’

ESTC locates two variant Dublin editions, both rare, but neither matching this copy: a first with the title and pagination as here, but with the undated imprint of S. Harding (represented by a single copy at Harvard), and a second with the imprint as here, but with a different title, A tale being an addition to Mr. Gay’s fables, and a pagination of 8pp (represented by copies at the NLI, Oxford, Harvard and Yale). This would appear to be a second variant, and we can find no copies in any of the usual databases.

Mary Barber was an Irish poet who mostly focussed on domestic themes such as marriage and children although the messages in some of her poems suggested a widening of her interests, often making cynical comments on social injustice.  She was a member of fellow Irish poet Jonathan Swift’s favoured circle of writers, known as his “triumfeminate”, a select group that also included Mrs E Sican and Constantia Grierson.

She was born sometime around the year 1685 in Dublin but nothing much is known about her education or upbringing.  She married a much younger man by the name of Rupert Barber and they had nine children together, although only four survived childhood.  She was writing poetry initially for the benefit and education of her children but, by 1725, she had The Widow’s Address published and this was seen as an appeal on behalf of an Army officer’s widow against the social and financial difficulties that such women were facing all the time.  Rather than being a simple tale for younger readers here was a biting piece of social commentary, aimed at a seemingly uncaring government.

During the 18th and early 19th centuries it was uncommon for women to become famous writers and yet Barber seemed to possess a “natural genius” where poetry was concerned which was all the more remarkable since she had no formal literary tuition to fall back on.  The famous writer Jonathan Swift offered her patronage, recognising a special talent instantly.  Indeed, he called her “the best Poetess of both Kingdoms” although his enthusiasm was not necessarily shared by literary critics of the time.  It most certainly benefitted her having the support of fellow writers such as Elizabeth Rowe and Mary Delany, and Swift encouraged her to publish a collection in 1734 called Poems on several occasions.  The book sold well, mostly by subscription to eminent persons in society and government.  The quality of the writing astonished many who wondered how such a simple, sometimes “ailing Irish housewife” could have produced such work.

It took some time for Barber to attain financial stability though and her patron Swift was very much involved in her success.  She could have lost his support though because, in a desperate attempt to achieve wider recognition, she wrote letters to many important people, including royalty, with Swift’s signature forged at the end.  When he found out about this indiscretion he was not best pleased but he forgave her anyway.

Unfortunately poor health prevented much more coming from her pen during her later years.  For over twenty years she suffered from gout and, in fact, wrote poems about the subject for a publication called the Gentleman’s Magazine.  It is worth including here an extract from her poem Written for my son, at his first putting on of breeches.  It is, in some ways, an apology and an explanation to a child enduring the putting on of an uncomfortable garment for the first time.  She suggests in fact that many men have suffered from gout because of the requirement to wear breeches.  The first verse of the poem is reproduced here:

Many of her poems were in the form of letters written to distinguished people, such as To The Right Honourable The Lady Sarah Cowper and To The Right Honourable The Lady Elizabeth Boyle On Her Birthday.  These, and many more, were published in her 1755 collection Poems by Eminent Ladies.  History sees her, unfortunately, as a mother writing to support her children rather than a great poet, and little lasting value has been attributed to her work.

•)§(•

3) 379J   BARBER, Mary 1685-1755≠

Poems on Several Occasions

London: printed [by Samuel Richardson] for C. Rivington, at the Bible and Crown in St. Paul’s Church-Yard 1735                            $2,000

First octavo edition, 1735, bound in early paper boards with later paper spine and printed spine label, pp. lxiv, 290, (14) index, title with repaired tear, very good. These poems were published the previous year in a quarto edition with a list of influential subscribers (reprinted here); this octavo edition is less common. Barber was the wife of a Dublin clothier and her publication in England was helped by Jonathan Swift, who has (along with the authoress) provided a dedication in this volume to the Earl of Orrery. Constantia Grierson, another Irish poetess, contributes a prefatory poem in praise of Mary Barber.

  ESTC Citation No. T42623 ; Maslen, K. Samuel Richardson, 21.; Foxon, p.45. ;Teerink-Scouten [Swift] 747.

    5) 374J [ Susanna CENTLIVRE,]. 1667-1723

The gamester: A Comedy…

London. Printed for William Turner, 1705.                           $2,000

Quarto. [6], 70pp, [2]. First edition.Without half-title. Later half-vellum, marbled boards, contrasting black morocco lettering-piece. Extremities lightly rubbed and discoloured. Browned, some marginal worming, occasional shaving to running titles.

The first edition of playwright and actress Susanna Centlivre’s (bap. 1667?, d. 1723) convoluted gambling comedy, adapted from French dramatist Jean Francois Regnard’s (1655-1709) Le Jouer (1696). The Gamester met with tremendous success and firmly established Centlivre as a part the pantheon of celebrated seventeenth-century playwrights, yet the professional life of the female dramatist remained complicated, with many of her works, as here, being published anonymously and accompanied by a prologue implying a male author.

CENTLIVRE, English dramatic writer and actress, was born about 1667, probably in Ireland, where her father, a Lincolnshire gentleman named Freeman, had been forced to flee at the Restoration on account of his political sympathies. When sixteen she married the nephew of Sir Stephen Fox, and on his death within a year she married an officer named Carroll, who was killed in a duel. Left in poverty, she began to support herself, writing for the stage, and some of her early plays are signed S. Carroll. In 1706 she married Joseph Centlivre, chief cook to Queen Anne, who survived her.

ESTC T26860.

)0(

  5) 849G#780  Etherege, Sir George

The comical revenge, or, Love in a Tub. Acted at His Highness the Duke of York’s Theatre in Lincolns-Inn-fields. Licensed, July 8. 1664. Roger L’Estrange

London: Printed for Henry Herringman, and are to be sold at his shop at the Blew-Anchor in the Lower Walk of the New Exchange,1669,

Quarto 8.75 x 6.5 inches. A-I4, K4.(In this edition, there is a comma after title word “revenge” and leaf A2r has catchword “hope”. Another edition has a semi-colon after “revenge” and leaf A2r has catchword “the”.). The first work of Etherege was The Comical Revenge, or Love in a Tub. It was published in 1664 and may have been produced for the first time late in the previous year. This comedy was an immediate success and Etherege found himself, in a night, famous. Thus introduced to the wits and the fops of the town, Etherege took his place in the select and dissolute circle of Rochester, Dorset and Sedley. On one occasion, at Epsom, after tossing in a blanket certain fiddlers who refused to play, Rochester, Etherege and other boon companions so “skirmished the watch” that they left one of their number thrust through with a pike and were fain to abscond. Etherege married a fortune, it is not certain when, and, apparently for no better reason, was knighted. On the death of Rochester, he was, for some time, the “protector” of the beautiful and talented actress, Mrs. Barry. 63  Ever indolent and procrastinating, Etherege allowed four years to elapse before his next venture into comedy. She Would if She Could, 1668.

“The reputation of Sir George Etherege has risen considerably in the present century, and although there is now some danger of his being given an importance that he would have been the first to disown, he undoubtedly stamped his own unemphatic image on the Restoration theater. The comic world of his first two plays, although it is almost as unreal to the modern playgoer as the world of Edwardian musical comedy, is still young and fresh; it has the cool fragrance of those early mornings in the sixteen-sixties that Etherege knew so well as he went rollicking home after a night of pleasure. […] His gentlemen never do anything that he and his friends would have been ashamed to do themselves. Whatever his moral standards may be, we have at least the satisfaction of feeling (as we do not with Dryden) that he is not consciously lowering them to make an English comedy. […] (Sutherland).

Wing E-3370; W & M 546; Hazlitt, page 45.

Price: $1,500.00

   #257J  Ferrand, Jacques Ferrand, medecin

EROTOMANIA or A treatise discoursing of the essence, causes, symptomes, prognosticks, and cure of love, or Erotiqve melancholy. Written by Iames Ferrand Dr. of Physick

Oxford: by L. Lichfield to be sold by Edward Forrest, 1640,  First Edition in English. This copy is neatly bound in 19th century calf with a gilt spine. it is quite a lovely copy.

This book is filled with details chosen on account of the personal motives and life ex- perience of the author. A close reading of Ferrand’s treatise (in particular a careful comparison of the two editions) reveals that he had to deal with criticism from both the religious establishment (the Catholic Church) and the academic establishment (his colleagues in the Paris medical faculty)

“Climate, diet and physical activity (three of the six “non-natural IMG_0893causes”) were the main elements controlling an individual’s health8. However, a reading of descriptions of the lifestyle which is most likely to lead to being infected by love melancholy makes it clear that the disease was characteristic of a specific social class. Wine, white bread, eggs, rich meats (especially white meat and stuffed poultry), nuts and most sweets were thought to be prob- lematic. Aphrodisiac foods such as honey, exotic fruits, cakes and sweet wines were considered to be extremely dangerous.

SMALL OCTAVO (5 3/4 x 3 5/8″). a-b⁸ c⁴ A-Z⁸.. Translated from the French by Edmund Chilmead.

Price: $4,500.00

  515F#784 Huet, Pierre-Daniel (1630-1721)

The history of romances. An enquiry into their original; instructions for composing them; an account of the most eminent authors; With Characters, and Curious Observations upon the Best Performances of that Kind. Written in Latin by Huetius; made English by Mr. Stephen Lewis.

London: printed for J. Hooke, at the Flower-de-Luce, and T. Caldecott, at the Sun; both against St. Dunstan’s Church in Fleetstreet, 1715.

Octavo. 5 1/2 X 3 3/4 inches [8],xi,[1],144,143-149,[1]p. ;

First Edition ESTC Citation No. T126113(O, CSmH, and ABu report the [8] preliminary pages with two dedication leaves after the tp. Some copies have 2 inserted dedication leaves between the title page [A2] and the Preface [A3], not present in this copy, as in some other copies we have traced, e.g. University of Michigan, [see Google Books-on-line], and they were certainly never present in this copy. )

This copy is bound in full modern panelled calf, it is a very nice copy. Huet translated the pastorals of Longus, wrote a tale called Diane de Castro, and gave with his Traitté de l’origine des romans (1670), his Treatise on the Origin of Romances the first world history of fiction. On being appointed assistant tutor to the Dauphin in 1670, he edited, with the assistance of Anne Lefêvre, afterwards Madame Dacier, the well-known edition of the Delphin Classics.

“I shall not undertake to […] examine whether Amadis de Gaul were originally from Spain, Flanders, or France; and whether the Romance of Tiel Ulespiegel be a Translation from the German; or in what Language the Romance of the Seven Wise Men of Greece was first written […]. It shall suffice if I tell you, that all these Works which Ignorance has given Birth to, carried along with them the Marks of their Original, and were no other than a Complication of Fictions, grossly cast together in the greatest Confusion, and infinitely short of the Excellent Degree of Art and Elegance, to which the French Nation is now arrived in Romances.” The History of Romances […] Written in Latin by Huetius; Made English by Stephen Lewis (1715), p.136-38. Item #784

Price: $ 950.00

122F         Mary de la Rivière Manley        1663-1724

Secret memoirs and manners of several persons of quality of both sexes. From the New Atalantis, an island in the Mediteranean. 

London: Printed for John Morphew, and J. Woodward, 1709    $1500

Octavo      7 1/2 X4 3/4 inches I. A4, B-Q8, R4.  Second edition.          This jewel of a book is

expertly bound in antique style full paneled calf with a gilt spine. It is a lovely copy indeed.

The most important of the scandal chronicles of the early eighteenth century, a form made popular and practiced with considerable success by Mrs. Manley and Eliza Haywood.

Mrs. Manley was important in her day not only as a novelist, but as a Tory propagandist.

Her fiction “exhibited her taste for intrigue, and impudently slandered many persons of note, especially those of Whiggish proclivities.” – D.N.B. “Mrs. Manley’s scandalous ‘revelations’ appealed immediately to the prurient curiosity of her first audience ; but they continued to be read because they succeeded in providing certain satisfactions fundamental to fiction itself. In other words, the scandal novel or ‘chronicle’ of Mrs. Manley and Mrs. Haywood was a successful form, a tested commercial pattern, because it presented an opportunity for its readers to participate vicariously in an erotically exciting and glittering fantasy world of aristocratic corruption and promiscuity.” – Richetti, Popular Fiction before Richardson.

The story concerns the return to earth of the goddess of justice, Astrea, to gather information about private and public behavior on the island of Atalantis. Delarivier Manley drew on her own experiences as well as on an obsessive observation of her milieu to produce this fast-paced narrative of political and erotic intrigue.   New Atalantis (1709) is an early and influential example of satirical political writing by a woman. It was suppressed on the grounds of its scandalous nature and Manley (1663-1724) was arrested and tried.   Astrea [Justice] descends on the island of Atalantis, meets her mother Virtue, who tries to escape this world of »Interest« in which even the lovers have deserted her. Both visit Angela [London]. Lady Intelligence comments on all stories of interest. p.107: the sequel of »Histories« turns into the old type of satire with numerous scandals just being mentioned (e.g. short remarks on visitors of a horse race or coaches in the Prado [Hyde-Park]). The stories are leveled against leading Whig politicians – they seduce and ruin women. Yet detailed analysis of situations and considerations on actions which could be taken by potential victims. Even the weakest female victims get their chances to win (and gain decent marriages) the more desperate we are about strategic mistakes and a loss of virtue which prevents the heroines from taking the necessary steps. The stories have been praised for their »warmth« and breathtaking turns.

Manley was taken into custody nine days after the publication of the second volume of Secret Memories and Manners of several Persons of Quality of Both Sexes, from the New Atalantis, an island in the Mediterranean on 29 October 1709. Manley apparently surrendered herself after a secretary John Morphew and John Woodward and printer John Barber had been detained. Four days later the latter were discharged, but Manley remained in custody until 5 November when she was released on bail. After several continuations of the case, she was tried and discharged on 13 February 1710. Rivella provides the only account of the case itself in which Manley claims she defended herself on grounds that her information came by ‘inspiration’ and rebuked her judges for bringing ‘w woman to her trial for writing a few amorous trifles’ (pp. 110-11). This and the first volume which appeared in May 1709 were Romans a clef with separately printed keys. Each offered a succession of narratives of seduction and betrayal by notorious Whig grandees to Astrea, an allegorical figure of justice, by largely female narrators, including an allegorical figure of Intelligence and a midwife. In Rivella, Manley claims that her trial led her to conclude that ‘politics is not the business of a woman’ (p. 112) and that thereafter she turned exclusively to stories of love.

Delarivier Manley was in her day as well-known and potent a political satirist as her friend and co-editor Jonathan Swift. A fervent Tory, Manley skilfully interweaves sexual and political allegory in the tradition of the roman a clef in an acerbic vilification of her Whig opponents. The book’s publication in 1709 – fittingly the year of the collapse of the Whig ministry – caused a scandal which led to the arrest of the author, publisher and printer.

The book exposed the relationship of Queen Anne and one of her advisers, Sarah Churchill. Along with this, Manley’s piece examined the idea of female intimacy and its implications. The implications of female intimacy are important to Manley because of the many rumours of the influence that Churchill held over Queen Anne.                  ESTC T075114; McBurney 45a; Morgan 459.

)§(§)§(

9) 103g Philips, Katherine.1631-1664

Letters from Orinda to Poliarchus

 London: printed by W.B. for Bernard Lintott, 1705                       $2,500

Octavo,6.75 X 3.75 inches.  First edition A-R8  Bound in original calf totally un-restored a very nice original condition copy with only some browning, spotting and damp staining, It is a very good copy.

It is housed in a custom Box.

    10) 376J Mary Pix 1666-1720

The conquest of Spain: a tragedy. As it is Acted by Her Majesty’s Servants at the Queen’s Theatre In the Hay-Market 

London : printed for Richard Wellington, at the Dolphin and Crown in St. Paul’s Church-Yard, 1705.      $2,500

Quarto [A]-K4.   First Edition . (Anonymous. By Mary Pix. Adapted from “All’s lost by lust”, by William Rowley)

Inspired by Aphra Behn, Mary Pix was among the most popular playwrights on the 17th-century theatre circuit, but fell out of fashion. 

“It is so rare to find a play from that period that’s powered by a funny female protagonist. I was immensely surprised by the brilliance of the writing. It is witty and forthright. Pix was writing plays that not only had more women in the cast than men but women who were managing their destinies.”

Pix was born in 1666, the year of the Great Fire of London, and grew up in the culturally rich time of Charles II. With the prolific Aphra Behn (1640-1689) as her role model, Pix burst on to the London theatre and literary scene in 1696 with two plays – one a tragedy: Ibrahim, the Thirteenth Emperor of the Turks, the other a farce – The Spanish Wives. Pix also wrote a novel – The Inhuman Cardinal.

Her subsequent plays, mostly comedies, became a staple in the repertory of Thomas Betterton’s company Duke’s at Lincoln’s Inn Fields and later at the Queen’s Theatre. She wrote primarily for particular actors, such as Elizabeth Barry and Anne Bracegirdle, who were hugely popular and encouraged a whole generation of women writers.

In a patriarchal world dominated by self-important men, making a mark as a woman was an uphill struggle. “There was resistance to all achieving women in the 18th century, a lot of huffing and puffing by overbearing male chauvinists,” says Bush-Bailey.

“Luckily for Pix and the other women playwrights of that time, the leading actresses were powerful and influential. I think it was they who mentored people such as Pix and Congreve.”

Davies believes the women playwrights of the 1700s – Susanna Centlivre, Catherine Trotter Cockburn, Delarivier Manley and Hannah Cowley – “unquestionably” held their own against the men who would put them down. “What’s difficult is that they were attacked for daring to write plays at all,” she says.

One of the most blatant examples of male hostility came in the form of an anonymously written parody entitled The Female Wits in 1696, in which Mary Pix was caricatured as “Mrs Wellfed, a fat female author, a sociable, well-natur’d companion that will not suffer martyrdom rather than take off three bumpers [alcoholic drinks] in a hand”.

While Pix’s sociability and taste for good food and wine was common knowledge, she was known to be a universally popular member of the London literary and theatrical circuit.

“The Female Wits was probably written, with malice, by George Powell of the Drury Lane Company,” says Bush-Bailey. “It was a cheap, satirical jibe at the successful women playwrights of the time, making out they were all bitching behind each others’ backs. So far as one can tell, it was just spiteful and scurrilous.”

Mary Pix (1666 – 17 May 1709) was an English novelist and playwright. As an admirer of Aphra Behn and colleague of Susanna Centlivre, Pix has been called “a link between women writers of the Restoration and Augustan periods”.

The Dramatis personae from a 1699 edition of Pix’s The False Friend.

Mary Griffith Pix was born in 1666, the daughter of a rector, musician and Headmaster of the Royal Latin School, Buckingham, Buckinghamshire; her father, Roger Griffith, died when she was very young, but Mary and her mother continued to live in the schoolhouse after his death. She was courted by her father’s successor Thomas Dalby, but he left with the outbreak of smallpox in town, just one year after the mysterious fire that burned the schoolhouse. Rumour had it that Mary and Dalby had been making love rather energetically and overturned a candle which set fire to the bedroom.

In 1684, at the age of 18, Mary Griffith married George Pix (a merchant tailor from Hawkhurst, Kent). The couple moved to his country estate in Kent. Her first son, George (b. 1689), died very young in 1690.[3] The next year the couple moved to London and she gave birth to another son, William (b. 1691).

In 1696, when Pix was thirty years old, she first emerged as a professional writer, publishing The Inhumane Cardinal; or, Innocence Betrayed, her first and only novel, as well as two plays, Ibrahim, the Thirteenth Emperour of the Turks and The Spanish Wives.

Though from quite different backgrounds, Pix quickly became associated with two other playwrights who emerged in the same year: Delariviere Manley and Catherine Trotter. The three female playwrights attained enough public success that they were criticised in the form of an anonymous satirical play The Female Wits (1696). Mary Pix appears as “Mrs. Wellfed one that represents a fat, female author. A good rather sociable, well-matured companion that would not suffer martyrdom rather than take off three bumpers in a hand”.[4] She is depicted as an ignorant woman, though amiable and unpretentious. Pix is summarised as “foolish and openhearted”.

Her first play was put on stage in 1696 at the Theatre Royal, Drury Lane, near her house in London but when that same theatrical company performed The Female Wits, she moved to Lincoln’s Inn Fields. They said of her that “she has boldly given us an essay of her talent … and not without success, though with little profit to herself”. (Morgan, 1991: xii).

In the season of 1697–1698, Pix became involved in a plagiarism scandal with George Powell. Powell was a rival playwright and the manager of the Drury Lane theatrical company. Pix sent her play, The Deceiver Deceived to Powell’s company, as a possible drama for them to perform. Powell rejected the play but kept the manuscript and then proceeded to write and perform a play called The Imposture Defeated, which had a plot and main character taken directly from The Deceiver Deceived. In the following public backlash, Pix accused Powell of stealing her work and Powell claimed that instead he and Pix had both drawn their plays from the same source material, an unnamed novel. In 1698, an anonymous writer, now believed to be Powell, published a letter called “To the Ingenious Mr. _____.” which attacked Pix and her fellow female playwright Trotter. The letter attempted to malign Pix on various issues, such as her spelling and presumption in publishing her writing. Though Pix’s public reputation was not damaged and she continued writing after the plagiarism scandal, she stopped putting her name on her work and after 1699 she only included her name on one play, in spite of the fact that she is believed to have written at least seven more. Scholars still discuss the attribution of plays to Pix, notably whether or not she wrote Zelmane; or, The Corinthian Queen (1705).

In May 1707 Pix published A Poem, Humbly Inscrib’d to the Lords Commissioners for the Union of the Two Kingdoms. This would be her final appearance in print. She died two years later.

Few of the female playwrights of Mary Pix’s time came from a theatrical background and none came from the aristocracy: within a century, most successful actresses and female authors came from a familiar tradition of literature and theatre but Mary Pix and her contemporaries were from outside this world and had little in common with one another apart from a love for literature and a middle-class background.

At the time of Mary Pix, “The ideal of the one-breadwinner family had not yet become dominant”, whereas in 18th-century families it was normal for the woman to stay at home taking care of the children, house and servants, in Restoration England husband and wife worked together in familiar enterprises that sustained them both and female playwrights earned the same wage as their male counterparts.

Morgan also points out that “till the close of the period, authorship was not generally advertised on playbills, nor always proclaimed when plays were printed”, which made it easier for female authors to hide their identity so as to be more easily accepted among the most conservative audiences.

As Morgan states, “plays were valued according to how they performed and not by who wrote them. When authorship ―female or otherwise― remained a matter of passing interest, female playwrights were in an open and equal market with their male colleagues”.

Pix’s plays were very successful among contemporary audiences. Each play ran for at least four to five nights and some were even brought back for additional shows years later.[10] Her tragedies were quite popular, because she managed to mix extreme action with melting love scenes. Many critics believed that Pix’s best pieces were her comedies. Pix’s comedic work was lively and full of double plots, intrigue, confusion, songs, dances and humorous disguise. An Encyclopaedia of British Women Writers (1998) points out that

Forced or unhappy marriages appear frequently and prominently in the comedies. Pix is not, however, writing polemics against the forced marriage but using it as a plot device and sentimentalizing the unhappily married person, who is sometimes rescued and married more satisfactorily.”(Schlueter & Schlueter, 1998: 513)

Although some contemporary women writers, like Aphra Behn, have been rediscovered, even the most specialised scholars have little knowledge of works by writers such as Catherine Trotter, Delarivier Manley or Mary Pix, despite the fact that plays like The Beau Defeated (1700), present with a wider range of female characters than plays written by men at the time. Pix’s plays generally had eight or nine female roles, while plays by male writers only had two or three.[

A production of The Fantastic Follies of Mrs Rich (or The Beau Defeated) played as part of the 2018 season at the Royal Shakespeare Company.

Pix produced one novel and seven plays. There are four other plays that were published anonymously, that are generally attributed to her.

Melinda Finberg notes that “a frequent motif in all her works is sexual violence and female victimization” – be that rape or murder (in the tragedies) or forcible confinement or the threat of rape (in the comedies).

^ Kramer, Annette (June 1994). “Mary Pix’s Nebulous Relationship to Zelmane”. Notes and Queries. 41 (2): 186–187. doi:10.1093/nq/41-2-186

PIX, Mrs. MARY (1666–1720?), dramatist, born in 1666 at Nettlebed in Oxfordshire, was daughter of the Rev. Roger Griffith, vicar of that place. Her mother, whose maiden name was Lucy Berriman, claimed descent from the ‘very considerable family of the Wallis’s.’ In the dedication of ‘The Spanish Wives’ Mrs. Pix speaks of meeting Colonel Tipping ‘at Soundess,’ or Soundness. This house, which was close to Nettlebed, was the property of John Wallis, eldest son of the mathematician. Mary Griffith’s father died before 1684, and on 24 July in that year she married in London, at St. Saviour’s, Benetfink, George Pix (b. 1660), a merchant tailor of St. Augustine’s parish. His family was connected with Hawkhurst, Kent. By him she had one child, who was buried at Hawkhurst in 1690.

It was in 1696, in which year Colley Cibber, Mrs. Manley, Catharine Cockburn (Mrs. Trotter), and Lord Lansdowne also made their débuts, that Mrs. Pix first came into public notice. She produced at Dorset Garden, and then printed, a blank-verse tragedy of ‘Ibrahim, the Thirteenth Emperor of the Turks.’ When it was too late, she discovered that she should have written ‘Ibrahim the Twelfth.’ This play she dedicated to the Hon. Richard Minchall of Bourton, a neighbour of her country days. In the same year (1696) Mary Pix published a novel, ‘The Inhuman Cardinal,’ and a farce, ‘The Spanish Wives,’ which had enjoyed a very considerable success at Dorset Garden.

From this point she devoted herself to dramatic authorship with more activity than had been shown before her time by any woman except Mrs. Afra Behn [q. v.] In 1697 she produced at Little Lincoln’s Inn Fields, and then published, a comedy of ‘The Innocent Mistress.’ This play, which was very successful, shows the influence of Congreve upon the author, and is the most readable of her productions. The prologue and epilogue were written by Peter Anthony Motteux [q. v.] It was followed the next year by ‘The Deceiver Deceived,’ a comedy which failed, and which involved the poetess in a quarrel. She accused George Powell [q. v.], the actor, of having seen the manuscript of her play, and of having stolen from it in his ‘Imposture Defeated.’ On 8 Sept. 1698 an anonymous ‘Letter to Mr. Congreve’ was published in the interests of Powell, from which it would seem that Congreve had by this time taken Mary Pix under his protection, with Mrs. Trotter, and was to be seen ‘very gravely with his hat over his eyes … together with the two she-things called Poetesses’ (see GOSSE, Life of Congreve, pp. 123–5). Her next play was a tragedy of ‘Queen Catharine,’ brought out at Lincoln’s Inn, and published in 1698. Mrs. Trotter wrote the epilogue. In her own prologue Mary Pix pays a warm tribute to Shakespeare. ‘The False Friend’ followed, at the same house, in 1699; the title of this comedy was borrowed three years later by Vanbrugh.

Hitherto Mary Pix had been careful to put her name on her title-pages or dedications; but the comedy of ‘The Beau Defeated’—undated, but published in 1700—though anonymous, is certainly hers. In 1701 she produced a tragedy of ‘The Double Distress.’ Two more plays have been attributed to Mary Pix by Downes. One of these is ‘The Conquest of Spain,’ an adaptation from Rowley’s ‘All’s lost by Lust,’ which was brought out at the Queen’s theatre in the Haymarket, ran for six nights, and was printed anonymously in 1705 (DOWNE, Roscius Anglicanus, p. 48). Finally, the comedy of the ‘Adventures in Madrid’ was acted at the same house with Mrs. Bracegirdle in the cast, and printed anonymously and without date. It has been attributed by the historians of the drama to 1709; but a copy in the possession of the present writer has a manuscript note of date of publication ‘10 August 1706.’

Nearly all our personal impression of Mary Pix is obtained from a dramatic satire entitled ‘The Female Wits; or, the Triumvirate of Poets.’ This was acted at Drury Lane Theatre about 1697, but apparently not printed until 1704, after the death of the author, Mr. W. M. It was directed at the three women who had just come forward as competitors for dramatic honours—Mrs. Pix, Mrs. Manley, and Mrs. Trotter [see Cockburn, Catharine]. Mrs. Pix, who is described as ‘a fat Female Author, a good, sociable, well-natur’d Companion, that will not suffer Martyrdom rather than take off three Bumpers in a Hand,’ was travestied by Mrs. Powell under the name of ‘Mrs. Wellfed.’

The style of Mrs. Pix confirms the statements of her contemporaries that though, as she says in the dedication of the ‘Spanish Wives,’ she had had an inclination to poetry from childhood, she was without learning of any sort. She is described as ‘foolish and open-hearted,’ and as being ‘big enough to be the Mother of the Muses.’ Her fatness and her love of good wine were matters of notoriety. Her comedies, though coarse, are far more decent than those of Mrs. Behn, and her comic bustle of dialogue is sometimes entertaining. Her tragedies are intolerable. She had not the most superficial idea of the way in which blank verse should be written, pompous prose, broken irregularly into lengths, being her ideal of versification.

The writings of Mary Pix were not collected in her own age, nor have they been reprinted since. Several of them have become exceedingly rare. An anonymous tragedy, ‘The Czar of Muscovy,’ published in 1702, a week after her play of ‘The Double Distress,’ has found its way into lists of her writings, but there is no evidence identifying it with her in any way. She was, however, the author of ‘Violenta, or the Rewards of Virtue, turn’d from Bocacce into Verse,’ 1704.

[Miscellanea Genealogica et Heraldica, 2nd ser. v. 110–3; Vicar-General’s Marriage Licences (Harl. Soc.), 1679–87, p. 173; Baker’s Biogr. Dramatica; Doran’s Annals of the English Stage, i. 243; Mrs. Pix’s works; Genest’s Hist. Account of the Stage.].

  )§(§)§(

331j.#781  Polwheile, Theolophilus

Aὐθέντης, Authentēs. Or A treatise of self-deniall. Wherein the necessity and excellency of it is demonstrated; with several directions for the practice of it. By Theophilus Polwheile, M.A. sometimes of Emmanuel Colledge in Cambridge, now teacher of the Church at Teverton in Devon

London: :printed for Thomas Johnson, and are to be sold by Richard Scott book-seller in Carlisle, 1658.

  First Edition ¶. bound in mid 19th century brown calf, (48) 424 (46) pp. including 8 pp. publisher’s catalog, errata leaf at end, text clean, bright, collated complete, ownership signature of a B. Fuller in an old hand on bottom of title page, probably not that of Bishop William Fuller, but perhaps. Wing (2nd ed.), P2782; Thomason; E.1733[1]. NO US Copy. #331j. Item #781

n 1651 he took the degree of M.A. He was preacher at Carlisle until about 1655 (Dedication to Treatise on Self-deniall). In 1654 he was a member of the committee for ejecting scandalous ministers in the four northern counties of Cumberland, Durham, Northumberland, and Westmoreland. From that year until 1660, when he was driven from the living, he held the rectory of the portions of Clare and Tidcombe at Tiverton. The statement of the Rev. John Walker, in ‘The Sufferings of the Clergy,’ that he allowed the parsonage-house to fall into ruins, is confuted in Calamy’s ‘Continuation of Baxter’s Life and Times’ (i. 260–1). Polwhele sympathised with the religious views of the independents, and after the Restoration he was often in trouble for his religious opinions. After the declaration of James II the Steps meeting-house was built at Tiverton for the members of the independent body; he was appointed its first minister, and, on account of his age, Samuel Bartlett was appointed his assistant. He was buried in the churchyard of St. Peter, Tiverton, on 3 April 1689. His wife was a daughter of the Rev. William Benn of Dorchester. Their daughter married the Rev. Stephen Lobb

¶ Polwheile was a minister based mainly in Tiverton; the year after this was published, in the Restoration of 1660, he was ejected from his ministerial position for his religious views and for his sympathies with the Independents, who advocated for local control and for a certain freedom of religion for those who were not Catholic; because of this, he was often in trouble until the Declaration of Indulgence by James II in 1687, establishing freedom of religion in England (James II being Catholic). Polwheile died in 1689. Very Good. (DNB).

Price: $1,800.00

  12) 323J Madeleine Vigneron (1628-1667)

La vie et la conduite spirituelle de Mademoiselle M. Vigneron. Suivant les mémoires qu’elle en a laissez par l’ordre de son directeur (M. Bourdin). [Arranged and edited by him.].

Paris: Chez Pierre de Launay, 1689.  $2,000

  Octavo 7 x 4 3/4 inches ã8 e8 A-2R8 (2R8 blank). Second and preferred edition first published in 1679.     This copy is bound in contemporary brown calf, five raised bands on spine, gilt floral tools in the compartments, second compartment titled in gilt; corners and spine extremities worn; three old joint repairs; on the front binder’s blank is an early ownership four-line inscription in French dated 1704, of

Sister Monique Vanden Heuvel, at the priory of Sion de Vilvoorde (Belgium).

Overall a fine copy.

This is the stirring journal that Madeleine Vigneron , member of the Third Order of the Minims of St. Francis of Paola, she began to keep it in 1653 and continued until her premature death, (1667) It was first published in 1679 and again in the present second, and final, edition which is more complete than the first. Added are Madeleine’s series of 78 letters representing her spiritual correspondence.IMG_1410

In these autobiographical writings, which were collected and published by her Director, the Minim Matthieu Bourdin, Madeleine speaks of the illnesses that plagued her since childhood and greatly handicapped her throughout a life that she dedicated to God by caring for the poor. She received admirable lights on the divinity and humanity of Jesus Christ, on the mysteries of the spiritual life. The hagiographers have remarked her austerity, her patience, her insatiable desire to suffer for God. Those who knew her perceived in her a virtuous life that impressed them.

This is a very rare book: the combined resources of NUC and OCLC locate only one copy in America, at the University of Dayton which also holds the only American copy of the 1679 edition.

§ Cioranescu 66466 (the 1679 edition).

checklist of early modern writings by nuns

Carr, Thomas M., “A Checklist of Published Writings in French by Early Modern Nuns” (2007). French Language and Literature Papers. 52.

)§(§)§(

End

This is a link to the rest of my books.

jamesgray2@me.com                  617*678*4517

Half price or less SALE Price DEFERED BILLING Early Modern Books by Women/ about them. Author INDEX 1) 415J #779 . Anon.), Waring, Robert 2)  342 J Attributed to James Wright…

[lohveandfilm]

My Own Private Idaho and the Pain of Unequal Love

The first thing I wanted to mention is that I watched My Own Private Idaho immediately after seeing The King on Netflix, and I learned that watching two very loose adaptations of Shakespeare in succession is extremely confusing.  Unfortunately, I think knowing some of the story of Henry V before seeing Idaho contributed to my feeling that the film was like two screenplays that had been thrown in the blender together.  I was watching Scott and understanding his story as that of Henry V while at the same time trying to figure out how Mike fit into that Shakespeare adaptation.  The problem was, of course, that Mike has absolutely no place in the Shakespearean side of the film.  This often led to the feeling that Mike and Scott were almost in two different movies, which made it hard to analyze their relationship in certain ways, so I’ve tried to ignore the Shakespearean aspects of this film for the sake of my own understanding.

I thought the C.S. Lewis was a really interesting reading for this movie given the rampant homophobia in his writings.  It goes without saying that I find his arguments about the impossibility of homosexuality ridiculous.  I also found it strange that he suggested male friendship couldn’t exist if homosexuality was real because there would always be an erotic component.  This also implies that heterosexual women and men could never be friends, which he then goes on to say explicitly is the case.  Beyond the fact that I never trust straight men who don’t have any female friends, I think Lewis is seriously underestimating the ability of humans to coexist without sexual desire.  For example, Scott is able to work as a prostitute with Mike, an explicitly sexual job, and yet never sees Mike or any man as a possible romantic partner.  Honestly, I am quite sure that if C.S. Lewis was open to having female friends, he would have found that there were many women for whom he never experienced any strong romantic or sexual desires.  The argument, then, that Scott and Mike could never be friends because of Mike’s queerness is clearly flawed, especially since I think putting the blame on Mike for the failure of their friendship is partly rooted in societally ingrained homophobia.

The aspect of the Lewis reading that I do think applies to this film is the difference between Companionship and Friendship.  Mike and Scott are associated initially because they are both sex workers who operate out of the same rag-tag group, led by Bob. They certainly seem to act like friends, especially during the scene in which they steal the money from Bob and the others.  That action suggests a strong bond between those two outside of the group, one that would be the basis of a friendship that exceeds the level of useful companionship. Yet Scott’s abandoning of Mike in Italy (I still have questions about how Mike got a passport) brings doubt into the definition of their relationship as a friendship.  I think Mike absolutely saw Scott as a friend, and that friendship is also how Mike came to see Scott as a romantic interest.  I wonder, though, if Scott ever saw Mike as more than an agreeable companion.  The biggest element of confusion for me here is that Scott and Mike were closer than all the others.  Did this mean that Scott was friends with Mike, or did he simply find Mike more interesting?  Did he feel bad for Mike because of the narcolepsy, or did he maybe even find it slightly amusing and kept him around for that reason?  I feel that there must be some explanation for their closeness outside of friendship because otherwise there is no explanation for how quickly Scott abandoned Mike.

(I wanted to insert the scene of Scott leaving Italy here, but I couldn’t find one amongst the absolutely insane number of fanfiction edited videos for this movie!)

If this is truly the case, that Scott hung out with Mike more for amusement than genuine affection, then I’m not sure Scott and Mike can ever be truly categorized as friends.  Aristotle was insistent that friendship can only be considered as such if there is a mutual acknowledgement of affection for each other.  Julia Annas uses a very relatable example to explain Aristotle’s meaning: “For Aristotle, however passionately I might feel about a film star (Robert Redford, for example) I could not be said to love or even like him; since he is unaware of my existence and my feeling about him all that I could feel would be goodwill, however passionate it might seem to me.”  I do think, though, that there is an added layer of complexity to Scott and Mike’s relationship.  Mike doesn’t just feel passionately about Scott, he knows him, and since he knows him, Mike can reasonably expect that the affection might be reciprocated. Mike feels goodwill towards Scott, but he also desperately wishes for their relationship to be elevated to the level of mutual affection, of friendship.  My friends in high school called this a “friend crush,” when you knew someone as an acquaintance (or Companion, as Lewis would say), but you liked their personality and wished that you could have a stronger relationship with them.  Mike’s situation is even more complicated because he has a friend crush and a romantic crush on Scott, but Scott doesn’t seem willing to reciprocate any of those emotions.  Perhaps Scott is holding back because he knows he will one day have to return to his old life, or maybe he simply tries to help Mike because he feels bad for leading the other boy on.  No matter his reasoning, I believe it was cruel of Scott to make no attempt at genuine friendship with Mike.  If he had treated Mike in the same way as he had the others (this applies to Scott and Bob, as well), he would’ve spared Mike an elevated level of emotional devastation when he inevitably left.  By presenting the possibility of mutual affection, he raised Mike’s hopes in a way that wouldn’t have occurred if he’d maintained a more companionate relationship.

[randosmstuff]

An unpopular opinion...

So, I finally mustered up the courage to watch Still Star-Crossed finale. I have to say that it was a much, much better put together episode. The background song for the Rosvolio kiss was on point (FINALLY). If I am not mistaken, the song they used for the Rosvolio kiss is a variation of the instrumental song from Baz Lhurmann’s Romeo and Juliet (1996); I might be wrong, though.

Now, let’s get to the point of this post.

Well, I decided to be completely honest with all of you. I want you to know that I am looking at the “Still Star-crossed Project” not as a fan of the show – which I am – but I am trying to look at it with critical eyes. No bias or whatsoever.

 I have to warn you. This is going to be a long post and a lot of what’s in here is most definitely going to “upset” a lot of people. But, please, don’t be mad at me just yet. Try to put your feelings towards the project aside and just read what I have to say and then, if you still think I am wrong, just say it so.

 With that being said…

I completely understand why Still Star-crossed was canceled. Actually, in my opinion, it shouldn’t even have been aired in the first place.  I say this because there were so many mistakes, TOO MANY, actually.

The writing was all over the place, the editing, the transition between scenes, the music, the understanding of the characters, the network, the time slot it was given…

 So basically everything?

 No, not everything. Definitely, not everything.

 The cast is amazing.

The changes they made with some of the characters were really good and intriguing. Princess Isabella, Lord Montague, Lady Helena, Tessa Montague, Lord Capulet… I would love to see their stories unravel.

I don’t know if you understand what I’m saying so I’ll try to elaborate a bit more. 

This kind of story is not supposed to go on for seasons and seasons. It requires a beginning and an end. It was meant to be a limited series all along. 

I’m not sure if it was the writing that sunk the project or if it was the overall misunderstanding of the project in and of itself.

I think that they were trying to make a political statement… not really political, maybe a social statement or a race statement or an equality statement? I don’t know… 

It seems to me that they were trying to create something so bold and ambitious that they somehow forgot what the story was really about and how this kind of story really appeals to the audience. 

I don’t think Still Star-Crossed sunk because of the color blind casting or lack of promotion (I believe the lack of promotion was an effect, actually, not a cause). Still Star-Crossed didn’t work because it failed to connect with the audience. And when I say “audience” I don’t mean “us”.

Everything that was cut, everything that was left unsaid and unexplained… 

I know, they felt like they didn’t have to. But unfortunately we still live in a world where we need to explain why some family members are from one race and some are from another. This caused confusion in so many viewers (racists or not), just overall confusion. People wanted a simple and clean explanation. Nothing a flashback scene couldn’t handle.

Another issue that I noticed is that even though the narrative tried to imply it otherwise, the characters were emotionally distant. Again, not the actors fault. They did an amazing job with what they were given. There was only so much they could do… I am blaming the writers and the directors for this. Like I said before, they didn’t quite understand the characters. 

Another mistake: they changed Shakespeare. You can play with Shakespeare but you can not change it. Changing Romeo and Juliet’s story was a bad call. Specially because it was supposed to be a sequel. Never mentioning, not even once, that Romeo was in love with Rosaline first? How come? This very fact should be a catalyst between Rosaline and Benvolio and yet it was erased completely. With what puporse? I don’t know. Hide from Verona that Romeo and Juliet were in love? Not even her parents seemed to know those two married in secret. Or did I miss something? (Maybe I did). 

Now, a very, very delicate matter…The unbalanced relationship between the leads. 

Benvolio and Rosaline were not equals, they did not bring out the best and the worst in each other, at least, not how they were supposed to. 

They portraited Benvolio as a lost soul, a lone and misundertood character and I actually liked what they were trying to do with him but they also made him weak. He was supposed to be the hero of the story. The martyr. He was supposed to be strong and witted, like Rosaline implied herself but it was rather talked about than shown. She was always the one supplying all the answers. So many things came from Benvolio - bookBenvolio - that they shifted and had them come from Rosaline instead.  

Rosaline was super super strong and independent (the political, social, race, equality thing I mentioned before?). I was really annoyed at the fact that Rosaline always semeed so sure of herself. How she almost never faltered. I still can’t get over the fact that she seemed more annoyed than surprised or shaken by Escalus when she first tried to talk to him about Benvolio’s innocence and he played it out like she was doing it because Benvolio was her fiancé when he knew the truth. That was supposed to be a key moment. She was supposed to see him in a different light. It was supposed to be a grave moment but they played it out like a mockery (the music helped with the mockery tone as well). And Rosaline never really shown vulnerability. Even when she delivered that emotional speech about her parents’ death, she was more proud and angry than actually vulnerable. And that is where Benvolio was supposed to come in. 

Benvolio was supposed to make her vulnerable. He was supposed to make her falter. He was supposed to tear down her walls without asking permission. He was supposed to make her question herself. What he made her feel was supposed to be so strong and unexpected that even Livia would slip her mind. Her feelings for him was supposed to be so strong that she would rather die with him than let him be killed. And we didn’t get to see that. Not really. 

The balcony scene was good, it was great but I was expecting something breathtaking. They should have made him climb the balcony… Invade her personal space. In my opinion that scene was supposed to be powerful, emotional and sensual. What I mean is… The balcony scene is the scene were Benvolio was supposed to break her and at the same time expose himself completely (which he did) but we needed (or I needed) a physical proximity, faces inches apart, uneven breath takes, hands accidentally touching… Because that was supposed to be when they would feel the attraction awake something inside them for the first time. They were supposed to see each other as man and woman, not as Capulet and Montague. There’s a line from the book that explains it so well. “Had Romeo’s eyes ever yearned as Benvolio’s did now?” Remember, in the book, Benvolio was cupping her face (physical proximity, anyone?). 

Anyway, I could go on and on about every scene between our leads, but I wouldn’t dare to go deep about the other characters because I didn’t quite grasp them or actually care for them? Paris, for example. Why he was so twisted? Was it because of his father? Was he being manipulated? And Lady Capulet? They made her so confused that I didn’t know if she was evil or just grieving. Lord Montague interested me the most. I think there was more to him and they failed to show us. And Tessa Montague? That woman wanted power. I can’t shake the feeling she had somehting to do with the attack. Wouldn’t that be great? But they needed to show more of her. And Princess Isabella? What about our weak Prince? 

And the music? The sound effects are there to help us feel, to help us connect with the story. To help with the dynamic. But that was not what happened. 

The pace of story? It was all over the place. It was rushed and not dynamic at all. I understand they had to cut a lot of scenes but a fast paced story doesn’t always mean a dynamic one.

And what about the promos? The very first promo we saw made us believe the epic love story was between our beautiful brown leads. Benvolio was barely in the promos. They were misleading the audience and it backfired. I can’t stop thinking of a promo with a few Romeo and Juliet lines and images of Rosvolio. “My only love sprung from my only hate” “You only hate for my name” “And you hate me for mine”. Can you imagine the appeal it would have had?

So many details they missed. I know… The project was too ambitious. It got out of hand. It became too expansive. They should have planned better, then. They should have fixed the mistakes and not ignored them, knowing that in doing it so, the show would be doomed. 

I should stop here. There’s so much more I want to say. 

Please, don’t get me wrong. I still love the show. I love it, not because we have a black female lead in a period drama or because the cast was so diverse. Those were a plus, the icing on the cake. I love the show because of the story. The potential was, is enormous. And I am mad because they mistreated it. 

My intention with this post was to show they could have made different choices. They should have targeted the right demographic. The direction of the show could have been different but for that the story needed to be more important than whatever message they were trying to pull through. And maybe, even still achieve both. 

In other words, it was not the story itself, it was not the diverse cast, it was poor and careless execution.

I’m sorry, if you don’t agree with me. I still believe in the show. I still want more. Rosvolio is still my OTP. The chemistry between Lashana and Wade is too much to be wasted. And I know for a fact they can save the show and profit from it. They only need to make the right choices and changes. 

I truly hope TPTB will give Still Star-Crossed another chance. 

*By the way, I’m black. Just so you know…