#specifically the version of the myth where she chooses power and they are a power couple

[waterdeep-weavemoss]

i bought pomegranate leave in conditioner because on all levels except physical i am persephone

[tornrose24]

Additional notes for the Disney RE 8/Village au (super long list, FYI)

Regarding the village itself-

-The village is hidden somewhere in New England in a mountain/wooded region. Think of it as the East Coast version of Gravity Falls and you are on the right track.

-The village is slightly more modernized than the main source material, but it’s extremely difficult to move into the village. If you are part of the four houses, then you can’t leave.

-The village was once a safe haven for creatures and abnormalities (much like Gravity Falls) when the colonies started to form. This knowledge has now been regarded as pure myth as they have gone missing.

-The village is divided into domains/areas. The central area is where Belos’ church is located (though he has his own hideout somewhere hidden in the area. Most of the wealthier residents choose to live near Eclipsa’s castle, and it’s the nicer area of the village. The middle and lower classes are intermixed in the areas near the lake and the cemetery (though the bookshop can be found near the cemetery). Most farmers live and do their work in the fields near the factory.

-Speaking of which, a significant portion of the town’s income is through agriculture.

-A significant portion of the villagers believe Belos’ teachings. Another portion doesn’t, and this includes those who were not originally from the village.

-Living in the village isn’t too costly for the middle and lower class, but you are expected to stay for at least a year, and you cannot take pictures or videos and send them to the outside world. (Yeah, no social media allowed here.)

-There’s a specific system regarding punishments in the village where if you commit a crime on the property of a certain lord, they will subject you to a punishment of their choosing. At best they can be utterly humiliating, but if you commit an unspeakable crime? Yeah, you don’t want to know what happens but they can range from experimentation, mental scaring and trauma, to… well… some don’t survive the night.

-Also, if any harm comes to a family member of one of the lords–regardless of where it took place–the person who caused/tried to cause it will be horribly screwed.

Regarding Father Belos/Philip Wittebane

–Wasn’t around during the 1600’s this time, but his views are still VERY outdated in the modern times. It’s safe to say that he is over 100 years old or more.

-His brother died under tragic circumstances.

–Found the megamycete by sheer luck and thanks to some research.

-Has the most personal grudge toward the house of Clawthorne because Caleb married into a family of people who were not strictly religious and because he married a girl who might as well have been a witch with her free-thinking, knowledge, and belief in the supernatural. Belos refuses to acknowledge his familial ties to the Clawthorne family.

-Secretly tried to keep the Butterfly family in check because they are regarded as the true protectors of the land that the village resides on. He had been orchestrating who was married into the family for years, but his final attempt failed when Eclipsa’s ‘intended’ was killed and she stuck with the one she truly loved.

-Secretly regards all the lords and their daughters as abominations that shouldn’t exist, despite that he caused most of them to have their powers and mutations in the first place. It plays into why he’s willing to get rid of them when he has the chance.

-Is against LGBTQ couples unless they actually produce children/potential future experiments.

-Actually does keep track of who gets the cadou and survives, but he keeps that number limited on purpose, depending on how useful the person can be to him. Those who show no powers often get kicked out. Those who lose their sanity or become mindless beasts are killed. This happens too often, unfortunately. Only someone very skilled can prevent this from happening to a patient.

Regarding the Clawthorne family

-Lilith was initially primed to be the inheritor of the cadou and title of lord, but Belos chose Eda instead because she reminded him too much of the woman who stole his brother from him.

-This backfired as Eda survived the experiment and kept her sanity at the cost of being subjected to involuntary transformations. She keeps herself isolated on a house on an isle in the middle of the lake because of this.

-To add insult to injury, Eda has more success of ensuring the cadou patients survive and keep their human form when her services is called upon.

-Lilith worked directly for Belos for a time. Her whereabouts during the main events are unknown. Eda rarely talks about her biological family with anyone and is fully aware that Lilith was the favored sister to a lot of folks.

-Luz and her mother came to the village in hopes of curing her father, but he passed away before he could be given a cadou. As it turns out, that was probably for the best, and Luz was horrified to learn what could of happened if he got one.

–Before being accepted as Eda’s heir, Luz used to live in the domain near the lake with Camila.

-Camila works as a veterinarian in the village. As one of the few in the village, she makes decent money.

-Luz had seen Eda a few times, but one day she came upon a huge secret by complete accident–Eda had secretly found a child of one of the creatures that once roamed the land. A certain little creature with a skull for a head. A rocky friendship was formed after that.

-Eda initially tolerated Luz because she got along with King and could keep him a secret, but gradually they got to be friends for real.

-Luz enjoyed hanging out with Eda, but Eda was fully aware that Belos was getting suspicious of the two hanging out. She told Luz the truth regarding Belos, as well as his plans and his beef with her family, but she also knew that he would do something horrible to the entire village if he ever accomplished his goal. 

So Eda revealed her trump card–she had access to Titan DNA, and whoever took it with a cadou would likely have a chance to turn the tables on Belos one day. Luz willingly agreed, even with the knowledge that there were risks.

-No one expected a lord to adopt a child, so Luz’s adoption and being accepted as Eda’s sole heir was a HUGE shock for a lot of people.

-However there was a painful catch, since Belos wanted to keep the families under his control–Luz could no longer live with her mother, if she indeed was to be Eda’s heir. Furthermore Luz was forbidden to reveal any secrets regarding the lords and Belos to anyone. This puts a strain upon the relationship between Camilla, Luz, and Eda.

-Belos was secretly pissed about Eda adopting, because he was secretly hoping the Clawthorne bloodline would die off. Luz unknowingly screwed that up.

-Luz was 11 when she was accepted as Eda’s heir.

-Luz’s friends are part of the village. She is secretly dating Amity, which few people know of, including Amity’s mother (who is pissed that a mere commoner was accepted as Eda’s heir).

–Amity lives in the domain near the castle. The rest of Luz’s friends live in the domain near the lake.

-Eda’s home is basically similar to her own home in her canon series. However, there is a secret labyrinth where she goes when her mutation gets out of control… or some unfortunate criminal meets a horrible end.

Regarding the Mortenson family

-The cemetery is one of the oldest areas in the village and is under the ownership of Scratch. If you want to bury someone there, you have to pay him for it. The price ranges depending on the location, but only the most wealthy can afford the most scenic spots, build fantastic headstones, or build mausoleums. (And Scratch has no problem overcharging the rich for all three.)

-Scratch was originally a commoner, and was granted his title and land because of how useful his powers were to Belos. Even before then, he had anxiety over leaving the village and going out into the unknown.

-Scratch used to be childhood friends with Adia before she left the village, however he completely lost contact with her.

-He has abused his powers for selfish reasons a few times and even left his body behind at a meeting once. The only person he is able to constantly fool with that trick is his ‘brother.’

-Those same powers also made the rest of the lords a bit uneasy around him because they are aware that he could be A LOT more dangerous if he put his mind to it. He’s just too lazy and unmotivated to put it to better use. This ultimately changes once Molly is under his guardianship.

-The house is basically the McGee house from canon. However, there is a few levels of basement area included–this is where Scratch is free to traumatize and punish criminals however he wants (and this is where he mainly chases Star around later).

-Molly lived with her family close to the cemetery because it was the only place in the village they could afford at the time that could house them all.

-Sharon does odd-jobs in the village while Pete has a job that’s slightly different than what he has in canon. Darryl still gets into a lot of trouble (and managed to get some contraband a few times).

-Molly moved to the village at age 10. Her parents saw it as the best way to try to accumulate some money over time until they could afford a better place outside the village.

-Molly befriended Libby, who was the one who told her about the rumor that the cemetery was haunted, as well as tell her about the lord who lived beyond it.

-Molly is acquainted with Andrea, who lives in the domain near the castle. Andrea’s dad is one of the town merchants/businessmen. The two couldn’t stay friends for long because Andrea’s father saw Molly as a way to win favor with one of the lords once she became adopted.

-Molly first met Scratch in his ghost form, and between then and when he was forced to reveal his true identity, he had been trying to keep his human face hidden from her.

-Molly had just turned 12 when she had her cadou and was adopted.

-The rest of the lords were horrified by the circumstances behind the adoption, but they couldn’t interfere unless it put them at risk.

-Eda was the one who made sure Molly’s cadou treatment would be a success because she was aware of what her ‘brother’ was going through and wanted him to finally have real happiness in his life.

–despite Molly’s attempts to ease things between them, the relationship between her parents and Scratch is strained since he can’t reveal why he adopted her. However, he gets along just fine with Darryl (who thinks Molly scored a cool position.)

–Sometimes Scratch can get a bit overprotective of Molly around the lords and especially Belos, considering what happened the first time she met him.

Regarding the Butterfly family

-The Butterfly family is the oldest family in the village. It is said that they might not have even been fully human at first.

-The Butterfly family used to be close to Belos–Eclipsa’s mother was practically his best ally until she passed away.

-Since she used to hang with Eda in her childhood, and was exposed to a lot about the true origins of the village, Eclipsa did not develop the same mindset as her mother.

-Eclipsa is not fond of the upperclass or how many people try to win favor with her, but she masks this carefully, knowing she could use her position to her advantage someday.

-Eclipsa used to be friends with Star’s mother Moon, when she used to live in the village. Moon was the older of the two girls.

-Eclipsa was aware that Moon had also been given a cadou, but she assumed Moon died because of it. The moment she was made aware of Star’s existence, she realized that Moon survived and might have passed something down to Star as a result.

-Globgor was originally human with Mexican ethnicity (and once had a different name). He speaks Spanish.

-ALL the ‘daughters’ see Globgor as their favorite ‘uncle,’ though Luz is his secret favorite. They help each other keep their Spanish from getting too rusty and will converse in it for long periods.

-Heck, even the other lords find little to dislike when it comes to Globgor–he really is that nice.

-A lot of the more formal occasions are thrown at the castle, and the upper class try to get themselves in. It is also where all four families are expected to show up with the daughters, whether they want to or not. Globgor isn’t allowed to show himself at these events thanks to Belos, but once in awhile, Eclipsa, or one of the lords and the ‘daughters’ will ditch the events and hang with him instead.

-When Bill had his rebellion, and the lords were forced to aid Belos to stop him, Bill gave Eclipsa a nightmare vision of what would happen to her daughter if she and her husband were taken away from her–she would become a horrible monster under Belos (who would emotionally abuse her). It horribly traumatized Eclipsa and it played into why she begged Star to take her daughter to Papa Titan when she assumed her daughter would be orphaned.

-Meteora’s room is connected to her parents and is tightly protected.

-Of the ‘daughters,’ Meteora is the most protected due to looking the least human of the girls. Only ‘family’ members are allowed to get close to her.

-Luz is Meteora’s favorite ‘cousin.’ When Luz escaped to Papa Titan’s caravan, there was a tearful reunion (mainly on Luz’s side, when she realized she would still have one ‘family’ member left in the worst-case scenario.)

Regarding the Doofenshmirtz family

-“So after putting up with the misery subjected by my parents–who loved Roger more than me–I decided to seek my fortune elsewhere and moved to America. I searched for a place where I could invent and conduct my experimentation in peace, which is how I came upon the village. The oddly named Father Belos allowed it after a series of difficult paperwork. However, in an accident that I dare not mention, I was subjected to his own experiments and made lord of my own domain. Though to be honest I think he only keeps me around because I am the only one with actual scientific knowledge and technical know-how.”

-“In case you are wondering, like many my favorite ‘sister’ is Eclipsa. She has weird taste in men, but I’m not judging her. My other ‘sister’ keeps to herself and I respect that. My ‘brother’ though… I hate that guy. He’s mocked me directly in my face and I’d do something about it if it wasn’t for the fact that he’s hard to kill. Oh, right you must be thinking ‘well what about your OTHER ‘brother,’ the triangle guy? I can’t stand him. Also he terrifies me.”

-Doof–despite his scientific abilities–is the LEAST respected of the lords, because… well… he’s Doof.

-However, he’s also the only one of the lords who shows some semblance of loyalty to Belos, even if he doesn’t agree with him… that is, until he figures out how Belos is going to screw him and his family over once he accomplishes his goal.

-Ironically, Doof WAS Belos best chance at having a vessel for Caleb. He didn’t go with Doof because Doof was too idiotic for such a thing.

-For a long time, he was the only lord who had an heir, and his daughter is a huge source of pride and joy for him. He also spoiled her a lot. Unlike her father, Vanessa gained a lot of respect and admiration from many–including the children of the village because of how ‘cool’ she is.

-However, he wouldn’t shut up about her a few times, which annoyed the other lords until they got their own ‘daughters.’

-Since he speaks Spanish, one of his favorite family bonding moments is hanging with the other Spanish speaking members and watch telenovelas. However these viewings get REALLY intense and at least three televisions were destroyed in a fit of passionate rage.

-He refuses to talk about why he and his wife divorced, but it wasn’t a huge shock to anyone that it happened.

-Vanessa hates the upper class because they are so annoying, they tried for years to suck up to her, and she’s aware that they disrespect her dad.

-Vanessa is the hardest ‘daughter’ to win a favor from because of her nature.

-Even if she doesn’t approve of all her dad’s creations, Vanessa does know how to use them, and that–combined with her enhanced durability and stamina–makes her dangerous if provoked.

-While Vanessa prefers hanging out with her friends from the village, she does love her father and her ‘family.’ She was pissed when she thought Star killed them all off. Especially her ‘cousins’ and her ‘Aunt’ Eclipsa.

-“By the way, if anyone over 18 tries to make a pass at my daughter, they will be killed.”

[johaerys-writes]

Not counting Patrochilles:

1) Who are your favorite characters from Greek mythology (in general)? 2) Who are your favorite Homer characters specifically?

Omg what a great question. So I have many many favourites when it comes to Greek myths, it's hard to choose. I basically grew up reading simplified versions of these myths, specifically these children's books by Sofia Zarampouka (a greek author and painter, I'm sure any Greeks following me will recognise these lol):

Just look at all those gorgeous covers. I had the whole series at some point and I have no idea where it is now, but I used to read these over and over when I was younger.

I absolutely loved reading about the labours of Heracles, those were really fun even though I didn't love Heracles himself as a character. I also really liked Theseus' story (Ariadne and her yarn! The maze! The Minotaur! Poor Aegeus dying at the end aksjs so sad) even though, again, I never much liked Theseus as a character haha. Atalanta was one of my favourites and her myth is very cool, and I also liked Perseus' story a lot. Antigone is a huge favourite, as well as Iphigeneia. I find their stories very compelling and very tragic and I think about them a lot!!!!

Another one that I absolutely love is Medea and her story with Jason and the Argonauts. The Argonauts on their own have a very interesting myth (heroes that sail to a strange land with strange customs in search of the mythical golden fleece) but the appearance of Medea and her later story with Jason is what makes it a fascinating story for me. She is the embodiment of what most Greeks at the time would find at once incredibly alluring and incredibly threatening: she is foreign (the Other), beautiful, powerful, she has hidden knowledge and magic, she defies her own father and kills her brother to help Jason escape. And when Jason, dickhead that he is, abandons her to marry someone else, she commits the ultimate taboo of killing her own children. She is such a polarising and blood-chilling character and I really love seeing how much she has inspired artists through the centuries.

As for Homeric characters, I do love Hector a lot, and the moments when he appears in the Iliad are among my favourites, alongside all the Patrochilles moments. I find Nestor very entertaining and he's always a delight when he appears, and I also enjoy Diomedes' and Odysseus' bro chemistry a lot lol. Clytemnestra is also one of my favourite characters in Greek myth in general. Technically it's Euripides' version of her that I love, based on his Iphigeneia at Aulis play, she doesn't appear in the Homeric works but she is mentioned so it counts lol. I also really love Briseis-- even though she talks very little in the Iliad, I still love her characterisation and the overall role and significance she has in the story. Another one I really love is Priam, I cannot read the passages where he appears in the Iliad without tearing up, he's just such a kind and noble person and his interactions with other characters in the epic give so much depth and nuance to Trojan society and culture and the tragedy that befell them.

Most of my fave Homeric characters are from the Iliad, but I should give special mention to some Odyssey characters I really love. I always found Circe very intriguing and the descriptions of her island and her magic etc are SO interesting and I wish we had been given more!! (Honestly even though I adore the Iliad I always found the Odyssey much more fun to read lol). Telemachus and Peisistratus are also special blorbos (and here I should give a shoutout to the amazing @figsandphiltatos for writing the fic that made me insane for them alsjs 😭🙏)

Gosh this is already so long and I feel like I could talk about this forever ahaha. I probably left a lot of characters and myths out but didn't want to ramble too much. Thank you once again for this question!

[theparadiseproject]

Marston did not "white wash" Ancient Greek culture. It's just a prominent part of western culture.

Also no one alive now, nor in the 40s when she was created, was from Ancient Greece or had some cultural claim to Ancient Greek culture or the religion to genuinely claim it's offensive or anything akin to "appropriation" or reductive to a still alive group of people since its called "Ancient Greece" for a reason.

You shouldn't be applying modern sociological phenomenons or terms to describe people talking about or using any part of a long dead society or the practices or beliefs of the people that were apart of it a very long time ago and was one of the most powerful, dominant and influential cornerstones to Western Society the same way you would a marginalized community of people that still exist in modern day. This is just silly.

The Amazons in DC were not meant to be historically accurate or anything like that. They were purposefully used and reinterpreted to build the mythology of a superhero in pulp fiction to represent a very specific idea. They were not meant to look like any racial group other than ones that would relate specifically to the American audience they were created for. They were not meant to be warriors but super powered beings. They did not use sword and shields but advanced technology and science. Their worship was specifically crafted around certain themes and ideas that were specific to Marston and his interests.

Theres nothing wrong with any of these things and he clearly took a very inspired, well thoughtout approach to ensure he made his version of the Amazons specific to what he was intending to portray while still being written faithfully and in line with the myths that inspired them.

It doesn't even make sense to say they aren't faithful to the source material because they are not characters created in a previous literary work but mythological figures that were used as inspiration for a pulp fiction super hero adventure comic. You choosing to be offended over something you can't possibly have any legitimate claim to anymore than anyone else raised in Western society or somewhere heavily touched by it is you purposefully misapplying ideas, concepts, dynamics that apply to real living things to something that would not even make sense given that the people that would even need to be around for to claim such offenses don't exist and would not do so since they were not marginalized groups of people that had their culture torn from them but a vast collection of some of the most influential and powerful forces in history that were able to spread their culture so far that it impacted all of the world, specifically the West, where people with a specific phenotype you are trying to claim is being used to "erase" people would also have this culture be foundational to the world around them and have as much claim as anyone that is presumably more phenotypically close to the supposed people that cultivated this culture despite the fact that the existing inhabitants of part of the world practice a completely different culture and religion due to their ancestors converting to Christianity and this religion and anyone that could trace their practices and beliefs back to the ancient culture they hail from having passed away without keeping it alive. So the only people that still worship or practice are re constructionist and later practitioners that are not related to those Ancient Greeks at all.

This is what I mean when I say the "Wonder Woman fandom" misapplies modern sociological ideas and politics to make an issue that simply does not exist.

Paradise island was likely in the Pacific Ocean, no where near Europe or Eurasia or the Mediterranean. Diana was modeled after an Irish woman with white skin, blue eyes, and black hair. The Amazons were meant to have the racial phenotypes common to Americans, obviously white Americans, of that time and not any sort of supposedly resemblance to what Academics say the "real amazons" would have looked like or were modeled after. It is fantasy to appeal to an American audience and that is not a bad thing at all.

Even when understanding the underlying beliefs and desires behind the Amazons meaning to appeal to an American audience so they were all very clearly white women there is no such thing as "white washing" the Amazons or anything like that. Frankly, there should be more concern with diversifying the Amazons to include more racial groups that are prominent in the US, like black people, as opposed to trying to perfectly emulate the characteristics of a fictional group of women that these Amazons were not meant to represent or look or be like in the first place.

Its just trying to ruin the character under the guise of "realism" or "historical accuracy" when the whole point is that they are neither of those things and trying to make them that flies in the face of their creation.

[mysillylittleseerblog]

Asked so I shall answer. How gay is Norse mythology?

Before I begin, it's important to keep in mind that most norse myths are lost to time, and of those that exist, the most complete source for the most famous myths was scribed by a Christian. Even still, a lot of downright John Waters-style filth still managed to survive.

The norsemen had some very complicated feelings about sexuality and gender. "Ergi" (unmanliness) seemed to be shamed (and possibly punished) in some communities and accepted under specific circumstances in others. AFAB queerness was not considered a big deal, though their are mild old norse insults that vaguely allude to the idea being strange or even funny. AMAB queer people, whether they be trans woman or gay man seemed to be more socially acceptable to most norsemen if they socially transitioned to a more womanly role, especially if they were Seidr or Galdr workers (Norse witches.) It's complicated though, and it probably varied from community to community.

For anyone not familiar with Norse mythology, it's a little unique in that it's 40% poetic, deep lore, 60% dirty dick jokes made up by sailors and farmers trying to get their buddies to laugh.

Loki:

Loki is probably the most famously queer Norse god since they confirmed him as genderqueer in the MCU then shipped him with himself, as you do. Loki has six named children, and he's confirmed to have given birth to at least one, possibly three, depending on the version of the myth. From a source I cannot confirm the legitimacy of so take this with a grain of salt, he's said to have given birth to a bunch of other monstrous shit. This is not in the prose Edda, but if you choose to believe it so, every horrible non-humanoid monster in Norse mythology has come from Loki's vagina. He's always disguising himself as a woman, just constantly. He's also guilty of the for mentioned Ergi, since he can do Seidr.

Thor:

Quite literally the most well-known story of Thor from norse mythology is him cross dressing. The TL;DR is that Loki (probably) gives mlojnir to a jotune who says he'll give it back if they give him Freya to marry, Freya says hell no (she's technically already married to a man who went missing but is secretly Odin who's already married to Frigga and that's actually part of what causes ragnorok, lol) and somehow the only other solution is Thor in drag pretending to be Freya, with loki disguised as a bridesmaid. The giant's super happy, marries bearded queen thor/freya, is then weirded out by thor eating an insane amount of food, drinking an insane amount of mead, and being so angry his eyes are glowing red. Loki bullshits their way through it until Thor gets mlojrnir and violently beats every jotune there to death. The end.

This gets funnier when you consider Thor doesn't look anything like Chris Hemsworth in the mythos--- he's got one of those strong man bodies where he's so muscular he looks fat, a very grizzled face, and a long red beard.

Side note: not that this is really queer persay, but mlojnir has a short handle, is typically depicted with the hammer part at the bottom and is considered a symbol of fertility because it's a small dick appreciation joke. Small but mighty. Thor loves his tiny member.

Odin:

Odin is a contradictory god in many ways. He's a sage loving father and a violent berserker. He created humanity but is also a god of death. To be able to see more, he cut out his own eye. He's wise and all-knowing and will play silly pranks and be goofy. It's his whole shtick. No surprise then even though he's pinnacle masculine partiarch, he's one of the most powerful users of Seidr magic second only to Freya. I have a post on my blog explaining Seidr, but the short version is it's time-based pussy magic. Which means Odin is also extremely guilty of committing ergi. Knowledge is far more important to Odin than those pesky gender roles though, a shockingly progressive hot take from the most powerful god in a pantheon. I'd call him a feminist icon if he didn't constantly cheat on his wife, though she may actually just be cool with it since, unlike Hera, we have not a single myth of Frigga showing the slightest bit of jealousy her husband's a whore. Dick move what he did to Freya though. Odin's bff is another poetry goddess he drinks with and has slam poetry nights with--- I imagine anyway.

Freya:

Her chariot is pulled by cats. She's a slut and is proud of it. If that's not high femme Sapphic I don't know what is.

Freyr:

Local twink falls in love with the first giant stone butch mega milk mommy he sees and contributes to the makings of the end of the world.

Heimdall:

He's the son of nine or eight-strong lesbian polycule of women who are also sentient waves.

Kvasir:

Okay, so, this God is already the product of every single Vanir and Aesir spitting into a bucket, m'kay? Already, John Waters shit is afoot. All the gods wanted to fuck him, he was just hella likable and hot. Skipping over some stuff, he gets killed and made into mead. Just go with it. He's stolen by either jotune or dwarves and I can't be bothered to look it up. Odin isn't having it. He disguises himself as an eagle and drinks his former-spit-bucket-former-hot-boy-crush-current-alcoholic-berverage so everyone can taste the hotness that was Kvasir. So he's flying around, sprinkling hot boy juice on all the nine realms, and everyone who gets hit with it gets ten times more creative/artistic/poetic depending on the translation. But the mead also gives Odin diarrhea. Anyone who gets hit with the literal shitty diarrhea creativity/poetic juice also gets super inspired, but only to make really really bad stuff only they think is good. Which is the most hardcore camp fairytale I have ever fucking read and sums up pretty well why I became a practicing heathan.

Valhalla is not heaven, and other reasons fascists are dumb dumbs.

The utterly, bewildering, so funny it's depressing thing about neo n@z1s and blanc enthusiasts being so fucking quick to appropriate Norse iconography as a symbol of their "proud heritage" is that they consistently demonstrate a grasp on Norse Mythology as deep as the Marvel Cinematic Universe does. Not a dig on the MCU, but, let's just say creative liberties is an understatement when it comes to representing Norse Mythology.

The primary point of interest boils down basically to the concept of the "exhalted warrior death." As fascism is the ideology of hero worship, on a surface level, this makes sense. Old Norse Culture was one largely defined by conflict and vikinging as a trade.

Many Norse beliefs are shaped by, designed to inspire and exhalt the warrior who fights without fear. Their society in part relied on "the hero warrior."

Couple things though:

1. Not all Norsemen were vikings, and you REALLY aren't one.

You think the Norse belief system was so heavily lazer focused on a single profession in what needed to be an entire functioning community everyone that wasn't a viking was poopooed to damnation and/or a dishonorable life? No bitch. "Hel" in Norse mythology is just where the dead ARE. It's a very morally neutral place to be. Hel be vibin'. Odin, Freya, and possibly Njord were collecting souls for a very specific reason. That being . . .

2. The souls of warriors were being brought to Valhalla (among other places) to train for a final battle THEY WERE DESTINED TO LOSE.

Y'all fucking forgot about Ragnorok didn't you? The souls in Valhalla are being conscripted to a suicide mission. It's a place of honor to be chosen, but it's not a reward.

The training is apparently honestly a bitch in a half in it of itself supposedly. I guess you get god mead, though. Sit next to Odin at the big boy table, maybe. An afterlife of pain and awaiting doom for beer and for daddy to notice you.

That's the thing, though. Valhalla isn't supposed to be Heaven. It aligns with many other Norse Myths in that it exhalts to bravery in the face of certain annihilation. Valhalla as a function of beleif designed to psychologically break past the human instinct to prioritize self-preservation. The quality in which it exhalts is not the hero's death, but embracing doom. THAT'S WHY Odin chose warriors who died WITH WEAPON IN HAND, as in, they already faced one destruction, they can face another.

The army of Valhalla weren't even the only deaths of honor Odin recognized one could achieve. The Volva were all very much in Hel once they died, and they are all distinguished as Odin's special little future-seeing squad in the mythos too. And that's JUST Odin, ignoring the other gods who chose souls for their armies.

Norse mythology, ironically to the point of head-exploading farce, spits in the face of the concept of the Hero's Death as defined by fascism. "Dying for the cause" is a Christian/Abrahamic value that they are retroactively interjecting into Norse belief because historical self-insert fanfiction that is the Arian Mythos. There's no fucking point in training and fighting in Ragnorok, everyone is destined to fail, everyone knows it, and that's the fucking point.

The concept of Ragnorok and Valhalla was not even universal among the Norsemen. The inevitability of death and rebirth is just kind of a given as a natural truth in most pagan beliefs. Everyone you know and love is going to die, and then something else will come from the ashes. Literally "chill bro it be like that sometimes."

And if that's not enough to convince you fascists don't actually know shit about Norse mythology, I can tell you all about how fucking gay it is.

[lokiondisneyplus]

A review of “Journey Into Mystery,” the penultimate Loki Season One episode on Disney+, coming up just as soon as I paper cut a giant cloud to death…

Journey Into Mystery was the title of the first Marvel comic to feature either Thor or Loki. It began as an anthology series featuring monsters and aliens, but Jack Kirby, Stan Lee, and Larry Lieber were so smitten with their adaptation of the characters of Norse myth that the Asgardians gradually took over the whole book, which was renamed after its hammer-wielding hero(*).

(*) The early Journey Into Mystery stories treated Thor’s alter ego, disabled Dr. Donald Blake, as the “real” character, while Thor was just someone Blake could magically transform into, while retaining his memories and personality. It wasn’t even clear whether Asgard itself was meant to exist at first, until Loki turned up on Earth in an early issue, caused trouble, and Blake/Thor somehow knew exactly how to get to Asgard to drop him off. Soon, the lines between Thor and Blake began to blur, and eventually Thor became the real guy, and Blake a fiction invented by Odin to humble his arrogant son. It’s a mark of just how instantly charismatic Loki was that the entire title quickly steered towards him and the other gods.

But once upon a time, anything was possible in Journey Into Mystery, which makes it an apt moniker for an absolutely wonderful episode of Loki where the same holds true. Our title characters are trapped in the Void, a place at the end of time where the TVA’s victims are banished to be devoured by a cloud monster named Alioth. And mostly they are surrounded by the wreckage of many dead timelines. Classic Loki insists that his group’s only goal is survival, and any kind of planning and scheming is doomed to kill the Loki who tries. But this ruined, hopeless world instead feels bursting with imagination and possibility.

There are the many Loki variants we see, with President Loki, among others, joining Classic, Kid, Boastful, and Alligator Loki. There are the metric ton of Easter Eggs just waiting to be screencapped by Marvel obsessives (I discuss a few of them down below), but which still suggest a much larger and weirder MCU even if you don’t immediately scream out “Is that… THROG?!?!?” at the appropriate moment. And all of that stuff is tons of fun, to be sure. But what makes this episode — and, increasingly, this series — feel so special is the way that it explores the untapped potential of Loki himself, in his many, many variations.

This is an episode that owes more than a small stylistic and thematic debt to Lost. It’s not just that Alioth looks and sounds so much like the Smoke Monster(*), that it makes a shared Wizard of Oz reference to “the man behind the curtain” (also the title of one of the very best Lost episodes), or even that the core group of Lokis are hiding in a bunker accessible via a hatch and a ladder that’s filled with recreational equipment (in this case, bowling alley lanes). It’s also that Loki, Sylvie, their counterparts, and Mobius have all been transported to a strange place that has disturbing echoes from their own lives, that operates according to strange new rules they have to learn while fleeing danger, and their presence there allows them to reflect on the many mistakes of their past and consider whether they want to, or can, transcend them.

(*) Yes, Alioth technically predates Smokey by a decade (see the notes below for more), but his look has been tweaked a bit here to seem more like smoke than a cloud, and the sounds he makes when he roars sound a lot like Smokey’s telltale taxi cab meter clicks. Given the other Lost hat tips in the episode, I have to believe Alioth was chosen specifically to evoke Smokey.

Classic Loki is aptly named. He wears the Sixties Jack Kirby costume, and he is a far more powerful magician than either Sylvie or our Loki have allowed themselves to be. He calls our Loki’s knives worthless compared to his sorcery, which feels like the show acknowledging that the movies depowered Loki a fair amount to make him seem cooler. But if Classic Loki can conjure up illusions bigger and more potent than his younger peers, he is a fundamentally weak and defeated man, convinced, like the others, that the only way to win the game into which he was born is not to play. “We cannot change,” he insists. “We’re broken. Every version of ourselves. Forever.” It is not only his sentiment — Kid Loki adds that any Loki who tries to improve inevitably winds up in the Void for their troubles — but it seems to have weighed on him longer and harder than most.

But Classic Loki takes inspiration from Loki and Sylvie to stand and fight rather than turn and run, magicking up a vision of their homeland to distract Alioth at a crucial moment in Sylvie’s plan, and getting eaten for his trouble. He was wrong: Lokis can change. (Though Kid Loki might once again argue that Classic Loki’s death is more evidence that the universe has no interest in any of them doing so.) And both Loki and Sylvie have been changing throughout their time together. Like most Lokis, they seem cursed to a life of loneliness. Sylvie learned as a child that a higher power believed she should not exist, and has spent a lifetime hiding out in places where any friends she might make will soon die in an apocalypse. Our Loki’s past isn’t quite so stark, but the knowledge that his birth father abandoned him, while his adoptive father never much liked him, have left permanent scars that govern a lot of his behavior. The defining element of Classic Loki’s backstory is that he spent a long time alone on a planet, and only got busted by the TVA when he attempted to reconnect with his brother and anyone else he once knew. This is a hard existence, for all of them. And while it does not forgive them their many sins(*), it helps contextualize them, and give them the knowledge to try to be better versions of themselves.

(*) Loki at one point even acknowledges that, for him, it’s probably only been a few days since he led an alien invasion of New York that left many dead, though due to TVA shenanigans, far more time may have passed.

For that matter, Mobius is not the stainless hero he once thought of himself as. While he and Sylvie are tooling around the Void in a pizza delivery car (because of course they are), he admits that he committed a lot of sins by believing that the ends justified the means, and was wrong. He doesn’t know who he is before the TVA stole and factory rebooted him, but he knows that he wants something better for himself and the universe, and takes the stolen TemPad to open up a portal to his own workplace in hopes of tearing down the TVA once and for all. Before he goes, though, he and Loki share a hug that feels a lot more poignant than it should, given that these characters have only spent parts of four episodes of TV together. It’s a testament to Hiddleston, Wilson, Waldron, and company (Tom Kauffman wrote this week’s script) that their friendship felt so alive and important in such a short amount of time.

The same can be said for Loki and Sylvie’s relationship, however we’re choosing to define it. Though they briefly cuddle together under a blanket that Loki conjures, they move no closer to romance than they were already. If anything, Mobius’ accusations of narcissism in last week’s episode seem to have made both of them pull back a bit from where they seemed to be heading back on Lamentis. But the connection between them is real, whatever exactly it is. And their ability to take down Alioth — to tap into the magic that Classic Loki always had, and to fulfill Loki’s belief that “I think we’re stronger than we realize” — by working together is inspiring and joyful. Without all this nuanced and engaging character work, Loki would still be an entertaining ride, but it’s the marriage of wild ideas with the human element that’s made it so great.

Of course, now comes the hard part. Endings have rarely been an MCU strength, give or take something like the climax of Endgame, and the finales of the two previous Disney+ shows were easily their weakest episodes. The strange, glorious, beautiful machine that Waldron and Herron have built doesn’t seem like it’s heading for another generic hero/villain slugfest, but then, neither did WandaVision before we got exactly that. This one feels different so far, though. The command of the story, the characters, and the tone are incredibly strong right now. There is a mystery to be solved about who is in the big castle beyond the Void (another Loki makes the most narrative and thematic sense to me, but we’ll see), and a lot to be resolved about what happens to the TVA and our heroes. And maybe there’s some heavy lifting that has to be done in service to the upcoming Dr. Strange or Ant-Man films.

It’s complicated, but on a show that has handled complexity well. Though even if the finale winds up keeping things simpler, that might work. As Loki notes while discussing his initial plan to take down Alioth, “Just because it’s not complicated doesn’t mean it’s bad.” Though as Kid Loki retorts, “It also doesn’t mean it’s good.”

Please be good, Loki finale. Everything up to this point deserves that.

Some other thoughts:

* Most of this week’s most interesting material happens in the Void. But the scenes back at the TVA clarify a few things. First, Ravonna is not the mastermind of all this, and she was very much suckered in by the Time-Keeper robots. But unlike Mobius or Hunter B-15, she’s so conditioned to the mission that even knowing it’s a lie hasn’t really swayed her from her mission. She has Miss Minutes (who herself is much craftier this week) looking into files about the creation of the TVA, but for the most part comes across as someone very happy with a status quo where she gets to be special and pass judgment on the rest of the multiverse.

* Alioth first appeared in 1993’s Avengers: The Terminatrix Objective, a miniseries (written by Mobius inspiration Mark Gruenwald, and with some extremely kewl Nineties art full of shoulder pads, studded collars, and the like) involving Ravonna, Kang, and the off-brand versions of Captain America, Iron Man, and Thor (aka U.S. Agent, War Machine, and Thunderstrike, the latter of whom has yet to appear in the MCU). It’s a sequel to a Nineties crossover event called Citizen Kang. And no, I still don’t buy that Kang will be the one pulling the strings here, if only because it’s really bad storytelling for the big bad of the season to have never appeared or even been mentioned prior to the finale.

* Rather than try to identify every Easter egg visible in the Void’s terrain, I’ll instead highlight three of the most interesting. Right before the Lokis arrive at the hatch, we see a helicopter with Thanos’ name on it. This is a hat tip to an infamous — and often memed — out-of-continuity story where Thanos flies this chopper while trying to steal the Cosmic Cube (aka the Tesseract) from Hellcat. (A little kid gets his hands on it instead and, of course, uses the Cube to conjure up free ice cream.) James Gunn has been agitating for years for the Thanos Copter to be in the MCU. He finally got his wish.

* The other funny one: When the camera pans down the tunnel into Kid Loki’s headquarters, we see Mjolnir buried in the ground, and right below it is a jar containing a very annoyed frog in a Thor costume. This is either Thor himself — whom Loki cursed into amphibianhood in a memorable Walt Simonson storyline — or another character named Simon Walterston (note the backwards tribute to Walt) who later assumed the tiny mantle.

* Also, in one scene you can spot Yellowjacket’s helmet littering the landscape. This might support the theory that the TVA, the Void, etc., all exist in the Quantum Realm, since that’s where the MCU version of Yellowjacket probably went when his suit shorted out and he was crushed to subatomic size. Or it might be more trolling of the fanbase from the company that had WandaVision fans convinced that Mephisto, the X-Men, and/or Reed Richards would be appearing by the season finale.

* Honestly, I would have watched an entire episode that was just Loki, Mobius, and the others arguing about whether Alligator Loki was actually a Loki, or just a gator who ended up with the crown, presumably after eating a real Loki. The suggestion that the gator might be lying — and that this actually supports, rather than undermines, the case for him being a Loki — was just delightful. And hey, if Throg exists in the MCU now, why not Alligator Loki?

* Finally, the MCU films in general are not exactly known for their visual flair, though a few directors like Taika Waititi and Ryan Coogler have been able to craft distinctive images within the franchise’s usual template. Loki, though, is so often wonderful to look at, and particularly when our heroes are stuck in strange environments like Lamentis or the Void. Director Kate Herron and the VFX team work very well together to create dynamic and weird imagery like Sylvie running from Alioth, or the chaotic Loki battle in the bowling alley. Between this show and WandaVision, it appears the Disney+ corner of the MCU has a bit more room to expand its palette. (Falcon and the Winter Soldier, much less so.)

[emberopolis]

A Brief Look at 🌟 Pop Pantheons 🌟

So I am a big fan of pop culture paganism/magic.  I could write at length about it (and I might eventually) but for now I want to focus on one of the (maybe) biggest aspects of pop paganism: pop pantheons.

A pop pantheon is a collection made of fictional characters, images, or archetypes that you work with like deities or other revered magical beings, or that you use in a sacred way.  A popular example of this is the tarot, where you can make 100 different decks using 100 different subjects and people can still connect to it as a divination tool.

Pop pantheons can be used either on their own or as a gateway into working with ancient deities-- both of which I’ll talk about.

Why would you use a pop pantheon over a ‘real’ pantheon? The answer to that question is very simple: connection.  You have a personal connection to these pop culture figures already, so you can really put your heart into working with them.  When you’re personally invested in something, you connect to it better.  The feelings you have for those things are raw and powerful and can be harnessed in your magic or your daily life.

I’ll use an example from my own practice: Pokémon.  I’ve explained in other posts how much I love Pokémon.  Because I have such a deep connection to Pokémon, I am able to tap into that and use Pokémon trading cards for divination.  I might also pick a Pokémon to embody something for a spell or ritual.  For example, I feel like I need to be more disciplined, but I don’t work with any deities or beings that represent 'discipline’ so I don’t feel like I have a source to call on.  I, personally, don’t feel comfortable calling on the help of deities I don’t work with, so instead I can turn to my special interest, Pokémon, and find something to represent discipline for me.  I could use Lucario as an image of discipline because of its history of being a knight’s companion and intensive training to be able to see and use auras.  I could do a spell where I involve this Pokémon through a trading card or a plush toy or an enamel pin, and I can use that item as my talisman.  Then when I need to call on discipline, I could turn to that item or carry it with me.

Pop pantheons are easily accessible. For some things in pop culture, there is vastly more information about that thing than there is about a specific deity or mythical being.  There might only be a handful of myths for a deity.  However, with pop culture work, you likely have access to the source material for the being you want to work with and can easily consume it.  A great example of this is Aslan from C.S. Lewis’s Chronicles of Narnia.  There are already books dedicated to using Narnia as a religious-adjacent text for your life.

Another example could be Merlin.  Merlin is an archetypal figure with many interpretations that you can consume and build a connection with.  You can read the legends of King Arthur, or you could choose a Merlin-esque being who embodies the same archetype, like Gandalf.  You can read the Middle Earth books to foster that connection to the archetype of the wise wizard or magical mentor.  This stuff is readily available at your fingertips, it’s as simple as going to the library and checking out the books or renting the DVDs.

What you need might be too ‘niche’ for a deity/being or you can’t think of/don’t work with a deity/being that represents what you need. As I mentioned earlier, some of us don’t feel comfortable calling on deities/beings we don’t regularly work with, but we feel we need the help of a supernatural force.  We can call on an archetype or a fictional being that we feel connected to to serve this function.  My example from earlier was how I felt I needed discipline, but I don’t work with any beings that represent or embody that, so I called on a Pokémon for the job.  A big facet of the world of Pokémon is establishing a deep connection with your Pokémon and being able to call on them when you need help, so it felt appropriate to me to use a Pokémon for this task.

Pop pantheons can be more comfortable to work with. This is sort of the same as the previous point, but I’m going to include it anyway.  I’m going to use an example that Molly Roberts used in her video on this subject (which is linked at the end of this post.)  For road opener work, Molly uses Glinda the Good Witch from The Wizard of Oz.  She mentions that many people like to call on/use Ganesha symbolism for road opener work because it falls under the umbrella of things he represents.  However, Molly doesn’t feel comfortable working with a being from a system she doesn’t know enough about, so instead she uses Glinda, who represents the same thing to her but comes from something she does know and understand.  She’s more comfortable with Glinda, so her work flows freely and her magic isn’t blocked up or diminished by uncertainty or discomfort or a feeling that what she is doing is ‘wrong.’

Pop pantheons can be a gateway into working with ‘real’ deities. If you’ve never worked with a deity before and aren’t feeling called to one, but want to start a relationship with one, it can be a bit intimidating to work with one at first, especially if you’re new to paganism and/or witchcraft in general.  You might feel drawn to a pop cultural depiction of a deity, though, and want to interact with that being through the lens of the pop culture ‘version.’  A great example of this is Loki from the Marvel universe.  I’ve heard of several people who came to Loki through an interest in his Marvel counterpart.  I have a friend who works intimately with Loki and the way he appears to her is much the same as Marvel’s Loki.  Is her work with him diminished because he resembles the Marvel character?  Not at all!

Another example is Hades.  Say someone played that game and suddenly felt a strong interest in Dionysus.  They might begin dipping their toes in deity work, and when they do they envision Dionysus the way he appears in the game.  This helps them connect to the ‘true’ Dionysus because they already feel drawn to that vision of him and feel comfortable with it.  They can use Hades Dionysus as their proxy for the ‘real’ Dionysus the god chooses to show his preferred form to that person-- if he ever does at all.  Dionysus might be perfectly happy to be represented as the Hades Dionysus for that practitioner and not change.

🌟 🌟 🌟

This post is getting quite long, so I will stop here.  I hope this feels like a good introduction to pop pantheons.  If you have questions or want me to expand on this subject, you can always send me an ask.

Before you leave, I’d like to recommend three videos to you.  Some of the information I’ve provided in this post comes from these videos, and each expands on the ideas presented here and provides more information.  So if you’re interested in knowing more, I highly recommend watching them:

Kelly-Ann Maddox: Worth with Deities and Other Personified Beings

Jesse Huntenberg: Discovering Gods, Goddesses, and Archetypes

Molly Roberts: Pop Pantheons!

[vegalocity]

...You know what?

Alright i'll play-

You know that was only one version of the myth right? there are in fact LOTS of different versions, in one version Zeus marries them both off because very simply he was tired of the other gods fighting eachother over Aphrodite and basically just said 'if you guys keep doing this i'll put her with the one no one wants'

If you maybe bothered to look at sources for him beyond one or two modern histories that were more concerned in telling popular versions rather than all of them you might have noticed that, hell even in Overly Sarcastic Productions Videos they make it clear that there are often MANY versions of how myths are recorded. And can change depending on the person wiritng them. (like the whole Medusa situation where everyone started telling the Version Ovid straight up invented because he loved rewriting the gods as monsters that toy with the lives of mortals in order to make political commentary)

also i dunno how to tell you this miss, but not being able to take no for an answer was a COMMON theme for the male gods, This is not slander just so you're aware, this is a mythologically accepted fact, Greece had a MAJOR sexism problem back in the day and since gods are themselves invented to explainthe world around them, it was reflected in their gods. so to decry Hephaestus for such behavior and excuse those gods that you personally worship or say that that simply isn't 'Your version' or that those stories in specific are bullshit is a narrative bias that i REALLY hope you grow out of.

And furthermore, Aphrodite was with Ares before she was married to Haphaestus, But Chronologically through the state of grecian stories. not necessarily in the chronology of the myths. Since many of those stories were kinda FRAGMENTARY (i mean hell we don't technically know about the pomegranate situation in full in the story of Hades and Persephone because the ONLY RECORDED SCRIPT OF THE STORY is literally damaged in that area) people speculate. People have always been speculating and giving educated guesses.

But in the Illiad they were a thing, and Hephaestus was married to another yes, but you know what happened before the illiad? that's right baby the Grecian Dark Ages where it's approximated that Aphrodite touched down in greece in the first place where she was adapted from the Phonetian goddess Astarte

(and i mean if you want to bring CHRONOLOGY into this then Adonis would in fact be Aphrodite's true love since he was the adaptation of the Babylonian Goddess Ishtar's husband whom was in fact the source material for Astarte)

But anyway, Aphrodite when she first touched down, as i'm sure you're aware if you're such an aficionado, was a war goddess, worshipped as such in her first island of worship and Sparta, but- Oh hey, that doesn't have greater appeal to the EXTREMELY SEXIST rest of greece huh? then what do you do Athenian Ruler in power that doesn't want those pesky women to get ideas? Simple! You look at her and say 'oh no no she's not a war goddess herself she's uh- She's SLEEPING With a war god! that's right she's with Ares!'

But oh no! that's not deterring people! So what do you do oh Athenian ruler? you go 'wait no guys its BAD that she's sleeping with Ares because she's.... cheating on her husband! with his brother!'

To treat the myths as if they were not written by people with agendas just as any religious text before it is folly at best misleading at worst. Just because they're older than the bible doesn't mean they weren't still carved into the stones by men whom wanted people to see THEIR version of the story before all else.

So we as people in the future with things like understanding of historical significance can then use these stories as bases to interpret what is laid out before us and thus we all are allowed to pick and choose as we please and from there can decide to have takes someone else may or may not agree with

Unless you want to take every story you can find as wholly literal

Because if you do i've got some stories to tell you

Again, this is not slander, this is VERY easily accessible with a simple google search.

if you can ignore certain aspects of the stories that give you yucky feelings about gods you otherwise adore, why can't someone else? what makes you special? why do you get to claim sources and then decry behaviors the very gods you're quoted to worship engage with those exact same ones, if not MORE often than the one you're decrying?

Your takes are no less valid than anyone else's they're just as biased as Ovid changed Medusa's story to make her a victim when originally, she was just another monster

I know Hubris is a common flaw in greek tragedies, but at least have the decency to not make it everyone else's business.

sometimes i wonder why 'modern greek mythology interpretations' tend to look at the Aphrodite's Affair situation and settle on 'it was so girlboss of Aphrodite to cheat on her husband with his literal brother' and make jokes about Hephaestus being 'cucked' or 'an incel' when memes about publicly humiliating cheaters are absolutely widespread on the internet, and in the myth itself Hephaestus basically just does the equivalent of the 'welcome home cheater' on the bedsheets meme, it's VERY weaksauce in comparison to what his mother usually does

then i remember Hephaestus is a disabled man and i realize exactly why.

[gryfon-spanish-werewolf]

Uuh dunno if you would like this prompt : Anna and Elsa as a mythical creatures.

Would love too see what you will write them as ^^

@like-redhead-probably I sat thinking about this ask for a long time, because while I IMMEDIATELY thought of one for Elsa, Anna’s absolutely eluded me. And I know you were probably looking for a story, but I am unable to stop myself from first EXPLAINING my choices xD

I was already thinking about the myth of the Hulder (or huldra if we’re speaking of the creature in general instead of the specific Norwegian myth) for other story-related reasons, and as I did more research, I felt like the Hulder REALLY shared similarities with Elsa.

Generally speaking the huldra is a Scandinavian myth of a pale skinned, blonde or brown haired, attractive young woman who lives in the wilderness, often luring men away with song or dance to be killed or misled, stuck wandering forever. Sometimes she’s connected strongly to water, and instead of making men lost, she drowns them. Sometimes she is described as similar to an elf or fey-like creature, with characteristics related to other Huldufolk (we’ll get to them later) such as living in a parallel world, or a world Underground, and therefore preferring caves or appearing and disappearing suddenly. Sometimes she is depicted as having a hollow back, or a cow’s tail, which she hides out of embarrassment or to conceal her true identity. Which… how cute is that?

Before the 11th century, the myths were focussed more around the Huldufolk, which literally means “Hidden Folk”. There are lots of stories as to why and how the Huldufolk came to exist, but for the purpose of Elsa I think it most appropriate to look at the Christianization of the myths. Why?:

Frozen and Frozen 2 are modern movies made by an American company and Christianity is nigh untanglable with American culture, they take place in ~1840s Norway, F1 has a dedicated place of Christian congregation depicted in said movie, an official royal crowning overseen by a Christian faith leader, and the adaptation of Frozen generally comes from author Hans Christian Anderson and therefore should take his life and society into account, etc.

The Christianized myth says that one day Eve was washing her children (presumably after Cain, Abel, and Seth) in the river, when she heard God approaching. Ashamed that He would see her kids unclean, she hid the half she wasn’t done bathing, and when God asked, “Where are the other children?” Eve claimed that she had all of them present, indicating the clean ones. This gave God pause, but in the end He said, “Then let all that is Hidden, remain Hidden.” The children that Eve lied about became the Huldufolk, unable to live among humans. These people would eventually become characterized as dwarves, elves, fairies, etc., as time and interpretations rolled on, the huldra being just one of many mythical “species”.

So. Who is Elsa? She’s a:

fictional, blonde-haired, blue-eyed, fair-skinned young woman who led thousands of men wlw to wander helplessly into the dark caves and wildlands of social media with a power ballad and a jaw-dropping transformation sequence

Okay I’m joking… mostly…

In fact my interest in choosing the Hulder for Elsa lies purely outside of any romantic or sexual appeal, especially since Elsa as a character exhibits next to 0 romantic or sexual interest across two whole movies and an additional two shorts. Indeed, there’s a reason people headcanon her as either asexual, aromantic, or both! No, the reasons I chose the Hulder are:

Elsa’s name

Her upbringing

Her duty as queen, and

Her general behavior, specifically in regards to Frozen 1, as Frozen 2 Elsa is, at times, an almost completely different character

Elsa’s name was chosen very specifically by the filmmakers because it means “God is my Oath”. Oaths are binding, heavy, and invoke the maker’s or subject’s actions and personhood in the future. In Elsa’s case specifically, it invokes divine witness: perfect for a queen, someone born to rule. A promise to be fair, to uphold, to protect, to lead, to be a dignified and honorable face for the country. And Elsa was so ready to be that… except for the powers of course. Or at least, when they became something other than a magical gift of wonder and joy. When they became dangerous. Then there comes another oath, spoken to powerful creatures of magic, the Trolls, and born from parental fear: “She can learn to control it.”

Binding, heavy, invoking of Elsa’s future. As she grows, Elsa becomes closed off, quiet, hiding in her own home. She still takes her duties seriously, but now that she has been Other’d, taught to hide herself and her curse, she is just as much shadow as person. To young Anna, Elsa must have been almost ghostlike, disappearing right when Anna thought she’d cornered her, only to reappear sometime later down the hall, out of arm’s reach.

God promised Adam and Eve that their children would inherit the earth, even after leaving the Garden of Eden. Then suddenly that changed, due to Eve’s fear and shame of her unwashed children, and some would now inherit Underground, or somewhere else entirely. The lost children of Eve had become Other’d, needing to hide, disappear, and resort to inhuman tactics just to exist. Maybe they’re jealous, maybe they're just tricksters. But it’s not their fault. And it wasn’t Elsa’s either. Another reason they are similar.

Now, it’s not all doom and gloom for the Hulder, or for Elsa. While the Hulder is generally known for her more chaotic and negative attributes - just like our favorite snow queen, there’s a light at the end of the tunnel. There are a few myths that say burning a charcoal fire -instead of a coal or gas one- is most pleasing to the Hulder, that she’ll even watch over it during the night, and wake the sleepers in case something happens. If a traveler leaves supplies behind with a note or offering for the Hulder, they will travel safely. In fact, some people leave caches for her, as though to cater to specific requests. Coming across the Hulder by chance can have a multitude of outcomes, but if an astute observer spots her cow tail and mentions it, she may become shy and run away. Don’t mention the empty back though, that’s almost certain death.

Basically my point is… trade out the word “traveler” for the name “Anna” and we can draw all the similarities we want. Anna did all of those things, in a way. Anna gave Elsa a little gift of their favorite snowman every Christmas. Anna knocked on Elsa’s door and spoke to her, treated her kindly despite the distance between them, literal and metaphorical. It’s not hard to imagine that Anna left little notes around the castle, hoping Elsa would find them, read them, and know that Anna still loved her, still missed her. And, well, hopefully Anna wasn’t setting any fires and falling asleep next to them - but Anna always kept a light on for Elsa, in her heart. And it flickered and wavered sometimes, but it was a strong fire most days. And we know Elsa was always drawn to it, drawn to Anna because she loved her right back. Loved her first, even. And because it was a warmth that pleased Elsa, she tended it, quietly, carefully, warmly. Like putting a blanket over an Anna that had fallen asleep in the painting room, refusing that slice of chocolate cake so Anna could have two desserts, and listening, for hours and hours, days and days, for the sound of Anna’s glorious bonfire-like soul outside her bedroom door. Even when her secret was revealed, Elsa believed that the best way to protect Anna’s life, her flame, was to distance herself, running to a secret, special place all her own - much like the Hulder might run away back to the Underground.

And this last part’s just me, but I’d like to think that if the Hulder was treated kindly, respected, and given dignity, maybe it wouldn’t be so bad if someone came across her accidentally. That instead of being instantly drowned, or the Hulder becoming sheepish and attempting to run, it would feel recognized. It could be called by name. And instead of feeling the need to hide it’s Otherness, it could be treated as part of it, and cared for just the same. I don’t even need to be subtle here: Anna called Elsa by Name, really saw her, and reframed her darkness into light. Anna hasn’t fought God yet, but she did walk through hell and back for a sister that everyone else saw as a threat, monster, and sorcerer. A category 9 Other. Too bad for them, Anna’s got a Category 10 heart.

Speaking of. We finally got to Anna.

Anna was difficult to pin down because to me, Anna is so very, very human. That’s what makes her special! Yes, yes, you could throw any mythical creature at Anna and the fun part would be trying to make it work within her personality and characterization BUT since the question was Anna AS a mythical creature, that changes the game! The word ‘creature’ itself tends to conjure something distinctly INhuman. So I…. tried, and cheated maybe a little. Because I picked for Anna the Norse Valkyrie.

Most people know what Valkyries are so this one takes significantly less explaining. Valkyries are women that are warriors, shieldmaidens, and the hands of Odin, and they choose who lives and who dies during battle. Their chosen dead ride with them to Valhalla, while those they choose to live are usually granted honors in life. There are the darker sides of Valkyries that paint them as blood hungry maidens waiting on the sidelines before a war, singing the names of who will die with glee… but generally speaking the version of Valkyries that most people know and admire today are accurate! And thank goodness because attempting to depict Anna the other way would probably give me an ulcer.

Anna, much like the Valkyries, is a woman of valor and strength, who is perceptive, guides others, sees into people’s hearts and reveals their goodness. Valkyries are also warriors of prowess themselves, and Anna in Frozen 2 with that ice sword? We all know she was ready to use that for real. She also exemplifies traits that Valkyries both look for and have! Bravery in the face of danger: hello Marshmallow, Elsa’s own blizzard, Hans’ lethal sword strike, LIVING MOUNTAINS, and a damn collapsing.... dam. She also defends those who cannot do it themselves: saying publicly that, “My sister is not a monster… she was scared, she didn’t mean any of this,” even if that cast suspicion or doubt on herself, and the crown, as a whole. Anna knew and believed in Elsa, despite all the years and heartbreak and anger. Despite the impossible magic that literally just happened before her very eyes. Belief in character, despite appearances. And once they were reunited, Anna made every effort to stay by Elsa’s side because she STILL had that faith in her. Anna’s name means “Grace” or “of Grace”, and damn if she didn’t extend that to the person others found most unworthy, even to Elsa herself. Valkyries see what others don’t, and their decisions are final.

[Deep breath] SO! You asked for Anna and Elsa as mythical creatures. You got… a small academic paper, by social media standards xD. I intend to write a little piece about a Valkyrie who encounters the Hulder on the edges of a battlefield and… realizes she never made a choice about this particular woman. And wonders why she can’t ;). BUT I didn’t wanna leave you hanging any longer. Hope you like my choices!

Oh also, nobody asked, but Kristoff is a werebear. No research required

[maryroyale]

The lovely @curiouselfqueen tagged me on this one. (Thank you! I love these things.)

Uh. I have *feelings* about these? I have no idea why I feel so strongly, but... uh... there you go.

deep violet or blood red? Both? Not at the same time, but I love both. Purple and red are both power colors, but they convey very different things. Old ladies are allowed to wear both because they have the power to pull it off.

sunshine or moonlight? Oof. My default answer is moonlight? Some of the medication I’m on makes my eyes super-sensitive to sunlight. I’m like a damn vampire. Even on cloudy days I need sunglasses. I like seeing the sunlight through the trees when I’m in the woods? It’s pretty and far less painful.

Don’t get me wrong—I do love the moonlight. It’s so beautiful. Winter moonlight and summer moonlight are gorgeous.

80s music or 90s music? How dare you! Don’t speak to me or my 874 music genres ever again. Seriously though, I really love music. I listen to a wide variety of genres and some artists span decades. I love new wave and synthpop, but I also love pop punk and the swing revival. I can’t say one decade is better than the other.

orchids or dahlias? I like to garden, and from a gardening standpoint it’s dahlias all the way. Orchids are a wildly diverse species (over 25,000 types), but the pretty, delicate orchids they sell in stores are not hardy and require a lot of intensive, specific support. They’ll die if you plant them outside where I live. And the garden outside is what makes me happy and brings me joy.

garnet or ruby? These are such different stones. It’s almost like asking if I like chocolate milk or cola. Yes, they are both brown and you can drink them—but they’re really not similar.

Garnet— it’s semi-precious, plentiful, in use since antiquity. A decent go-to stone for jewelry. Like any gemstone, the color is determined by the type of impurities, so garnet can be almost any color. Blue garnets are the rarest. The Mohs scale for garnet depends on those same impurities because some can actually strengthen the hardness of the stone. Generally 6 to 7.5 on the Mohs scale.

I like garnets. Depending on the talent of the jeweler you can get lovely pieces set in silver that won’t cost an arm, a leg, and your soul. It was also my mother’s birthstone, so there’s that.

Ruby— Occasionally confused with spinels, rubies are pieces of corundum that contain the impurity chromium. Corundum that contains the impurities iron, titanium, vanadium, or magnesium are usually blue and referred to as sapphires. (Pink sapphires are actually poor quality rubies that the jewelry industry decided to rebrand to dupe the public. Similar to “chocolate diamonds” and other attempts to sell gems that don’t meet the criteria for their type.)

Corundum is a 9 on the Mohs scale. They highly sought after, have a rich mythos surrounding them, and feature prominently in history.

It seems like a lot of hype to me? They’re sturdy pieces of jewelry, not prone to breakage, but they ought to be for the price you pay. They’re pretty, I’ll grant you that.

moths or butterflies? Well, one is nocturnal and one is diurnal. One is fuzzy and stocky and one is smooth and slender. One is drab and one is brightly colored. I feel like I should picks moths on principle. I love Luna Moths. But butterflies are so very, very pretty. Moths I guess?

Aphrodite or Athena? Okay... so, um, here’s where it’s going to get heated. I apologize. I am *specifically* addressing how Athena and Aphrodite were worshipped/treated in Greek myths. I’m not looking at proto versions from Minoa, Mycenae, or Phoenicia. I’m also not looking at later syncretizations with other cultures e.g. Rome. It is the Greek myths that matter here because those are the myths and attitudes that were directly incorporated into Western culture. We’ve learned a lot about their origins, but *those* myths and attitudes were *not* incorporated into mainstream Western culture.

Athena was either born from Zeus’ head or his thigh. Either she has no mother—Zeus is her only parent—or Zeus swallowed her mother Metis (wisdom, prudence, counsel). This is critically important. In Athenian law, the father was the only legal parent. Mothers had no legal rights to their children at all. Athena is a very real symbol of that.

She is often portrayed as the goddess of wisdom, handicraft, and war. She is a goddess of industry (wine and olive oil). The thing we must ask is what kind of wisdom? What kind of war?

Plato argues this in Cratylus— that Athena’s wisdom could be a number of things from divine knowledge to moral intelligence. I think it’s important that Plato, one of Greece’s most celebrated philosophers, and more important one of the philosophers most embraced by Western Culture praised this choice of “moral intelligence.” [see Plato’s stance on poets in The Republic.]

Athena’s war is not the war of Ares, which is tied to passion and emotion. Ares represents the brutal aspects of war where humanity gives way to cruelty and inhumanity. Athena’s warfare is rational and “just.” Athena makes war on behalf of the city-state. Athena makes war to defend the government.

Athena’s purpose in myth and in poetry and song is to support the government. She is the shield of the king. She upholds and enforces the status quo. Look at her role in the Orestes trilogy. She supplants the Erinyes [the furies originally hunted and tormented ppl who committed matricide]. She decides that Iphigenia’s murder didn’t matter. Clytemnestra (Iphigenia’s mother) didn’t have the right to revenge for her daughter. Orestes was *justified* in murdering his mother because she killed his parent, his father.

Aphrodite also has a motherless birth, but it’s more incidental and spontaneous. Kronos cuts off his father Uranus’ genitals ( like you do ) and tosses them into the sea. Aphrodite is born from the sea foam. There’s a different feel to Aphrodite’s myth. An independence almost. Yes, a male god was involved because it’s a Greek requirement for any child, but it’s in such an incidental way. There was no purpose or intent on Uranus’ part. He had no control over her birth.

Aphrodite is an incredibly independent goddess. She owns her own sexuality and has autonomy over her own body. She is often referred to as the wife of Hephaestus, but in both the Iliad and Hesiod’s Theogony, Hephaestus has wives with different names and Aphrodite is unmarried.

A goddess with this kind of freedom and power in her own right—not tied to a husband or male family member (sorry Artemis!)— is almost unheard of. It makes Aphrodite unique and interesting.

TLDR: I prefer Aphrodite.

grapefruit or pomegranate? Pomegranate. For so many reasons, not the least of which is it’s associations with death and fertility. It’s a lovely contrast and a reminder that death brings forth life e.g. Nurse logs.

angel’s halo or devil’s horns? Oof. This is another rant, guys. Horns as a symbol of divine power are used throughout history and throughout the Indo-European culture. From Egyptian gods like Amun and Isis to Hindu gods like Śiva to Canaanite gods like El and Yahweh, horns have been used to show their power and might. Moses has most famously been depicted with horns due to murky/difficult translations of the Hebrew verb keren/qaran, which can mean BOTH “to send forth beams/rays” and “to be horned”.

There was a concerted effort to associate horns with the devil/evil/bad. Horns are also used to imply fertility/abundance, and that may have played into the perception of horns as devilish. Moses with horns was used as a jumping off point to demonize Jewish people during the Medieval period in a variety of European countries and cultures.

Halos, too, have been used across history and cultures as a symbol of divine power. Sumerian literature talks about a bright emanation that appears around gods and heroes. Chinese and Japanese Buddhist art shows Buddhist saints with halos.

I choose horns because I choose to reclaim that divine power. I reject the idea that either symbol is wholly good or wholly evil. I reject the idea that sexuality by itself is evil/wrong.

sirens or banshees? Both!!! I must admit a partiality to Sirens that is based wholly on my preference for the sea/ocean.

lorde or florence + the machine? Both!!! I love both groups and I’ve listened to their albums so many times. I will admit that I end up listening to Lorde more often when writing.

the birth of venus or the starry night? Huh. I’m going to assume that you mean the painting by Boticelli, even though there’s more than one Birth of Venus.

Honestly, Venus Anadyomene (Venus rising from the sea) is my favorite. It’s her origin myth and anyone could paint it, draw it, write about it, and put their own spin on it. It is malleable because it is myth. It lives on and changes and grows with us. Boticelli’s version is particularly lovely.

Starry Night (1889) belongs to VanGogh. No one can really recreate it without copying his style or his vision. Verschuier’s The Great Comet of 1680 Over Rotterdam could never really be confused with Starry Night. Not even Munch’s Starry Night (1893) could be confused for VanGogh. The two paintings are wildly different in subject matter despite the fact that their subject is the night sky.

I doubt any modern painter would dare. O’Keefe called hers Starlight Night, and I can only guess that others would follow that naming pattern of not quite using the title Starry Night.

Boy, I bet @curiouselfqueen is regretting tagging me now... sorry?

[doomonfilm]

Review : Candyman (2021)

Nearly all 1980s children like myself had a morbid obsession with ghost stories and urban legends, with much of our free time spent daring one another to do silly things meant to scare the daylights out of one another.  For as long as I could remember these events, I remember the presence of Bloody Mary and the ominous way that she is beckoned by repeating her name while looking in a mirror.  Imagine my surprise when 1992 rolled around, and this very familiar Bloody Mary construct was reskinned into the iconic Candyman film, the tale of a former mob justice victim turned Cabrini Green boogieman.  After three films of varying success, many people thought that was it for Candyman, but along came Jordan Peele and his revelatory reveal as a master horror facilitator we’ve not seen the likes of since Rod Serling.  With the announcement that he was helping to produce a Nia DaCosta directed sequel to the first film, the anticipation was high, and even though it was delayed by COVID-19, the film recently found a release to much critical acclaim and box office success.

The immediate and permeating strength of the 2021 Candyman film is the way that it continues the ruminations on the power of myth.  The original Candyman film used its titular character as a thinly veiled piece of symbolism for gentrification, particularly in the way that White exterior curiosity and interest in the “hood” eventually drives the original inhabitants (read : Black people) out of the hood.  DaCosta updates this approach by flipping the ideas on their head, particularly in the way that the forgotten Candyman myth hangs around in the air of North Chicago as a sordid and sobering reminder of what once stood there, and the capacity for poverty, crime and despair to invade the area again.  Positioning Anthony McCoy as an artist seeking inspiration perfectly opens up the gateway to the shocking revelations we are presented with, bringing the Candyman lore full circle in a way that is satisfying to both those familiar and unfamiliar with the original Candyman film.  Using the unreliable narrator approach to retell the Helen Lyles story was a very nice touch, especially for those that know the way the events unfolded.

Like much of the media originated from or focused on the Black experience in the modern day, 2021 Candyman takes a long and hard look at generational trauma.  Placing us in the familiar location of the former Cabrini Green give us an air of familiarity for certain elements within the film, but despite how much the area has changed, the impact from the horrors that took place prior to the economical shift clearly resonate even if Candyman himself is a distant memory to the people.  Much like the N-word (which I will choose not to use, as per usual), Candyman becomes a tool that can be reclaimed, and rather than embraced, it can be wielded against those that created it by the ones it was intended to hurt.  Even the figure of Candyman goes through his own form of generational trauma as different individuals that succumb to tragedy all step into their own version of the Candyman mantle, up to and including Anthony McCoy (who has his own direct generational ties that I will not spoil).  Even the generational trauma subtext, which is presented through the story of Brianna Cartwright and her sorrowful relationship with her tortured artist father, hits in a way that can be felt and understood by everyone, and even more so by those that have lost loved ones that chose to take their own lives.

While there was symbolism present in the previous film, the dials are ramped up to eleven in this release, with the mirror and bee symbolism in particular working pitch perfectly.  From the opening titles we are made aware of the presence of mirrors within the film, and for those keen enough to keep one eye on the main action and another on any mirrors that present themselves, you are treated to a feast of visual trickery.  While bees were used as a way to put viewers off in the original film, like some sort of sick dig for sympathy by way of shock value, bees in the DaCosta film work as a harbinger of doom, specifically for Anthony McCoy, while also standing as a symbol for how deep the core connection is between McCoy and the Candyman lineage.  Chicago is always the uncredited star of any film it is in, and DaCosta beautifully covers all areas of the city while including segue cutaways where we float through the various famous streets of Chicago from the perspective of a corpse in a casket.  Speaking of perspective, it is used in masterful ways throughout the course of the film, with the Anthony McCoy sequence in Finley Stephens‘ hallway standing as the cherry on top of the perspective sundae.

We need to go ahead and give Yahya Abdul-Mateen II his flowers while he can smell them, because this man may be the most capable actor currently working in terms of effortlessly and casually showing the full spectrum of human emotion in his performances, all the while radiating off of the screen like the kind of guy you’d love to have a beer with, and the kind of friend you care deeply for when they are falling to pieces.  Teyonah Parris counters this by bringing a deeply grounded and protective energy born of trauma to her performance, carrying and conveying deep hurt in very subtle ways that bloom as we pick up with her journey.  Colman Domingo puts a new and updated twist on the familiar harbinger role, shedding the initial terror and uneasiness approach and instead opting for the wise observer approach, hooking both Anthon McCoy and us as viewers and dragging us right up to the point of payoff.  Nathan Stewart-Jarrett takes on the dual task of bringing levity to the proceedings and serving as the universal audience surrogate in terms of a voice of reason, with Kyle Kaminsky adding some very subtle additional laughs in tandem.  The physicality and pain that Michael Hargrove is able to communicate in his Candyman performance stands in stark contrast to the regal Tony Todd approach, which in many ways makes his unfortunate ghost characterization more of a psychological terror than a danger.  Vanessa Williams and Virginia Madsen reprise their original roles, while Rebecca Spence, Brian King, Cari Clemons-Hopkins and many more lend their talents to the cast. 

In all seriousness and sincerity, I love this 2021 take on Candyman even more than I expected to going in.  I’m not ready to place my bets yet, but I’m slowly working on a theory about the Candymen in this film, and specifically who is “responsible” for what actions.  I love films that I instantly want to own after seeing it in the theater, and Candyman is 100% one of those films... lucky for all of us, we should be seeing this one hitting the streaming services within 45 days or so, though I am likely to spend money on seeing this in a theater again prior to that time.

[star-maiden]

Oracle of December Theme: What needs to be laid to rest? What are you ready to release from your life?

Hello and Happy December! This month, I am calling in some guidance from Spirit about what you need to let go of. In the northern hemisphere we are in the middle of the coldest and darkest days of winter. For me, this always feels like a good time to withdraw, rest and recover. It is a powerful time of releasing the old in order to make way for the things that will be brought into our lives in the coming of the new year. This sense of withdrawal and rest has always felt sacred to me. I hope this reading can serve you, and assist you to let go of the things that have not been supporting you. I’d also like to mention that this month’s oracle is very much focused on spirituality. I usually try to keep my readings as general as possible, but the messages that were coming through about personal paths and magical practices were very strong. If you are a witch, a wiccan, a pagan or in any way a practitioner of alternative spirituality, then this reading is dedicated to you.  

As with all of my readings for the collective, these messages are meant for a wide range of people, life paths and situations. It is general outlook advice. As such, you may find that not everything resonates with you completely, and that is ok. Please take only what resonates and leave the rest. You will also want to check your sun, moon and rising signs for the message or messages that are meant for you. I sincerely hope that these messages will serve your highest and greatest good, and assist you in making wise, informed decisions. May you be safe and supported at all times!

♈ - Aries: The Coyote - In many myths and legends, coyotes represent deception and trickery. The coyote in this deck is no different. This card speaks of sacred deception, or the idea that what we think we want may not always be for our greatest good. This oracle is coming to you this month to encourage you to gaze deeply at your desires, goals and passions. What purposes do they serve for you? Are they nourishing, or are they more superficial? If you find that something in your life is rooted in unhealthy ambition or that you are going through the motions of something purely for the aesthetic, consider how this thing or idea is showing up in your life. Something or someone might be masquerading as spiritually profound or meaningful, but is this really true? This month, you are encouraged to look at your life through the eyes of the coyote. What parts of your life are true, and what parts are illusionary? You may find more happiness if you let go of the parts of your life that do not hold any significance for you.

♉ - Taurus:  The Jaguar - The jaguar knows how to move swiftly and silently through the jungle. She is a hunter; a walker of unseen realms. She is not afraid to tread where others fear to go because she trusts in her own ability to navigate the unknown. When the jaguar shows up in our lives, it is a sure sign that you are ready to let go of fear. If there has been something in your life that has been holding you back or keeping you trapped in cycles of fear and anxiety, then this card encourages you to release it. The jaguar calls you to explore and to step outside of your comfort zone. Trust in your natural ability to discern what feels right and true for you, and if something doesn’t feel in resonance with how you envision your life to be, then don’t be afraid to leave it behind. The jaguar also moves in the realm of the shadow, death and transformation, so learning to move beyond what holds you back may feel quite daunting at first. That’s ok. Let go anyway. Know that your own discernment is strong. Rely on this skill, and call for an end to any toxicity or negative patterns.

♊ - Gemini: The Crow - For many cultures around the world, crows are messengers. Sometimes Bringers of great insights, and other times they appear to carry omens or warnings. In this oracle, the crow symbolizes truth in all its forms. It encourages you to seek truth in your life as much as possible. How you speak, the way you act and the thoughts you hold can all be great conveyors of truth if we allow it. Our words, both in thought and when spoken out loud, have the power to make us co-creators of our world. In  many ways, how we communicate with ourselves and others has a direct impact on our own experience. This card encourages you to examine that? What un-truths have you been telling yourself? Others? Is there any resistance to a particular truth that you or others in your life have trouble seeing? This month, strive to uncover the truth. Dismantle any illusions or lies in your life, and see what you can make of it. It is only in absolute truth that we can come to know ourselves fully.

♋ - Cancer: The Beloved - This is the card of relationships and of connection. It speaks of the idea of a collective consciousness, and asks us to recognize the Divine Spirit in others, just as we recognize it in ourselves. As a tool for self-growth, this card reminds us that what we see in others might only be one perception, or one facet of a personality. To strive to create connection with others is both human and divine at the same time, but we must take care to remember that sometimes what we see and experience might be influenced by the projections and expectations that we have placed upon someone. What this means is that we can only ever know one version of a story if we remain stuck in our own negative patterns. If there have been difficulties in a relationship in your life, then this card asks you to examine why. What expectations or perceptions have you placed on the relationship? What perceptions and expectations have been placed on you? How can you uncover the truth, and have an honest conversation with this person that you care about? This month, let go of perspectives and see what truths you can find. Don’t be afraid to have difficult conversations, but also know that you can choose to cut anything away from your life if the truths you find do not feel supportive for you.

♌ - Leo: The Serpent - Snakes have a reputation for being tricky, manipulative or dangerous. In many popular media, snakes invoke fear and revulsion. This deck takes a different approach of what the snake is, and how she shows up in our lives. At the core of her essence, the snake represents the divine life force of the earth. The snake who sheds her skin to make room for new growth is reminiscent of the cycles of death and rebirth in nature. We can use the snake as a metaphor for change and transformation in our own lives. This card doesn’t carry any specific messages about what needs to be let go, but rather it is confirmation that if you have been experiencing change or transformation in your life, then it is for the better. Embrace change. Don’t be afraid to let go of your old self because some shedding of the past is needed to make room for your own personal growth and healing. Change can definitely be uncomfortable at times, especially if we are resistant to it. Consider what changes have been taking place in your life? What have you gained? What new opportunities await you? If we can learn to flow through the change with grace and ease, we will find that change is not always so disastrous.

♍ - Virgo: The Rattle - In this deck, the rattle represents spirituality and the way in which we interact with the divine. In many ways, this card is about traditions and customs in spirituality. A question to ponder this month is this: What tools do you use in your spiritual practice? In your daily life? What purpose do they serve? When we seek to experience a conscious partnership with the divine, then we are stepping into our own power as spiritual beings. One popular idea is that you may have seen floating around the internet is that we are spiritual beings having a human experience. This card carries this idea, and takes it a step further. If there is something in your life that you are trying to create or force, it is likely that it is already there. Your own expectations of what you should see or experience may have clouded your perception of what is already available to you. This month, let go of practices or beliefs that limit you. Don’t try to force anything. Instead, pause. Take a breath. Notice what is already around you. Notice what you do or do not need, and don’t take things that aren’t yours simply for the sake of having them or because someone else said you need them. A spiritual path is deeply personal. It’s ok if it doesn’t reflect every single aesthetic seen on social media. Create a practice that is meaningful for you.

♎ - Libra: The Corn - On a purely physical level, corn is a source of food and a source of income for the people who cultivate it. On a symbolic level, corn symbolizes abundance and the harvest. What have you been cultivating in your life? What goals or dreams have you been working on? This may be in reference to things you have already set in motion, or these aspirations may still be something that you are thinking about. Whatever it is, it is important that you consider how you will get there. In order to attain whatever it is that you are trying to reach, be mindful of how you do it. Let go of feelings of doubt or hesitancy, but keep your awareness of how your actions influence results. Let go of unrealistic expectations. You can manifest anything your heart desires, but you have to put in the work in order to get there. In order to receive something, you have to cultivate a relationship with it. Throwing intentions into the wind and hoping a nice pile of money will drop out of the sky, and  onto your doorstep isn’t the best way to go about calling abundance into your life. This month, set your sights high, but be sure to bring in a healthy measure of practicality. What must be done to achieve your goal? What needs to fall into place?

♏ - Scorpio: The Arrow - This card reminds us to strive for alignment between what we say and do, and how we feel. At this time, you may find yourself on a path that doesn’t fit well with what you truly believe or desire. It may seem lovely to the casual observer, but is this path truly taking you where you want to go? Any time we are putting energy and effort into something, it is wise to ask ourselves why. What is the end result we are hoping for? If we have struggled along the path, is the effort worth it? Sometimes, effort and energy directed toward overcoming a hardship is time well spent. In these kinds of situations, we will know in our hearts that what we are working toward is important and meaningful. But this isn’t always the case. If you notice that something in your life has been difficult or disruptive for you, this card is asking you to evaluate it. How is your life enriched by this situation? How is it supporting you? Take some time to consider the path that you are on, and the trajectory of your arrow. Is the thing you are aiming at really what you hope to achieve?

♐ - Sagittarius: The Drum - The rhythm of the drum represents the heartbeat and the life energy of the universe. This oracle is encouraging you to find your own rhythm. Don’t be afraid to move at a different pace than those around you. It’s ok if their drum doesn’t quite match up to yours. Forge ahead. Create your own way. Let the rhythm of your life take you where you are meant to be. Now is not the time to fight against the current. If there is something that is meant for you, it will find its way to you. Trust the process. Relax into the journey and see what you can discover about yourself along the way.

♑ - Capricorn:  The Journey - This is a card about personal transformation through the act of stepping outside of what is known or comfortable. It may be a literal journey, or it may be a more metaphorical journey that is found in an experience. This card is cautioning you not to jump in too soon. The allure of wanting to explore, to dive in and to learn all there is to learn about the path you are on may be quite strong right now, but the timing might not be the best. Before we can effectively journey into the unknown, there are certain questions that must be answered. What are you hoping to find in this journey? What truths are you seeking? How will you get there? What will you do and who will you be after the journey is done, and the transformation complete? If you have recently found yourself curious about a new path or spiritual practice, then this card is asking you to do a little self-reflection before embarking. The true power of a journey is often the experience itself, but that does not mean that the destination does not matter. Make sure you have a solid plan and plenty of resources before committing to anything.

♒ - Aquarius: The Blade - This card represents the powers and energies of the mind. It speaks of discernment, and our ability to choose what we allow into our lives. This month, you are encouraged to take great care with what you hold onto and who you allow into your life. This card also speaks of action. How do your actions inform your experience? Is there something that you are doing or have done that has created difficulties for you in the past? If so, then this is good news! As the wielder of the blade, you have complete power to adjust any actions that do not bring about the desired results. If you have recently found yourself acting in anger or hurt, then this card is asking you to recognize the difference between response and reaction. When we are in a state of reaction, we are unconsciously acting against someone or something in our lives that made us uncomfortable. While this isn’t necessarily going to always be a negative thing (think of a surprise meeting with a bear in a forest and the fight or flight response), reacting may begin to create toxic patterns in our lives if we do not examine them carefully. This month, consider how you react to situations and people in your life. Are these conscious responses, or unconscious reactions? If the latter, examine why these reactions are showing up for you. You may want to do a cord cutting ritual if you find any lingering emotions that are not serving you right now.

♓ - Pisces: The Hummingbird - The hummingbird represents gentleness, both with ourselves and others. However, to be gentle does not mean that we are permissive or easily taken advantage of. In fact, hummingbirds can be fiercely territorial. This card also speaks of boundaries, and maintaining a strong sense of self. How can you be kind to yourself and others while still maintaining your boundaries? Sometimes, our perceptions of what it means to be kind and helpful can overshadow our own personal sense of safety or well being. We may find ourselves saying yes to things that are not good for us, or that take up too much of our time simply because we worry that others will think less of us if we say no. This inability to draw and maintain clear boundaries with others can lead to cycles of resentment. There is resentment on our side because we begin to feel taken advantage of. If we then choose to say “no” after cycles and cycles of the same permissive behavior, then others will come to resent us for no longer wanting to engage in something that they have become used to. This cycle can be quite vicious if we allow ourselves to remain there. If there is something in your life that you don’t like, but have a hard time saying “no” to, then this card is asking you to let go of the beliefs and worries that have been keeping you compliant. It’s ok to affirm your boundaries and inform others that you expect them to be respected. You won’t be able to escape the cycle if you don’t tell others what you need.

[keyofjetwolf]

@cello-moon submitted:

SO! Submitting as this is long. You certainly don’t need to publish it if you don’t want to!

Tipsy Sumerian/Akkadian Mythology 101 as relevant to Camilla.

Our Relevant Mythological Cast

The Dean - Inanna later known as Ishtar, the Goddess of Love, War, and the Sky

The Death Goddess - Ereshkigal, Queen of Kur, sometimes called Irkalla/Irgal (depending on the translator), the land of the dead

These two are sisters, possibly twins depending on the translation.

(also named dropped are 2 of the 4 members of the Silas Board of Governors - Enki, Patron of Eridu, God of Knowledge, Mischief, and Seawater who is the sentience behind the Library originally and the Owl Lady whom Laf calls as Ukuku, the prophetess of Eridu.)

So mythology backstory as paraphrased from memory (and let me preface this with, scholars argue which of these myths happened first because they both reference the other at some points as if the other one happened first.)

Epic of Gilgamesh - King Gilgamesh (the main character of the Epic) is the 5th King of Uruk - the city Inanna is patron of - and he’s kind-of an arrogant bag of dicks (example: he’s credited with starting the practice of prima nocta). Inanna decides she wants to take Gilgamesh as her lover and consort and refuses to take no for an answer when he turns her down. Specifically, he mentions that she got her husband trapped in the underworld, has generally mistreated many of her previous lovers and he wants no part of her lack of … non-sexual care for her lovers. She goes to some of the higher ranking gods in the Sumerian hierarchy and basically throws a temper tantrum demanding that they hand Gugalanna, the Bull of Heaven, over to her to best Gilgamesh in combat and make him agree to her demands. If they won’t hand Gugalanna over for her to use, she threatens to tear down the gates to the underworld and let loose the dead to devour the living.

One problem here? Gugalanna is Ereshkigal’s husband.

Another problem here? Gilgamesh and Enkidu, his Best Friend/Lover (depending on the interpretation/translation) kill Gugalanna and Enkidu decides to desecrate the body by tearing off the bull’s right thigh and throwing it at Inanna’s head.

Descent of Inanna - there are 2 majorly different version of this poem - the Sumerian one and the Akkadian one.

Sumerian - Inanna decides she’s going to visit her sister, Ereshkigal to attend the funeral rites for her dearly departed brother-in-law, you know, the one Inanna got killed in the Epic of Gilgamesh. This pisses Ereshkigal off so she orders the 7 gates of Kur bared shut and sends her gatekeeper to only allow Inanna through each gate after something is sacrificed/removed. St the first gate, it’s her scepter of power, further gates are jewelry, armor, clothing, ect (all standing for some mastery or strength) and at the last gate she must give up her Divinity to enter Ereshkigal’s throne room - naked and moral. Ereshkigal screams at her, kills her, and chains and mounts her body on a meat hook in her throne room for all the dead to see.

Three days later, Inanna’s handmaiden goes to the other gods of the Sumerian hierarchy asking for help for her mistress. Only Enki agrees to help - sending two divine spirits made from the dirt under his fingernails to help. They retrieve Inanna’s corpse and one gives her their life and the other their divinity to restore Inanna to her original state. Ereshkigal demands a replacement for the no-longer-in-Kur Inanna and, through a series of not relevant to Carmilla events, Inanna’s husband Dumzuid is trapped in Kur forever.

Akkadian - Inanna decides to conquer the underworld for no stated reason other than perhaps shits and giggles and encounters the same 7 gates where she must remove her the same clothing, jewelry, makeup, and divinity. In a rage, when Inanna reaches the throne room, she tackles Ereshkigal and they engage in combat where Inanna loses, is imprisoned in her mortal flesh, and inflicted with 60 diseases. While Inanna is being held in the underworld because she is a goddess of love, no sex can happen on Earth. It takes 3 days for the other gods realize this, come together, and ask Ereshkigal to give Inanna the water of life and restore her to her original state.

Plus, there’s a whole lot of blink (or be unfamiliar with this mythology) and you’ll miss it foreshadowing and namedropping happening even as far back as season 1 indicating that the Sumerian language may be important/relevant, since it just kept popping up in various ways. I’d be happy to point out some of them to you, but I remember from the SU Freezer Friendship Bracelet Shenanigans from ages past that you usually prefer to notice or choose not to notice them yourself.

Hopefully this makes somewhat sense and you can see where the Carmilla authors took inspiration, pulled themes and such, and how it’s similar to what they did in Season 1 with the Sheridan Le Fanu Carmilla novel being a close, but not perfectly accurate record of what happened in the show’s past and what is happening in that season.

(AND HEY! Carmilla doesn’t have to be over unless you want it to! There’s still the movie, if you’re up for it!)

and:

I FORGOT TO INCLUDE THIS PARAGRAPH IN THE SUMERIAN SUMMARY! OH GOSH! THE REASON INANNA'S HUSBAND IS PICKED AS THE ONE TO GET STUCK IN THE UNDERWORLD IS BECAUSE HE WAS THE ONLY ONE NOT WEARING MOURNING CLOTHING/MOURNING FOR INANNA. HE WAS JUST SWANNING AROUND IN HIS DIVINE FINERY WHILE SHE WAS TEMP DEAD. SO REGARDLESS OF IF IT WAS GILGAMESH OR HER HUSBAND WHO WAS MEANT TO BE HER BELOVED RAISED BY THE PORTAL, NEITHER OF THEM WOULD BE HAPPY TO SEE HER. YOU WERE RIGHT ABOUT DUDE LEAVING HER ON READ.

I need you to know how delighted your conclusion made me. MY SHITPOST TIME WAS WELL-SPENT

All of this was super fascinating, thank you for writing it up! I still can’t stop laughing at the particular Venn diagram for all this, it’s amazing and a full 60% of the charm of the whole thing, I love it. If you’re still moved to do so, please feel free to send me the specific bits you mention in S1!

(I’ll contact you privately on the movie!)

[reblogthiscrapkay]

Persephone in “Genealogy of the Pagan Gods″ by Giovanni Boccaccio

Let me tell you a story about how I’m a witch.

So over the last week, I had been living at my best friend’s house because the power went out at my house. One day after watching a documentary about rare booksellers, we went outside to take a walk around and discuss it and there was a package on his deck. He opened it up and it was a book he had ordered by an ancestor of his, a famous Italian author (arguably the second most famous Italian author? he’s definitely been getting some recent press as his most famous work is about a plague). My friend is trying to get translated copies of every book written by him. Because my friend knows about my interest in mythology, he immediately handed me the book and I opened it up to a random page to see this header:

I showed him what I had done and my friend was like, “Well, she’s calling to you.”

So let’s talk about my girl Persephone (or Proserpina in this case) via her mom Demeter (Ceres in this case).

There is so much interesting detail here!

First of all we have Demeter lighting torches. Hecate is usually the one portrayed with torches because of her nature as a crossroads goddess but I’ve also seen a lot of ancient art (especially in Eleusis) of Persephone with torches too. Never Demeter.

The idea of Demeter confronting Hades (how? was he above or she below?) is not one I’ve really seen and the idea that she ate poppy seeds actually made me really excited. The poppy is one of the things associated with Demeter, and this is the first time I’ve seen it included as an element of this myth.

Also, I have to laugh at “Pluto’s pleasure garden.” Because I’m a child.

Demeter making Trip immortal seems to me to be a confusing mistake or possibly Boccaccio trying to make the myth make more sense. In the Hymn, it’s Demophon, not Trip, who she tries to make immortal. Since Trip is the more important one who works for Demeter, I could see why changing this would make narrative sense. Also never heard the idea of her KILLING a king. Also Trip and Demo were Celeus’ sons not “King Eleusis”? This whole thing is kind of a mess.

The mention of Demeter’s son makes sense because this is a chapter on her specifically. A lot of the time I’ve seen the son’s name as Plutus to try to distinguish him from Hades, but since Plutus and Hades are both gods of wealth, the whole thing has always been kind of a mess that clearly shows a bunch of myth meshing over time.

Then we get Boccaccio’s interpretation, which is some of the most interesting stuff because of how it reflects his time (medieval) and place (Italy, so he’s viewing this from an Ancient Roman and not Ancient Greek lens). According to Theodontius (who’s work is apparently mostly unknown except for liberal references made to his work by BigMouth here), Demeter is the wife of the king of Sicily, Sicanus, which makes sense when you consider that Sicily is considered Persephone’s island.

All his talk about the moon and layers of the earth is so unique. And his literary interpretation of Persephone as a crop! So cool, but also tells me as a reader so much about Boccaccio in a way. Through a modern lens and all the 20th/21st century texts I’ve read, we often see Persephone as a symbol of the life/death cycle or as a symbol of maturation (with seeds being more of a sexual thing or of choosing to grow up than an agricultural thing). It makes me wonder if the nature of Boccaccio’s society is more agrarian or maybe he’s more male-fixated and therefore less likely to think of Persephone in such female-focused ways, that makes the crop comparison make more sense to him. He also uses Ovid as justification, which tells me a lot (as someone who has some not-so-positive feelings for Ovid).

Orcus, as it turns out, was basically another Hades idea common in rural areas. Like Pluto, he’s Hades but also not. Orcus also was apparently more of a scary demon type underworld king, than Hades or Pluto. Orcus/Pluto/Hades is what happens when you have too many gods doing the same thing. THat gives me a thought actually. What is someone wrote a story where Orcus and Hades both exist but Orcus is the villain? Or even Orcus is an alter ego of Hades?

All that stuff about Trip is confusing to me. The mixing of mythologies is making my head hurt. 

Glauca I can’t even find anything on. I’ve heard of Glaucus, of course, but I’ve never heard of Hades having a twin sister who died young. Or of the idea that Hades was actually protected from Kronos. That was just Zeus. Hades was swallowed.

I respect Boccaccio citing his sources.

Super minor detail but I often hear of Hades having four, not three horses. I sometimes wonder if the four has something to do with a Biblical conflation.

Also, I have read Ovid (Metamorphosis, but then I don’t know what BigMouth is citing here) and I don’t remember Hades going above ground to check on his roofing, but I got a good chuckle out of it.

Hades having a kid named Veneration is SO Roman. The Romans had so many random gods like this that the Greeks didn’t, most famous being probably Fortuna, goddess of fortune. There’s a bit more on her at the end of the Pluto chapter (with more super Roman ideas and the detail of Persephone being barren, which is super ironic and totally possible):

Back to the main narrative on Hades: I also laughed at “Tricerebus.” And Tisiphone as a guardian of wealth instead of a Fury? Odd.

And then BigMouth’s going off with more interpretation. The idea that a combination of abundance (represented by Persephone) and wealth (represented by Hades) yields nothing 1. would be an interesting way to explain their lack of children and 2. again says a lot about Boccaccio’s perspective.

The notes on naming Hades are really interesting and connecting him with February and funeral rites. And then we have the world dividing and such.

So I used the index to look up more on Persephone specifically and found some other little mentions of her including one that said the Sirens where her companions and when they couldn’t find her, they were turned into marine monsters. We get this absolutely hilarious line explaining BigMouth’s opinion on this, “I think they were companions of Proserpina because by Proserpina is understood the abundance of Sicilian products, from which libidinous sexual craving is especially derived and the delights of food and leisure are supplied” (195). I read this line out loud to my friend because the side of his family related to Boccaccio is also Sicilian so at some point in the last 600 years, BigMouth’s descendants decided that the land of sexual craving and food is the place to be.

We also have the myth of Pirithous:

I have read versions where Persephone is the main one to stop him, Hades is the main one to stop him, and now Cerberus. Also leave it to a man to somehow have a weird moral to this story about manliness.

And finally, we have this incredibly odd tale that is both specifically Roman and also kind of exemplifies everything I’ve said before about how much the Romans messed with Greek mythology by just smushing everything together and then adding new gods from local cults:

“In fact I detest these riddles and ambiguities and gladly lay them aside” (331). You said it, BigMouth. I hope you’d be proud of your great-great-great-great-great-great-great-etc. nephew or son or whatever because he’s one of my favorite people.

[celticcrossanon]

Will Prince Harry Attend Remembrance Day? Draft, WIP

This is speculation only.

Practise spread - we will see how much I get written up.

Celtic Cross Spread

Spread drawn at  approximately 4.15am on the 15th of September GMT

Cards used: The Mythic Tarot (the cards are based on a version of Greco-Roman mythology; the descriptions are more the mixed, popular culture version of mythology than the original myths, so keep that in mind as you read the interpretations below)

All interpretations taken from the book that came with the cards

*

The Celtic Cross had 3 Major Arcanas out of 10 cards, so while this is significant for the BRF and will be played out on the world stage, it is not hugely significant for them (only 1/3 or so of the cards were major arcana). Of the remaining 7 cards, there were 3 Cups, 2 Swords, and 2 Wands. No Pentacles. So this is not about money, it is about family and emotions and being nurturing (Cups), long-term, strategic planning (Swords), and the image that is communicated to those outside the BRF (Wands). Repeated numbers were two Sixes, two Twos, and two Nines. I usually only consider repeated numbers if they repeat three or more times.

*

Bottom of the Deck - Overall Theme - Strength (Card 10)

This card shows Heracles wrestling with the Nemean Lion in a cave.

The lion can represent royalty, even at its most destructive, i.e. Harry. The lion is also the infantile, savage, and completely egocentric beginnings of individuality, i.e. Harry's attempts to 'find himself' as a person and all the damage these attempts have caused to others. The lion here is the Nemean Lion, which possessed a hide that no weapon could pierce, giving it a shield of invincibility, i.e. Harry's position in the Royal family. Here the Nemean Lion stands for a "Me First" drive that will happily destroy anyone and anything in its path, as long as its gratification is assured. One of the manifestations of this "Me First" drive is an furious, explosive, rage-driven tantrum when the person does not get their own way. Another is bombast and an inflated sense of self importance, making the person savage and unrelenting both towards the people on whom they are dependent (i.e. Harry and the BRF) and the people [who they see as] stealing their limelight (also harry and the BRF).

Heracles wresting with the lion shows the struggle we all face to subdue the lion's unbridled individualism and make it serve a higher purpose; the need to subdue our desires and care for others so that together we can form a caring and responsible community instead of being a collection of individuals running rampant and destroying each other in our need for instant gratification. It is considering the long-term consequences of our actions and putting other's needs before our desires. Courage, strength and self discipline are necessary to see the struggle through to a successful conclusion.

In this specific instance, the card shows the BRF (and their long tradition of service to their country) wresting with Harry's unbridled egomania. Do they include him as part of the family (and the BRF is all about family), or do they cut him off and show quite clearly that however loved as a brother, he is no longer a member of the Royal Family. Will they sucumb to his temper tantrums and unjust accusations, or will they hold firm for the good of "the Firm"? What damage will he do if he is allowed to attend? If they place limits on him, will he follow them (hint: No)? These are the questions the BRF is struggling with at the moment, and while the course of action may seem clear to an outsider, for them it is not yet decided.

*

Significator: The Moon (card 18)

This is where the situation is at this moment in time. 

The card shows the goddess Hecate, associated with the Moon, magic and the underworld. Hecate is an ancient goddess, as the BRF is an old regime. She is shown of the card with a cute-looking (not terrifying) Cerberus, who guards the entry to the Underworld, a domain associated with her and full of mystery, wisdom and hidden riches. To me this signifies that Prince Harry thinks that going back to the BRF (here represented by Hecate and the underworld) will be easy, as there is no monster guarding the way, only a cute dog (who will be expected to roll over and obey his commands). Hecate, shown here as an older woman (and usually shown as a very old woman, like the Queen) is looking to the past, the present and the future all at once, as the BRF must do in making this decision. As an impersonal image of the feminine, one of the rulers of the Underworld, she represents the Queen in her role as the ruler of Great Britian and some countries of the Commonwealth, a figure who cannot be the warm and loving grandmother that we know she is with Harry, but who rather must be the impersonal Ruler who puts the good of her country above all else.

In the bottom right hand corner of the card, supporting Cerberus and Hecate, is a crab. The crab is the sign of Cancer, and Cancer is the sun sign of Prince William. Prince William may very well be acting as the 'right hand man' pf the Queen during this decision making process. The unseen presence of the underworld in the background suggests the hidden presence of Prince Charles, a sun sign Scorpio, as Scorpio is the sign that rules the Underworld. Prince Charles may be working behind the scenes in this decision, absent in flesh but present in spirit. 

The road to Hecate's realm is the 'royal road' of dreams, and Prince Harry may well be hoping to either using his visible status as a royal (supported by an appearance at Remembrance Day) to fulfil his non-royal dreams, or to use his appearance at remembrance Day as a road back to his previous status as a taxpayer funded working Royal sometime in the future, or both together.

Hecate was associated with the crossroads, which suggests that this decision is a crossroads for the BRF - they have to choose a path and move forward on it, removing all other options. Hecate also had the power (according the to tarot book) of bestowing or withholding from a mortal any desired gift, and that is exactly the position that the BRF are in - do they bestow the desired gift of attendance upon Harry (and his wife), or do they withhold it?

So the BRF is facing a choice, a crossroads. There is confusion (heart versus head) and anxiety over this choice, and it has not yet been made. The Major Arcana card says that this is a major decision and one that will have a lasting impact on all involved.

* Crossing Card : Queen of Cups

This is the main obstacle in making the decision.

The card represents Helen, the woman who was married to one man (the King of Sparta), fell in love and ran away with another (the Prince of Troy), and thus instigated the Trojan Wars (during the course of which she took three more lovers). As a woman who created a crisis in the ruling family of her country by following her own selfish desires, the parallel to Meghan Markle is obvious. If you look at the woman on the card, she resembles Meghan Markle as she is today with her long black extensions. As well as creating trouble wherever she goes (as Helen of Troy did), Meghan Markle has also run away with a prince of the BRF (a neat inversion of Prince Paris running away with Helen). My feeling is that the obstacle is not so much Meghan Markle herself, but rather her effect on Prince Harry, the loved grandson of the Queen and prince of the BRF.

The Queen of Cups can be seen as a woman who is a catalyst for the emergence of deep feelings and fantasies that have previously been hidden from awareness, and there is no doubt that in his association with Meghan Markle, the public have become aware of Prince Harry's rage and contempt for both the BRF and his position within it, something that was previously skillfully hidden by the 'Hero Harry" and "Harry the lad" PR. This emergence in the public eye of the 'real' Prince Harry is also part of the obstacle the BRF faces in making this decision.

Another meaning of the Queen of Cups is a loving and nurturing woman. As such, the card can be taken to represent Princess Diana. From this perspective, the obstacle is not Meghan Markle herself but rather  her unsuccessful attempts to push herself onto the public as Princess Diana 2.0, with her constant cries of "racism" and her accusations of the BRF as "unsupportive", "mean", and "treating her like they did Princess Diana". While easily disproven in themselves, these statements gain traction when they are supported by Prince Harry, either by his actions, his own statements against the BRF, or his silence.

Prince Harry is considered by most to be under the thumb of Meghan Markle. He supports her behaviour in tearing down his family and appears to be transforming into a woke male version of herself. Prince Harry is known to have mental issues, and as the nurturing, caring force represented by the Queen of Cups the BRF may hesitate to do anything that could worsen hos mental state. Unfortunately, this leaves them open to emotional blackmail by Prince Harry (the negative side of the Queen of Cups), as he will not hesitate to use the "Princess Diana Card" and remind everyone of the trauma he suffered as a child to get his own way (the fact that Prince William suffered the same trauma while also a child does not seem to occur to anyone).

The crossing card is a Minor Arcana card, so while the obstacles are being considered carefully by the BRF, they are not a huge problem, as would be the case if a Major Arcana card appeared in this position. The Minor Arcana card shows something that is a nusiance but that also is a problem that is  definitely manageable/surmountable.

* Crowning Card and Base of the Matter Card: Ace of Wands and Six of Swords

This is where I made a mistake in the spread. 

When I drew the cards, I drew the Ace of Wands as the third card and put it in the Crowing Card position, and then I drew the Six of Swords as the fourth card and put it in the Base of the Matter position.  However, before I started this spread, I formed the intention of doing the spread as it appeared in the accompanying book, and that book spread has the third card as the Base of the Matter and the fourth card as the Crowning Card.

I put the cards in the wrong positions. Bollocks.

Rather than choosing between my intention to follow the book spread or my instinct in putting down the cards, I have decided to honour both and read both cards together as both the Crowning Card and the Base of the Matter Card (next time I will double check the spread before I draw the cards).

Card 3: the Ace of Wands 

Due to certain life events, the Ace of Wands is strongly linked in my mind with the male, um, 'manhood', and that phallic imagery immediately suggests that someone here is being "led by their dick", that someone being Prince Harry (apparently Prince Charles referred to it as being 'cunt-struck'). This association is strengthened by the card showing a male wearing a crown and holding the world in one hand while the other holds a thick wand emitting flames (the phallic imagery of the wand is obvious and I won't detail it here). The crown and the world can be taken as showing Harry's previous status as a royal prince, where the world was his oyster (more or less).  

The image on the card is the god Zeus, who is famous (or infamous) for not being able to keep it in his pants, and thus reinforces the "led by his dick" meaning. 

The Ace of Wands as a card symbolises the creative power of the imagination, the impulse that makes us restless and dissatisfied until we formulate and manifest it in the world (successfully or not). It is important to note that here the idea has not been thought through and formulated; it is simply a dissatisfaction, a feeling that things could be different. I believe that it was this feeling of dissatisfaction that led to Prince Harry leaving the BRF. He could have looked for ways to improve his role/position/life within the BRF. Instead he chose to leave when his wife did and, together with her, to pursue another future outside the BRF. 

The Ace of Wands, like all aces, also indicates something new. This indicates that this situation is something new for the BRF - never before has a blood royal left Great Britian to live as a minor celebrity n Hollywood. As with all new situations, they may be uncertain as to what is the best response, especially as we now live in an age of instant social media (and not the previous time of newspaper media, which was slower and could be controlled by the BRF).

Card 4: the Six of Swords 

Here we have Orestes, the doomed hero, travelling to Argos to fulfil his terrible duty to murder his mother. He is travelling through rough water, although calmer weather lies ahead. This figure again has echoes of Prince Harry, whose mother died when he was young, and who has left the country of his birth to travel overseas and make his home in another land. This is the Prince Harry who is no longer a working royal and who has left the BRF for the life of a wanna-be celebrity in Los Angeles. Orestes's future murder of his mother could show Prince Harry's future 'murder' by overexposure of his mother's image via documentary, after dinner speeches, and Netflix musical, as well as his constant use of the "Princess Diana Card". For both Orestes and Prince Harry, this journey appears to be one-way; both have left with no intention of returning to their former place of residence.

Orestes was born in Argos, banished to Phocis, and returned to Argos to avenge his father by murdering his mother. Harry was born in Great Britain, willingly left for a life in Los Angeles (and there are articles saying how unhappy he is there and how he feels in 'exile'), and now  he is trying to return home - to resume his role in the BRF, or like Orestes, to 'murder his mother' by trying to complete the destruction of the public image of the BRF who bore, raised and nurtured him? Both interpretations are possible, and indeed by doing the first the BRF may achieve the second. Popular opinion seems to be that the UK public are very glad to be rid of Prince Harry and his wife, and they do not want them to return - ever. These sentiments and the possibilities of what Prince Harry will do in Los Angeles are things to be considered in making the decision whether to extend him an invitation or not.

The Six of Swords in general shows a time of moving on, a time when clear thoughts, understanding and logic will ease a difficult situation and propel you into smoother waters. Sentiment and emotions (cups) play no part in this process, it is all duty and an acceptance of your obligations. This, then, appears to be the path of the BRF - to decide with the mind and not with the heart.

Together 

As the Crowning Card, these two cards show the situation as it appears to others - Prince Harry being led by his dick to leave the BRF and create a future for himself in another country as a minor celebrity.

As the Base of the Matter, these two cards show other motivations - Prince Harry being prompted to leave by dissatisfaction with his life as well as sexual desire, the idea of having him invited to remembrance Day bringing with it the danger of destroying the reputation of the BRF, the fears of what exactly he will do in Los Angeles if he is - or is not invited, and above all the necessity for clear, logical thought without sentiment to find a path through this situation.

*

Past Influences: Justice (card 8)

This is what has influenced the situation in the past. The situation is moving away from it.

The Justice card shows the goddess Athena, seated on her throne, holding the sword and scales of justice. Athena sprung fully formed from the head of Zeus, so this Justice is impersonal, abstract, a thing of thought and not passions. This is further emphasised by the armour worn by the goddess. Her chest and her back are encased in steel, stiffening her spine and enclosing/locking away her heart, the seat of emotions. It is like the judgement handed down in a court case is supposed to be - the situation is weighed against the law and, if found wanting, a punishment prescribed by the law is delivered. There is no room for the passions or emotions in this sort of justice. Facts are all that matter.

The female goddess Athena represents the Queen, a powerful female who made the decisions in this matter. This impersonal, abstract, emotionless justice is how the Queen has dealt with this situation with Prince Harry in the past (to the best of her ability). She has considered the facts, weighed them in her mind, and delivered a consequence. The goddess is armoured and armed with a spear, and so the Queen has acted not out of personal pain but in defence of her institution (the BRF) and her realm.

As the goddess is sitting down, the consequences were more often passive than active; the result of Prince Harry's repeated actions rather than actions taken to forestall them. Like the scales the goddess holds in her hand, the Queen did her best to deliver consequences that she saw as balanced and fair (no matter how the rest of the world saw them). Athena is the goddess of strategy, and the Queen would have taken the strategic long view when deciding on the consequences for Prince Harry's actions. Justice is the card of Libra, and Libra aims for civilised harmony, so the Queen may have had that as a goal in making her decisions (for example, playing Happy Families and presenting aunited front to the world).

The fact that this is a past influence suggests that things are going to change. A new force will lie behind the actions of the BRF. Prince Harry may not be aware of this change. Justice is said to be blind, and he may go blindly forward, expecting everything to work out the same as it had in the past.

This is a Major Arcana card, so it was very important in the past for the treatment of Prince Harry to be seen as fair and unbiased by emotion. Whether this holds true for the future remains to be seen.

*

Future Influences: Nine of Wands

These are the influences on the situation that are going to appear in the immediate future. The situation is moving towards this.

The Nine of Wands shows the ship Argo just before it passes the final obstacle in its journey home, the Clashing Rocks, and comes into the safe harbour of the city of Argos. The sails of the ship are tattered and torn, for it has been through many difficulties on its voyage, and only one final obstacle remains between it and its goal. That obstacle is the Clashing Rocks, a pair of huge rocks that clashed together whenever a ship sailed between them, crushing the ship between them. The captain of the ship, Jason, acted on the advice from a crew member and released a dove between the rocks to see how fast the crew would have to row to escape them. The dove lost a few tail feathers, and by rowing at a similar speed, as fast as they could, the Argo passed between the rocks, losing only its stern ornament. After this defeat the rocks became motionless, facing each other across the sea.

For this card, the Argo represents both the BRF and Prince Harry. Both have been battered by the events of the past, and both want to come to a calm and stable future. Standing between them and this outcome is the Clashing Rocks, which represent the interests of the BRF on the one side and the desires of Prince Harry and Meghan Markle on the other. A passage between the two needs to be negotiated without destroying either the BRF or Prince Harry. Then the rocks will freeze in place, the calm and stable future will be reached, and both parties will continue to hold the positions that are seen at this event. Otherwise, one or both party will be destroyed between the rocks of their conflicting goals.

Like the dove, both Prince Harry and/or the BRF might have to lose a few tail feathers to achieve this result. The compromises will not be significant in the overall scheme of things - the dove can still fly away and regrow its feathers; similarly both Prince Harry and the BRF will recover from whatever compromises they have to make to achieve this future.

The passage to this future will not be easy. The sea around the rocks is turbulent and the crew of the ship are exhausted. it is the same with the BRF and Prince Harry. They have both been on a long journey, and both are exhausted, and finally the end is in sight. Then one last hurdle appears. The obstacle may have been foreseen, as the crew of the Argo knew of the Clashing Rocks, or it may suddenly arise from the depths and stand before them. They must try again, one last time, to overcome this obstacle and finally reach their goal. 

The Nine of Wands represents one last burst of energy that comes from the willingness to try again, one last time, even though you are exhausted, when a final obstacle arises and stands between you and your goals. That willingness to try will bring forth fresh energy and new ideas. It is this last burst that can carry both Prince Harry and the BRF through the rocks and through any compromises into the safe harbour beyond, their positions set for the future. The alternative is for one or both parties to be destroyed. Blindly rushing ahead, refusing to take the time to observe and plan and take advice, will result in the person being crushed between the rocks and drowning. Only by planning and taking advice, as Jason did when he released the dove and calculated the rowing speed required, will a safe passage be assured. 

The member who advised Jason to release the dove was Phineus, a King rescued from his torments by two of the crew of the Argo during their long journey, and who then joined the crew on their quest. Perhaps someone in a similar position may offer wise advice to the BRF and/or Prince Harry.

Wands can represent PR (creativity, ideas). It is very likely that this final obstacle (future influence) will either be in itself or will come from PR pieces designed to stir up the emotions of the general public (emotions are water and the ship is sailing through a turbulent/stirred up sea). As the PR from the Harkle camp has already shown itself capable of being extremely nasty, I expect either something even nastier from them that completely crosses one or more lines, or for Meghan Markle to turn on Prince Harry and tear him to pieces. The current trend of the Harkle PR can go either way.

*

Where One Finds Oneself: Judgement (card 20)

This is what will happen in the near future. The situation is moving towards this.

Here we see Hermes the Psychopomp, the traveller between two worlds, who brings messages to and from the Underworld, summons the dead to the Underworld, restores the dead to life, and who leads heroes out of the Underworld. 

When we die, it is said that our life passes before our eyes, and in we go the the abode of the dead, where we are judged for our deeds and delivered into peace or torment. This is where Prince Harry will find himself. Gone is the abstract justice of the past, now his actions will be judged with emotion, based on how they affect the BRF, and he will be punished or promoted accordingly.

If we look at the picture, we can see a land of glowing wheat fields at the top of the stairs. To me this is England, the Underworld is the life of exile in Hollywood, and Hermes is the messanger between the worlds, with a message  that has been or will be sent to Prince Harry. How Prince Harry responds will determine whether he is led out of the underworld and back to the wheat fields of England, or whether he is left to languish in the darkness of Hollywood. Hermes as a God often displays deceit and trickery, and here he could also represent not a message, but Prince Harry trying to lie and cheat his way back into his past privleges as a member of the BRF.

Whether or not Prince Harry returns to England, he faces a judgement. Should he be restored to some of his past privleges, should he be seen to be a member of the Windosr family but not the BRF (i.e. present in a minor role), or should he simply be excluded from all public events? This is not the cold, abstract, passive Justice of the past, but a Judgement that is active, as Hermes is upright and moving in this card, and a Judgement that is emotional, full of the hurt and pain that he has caused to others (to his family on a personal level, to the BRF as an institution, and to the British public whose taxes have supported him his entire life). This is a very different sort of "judge and jury" than in the past, and I don't think Prince Harry is aware of the change. He is represented here by the dead people, as he "died" by cutting himself off from the BRF. They are swathed in bandages that block their eyes, ears, and mouth, as Prince Harry is blind, deaf and dumb to the changes that await him in the BRF.

The Judgement card is the card of Pluto, the ruler of Scorpio, and Prince Charles is a sun-sign Scorpio. This suggests that Prince Charles is going to move from a force in the background to a major player, front and centre (as Hermes is in the card) in the decision about whether Prince Harry is invited to Remembrance Day or not, and if so in what capacity. Scorpio is a water sign, and water signs are very emotional, so this judgement of Prince Harry's worth as a member of  the BRF is going to be based on an emotional response to all his past actions, the good and the bad, the ones Prince Harry accepts as his and the ones where he places the blame upon others . The Judgement card is a Major Arcana card, which says that the judgement on his position is a major event and it will be seen on the world stage. 

The Judgement card also shows the personal process in which Prince Harry will find himself in the near future. He will face the consequences of all his actions, both those he admits to and those where he has avoided responsibility. All of those actions will be called to account, not just on a world stage but also on a personal stage, and Prince Harry will be confronted with the realisation of what he has done and how it has created his future (whether he accepts his part in this or chooses to play the eternal victim is another matter entirely). The  Judgement card signifies the end of a chapter in his life. Whether the next part is sweet or bitter, as part of the BRF or alone in Hollywood, will be the result of all his actions, past and present.

*

Views of Others: Two of Cups

This is how friend s and family see the situation.

*

Hopes and Fears: Six of Cups

This is what the people involved hope for and fear from the situation.

*

Final Outcome: Page of Swords

If no energy shifts, this will be the outcome of the situation.

Clarifiers: Queen of Swords, Seven of Pentacles

I pulled two clarifying cards to help me understand the outcome.

Queen of Swords

Seven of Pentacles

*

[hellzyeahwebwielingessays]

Super Heroes ARE NOT INHERENTLY a Conservative power fantasy

Master Post

I don’t really agree superheroes are inherently a Conservative power fantasy nor that they simplistically preach law and order and justice are necessary for a happy ending.

After all Superman was fighting corrupt politicians in his very first appearance. The X-Men are institutionally persecuted often by government forces. Stan Lee did an entire story arc in refutation to Law and Order politics in the early 1970s.

Yeah, they hit people to save the day but like...I honestly think that’s far more of a human power fantasy than something of any specific ideology. There have been examples of mythic and folklore figures doing that since forever. The broad appeal of those types of characters throughout history and across political ideologies speaks to how it’s not inherently a political power fantasy of one type or another.

I know someone who is incredibly Liberal and has himself and people he’s known been persecuted by the police and he’s outspoken against such institutional persecution. He loves Daredevil and more poignantly the Punisher, a character outright adored by the police themselves but who is near universally framed (even within his own stories) as not a good person and someone you shouldn’t aspire to be like. This was even the case in his debut in Daredevil season 2 where it was made explicit that he is self-destructive.

Obviously my friend would be disgusted by the Punisher in real life, as would we all (I’d hope). But the fantasy is still unto itself appealing despite it conflicting with his ideologies. Hence super heroes are not a power fantasy rooted in a specific political ideology. Now sure that is one anecdotal piece of evidence. But the Punisher is clearly very, very popular and the degree to which he is popular (especially in the 1990s) wouldn’t really add up if his fanbase were predominantly Conservatively leaning people with the occasional Liberal exception.

He’s very obviously a character people of either leaning or in-between enjoy and was after all created by an outspoken young Liberal in Gerry Conway. Batman too is often perceived as very conservative. But he is the most popular superhero ever so he obviously appeals across political ideologies. After all, the two most defining Batman writers (after Bill Finger) were the incredibly Conservative Frank Miller and the incredibly Liberal Denny O’Neil.

I also don’t think super heroes are analogous to stand your ground myths. For starters, super heroes are not enshrined by the law. The closest comparison you could draw is if you encountered a clear cut crime in progress and intervened non-lethally somehow. E.g. that scene in Spider-Man 2 where Peter Parker walks away from a mugging in progress, but for the purposes of what I’m saying actually tried to intervene.

I once received counterpoints to the above view that went something like this:

You are extrapolating specifically European myth created by white males and applying it to all humans. African myths are different. Native American myths are different. Asian myths are different. You’re making my point that comics are a dominant conservative culture - specifically white male - fantasy, not refuting it.

Actually I wasn’t. There examples of such figures in Eastern myths too such as Sun Wukong. Son Goku is a 1980s manga character based first and foremost upon him (and Jackie Chan) and is a veritable institution in Japan. There is a vast crossover between fans of him and fans of other superhero characters despite him not being directly based upon any of them, having distinctly Eastern cultural influences and also not being a crime fighter in the traditional sense.

Goku in truth is probably more comparable to figures like Theseus in spite of not being based or influenced by him. African myths and European myths may be different but most cultures involve figures who have beyond human abilities and among those figures those who engage in actions that, within the values of those cultures, are regarded as good. All human beings are innately attracted to stories that in one shape or form present them as physically more powerful than they are, a by-product of more innate survival instincts. On our absolute most deepest levels we are animals and because of this the fantasy of being stronger, faster, less vulnerable to injury or malnutrition and/or having the ability to defend our homes/territories/family units (which in superhero comics is usually extended to the general population of a native city) is incredibly potent and attractive.

The counter pointer continued:

“It’s not a female fantasy. Women tell very different myths, most of them lost because men wrote down the stories. The romance genre is dominated by female writers because those are the stories women are drawn to tell.”

Given the vast plethora of female fans of the genre from 1938-now I really do not see how we can honestly say this is a genre that is particular to the power fantasy of one gender or another. Wonder Woman was after all a distinctly female power fantasy created with a lot of input from two women very much ahead of their time.

But going into another culture Sailor Moon (and her predecessor Sailor V, who was more of a traditional crime fighter) was arguably even more of a female power fantasy. She was the singular vision of a female mangaka who was aiming at a young female audience and was very specifically creating a female power fantasy. In both cases they are people with secret identities who engage in physical violence to varying degrees against very clearly coded evil individuals who pose direct threats to innocent lives.

Now about the gun debate? Well, most superheroes use guns?

But for the sake of argument let’s extent ‘guns’ to mean stuff like:

Ray guns

Web-shooters

Firing concussive energy blasts, like Cyclops’ optic blasts

Any kind of projectile

Well, even if you define guns like that, the majority of superheroes’ weapons are non-lethal whereas guns are designed specifically to kill. Yeah you can wound or incapacitate but gun wounds can still be lethal or crippling. Plus you could in theory kill someone with a net but that wasn’t what it was designed to do.

Things get iffy if we count biological weaponry, like in Cyclops’ case. Whilst his super power is literally having a powerful gun for his eyes, it’s also part of who he is and he’s got no choice in that. This changes the context drastically from someone who owns a gun and seeks to use it.

In Cyclops’ case he’s forced to own that weapon and it’s an immense burden upon him . It curtails his ability to have physical and emotional intimacy with others the way anyone else would. I anything I’s more analogous to a disability. So it isn’t like this is a wonderful fantasy about how cool it’d be to own a big gun without the burden of choosing to own it in the first place

That doesn’t even make sense considering the real issue regarding American gun laws ultimately isn’t about people merely owning  guns but how they use  them upon  owning them. Cyclops still has to choose how to use his biological ‘big gun’ even if he didn’t get a choice in owning it one way or the other. It’s also a poor analogy considering Cyclops’ ‘Big Gun’ doesn’t even work properly due to a disability he has.

In fact, it’s posited superheroes are needed, especially vigilante heroes like Spider-Man who take law enforcement into their own hands despite being outside the law enforcement establishment, because the Marvel U is a dangerous, violent place. This is very similar to arguments used by conservative gun advocates in the US: we need guns to protect ourselves because our institutions can’t. Moving on let’s talk about the severity of crime. Is it not a Conservative power fantasy that the world of Marvel and DC comics is a dangerous and violent place? And therefore vigilantes who take the law into their own hands are needed?

That’s kind of similar to what Conservative gun advocates argue isn’t it? Guns are needed to protect one’s self.

Well for starters, the nature of the severity of crime is questionable in most Marvel or DC comics sans like Batman. It is made clear that superheroes absolutely do good but at the same time it wasn’t presented as though there was such a massive crime problem that say Marvel New York would’ve fallen apart without them.

That is exempting of course super villains.

Super villains however are cut from the same fantasy cloth as the heroes so how much to they really count towards representing real life concerns over crime anyway? They were after all literally created as a means to challenge the heroes. Action Comics #1 for example didn’t have any super villains.

Similarly modern interpretations of Batman do not seek to present the world or urban landscapes in general as inherently so riddled with dangerous crime that it necessitates Batman. They make it clear that Gotham is this extreme exception as opposed to the rule. Greg Rucka once spoke about this in an old documentary (for I think the History channel).The idea is that Gotham is exceptionally bad thus they need Batman.

In most versions of Superman post-1987 Lex Luthor has such a stranglehold on Metropolis that it needs Superman. And in Golden Age versions of Superman he was presented as just tackling general urban crime that existed amidst the Great Depression, most of which stemmed from organized crime or corrupt political figures. But it wasn’t as though Metropolis was on the brink if not for Superman’s intervention.

Really the levels of crime and such that exist in superhero stories exist purely to justify a superhero being a crime fighter in the first place; it’s a practicality issue not an ideological one. I think this is different to say police TV shows or films that present characters who allegedly exist in the real world, who represent real world police officers who do a real world job that involves them interacting with allegedly real world threat levels. In a superhero story, of course t here is more crime that actually exists in the real world but I don’t think anyone making the stories ever honestly thought otherwise or paid much thought to it one way or the other. It was just a means to an end of challenging the protagonists.

Okay, but how about the fact that heroes rarely (if ever) calling for gun control or gun bans? Surely that is a Conservative.

Well no not really. Again, it’s not really an ideologically driven factor in super hero stories. It’s more akin to how superhero comic books just do not touch for example the issue of abortion or how they rarely make it truly explicit what political leanings a character has one way or the other.*

John Byrne when discussing his iconic Superman run stated he felt the character was a card carrying Republican, but to the best of my knowledge no Superman comic before or since has ever come out and said that. No Punisher story to my knowledge has ever stated Punisher is a Conservative in spite of the fact that he obviously is. No Spider-Man story has stated Spider-Man is a Liberal/left leaning moderate. And yet he has been depicted that way in most stories and it’d just be incredibly likely given his age, where he lives and his family background. I don’t even know if any Captain America story has stated clearly and without question that Cap would obviously vote for the Democrats 100% of the time out of the two major parties, even though he was explicitly Liberal  from the very first piece of artwork depicting him. In ne of Bucky’s early adventures as Captain America though he simultaneously protected Democrat and Republican politicians.

So whilst superhero comics do not involve characters calling for the abolition of guns 99% of the time, that’s less because they are or are not a Conservative power fantasy and more because the companies do not want to touch what they at least perceive as an incredibly volatile issue.

If the gun debate in America (which to me shouldn’t even be a debate, just get rid of them) ever moves to a place where there is virtually nobody opposing the abolition of guns most superheroes would absolutely be depicted in support of that.

To strip back everything I’m saying, super heroes are intended more on, and consumed more on, a symbolic level  than something in line with a particular ideology.

They are vigilantes who fight crime. But it’s understood that the crime is in the story simply because it is universally understood as ‘a bad thing’ that can cause harm and damage. The superhero is you. You being a vigilante symbolises how you have to on an individual level deal with a problem, the ‘bad thing’.

And the super powers are the catharsis of how much easier it would be to deal with the ‘bad thing’ if you were more than what you are.

I don’t agree with 100% of this, but this video (which is interesting unto itself) touches upon this idea around the 15:30 mark.

It’s not as though a Liberal enjoys the genre for the escapism or the perverse indulgence in politics they wouldn’t agree with whilst a Conservative just loves it’s reaffirmation of their beliefs.

They love it for the same reasons and those are usually rooted in the human elements of the characters alongside the power fantasy. Which is why I maintain there is an innate human appeal to the genre regardless of what perspective you come at it from.

I mean Jesus, if we are really going to argue that superheroes are a Western  Conservative power fantasy why have countries with anti-Western  values, countries that American Conservatives are heavily in opposition to, devoured the genre on film?

Why is the MCU outright beloved  in China?

Why have they tried to create their own super heroes in a similar vein?

Because these characters are not a Conservative, or a white, or a male power fantasy. They are just a human  power fantasy.

*And contrary to what people who are hardline on one ideology or another think, not opposing an issue isn’t tantamount to supporting it. Neutrality exists. If you support abortion that’s Liberal stance on the issue. If you oppose gun control that’s a Conservative stance on that issue. If you do not care about them one way or another you ware not expressing a Liberal or Conservative view point.

The whole ‘With us or against us’ viewpoint is absolutely myopic and overly simplistic. By this logic America was supportive of Hitler before they joined the Allies in WWII. But they were also supportive of the Allies because they weren’t supporting the Axis powers either.

Neutrality can exist.