#this is what happens when you give Middle Easterns representation actually

[azacello]

no bc they rlly got me with that “do you remember what he did to you? I was there” bc up to this point no one has been genuine about the abuse. They’ve used it in power plays, in weird psychosexual soliloquies, everytime someone else’s experience of abuse has been brought up it’s been transactional. Say sorry because you neglected Connor, feel an emotion because you hit Roman. But stewy… man! It was just this one last Hail Mary to get Kendal OUT. And the only way kendal knew how to respond to probably the only non-transactional ‘normal people’ exposition of abuse was trying to get his own transaction to go through while offering nothing in return because stewy showed his hand and Kendall knew he wanted Nothing but Him.

[qqueenofhades]

(1/2) Honestly, Hilary, you are a blessing. I want to scream about your amazing Fic, how I love Immortal Husbands and the whole Immortal Family and how I had more fun learning history from your writing than in my whole damn school. But I also want to appreciate your TOG answers and meta. All the more because my friends outside the internet saw TOG as some boring movie with shitty plot and I'm just here in the corner, wanting to scream at someone who will understand about FINALLY seeing...

"(2/2) ...some GOOD queer representation, without throwing stereotypes in our faces, and I can't even begin with the found family trope because THE FEELS. Anyway, what I was trying to say with this rambling: thank you. <3"

....I’m sorry what. Who. Who is saying this. Straight people? I feel like the answer is definitely straight people. Because they have had EIGHTY FUCKING THOUSAND shitty action movies with the Boring White Man Hero, the disposable Muslim-coded (or actually Muslim) villains, the equally disposable eye-candy female love interest who either gets fridged or is secretly evil, Grimdark Everyone Is Secretly Bad And Nothing Matters crap philosophy, Moral Hand Wringing Over Superhero Violence, on and on. So of course they can moan and whine about “iT’s nOt OrIGinAL” and apparently not sufficiently Grimdark and Amoral, and how the dynamics of the team are completely reshuffled in a way that actually doesn’t prioritize THEM, and like.... this is why I never trust media only beloved by straight people, and only ever watch anything after it’s been recommended to me by a trusted queer friend. Because sometimes I remember the difference, and WHOOF.

Because: the gays and people of color DESERVE formulaic action/superhero movies as much as the Generic White Bro (in fact, we can all agree, far more than the Generic White Bro). This is the trap where every piece of media that’s not made by a Mediocre White Man has to be the best all-time of its genre, apparently, rather than using some of the same well-loved storytelling tropes but recoding them and re-deploying them for a more diverse audience. Instead of the Hard Bitten White Man Action Hero, we have Andy and Nile (two women, and Nile as a young Black woman who literally cannot be shot to death, in the year 2020, is fucking revolutionary on its own don’t @ me). As I said in my first meta, even Booker, who comes closest to fulfilling that trope, is made the closest thing to a “villain” there is on the team and even then for entirely sympathetic motives that rest on him having teary-eyed conversations with Nile about how he misses his family and feels like he failed them. His emotions help drive the story in an actually GOOD and useful way, rather than sacrificing everyone else to coddle him through his feeble heterosexual manchildness (why yes, I AM staring directly at the Abomination without blinking). Nobody in the story is EVER penalized or made a fool of for loving their found family (itself an intensely queer trope, even before the queerness of the individual characters) or trying to do the right thing even in the middle of the horrors, and frankly, I just want to consume more media with that as the main message. I’M SO FREAKING TIRED OF GRIMDARK. GOD. IF I WANTED THAT I COULD JUST TURN ON THE NEWS.

And of course, my BELOVED Joe and Nicky: an interracial, interreligious gay couple that has been wildly in love for literal CENTURIES and gives me the opportunity to do things like write the most self-indulgent historical romance backstory fic ever with DVLA. They met in the embodiment of religious conflict and have transcended that, there are never any cruel jokes or expectation for you to congratulate the narrative for being so beneficent as to give you “an exclusively gay moment” (fuck you Disney!). Joe and Nicky’s love story is central both to who they are as characters, doesn’t revolve around them being suffering or being Tormented over being gay (when the cops pull them apart for kissing, they beat the cops the fuck up, WE STAN), gets to unfold naturally in the background of the story with these beautiful little beats of casual intimacy (the SPOONING /clutches heart) and since THEY LITERALLY CANNOT DIE, no chance of the “burying your gays” bullshit. Even when they’re captured first by the bad guys, and I briefly, upon first viewing, worried that they were going the Gay Pain route just for cheap emotional points, they remain constantly united and fighting together and able to do stupid things like flirt when they’re strapped to gurneys by a mad scientist. Then the rest of the team ends up right there with them, so it’s not something that happens to them alone, and Nile comes in to save everyone’s asses, and Joe and Nicky get ANOTHER beautiful moment of fighting the bad guys and being worried about each other and tender even in the middle of this chaos and GOD! MY HEART! MY WHOLE ASS HEART! I LOVE THEM!

And just the fact that it’s not the Evul Mooslim Turrorists or Boilerplate Scary Eastern Europeans or whoever else who are the bad guys, but Big Pharma, nasty white men with too much money and not enough ethics, the CIA (at least tangentially; they could have pushed a lot harder on that but I’ll give Copley individually a pass), and the very forces that want to stop the Old Guard and discount what they do (helping the little people) as worthless... GOD. That is fucking POWERFUL. They literally take the time to explain with Copley’s Conspiracy Wall that even the little things the team does, when they can’t see it themselves, spiral out through centuries and have positive effects down the line. And it’s NOT just in the Western world (no scene in the movie takes place in America, none of the main four characters/heroes are American, and they only go to England when the English villains capture them). They’re in Africa, in Asia, in South America, in all these places where the Western/imperial world order has harmed people the most and in a way that Euro/American audience often gets to forget. On the surface this might be an action movie with Charlize Theron beating up men (which I mean, that alone is fine if you ask me) but there are SO MANY WAYS in which it achieves these deeper moments of meaning and subversion of the narrative that we are so often fed and the ways it could have done this (i.e. the same old Mediocre White Man ways).

I love the fact that the team unabashedly LOVES each other as their family members (I will never get over them all liking to sleep in one room even in their safe house in France), even when they struggle, and that they continue trying to make it right and never consider leaving Booker behind, because he screwed up but they still love him (and he them). I LOVE LOVE LOVE that this movie gave me not just Joe and Nicky but Andy and Quynh: two completely badass queer couples who kick tons of ass and have romance and Drama and rich and well-realized lives outside being used as emotional manipulation or suffering porn for straight people. (I realise it’s only been two weeks since the first one released, but where is my sequel, I have Needs. Especially Andy/Quynh and Quynh/Joe/Nicky needs). I was disappointed that they’d gotten rid of Quynh in a Bad Medieval Way to cause pain for Andy and then shocked and DELIGHTED when she turned up alive in Booker’s apartment at the end of the film. I LOVE that this movie gave me Nile Freeman and everything that she represents in the middle of this hellish year. I even love Booker! BOOKER! When he’s usually the character type I can’t stand and have the least patience with!

So yes. I have watched it three times already. I am sure I am going to watch it several times more. It just makes me so happy.

[fictionfreakazoid]

That post you made about our culture as lgbtq+ POC and liberalism/modernism is chef’s kiss. I must add I was very disappointed when I first saw the Marjan Muslim woman arranged marriage spoiler, because as a Muslim woman myself these tropes never reflect our true irl experiences. The resolution tonight was surprisingly somewhat not all bad to me. All we see in US tv shows is how inferior our practices are and how they can be ‘cured’ by their modernism for us to be truly happy. Yes some of our practices are problematic but it’s hard to just toss out our family who like Carlos phrased “are good people but not perfect “ for found family without the struggle of needing both.

I am a Biracial, Muslim and engaged to a woman. My parents know and we have had dinner with them. My mom is more welcoming (she is white) and my dad (he is black) is always happier to avoid any conversation about it. I literally stopped wearing a hijab at work & Ṣalāt al-Jumuʿah after the Nice attacks but almost everyday before work, during lunch etc I cry about it to a point where I want to quit because I am not fulfilled. Yes I don’t get to be a target but I want to celebrate my religion the way I please.That conflict phase is hard and most media gloss over it like it’s empowerment (remember Nadia removing her hijab in Elite?) .

Do they (911 LS) need to research more on Muslim and Islam representation? Absolutely!!S1 was very cringe but today I was left feeling somehow hopeful to give them a chance. I will probably get a lot of backlash for this but couldn’t they just hire a Muslim actress or consult with IRL Muslims?

I flesh it out because you gave me the stage lol, Again sorry for the bad English.

Salamu Alaikum sister! First of all, thank you for sharing, and I will always support you as my fellow Muslim and I’m glad there’s another lgbt+ POC Muslim watching the show!  Also, I actually didn’t watch Elite because I heard about that specifically and I didn’t want to go through that painful “representation” again. This is kinda long lol sorry I like writing and I have a lot of feelings about this, so I’ll put a read more here

I didn’t see any spoilers of the arranged marriage before the episode, so watching the episode my dread just grew and grew and unfortunately materialized. However, a few years ago I became friends with a hijabi in my college class and she informed me that she was engaged in an arranged marriage. Obviously, this shocked me at first but then she further explained that it had been more of a matchmaking process where her parents showed her people, and then she got to choose. I was still uncomfortable with this because obviously she was still pressured to get married, but my mom talked to me about it later and was like well, how else are (Muslims) going to find a suitable spouse in a halal way if not by matchmaking or happening to find a person? And I have to agree that at least that form of “arranged marriage” sounded somewhat reasonable if it was truly still a consensual choice by both spouses. However, the form of arranged marriage they showed in the episode was strongly different than that and literally proved to be problematic in the episode. I know Muslims from several different countries, I know my relatives who literally live in the Middle East: none of them still do that or even did that generations ago and honestly, the practice isn’t that Islamic either if the choice to opt out wasn’t apparently given to them from the start, which it didn’t seem to be in Marjan and Salim’s case. Arranged marriage in that form is definitely part of some cultures, but not, to my knowledge, a part of the Muslim nor Middle Eastern/Arab culture at large other than the clearly and undoubtedly unislamic practices of forced child marriages. So clearly they did not actually base the arranged marriage on actual Muslim culture, although arranged marriages do still happen in our culture, I personally do not know of it being common in our Muslim, particularly Muslim American, culture to be in that form so my suspicion is that they really just heard that Muslim communities still have arranged marriage without any context and tried to put it in the show and act all woke about it. I know that Marjan’s actress isn’t Muslim (which is also problematic, I definitely agree with you) and I doubt they either consult any actual Muslims nor is it likely that they have any Muslims in their writing team, and if they do they will only choose the most liberal of their opinions that fit their ideas of liberalism/modernism and escaping stereotypes and that’s too much of a portion that they’re including in the show. 

To continue to the part of the arranged marriage arc that I actually found reasonable: Marjan’s ultimate rejection of Salim. Despite some of the problematic ways they showed it, Marjan did strongly and visibly believe in Islam and its practices and was proud to be Muslim and defended it when the squad questioned any aspects of it. She also made it clear that she personally believed in it/had her personal conviction in Islam and that it wasn’t just something she pretended to follow along for the sake of pleasing her parents, which some Muslims, unfortunately, end up doing, particularly in this generation with exposure to “modernism”, which I still respect because that’s their personal journey and only Allah can judge and they as well as anyone else might end up coming back to Islam ultimately. Also, that can show that they weren’t really taught enough about the beauty of the true religion and not conservative/traditionalist propaganda of Islam, which is not just spread to nonMuslims through Islamophobic media but also spread to poorly Islamically educated Muslims ourselves, to have strong enough convictions for it, but again, their personal journey and I still respect them because true Islam teaches that you respect anyone even nonMuslims and that you always leave the door open and just try to educate and be a good example. Marjan seems to follow that same mindset as well because she is shown to be very accepting of others and their beliefs even when they don’t match hers, she just respects them and makes her boundaries clear. And to tie that back to the main point - that’s exactly what she did with Salim. Salim showed multiple signs of not truly adhering to Islamic values, first the alcohol drinking (which I also strongly admired the visible discomfort she had for that), the side relationship and then ultimately kissing her. She respected his personal decision to do those things, but she ended it when it became apparent that he expected her to do the same or at least tolerate it if she loved him. What I admired is that she put her foot down and said that if she not only couldn’t be in a commitment with someone who didn’t keep their commitments (which even plenty, if not most, of nonMuslims agree with) but also no longer had the same values or a tolerable amount of the same (Islamic) values she held. That along with other subtle signs of Marjan’s personal conviction to Islam are what make me still have at least some hope for the representation. Despite the terrible form of the arranged marriage they showed, they still showed that Marjan sticks to her beliefs and isn’t ashamed of them and is even willing to defend them, she doesn’t conform to just abandoning everything because she loved Salim, which is what the modernism ideology wants to promote. I also liked how they showed that it wasn’t an easy decision to make either - it was a clear choice for her, but it still hurt her and I like that they didn’t just shame her for that like certain modernist ideologies would’ve wanted to portray her situation (particularly because it would further Islamophobia, which let’s be honest is usually the goal for most nonMuslim media): either you abandon everything for love or you cut ties for things that you can’t agree with and feel nothing because your beliefs are strong. That ideology is so wrong and I’m glad the show portrayed that: it’s a struggle, and it hurts. I’m glad that they showed that struggle with a Muslim POC instead of just being like “Oh well her sticking to Islam makes the decision really easy and it wasn’t even a struggle because *shameful tone* religion means a lot to her, and they easily could’ve gotten away with that, but thankfully they at least did that for us. 

I also really liked that they showed a similar struggle with Carlos, but instead of Islam, it was more about the struggle of being lgbt+ and also the love for your family despite their intolerance. (Personal) I literally went through an almost identical scenario to Carlos - I (regrettably) came out (as biromantic asexual) to just my dad and even though I specifically told him not to he later told me that he outed me to my mom. My dad was supportive and said that God made me this way and that true Islam says it’s ok, and although right now I’m still kind of uncomfortable talking about it with him because some of his opinions or understandings are kind of problematic/misunderstandings/stereotypes (i mean he literally outed me to my mom and who knows who else when I told him not to), but my mom... he literally told me she thought it was haram (not Islamically allowed) and that was the last time I discussed anything lgbt+ with my dad and I never even mentioned it to my mom myself. But they’re my parents, I love them and all my relatives and Islam, they’re all so important to me, but I’m also not ashamed of being lgbt+ and it’s a part of who I am. I’m in the closet in real life other than my parents and my personal best friend who is also lgbt+, but I wish I didn’t have to be. I struggle with it every day, I don’t feel safe or secure enough to be out, those words TK chose specifically struck a chord with me. Not only do I physically feel unsafe about being out, I know that despite being supportive of lgbt+ historically before colonialism, the Islamic community, even my family, would not only not be supportive of me now, they’d also be one of the sources of my fear if I came out. I love Islam, I love the community and my family and I know they have their problems, some of which are really serious, but they still have a lot of amazing qualities and they have helped shaped who I am. (End personal)

You know what’s ironic about the message modernism sends out against lgbt+ POC and also Muslims (particularly POC Muslims)? They say that being lgbt+ is part of who you are and you shouldn’t be ashamed of it, yet they promote that you should abandon your ideology, culture and family if they don’t support you, even though those can also be important parts of who you are. I know some people are forced/coerced to make a choice between at least some of those things because of safety and intolerance, and I respect that and my heart is out to all those who have been forced to do so, I easily could’ve been one of them. I know that they struggled with this stuff too, I know they likely still struggle with it. Modernism can’t make that struggle go away, as much as it tries to hide it under an easy choice. Our ideologies, our cultures and our families aren’t personal hobbies that you can toss out at any point because they have problems, modernism can’t and shouldn’t always try to “fix” them, they might have problems but a lot of times modernism tries to “fix” them without context and only out of disrespectful ignorance and prejudice, it’s not empowerment. Our ideologies, our cultures and our families have value not only in general but also to us personally, and just saying that they should be easy sacrifices is disrespectful. Both sides usually make it seem as though we can easily choose only one and can only choose one, but they’re usually both important to us. Neither of them are easy to give up, they’re a part of us, we don’t want to choose between them and we struggle with that every day. 

On a more personal note to you, sister, I understand your fear of publicly wearing the hijab, it’s like the fear I have of being out. I’m so sorry you don’t feel safe enough to show your Muslim pride through your hijab as well. Allah (swt) knows you still love Islam and are not ashamed and are considering your safety, he will always take that into account. I support you and if you ever want to talk more about it, feel free! I know it sucks to have your family not really fully support your lgbt+ identity and all the aspects of it including your fiancee, who I hope makes you as happy as you deserve and respects you and all who you are. You are valid and I hope the struggle gets easier for us and things improve in the future inshAllah. Feel free to reach out any time, and let me know what you think! 

[script-a-world]

Google Form Ask: I'm working on a fantasy set in kind of an alternate earth that has various nation-states representing various cultures, so I have an idea for one to be a Chinese representation, North African/Middle Eastern pre-Islamic rep, Mediterranean (likely Greek) rep, and various European areas. The nation-states are all under the overarching rule of a monarch in the head nation state. Most of the language for the nation-states in my early draft was based on color names in AngloSaxon (which relates to the colors of their standards, etc), but if they're based on these other nations/cultures, would it be appropriate to come up with names for them in the language in which they're based? (ie a Chinese name, an Arabic name, etc) but having all political language be in that AngloSaxon name they were originally given? (i am white so that's really why i want to be sure i'm giving accurate rep here)

Constablewrites: When languages intersect, the powerful set the standards and the powerless adopt and adapt. It’s such an inherently political process that it can provide some valuable insight into the history of your setting.

The origins of English as a bastard language come from the Norman Conquest, when the French ruled England, and their language was the language of court. But the peasants had no reason to learn that language and continued speaking English. It was the noble class (who had to operate in both worlds) and the merchant class (who wanted to live like nobles) who drove the hybridization and the development of Middle English, and the choices of which language to use for what reflected their class concerns.

For instance, the dirty, farty animal tended by the peasants remained a Saxon cow. But slaughtering it and serving it at table was reserved for the gentry, and accordingly at that point it became boeuf (beef).

One language can be imposed on another people from above, like how the ruling class uses their own words for the mechanisms of government. It can also come from below as people aspire to the ruling class. (Think of the dude who uses overly long Latinate words for everything, even when they’re not really accurate, just to show how educated he is.)

The setup you’ve described is inherently colonial: your Anglo-Saxons conquered everyone else, and hung onto that land for long enough that their language took root. (Note that it doesn’t have to be like that in the present. See Spanish in Latin/South America, or English and French in Africa.) Place names would largely still be in the native language, since those don’t naturally evolve in the way that names for people, things, and actions do. How much else survives of the native language depends on your history and politics: if the lower classes had no need to learn the language of the elite and the upper classes didn’t really care how the peasants spoke, that implies the sort of conquest whose attitude was “your taxes go to us now, otherwise just keep doing what you’re doing and try not to riot k thx” and you’d see that in their other policies. If the ruling classes were actively trying to spread their own culture, that would require stamping out the existing way of life and having a much lower tolerance for the native language. Historically, the latter has been much more common. In those sorts of scenarios, perpetuating the native language, even just in personal names, becomes an act of resistance. If you want to see how this plays out, look at the history of indigenous languages--well, basically anywhere, but especially in North America, and also the evolving debate in immigrant communities about given names and what language is spoken in the home.

There’s nothing wrong with creating this kind of setting, but be aware that presenting it in a neutral or positive light makes just as much of a statement as digging into its flaws. If you don’t want to take that on, or if this doesn’t sound like at all what you were going for, you might need to adjust the approach to language accordingly. A creole or pidgin language ([this Quora article] elaborates on the difference) implies two cultures coming together on a more equal footing. You can also rely on the [translation convention], which says that everything is in English except the names not because the world’s English-equivalent is that dominant, but because you’re writing for readers who speak English and you want them to understand. In that case, you’d use other cues to establish how the cultures manifest and interact with each other.

Feral: If I may, I would like to interpret this question as, “I think my story has elements that are problematic, can you help me identify them?” Because the potential issues I see in the small amount of information given in this ask are much more far reaching than “can I use a real life language as the basis for a fantasy language/naming-system?”

Constable has already pointed out various scenarios throughout real history, so I won’t repeat all of that. But I do need to emphasize one thing:

What you’re describing is colonialism. And it is bad. It is, in fact, evil (if evil exists). We shouldn’t have to say this in 2019. It is completely okay to have colonialism in your worldbuilding; it’s a thing that exists in the real world so it can exist in fiction. But here’s the thing: once more, it’s evil. The Anglo-Saxon imperial power you are describing is evil. They have done an evil thing that the real world analogous cultures actually did do and the effects of which are still very very real and felt by the real world cultures you're having your fictional versions subjugate. Which means they can’t be the good guy. If they are, in the context that you are writing in, your worldbuilding is fundamentally racist. And I know from the very fact that you are asking for help that this is the farthest thing from what you want for your world and your story. But if this is the case, then the only thing you can do is raze the world and start again.

Another thing in your ask that jumped out at me is the phrase “pre-Islamic Middle Eastern/North African rep.” I assume you’re going with pre-Islam for one or both of two reasons. 1) This is a “sandals and sorcery” setting that would take place in an analogous time period to pre-Christian and pre-Islam; your reference to Greece being the inspiration for the “Mediterranean” culture makes me think that pretty much all cultures are being referenced in the BCE (which would be between 500 and a thousand years before the Anglo-Saxon invasion of England, so keep that in mind). 2) You’re concerned about representing an Islamic culture sensitively.

Here’s the thing: there’s no such culture as the Middle East, and definitely not Middle East/North Africa, pre-Islam (one can argue that there’s no such thing as the Middle East pre-WW2, but I do not have time for that argument). The spread of Islam is responsible for whatever homogeny there is between the cultures, and even today, there is not one single culture in the Middle East (a political designation, hence the post-WW2) or in North Africa. There are many cultures between the different countries and between the different ethnic groups within the same countries. Arabic would only be an appropriate reference language if your reference is pre-Islam Arabia, not the whole Middle East, because again Arabic spread through Islam – different places have different native languages which are still the common use languages.

It may just be in the limited space you had for the ask, but the way you’ve represented your worldbuilding makes it seem like your inclusion of these other cultures is more of a check-list style, no-can-call-me-racist-because-I-mention-other-cultures-that-are-different-from-mine attempt than an actual desire to have representation.

Moving onto what is not really problematic in your ask but is confusing… I just don’t understand what the whole color thing is about. That’s not how countries are named. Where do these standards come from? Did all the cultures just happen to have single colored standards that they used to identify themselves pre-invasion/colonization? Or did the Anglo-Saxon culture literally conquer the world through the cunning use of flags [video]?

I would check out this Wiki article on the etymology of country names in English. A good example of how English names for countries do come about is in the name for Japan. Japan is the Anglicization of Marco Polo’s Italianicization of the Shanghai accented pronunciation of 日本, “jitpun,” which has been Japan’s name for itself since the end of the 7th century, is pronounced “nippon” or “nihon” there, and means “land of the rising sun.”

Hello Future Me has a fantastic video on how to go about replicating both native placenames and colonial placenames in your worldbuilding.

Finally, as far as your actual question goes, can you use a real language from a culture not your own to name places in your world? I think you need to do a lot of researching and a lot of revisiting your worldbuilding before you can make that call.

Tex: You have an... interesting collage of places listed. Some of them go into more detail than others - I'm curious why you've picked what you did, and to the depth that you've chosen. Given the Ango-Saxon bias I'm picking up on, can I assume that you're basing the head of this government in England/the UK? If so, I'm also curious to know whether this alternate world is the consequence of a diversion point in our own history (e.g. someone lost a war that let the UK steamroller everyone into the Commonwealth), or if previous other world powers are for some reason less effective at consolidating their powers and conquering their neighbors than the UK (I'm going to keep assuming UK for simplicity's sake in my answer, but feel free to plug in whatever works for you).

There is a bit of an issue with your current set-up, assuming real-world, real-history parallels. The most immediate of which is that humans are quite simply very good at organizing themselves into societies as soon as they've got that sedentary lifestyle (i.e. agriculture) down pat, and this can and has happened in every found and currently living human settlement, with rare exceptions. Statistically speaking, empires are an eventuality, especially given the right combination of genetics (De Neve et al, 2013; Li et al., 2012) and circumstances (The Creativity Post; Zhang et al, 2009; Halverston et al., 2004; Hunt et al., 1999) to launch a would-be leader into capably instituting a strict hierarchy with a penchant toward warfare. Please let it be known that expanding borders is typically a bloody process, because other people get upset if you take their things without permission - namely, their land, food, and women.

(I name "land, food, and women" because 1.) land is a place to grow food, bury your dead, and obtain water, 2.) food is necessary to not die, and 3.) women ensure the existence of the next generation and thus perpetuity of your society/ethnicity. These are integral, and missing even one of them can immediately - or very, very quickly - lead to the downfall of your civilization. The rest are frills that build upon these three components.)

The reason why I'm curious as to the places you've picked is because every single one of them has at least established a kingdom, if not an empire of their own. For the practical reasons of warfare, these are difficult governments to topple and replace with your own (particularly if you're culturally distinct from them, but that's a slightly different topic). Wikipedia has multiple lists about empires across the world: List of largest empires, Colonial empire § List of colonial empires, and List of empires. I’m going to toss in List of people known as “the Great”, to round things out.

The issue, from a would-be conqueror's perspective, in attaining governance of these places is their armies and ability to call upon allies due to their accompanying diplomatic prowess. In order to be formidable, you need an army of your own that's capable of overcoming such an obstacle. If you're canny, you can trade some brute strength for things like economic manipulation and various degrees of diplomacy that probably delve into things like assassination (China and Rome were big fans of these methods to one degree or another).

Pick a region and an era, and you'll find someone that's done exactly that in varying ratios at least once. Sun Tzu's The Art of War comments about warfare to degrees of honorability and the effectiveness of the different grades depending on the situation; familiarizing yourself on that book will help you greatly in laying the foundation of how your world came to be, if you haven't already done so. The history of your world will most definitely set the stage for any era coming after it, particularly if you're writing for a post-"unification" era.

Now, nation-states are a relatively new concept, particularly because they're a combination of two distinct ideas - the nation and the state (this might appear a bit obvious, but please bear with me). Nations have existed for ages because they're defined by a homogenous ethnic group congregated in the same general area - they are typically grouped by a shared bloodline and culture.

States are different in that their primary association is in an organized government that may or may not be constrained to a single ethnicity - borders exist here, whereas in nations borders hold a more ephemeral placement (the people are the border, rather than geographical markers or lines on a paper).

As such, states are a newer concept than nations, and tying the two together generally leads to a majority ethnicity that is frequently enforced by genocide in order to maintain status quo (Wikipedia); this is, incidentally, where laws protecting minorities originate from, a subject of which can and often is used as political leverage for a variety of motivations.

I will also note that nations, being ethnically-oriented, have their people as their borders. As you can imagine, history in a few continents has proven that "rights" to land have been attempted by spreading out an ethnic group via practices such as immigration, inter-marriage with other nations, and purchase of land. You can see inhibitory reactions in legislation via things like restrictions on religions (forbidding the practice of certain religions), clothing (forbidding or dictating types of clothing - frequently on both class and gender lines), marriage (enforcement of social classes), and language (forbidding of languages and dictation of a national standard).

What you’re describing is colonialism, and with a check-listing tilt that comes across as disrespectful to the cultures you’ve picked out, but I hesitate to call it “evil” because that ascribes a morality that’s inherently tied to particular cultures. Homogenization has certainly displayed benefits in the form of accessibility:

Ancient Egypt, while not strictly speaking an empire, has a mostly continuous lineage with flourishing arts, social development, and many cities were considered cosmopolitan because of contemporary tourism

The Persian empire had a fantastic postal system because of their extensive network of paved roads

Imperial China saw not only the development of a new language, but also the advancement of literature, philosophy, and physical arts such as architecture, pottery, and painting

The Huns developed trade routes across multiple continents which benefited not only goods but intellectual progress

Alexander the Great brought along an entourage of intellectuals and artisans to assemble a compendium of knowledge across his empire that was disseminated as far as possible

The Romans achieved many things - not least their advances in architecture and literature

The Mughal Empire in India was a world leader in manufacturing during its time, and many artworks during its time are considered cultural classics

The Byzantine and Holy Roman Empires both unified large swathes of Europe and other regions of the world

So while colonialism in its many forms does function as an eradication of culture, it also has a tendency to promote stability, relative peace due to a common background, and a marked increase in literacy and the arts - culture, in other words, becomes more intricate because there’s now an opportunity to do so.

Unfortunately for many would-be colonizers, this works best with respect toward the original inhabitants of a land, because otherwise it just devolves into more war. These wars, because they’re culturally- and ethnically-based, are often bloodier than ones fought specifically over resources, because trade negotiations cannot be offered as a common ground where lasting peace can be found.

In order to not have a dissolution of empire like was found when Alexander the Great died, common ground must be found as a unifying factor - genocide doesn’t endear you to anyone, and fosters resentment that’s taken advantage of whenever bureaucracy at the top of the chain fractures. For your instance, the colour names likely won’t work, because it’s imposing a cultural norm that might not match up with the sub-administrations, and it comes across as a patronizing pacification to suggest merely translating it.

“i am white so that's really why i want to be sure i'm giving accurate rep here” - This, combined with your broad strokes of stereotyping, is the checklisting that Feral mentioned. Checklisting is inherently disrespectful to the source cultures, and you would be better off removing them entirely if you find yourself struggling too much with including them as equal in terms of cultural richness and longevity of existence (and for the most part, the ones you’ve skimmed over in your list are older than the UK, so it currently says unkind things of your perception).

Citations

De Neve, Jan-Emmanuel et al. “Born to Lead? A Twin Design and Genetic Association Study of Leadership Role Occupancy.” The leadership quarterly vol. 24,1 (2013): 45-60. doi:10.1016/j.leaqua.2012.08.001

PDF - Halverson, S. K., Murphy, S. E., & Riggio, R. E. (2004). Charismatic Leadership in Crisis Situations: A Laboratory Investigation of Stress and Crisis. Small Group Research, 35(5), 495–514. https://doi.org/10.1177/1046496404264178

PDF - Hunt, James G., Kimberly B. Boal, and George E. Dodge. "The effects of visionary and crisis-responsive charisma on followers: An experimental examination of two kinds of charismatic leadership." The Leadership Quarterly 10.3 (1999): 423-448.

Li, Wen-Dong, et al. "Do leadership role occupancy and transformational leadership share the same genetic and environmental influences?." The Leadership Quarterly 23.2 (2012): 233-243.

Zhang, Z., Ilies, R., & Arvey, R. D. Beyond genetic explanations for leadership: The moderating role of the social environment. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 110(2), (2009): 118-128.

[revangerang]

Oh boy I really got in my feelings and wrote way too much lmao

Tagged by: @edithpattou86

Tags your friends to do their own lists: @chierafied @mother-ishvara @doughygraduatestudent @kazoomajor @pagan-assassin

[[MORE]]

Top 5 animated movies:

1. Whisper of the Heart - Such a cute and whimsical slice-of-life coming of age story, and so inspiring for creative types! I love how Shizuku sees her fantasies come to life in the world around her, and how she just follows her whims to wander the city and treats each day like an adventure. I see a lot of myself in her. The grandpa and his shop are so cool! I want to find a place like that in my city! I love how she and Seiji inspire and encourage each other to improve themselves. Even though they’re so young and I usually hate that kind of thing, I think it’s a very realistic portrayal of what true love and a healthy relationship should be. The way her writing is treated as a creative process and something she can polish with hard work is just such a wonderful message and so inspiring to me.

2. Spirited Away - I love the Japanese culture and mythology, and the serene, still tone of the film. Truly beautiful. The way it doesn’t paint the spirits and gods in a bad light is good and correct: they were the careless humans who went into their world and took what they shouldn’t have. But it still focuses on the supernatural and eerie elements, often without even explaining anything, which I love. And the bathhouse feels like a real functioning place with workplace culture and all. And of course it’s great that Chihiro steps up and learns to be strong. I just love it.

3. Howl’s Moving Castle - I love all the characters so much, and all the magic and whimsy. The fantasy European setting is so charming, and they did a good job depicting Western magic. Ghibli movies really have such mundane magic, and they make me feel like my life is magic too. Sophie is so good and strong and I love seeing her come into her own. And Howl is hot. lmao

4. My Neighbor Totoro - I had the original Fox dub of this on a bootleg VHS my grandma made us when I was literally like an infant. My parents threw it away when I was still young- like no older than 5- because it “has Eastern religion in it” 🙄 Too bad for them the damage was already done lmfao. It was definitely one of the biggest influences of my formative years, I loved it so much and I’m so grateful to it. That mundane magic I talked about before, and just introducing me to a totally different worldview from my sheltered white American Christian bubble. I was fascinated by every single aspect from the traditional Japanese-style home to the bentos to the shrines... I really admired Satsuki and how grown up she was, taking care of her little sister like she did, making the lunches, all that. It’s really such a charming movie with great music and such a realistic depiction of childhood. Plus who doesn’t love Totoro himself?? And catbus! Iconicccc. I still look for little portholes in bushes and trees to this day lmao

5. Mulan - My little 8-year-old enby ass crying in the living room and repeatedly playing the Reflections scene over and over makes so much more sense now 😂 But really it’s just such a great film with a unique art style, fun characters, and great music. I love how Mulan fights for what she believes is right, and wants to protect her father. And I think it’s great how she also fights to find her own place in the world. I like how they don’t make it a “not like other girls” thing, but just that she personally somehow doesn’t feel comfortable in her own skin with the makeup and all that. Between her living as a man and the clear romantic relationship between “Ping” and Shang, it’s pretty good queer representation for a 2000s Disney movie lol. Also Mulan and Shang can both get it I mean what.

Honorable Mention: Prince of Egypt - That animation tho! So fucking cinematic!! And the music and everything just ugh so good! The characters are really compelling too and you can totally feel the brotherly love and familial issues.

Top 5 live action movies:

1. Miss Pettigrew Lives For A Day - This is a movie where you can’t look away for a moment or you’ll miss something important. It really is just one entire heck of a day for the main character like howwww does so much happen. It’s really just written so well honestly that they manage to pack so much into a single movie and a single day. I aspire to that level. The 30s setting is so great with the costumes and set and music ahh I get so much inspiration from it. Every single character (and actor for that matter) is just fantastic. It’s super funny- that situational comedy is my jam. And there are touching moments that give me inspiration for my own life. I relate to Miss Pettigrew with her clear social anxiety, and perhaps neurodivergency? But I love how the events of the film bring out the best in her. And Delysia is just so charming! I want her confidence

2. La La Land - Such a fun and whimsical musical about life for creatives in Los Angeles~ It makes me feel nostalgic and proud to live here. I love all the different homages to classic Hollywood, and the music is so good!! The love story feels realistic and I actually really like that they don’t end up together in the end. They just encourage each other to be better, and if that means being apart, they’re willing to do it. It is another one that gives me inspiration for my life and creative endeavors, especially The Fools Who Dream 😭 Gets me every time.

3. Mamma Mia - This is my shameless feel-good movie. I love just putting it on in the background as I clean or whatever. It’s just so upbeat and fun!! I love Amanda Seyfried and Meryl Streep especially. And I like that the main character learns what she wants (and doesn’t want) out of life right now. And I love that they depict older characters and women!! having full and rich lives including romance and sex. The message that it’s never too late for love is so great! And also just like please communicate and you will probably save yourself so much heartache lmao.

4. Across the Universe - I have an affinity for the 60s and 70s, and I love how this movie kind of takes you through that era with the various characters. It’s such a fun movie with great costumes, cinematography, and music! I just love all the covers of the Beatles songs!! I honestly like them just as much as I like the originals. This is one of the first things I ever saw with positive/neutral queer representation?? Like Sadie is presented just as she is, without it being like WHAT SHE LIKES WOMEN?????? I”MPOSSIBLE !! Or making it all about sex or whatever. It’s literally just like “I want to hold your hand.” Also the whole bit with Eddie Izzard is just incredible lmfao

5. LOTR - My first fandom~ I love these movies so much ughhh. The music! The costumes! The characters! The world! The high fantasy!! I think PJ was so true to the books, or at least as much as he was able in just 10-ish hours. I love that they just went for it and filmed all three in one go, and made them over 3 hours long, which was basically unheard of at the time for blockbuster films. They did so good fully representing the different races through costume, language, culture, and the music too. I literally used to just lay on my bed for hours at a time in junior high, listening to the soundtracks and being immersed in the world. My friends and I would often play pretend that we were in Middle Earth (so lame for middle schoolers lmaooo). I love every single (not-evil) character and I will fight for them. I will especially fight Denethor I don’t even cARE !

Honorable mention: A Little Princess - Sooo whimsical and lovely, even when the girls are going through hardship! I love Sarah and how she literally does magic and even puts a curse on what’s her face omgg. She’s so charming and a genuinely good person too, even though she could have been a spoiled brat. The big climactic scene is so !! Omg I still get the adrenaline when she’s crossing the board and then hiding from the police even though I’ve seen this countless times since I was a small child. And it’s so wonderful that she’s reunited with her father, and they adopt the other girl. It taught me at a young age that the world isn’t fair and people will be nasty and abusive for no reason, but that you can still believe in magic and “fancy yourself a princess.” And the neighbor guy taught me that strangers will step in to help out of the goodness of their heart.

Top 5 TV shows:

1. ATLA - One of the best series of all time. The worldbuilding, lore, storyline, character development, animation, music, etc, are all incredible. If they had gone with the original intention of making Zutara canon it would have been literally perfect and so subversive and innovative! As it is it is still nearly perfect and they still did an amazing job with Zuko’s redemption arc. I just ignore that very last scene tbh. In my mind, it didn’t happen. The series addresses so many issues like imperialism, sexism, abuse, family, disability, war, etc, in a very realistic way. Uncle Iroh is literally a treasure.

2. Steven Universe - So charming and wonderful!! I just love it so much!! It is so goddamn queer, it makes me so happy. Stevonnie is the nonbinary representation we don’t even deserve!! I love every single character. I love the animation and the music too! The bgm is so bubbly and glitchy and cool, super on point for trends these days. And the original songs are so charming~ It also deals with a ton of important issues like imperialism, interpersonal relationships, oppression, self-identity, abuse, leadership, mental health, boundaries, consent, brain-washing, unlearning unhealthy behavior, etc. I love that every single character, even minor ones, get character development and a chance to be strong and improve themselves. And it shows that even the ones we initially think are super strong and have it all together, actually have their own issues that they struggle with too.

3. Yuuri!!! On Ice - This show!!!! Oh my goddddddd. Literally perfect. I love that it just subverts every single trope???? Especially with the events at the beginning and the big spoiler in episode 10. Simply incredible. I love every single character so much??? Even ones I was expecting to hate, like how Yurio is a little shit at the beginning, and then when Lilia is introduced as this super severe tyrant, but she ends up just being a good, yet strict coach because she really wants Yurio to succeed. It’s honestly just so wholesome! The music is so amazing and the ice skating is really realistic too! It really shows that they had an actual skating choreographer and worked off video of him performing. I love how realistic the whole show is like with lots of social media, youtube, instagram, etc. And it does a queer romance without it being a gimmick. It’s just a sports anime with a side plot of a romance but it just happens to be gay. And Kubo-sensei has stated that homophobia doesn’t exist at all in their world which makes me so happy. It’s honestly so queer and I adore how all three main characters are genderfucks a bit. I also love how realistically Yuuri’s anxiety and depression are portrayed. I relate so much to him, especially because mine exhibit in the exact same ways as his. It’s another one that inspires me to fight to be better and live the life I want to live.

4. OTGW - So charming. A perfect addition to the canon of New England fairy tales. The music is great, the animation is wonderful and nostalgic, the characters are fun and interesting and spooky. I love how liminal it is and you aren’t really sure where they are or what’s going on for the majority of the episodes. Greg is the most realistic depiction of a small child and the brothers’ relationship is the most realistic I think I’ve ever seen in my life lmao. He’s just so random and weird and has such Little Kid Logic I love it so much lmao. The story is perfectly contained in its 10 short episodes, and it gives a very satisfying ending. I still can’t get over how many huge stars were in it too?? Like fucking Tim Curry as Auntie Whispers???? I can not believe.

5. Inuyasha - I’m weeb trash and this show is also trash but I love it so much okay. As a big fan I hold so much against the anime for changing things from the manga, but even so I love it. Overall I think the animation, music, and voice acting is perfect. It’s so cool with all the mythos of youkai and the shikon jewel, plus I love traditional Japanese culture stuff. And isekai type stuff is my jam. If I found a portal to another world or to the past you bet your ass I’d go through it. I totally don’t still look for portals as a 30 year old adult, I don’t know what you’re talking about 😂 Kagome is such a great mc tbh like she’s so smart and strong and talented and kind I just love her so much??? I want to be more like her. And I love all the characters honestly. I have to overlook some questionable 90s anime tropes for certain ones, but I still love them. As much as we rag on the constant upgrades thing, the battles and stuff are pretty thrilling, and overall the series is good fun. And yes Sesshoumaru is my husbando, next question.

Honorable Mention: Doctor Who - I love how this show manages to be like every single genre?? SciFi, historical, comedy, thriller, mystery, slice of life, etc. I love all of the Doctors, and all of their companions. I just love how much the Doctor loves humans, and how much faith they have in humanity. And again it’s that whole isekai, time travel, normal modern human goes on magical adventures thing. I would go with the Doctor in a heartbeat. I still cry over Donna 😭

[araminakilla]

Faris D'jinn (long) appreciation post

Warning: If you don't like very long posts or deep analysis of a character or situations, maybe you want to skip this. But you are always welcome.

I will always say this: Treasure of the found lamp! is one of my favorites episodes of the Ducktales bomb (the other is Nothing can stop Della Duck!) I like the jokes, the journeys of the two groups, the cameos of different characters that appeared in Season One. But most of all... Him.

Faris D'jinn. Middle Eastern adventurer. Seeker of the lamp. Descendant of an actual genie and the amazing woman who freed him. Here are ten reasons (not counting the facts that he is a great swordman and a cool biker because everyone knows that) of why this warrior is one my favourite characters in the Ducktales universe:

1. He is not what he seems

The first time I saw this guy in the SDCC 2018, and the person presenting the characters said he was Dijon from the Ducktales movie, there were two different reactions from my part:

"OMG! They acknowledged the movie. That means Merlock is going to return!" And...

"This Dijon looks so COOL! But...he looks like a terrorist"

And before you sue and attack me, there are some comments in YouTube that reflected my thoughts. One of them said he looks like an ISIS member.

But I have investigated and I found out that in fact, there are some people that wear traditional black clothes in the Middle East and are NOT asociated with violence or radical groups. So, my bad people. I'm really ashamed for making this statement. I try to not be an ignorant of different cultures for reasons like this.

Anyway, those months I tried to stay positive that, if he was a bad guy, he could get a redemption arc. Because there's no way that this awesome Ducktales crew, that handles the Latino community very well, is going to portray arabs in a bad light, just like every old Hollywood productions (I'm looking at you, Aladdin)

And when the promo of Ducktales and Big Hero 6 appeared, with this warrior using his sword in front of a very scared Scrooge... well... I put my thoughts on another post, but I was a little concerned for the Middle Eastern representation.

Great was my surprise when I saw the episode for the first time. Let say that the power of the lamp wasn't the only plot twist of that episode.

2. He's so serious that it's funny

His single-minded quest for the lamp before the Ifrit's dawn (a fact that he monologued for 10 minutes without blinking) leaves him with no time to joke around, except everyone around him is a goof, and that makes him hilarous in a sense. Best demostrated when he answered ALL the riddles from a literal JOKE BOOK. He's so smart... yet so gullible that it's amazing. It's like he can't tell when someone is lying or making a joke... I don't know if that's possible. There's also his reaction at the "got your nose" prank which, honestly to me, was one of the best reactions EVER. Maybe it's how he screamed "monster!" and how he seems to really believe the creature got his nose. Truth to be to told, I was very surprised the first time I saw him laugh, that was something unexpected. And how the premise of the episode was him getting a family of adventuring Ducks, a greek Godness, a sea monster and a bunch of Beagles involved in a quest...to give himself a birthday present, like... Who gives himself a birthday present? (Really, I don't know someone who does that)

3. He is grateful even with enemies

He defeated Charybdis and the poor monster was whipped and given the beat of his life because he wanted to help Scrooge and Webby with the phony quest, and the first thing the warrior does is thanking him and saying that he will be remembered in the story of the lamp. That impressed me... And somehow made worth all the pain that Charybdis had. The same happened with the "Minotaur" and Ma Beagle (the little bow that he made is priceless). Many people would mock their defeated enemies and give them zero respect... but not him. That was so honorable, it reminded me of how Medieval Knights act, which would be discussed in the seventh point of this post.

4. He forgave the Ducks easily

"Djinn, I'm sorry I tricked you. If I'd known what was at stake..."

"Another chapter in the legend. A final trial before we find the lamp! It's all part of the journey!"

Like wow... That was something I was NOT expecting, because I wouldn't expect a guy who was shouting and slicing things all day to be that... nice. And maybe that could be because there was no time in the episode for the liar revealed drama. But the points D'jinn made about why he forgave Scrooge make total sense. He loves adventures and journeys, he likes to write in a scroll about the trials he had, so he instead took the positives aspects that the phony quest had and continue with his life. Now that's something you don't see very often. Instead of swearing revenge and dedicate his time ruining someone's life (I'm looking at you Glomgold, Magica, Negaduck and other villains) he forgave the Ducks, focused on the present and keep only the most important facts. I like that way of thinking.

5. He has a deep love for his family's history (and his heritage and bloodline)

He comes from a family that, as far as I'm concerned, keeps the stories of their past alive, passing them to the next generations. It's been ten generations since the genie was freed. What the ex-magical creature got was more valuable that having phenomenal cosmic powers: A loving wife and many descendants who remember them with such passion, and now one of said descendants, fascinated by their love story has adquired the "totem that started it all". I heard that arabs in particular are family oriented people, they would do ANYTHING for their loved ones, and that's the first time I saw that in a cartoon (at least in a Disney cartoon, the other example that is Non-Disney is the Oscar nominated "The Breadwinner", which I recommend you guys have to see it, it's so good)

D'jinn made a long journey from the Middle East to America (at least I think Duckburg is in America) for a powerless lamp because of it's sentimental value, which leads us to the next point...

6. He is a sentimental guy

You wouldn't expect a tough, serious and to some extent dangerous guy to have powerful feelings like love? Right? Think again. There's a reason of why the call D'jinn (and his VA, Omid Abtahi) a cinnamon roll. He has strong emotions, that is (I think) one of the reasons of why he's so dramatic. It's part of his personality. In fact, his volatile personality (using many times his sword, cutting things, flipping a table) has a solid base of why it is the way it is. I'm not saying that destroying the couch and threatening the Duck family is not wrong, I'm saying this because this is NOT a matter of the "He's an arab and all arabs are volatile/barbaric/will scream and attack you 'cause that is their nature" thing that all the Hollywood movies I saw (at least the examples I saw in the documentary "Reel Bad Arabs") have. No sir, this is different.

And talking about Arab stereotypes...

7. He's a HUGE improvement from the Ducktales movie and series

Back in 1990, he was Dijon, a thief and mook to Merlock, the Big Bad Wolf of the Movie. He was funny and the interactions he had with Scrooge in the movie and the series are funnier (Also, did you know that the last words Scrooge said in the series was "Dijon!" because the duck was running towards him 'cause he stole his watch?)

But, as the Nostalgia Critic put it in his review of the Ducktales Movie

"I don't know... Is this considered racist now? Yes, he has an accent and is a thief..."

He's fine as a comic relief, but nothing makes him different from the Crows of Dumbo, or the Indians of Peter Pan, or the Siamese cats of Lady and the Tramp, or...

Honest Trailer's guy: Stop it!

OK ok. The point it's... The Ducktales reboot did it again. They took a not so well liked character from the '87 series and made him/her a lovable character, like Mamá Cabrera (I swear, she's also mi mamá now)

Now he's honorable, charming, etc (and yes, those words are from a YouTuber reviewer) But specialy, they changed his name to Faris D'jinn which not only sounds more arabic, but also foreshadows his relationship with a genie. Plus, Faris means "Knight" in arabic, which describes what he is and how he acts perfectly.

8. He's different but at the same time just like everyone else

Gif belongs to @i-mostly-reblog-things

Yeah, he looks different, speaks with an accent that's not American, has a different mindset about things in life and maybe that could come from the country he's been raised, or his family or maybe he decide to be the way he is on his own accord. But, as an lesson learned in the episode "The Depths of cousin Fethry!"

Just because something or someone is different doesn't mean is bad.

True, D'jinn didn't make a first good impresion with the Duck family, except from Webby (You go girl! It seems that she has a talent to see edgy but misunderstood people and give them a chance) but at the end everyone was celebrating his birthday with him. They give him a cake! This small but powefull gesture made me 100% convinced that, even with flaws and conflicts, they are the perfect family. It still surprises me that the crew of Ducktales and Disney would make a scene like that. If someone told me a year ago that they would make a scene with: An arab. Dressed with traditional clothes (turban and all). Wearing all black. Celebrating his/her birthday with an American (Scotish in Scrooge's case) Family, I would have laugh and say: Yeah, sure, like they would actualy show that.

But they did it and I couldn't be more happy.

Just a pause from this Ducktales' post

Some of you could be thinking as you read this: "Nice that your people are shown in a positive way"

The thing is... I'm not arab. I'm a latinoamerican who just happens to love Middle Eastern cultures. My country isn't very prejuiced towards Middle Eastern people (maybe because there's a few of them) but I have come from a long way. To being sure that everything there was just sand and violence to wanting to visit some of the many wonders that the East has to give, meet people and learn their point of view. I think everyone should do that at some point, instead of, you know, getting all your arab information from Hollywood movies and concluding that everything would be better if the Middle Easterns were dead. As this quote from the YouTube Documentary "Reel bad Arabs" states:

"We feel that Arabs are not like us, are not like everyone else, then let's kill them off, then they deserve to die, right?"

The thing is, they are more similar that we think, it's just that the international media doesn't show that... until now.

And going back with Ducktales

Yeah, this dude looks different, but he laughs, feels, and enjoys having a great time just like everyone else.

It's the same that is happening with Fenton and the latino representation. D'jinn is a hero who happens to be arab. A dramatic warrior. A family values man. A great allie, friend and who knows what many things more. He, and other Ducktales characters, have so many layers that it's incredible. Just like people, you can't define someone only from their personality or their race. There are so many things that make a person unique. D'jinn broke the expectations I had for him (or he sliced them with his sword) for the better.

9. He's better than Aladdin in many ways

By starters, the voice actors. Aladdin's VA is American and has an American accent in the movie. D'jinn's VA is Omid Abtahi, born in Iran, a Middle Eastern actor. And I'm not saying arab because Irani people are not Arabs (correct me if I'm wrong). Omid doesn't have an accent, as far as I know, but I think it's a nice detail to have the warrior being voiced by someone who comes from the same place. Then, we have the fact that Aladdin lied to almost everyone and D'jinn was a victim of a lie. True, the Ducks assumed he was going to kill them all (and for a good reason) but a lie is still a lie. I don't know many things about Middle Eastern clothes and fashion in the past and the present, but I can tell you will find (maybe traditional) people who wears something more close to D'jinn than Aladdin, and I'm pretty sure the warrior would free a genie if he has the chance because he's a descendant of one. But apart from their differences, both are really good people with a big heart and a kind soul, it's just that we find out Aladdin is good in the beggining of the movie with the bread and orphans scene and with D'jinn almost in the end of the episode, because to be honest, I was expecting him to be lying about wanting to protect the lamp and instead working for the new Merlock, since that was his role in the original movie. Many of us expected a lying thief, but instead we got another Diamond in the Rough.

10. He is a key for one of Scrooge's character developments

Gif belongs to @everythingducktales

The richest duck in the World was SO impressed by the warrior's story that he opened a museum of valuable artifacts so he can share his stories with his family and the world. Let's repeat that. Scrooge McDuck, a very famous, very important and proud adventurer took the advice of a stranger (he also was 100% sure this stranger would kill him and his family if he doesn't get what he wants) because he saw his "human" side, a family side that made the duck realize "maybe we are not so different after all".

Not even the Buzzards (people who worked with Scrooge for who knows what many years) were capable of convincing Scrooge to do some of their plans (but lets be honest, their plans are awful)

That made him be more open about his adventures, his past experiences and his treasures, each one with a unique story. Maybe that would prevent unfortunate yard sales in the future.

Bonus:

11. He is going to return

It is confirmed in one of Frank Angones' posts that he is going to appear in the future, maybe as an allie of the Duck family in an adventure. Or who knows? Maybe they can recruit him as a member of a superheroes team along with Gizmoduck, Darkwing Duck and others. Plus, I want to see him interact with Launchpad and Donald.

That would be all... for now.

[alatismeni-theitsa]

What do you say about Greek culture VS what do you really mean. A mastrpost.

(All of those I have seen on Tumblr.)

What do you say: "The images of gods were created by rich white racist Athenians, so they are not valid".

What do you mean: "I must change the race of the gods as shown in ancient Greek depictions to suit my own view of a proper society. No, I don't find that racist. I won't accept worshiping a White pantheon, because I will feel uncomfortable. (Because white = evil, duuuuh). So, the past and the ancient art MUST be ignored. The ancient Gods need to be redifined to fit my standards. I don't say this for any other gods of any other religion. But I don't think that's racist or hypocritical. I also have never looked up antiquities found in the rest areas of Greece and in remote areas, made by simple people and not rich Athenias. I have no idea that their depictions were the same with the Athenian. My arguments only include Athens because the other places didn't exist, apparently. Additionally, I blindly believe that race was so important in ancient Greece as it is for America and Australia today".

What do you say: "Gods could have any skin color because they were worshipped from people of all colors".

What do you mean: "I completely ignore the fact that as subsaharan Africans and people from Middle Eastern and Mediterranean nations could go to Greece, so Greeks could also go to those places. So there were White/Caucasian people worshipping the Persian, the Hindu, the Egyptian and the subsaharan African gods. I don't believe the gods of those other nations should change to reflect all skin colors of the people who ever worshiped them. I only want the Greek ones to change (despite ancient Greeks never changing them) because Greek culture is popular right now and everyone MUST be included in there. (See answer 1). I don't usually like seeing them in various Mediterranean skin tones because they still look Caucasian and White™ (because a tan or a bronze skin doesn't automatically make you a POC*)".

*the only part I actually agree with 😂😂😂

What so you say: "There were POC in Greek mythology because I learned about some deities and some characters who lived in remote places".

What do you mean: "Because Poseidon went to Ethiopia I say he is Black. Andromeda is also from Ethiopia, so she is Black. I have no idea about the fact that Ethiopia for Greeks was an Asian exotic country. I have no idea that Poseidon and Andromeda were depicted Caucasian (and Andromeda also pale) in Greek art. I don't care if Posseidon, Andromeda and her family had Greek given names. Even if I know it, I feel the need to change it because it doesn't resonate with me. And I will forget that Ethiopia was a different place for Greeks and I will refer to the modern country I know today. Also some sources I have said Dionysus went to India once. So he must look Indian. I ignore the fact he was always depicted Caucasian by the people who worshiped him. What? Helios disappeared in the Hyperboreia at times? Oooh that means he is... um... a Viking god! I take everything literally and don't see the myths as religious stories and fairytales crafted by and for Greek people".

What do you say: "Greek heroes and gods were fictional, so we can depict them however we wish".

What do you mean: "I don't say this for any other national heroes or gods, but I think it's alright for the Greek culture. When I Japanese heroes or Indian heroes are depicted in media, I ask for Japanese and Indian actors to be hired, because that's the respectful thing to do. I assume the people of those nations had heroes who looked like the majority or them. But Greeks? Naaaah not the same. Every rave can play every race, right?? Ah, no, sorry, that's not politically correct. That can only happen for the Greek culture. I also think it's good to ignore the original material which describes those heroes (for example "blond" and "they washed his white skin" have no importance. The important thing is there is representation! What do you mean that mainly *Greeks* mainly be represented in media which profit off their heritage? Get outta here!! We all know Greeks are Caucasians so they are already represented! It's not like they are different from the other Whites because of culture or anything... And representation in my mind means only "skin tone representation" not "representation of ethnicity"! After all, where I come from, one skintone = one ethnicity. And the fact that the overwhelming majority of Greeks complains for the racebending means nothing to me. They are not entitled to their heritage and they are a bunch of racists anyway. They hate all POC! (Oh, but when other nations complain about the racebending of their heroes and gods I listen to them because I am woke)".

What do you say: "The Greek gods are not really Greek because they were borrowed from other religions of the Middle East".

What do you mean: "I found that both Ishtar and Aphrodite were goddess of beauty and sexuality, so they are basically the same. I have only assumptions to "prove" the rest of the Greek gods were borrowed, but most of the cases follow my previously stated point. Despite Greek gods having the same Greek identity kept for eons, I still don't believe they are truly Greek. (But I call them by the Greek name "Theoi" anyways and use ancient Greek prayers and words to communicate with them). Perhaps the Greek language is also not Greek because it was partly taken by the Phoenicians".

What do you say: "You are modern Greeks, you have nothing to do with ancient Greek culture".

What do you mean: "I am ignorant when it comes to modern Greek traditions and I have no idea about the customs (many times baptised "orthodox Christian") which continue since the ancient years to our days. I also have no idea about Greek names or that the modern language is 70% similar to the ancient. I have no idea that Greeks in all historical periods were taught about their mythology or studied the classics, to keep in touch with their past. I have no idea that Greeks have fought and died to prevent antiquities stolen or sold away from their country".

What do you say: "Greek culture belongs to everybody".

What do you mean: "Because it's become popular, the Greek culture no longer belongs to the original people of the country. The two of them must be detached, because I and other foreigners say so. I don't accept ancient Greece is their heritage because so many generations have passed. And apparently heritage is given by blood ratio and not by who is continuing and evolving the culture. I don't say this for any other nation, but I don't think this statement is racist. Perhaps, if their culture is public domain they need to give us marbles and more antiquities.. hmm... My ancestors stealing Greek antiquities are excused that way. Moreover, I am more entitled to have an opinion on the culture than the Greeks themselves. They are a living example of the living and evolving Greek culture, but I took some classes, sooo... Plus, I was taught about the ancient Greek culture and gods in my school, so it's part of my culture too and I can bastardize it and treat it as a fandom. (Yes I ignore that Greek children were taught the same things too, and even earlier than me, by the cradle). I learned about other cultures in school too, but I don't treat them as badly because they are not *western* (which is an evil word)."

What do you say: Cleopatra was a POC (or Black) because she lived in Egypt.

What do you mean: I have no idea that her dynasty was Greek, that the names of herself and her parents were Greek or that her dynasty practiced interbreeding (to be kept purely Greek*) like the Pharaos. I have no idea that the family was so absolute in their Greek ways that Cleopatra was the first member to speak the language of Egypt at that time. Ah, also for me "living in Africa" = "being POC and usually Black". I have no idea how Mediterranean Africans look like.

*It must be noted that some say that her mother, was a part Persian. We don't know for sure, though. We don't have many information about her.

What do you say: "Greeks are Black and dark skinned anyways. After all, Greece is so close to Africa".

What do you mean: "I ignore all ancient art that depicts Greeks Caucasian or with Mediterranean skintones. Moreover, I haven't seen any modern Greek media or actual Greek people. I am entitled to say to Greek people that they don't look Greek, because they don't fit the image I have in my mind for them. And, apparently all nations close to Africa have dark skintones so Greeks must have those too. Again, I have no idea about the populations of North Africa and I have no idea what they look like".

[tanadrin]

Notes toward an MMOCKSPP(SO)RPG

i.e., “a moderately multiplayer offline crusader-kings style pen and paper (sort of) roleplaying game”

Provisional Title: Terra Vetus, bc Latin makes things Cool and Medieval Sounding (better suggestions welcome)

Design goal: Something that can be run either in an in-person multiplayer session, or (more realistically) online via a subreddit or Discord server; that satisfies the itch for diplomacy and strategy and cooperation; while encouraging roleplaying; and that supports a large number of players--say, well north of a dozen. A secondary design goal is to make most elements of the game publicly tracked and recorded; because I expect a large number of players, the potential for disputed outcomes the GM(s) must resolve, and a degree of complicated gameplay, it’s important that GMs and other players can go back and check if something feels off, whether due to malice or simple player error. However, if an error is discovered, especially if it’s a minor error more than a couple of turns in the past, it’s not necessarily important to ensure it’s corrected even if that would greatly disrupt the flow of play. More major errors, and things like intentional cheating, should be corrected or punished at GM discretion.

The major gameplay elements are character building and roleplaying; empire management; warfare (mostly strategic, some tactical); personal combat; laws and religion; and, of course, diplomacy.

The following notes do not constitute a complete ruleset. All numbers are extremely tentative, where given. Suggestions, comments, criticism, and other forms of constructive feedback welcome.

1. Game world

The game world is the physical representation of all the lands players control, the locations of their armies and important characters, and of big political organizations like realms and organized religions. There is not a single fixed map: rather, I envision that either the organizers of a game (”GM(s)”) or the players as a whole will discuss and decide on what kind of map they want. It could be a hex grid map, or a map divided into PDS-style “provinces.” These rules should work equally well with either.

[a simple hex map via http://hextml.playest.net/blank.html]

[the eastern Mediterranean in EU4]

At the start of the game, after players have created their characters and decided on how many holdings (i.e., provinces or hexes) they’ll start with, they should take turns selecting their starting holdings on the map. GMs can and should encourage players to start close to one another, to encourage interaction and to leave any blank spaces at the edge of the map for later-joining players, if that’s a thing you want to happen. More on character creation in a bit.

After starting positions are worked out, there is a “free” round of diplomacy, where players work out what the starting configuration of realms will be. During this round, players who want to cooperate as one kingdom or empire can swear fealty to a common overlord; vote on what they want their realm laws to be (more on Laws later); choose their realm’s official religion (more on Religions later), and so forth. When this round is done, the game is ready to start.

2. Basic gameplay

Each round of play represents 1 month of in-game time. Three months are one season; four seasons are one year. The seasons, in order, are spring, summer, autumn, and winter. Whether in-person or online, I recommend simply ending a round at a fixed time; say, one day of real life is equal to one round; or twenty minutes, or whatever length of time is convenient for players and for the setup you’ve chosen.

At the beginning of a turn, if it’s the first turn of a new year, every player gets their annual income from rents and taxes on land they own directly. They can then take basic actions.

There are two kinds of actions: military actions (troop movement and the like) and diplomatic actions (deals and discussions between players). Diplomatic actions can take place at any time. Any deals or negotiations between players resolve as soon as players want them to: instantly, or at the end of the turn, or at some agreed-on date in the future. The exception is any deal involving the transfer of land.

Military actions resolve at the end of the turn (only after military actions have resolved do land transfers take effect). Military actions involve ordering armies to move around. They also involve player movement (every player has a position on the map). Armies can move 3 provinces/hexes a turn; 2 if they cross a major river or enter or move through hills; 1 if they enter or move through mountains. If 2 hostile armies are in the same province/hex at the end of the turn, then under normal circumstances a battle will be fought between them.

Only when all movement is resolved, all battles are over, and all other recordkeeping actions for the turn are over, does the next turn begin.

3. Holdings

Holdings are lands you administer, not through any vassal, but as direct owner. Your peasants and serfs work the land; you tax the surplus they generate, and use it to fund your various activities. You can give land to vassals, improve it to improve your economic situation, or conquer it from other players.

Each holding is one map hex or province. Holdings have 3 main statistics: size, population, and efficiency. Size is the maximum productivity of the holding, an abstract measure of land under cultivation and other useful economic activities like cottage industry and resource gathering. Population is the measurement of the available workforce of peasants/serfs/commoners. Efficiency is a measure of any bonus or malus to production from any source (default 100%).

In addition to the actual population, each holding has an ideal population. The ideal population is the size*100. If the size of the population is less than the ideal population, the holding can’t produce its full amount of income. Holding population increases by 2% per year (applied in spring, after rents are paid), up to a maximum of twice the ideal population. Ideal population can also be temporarily increased by “labor costs,” which denote labor being diverted to things like holding improvements. These are represented by a temporary increase in the holding’s ideal population, usually for a set number of years. Labor costs can’t increase a holding’s maximum population.

Holdings can be improved by investing money and/or labor (usually labor, sometimes both). Improvements can increase the efficiency of holdings, their rate of population growth, the quality and number of levies you can raise from holdings in times of war, and so forth. A full list of holding improvements should be made in an appendix.

As the source of the mostly-untrained fighting men in your armies, you can raise the population of a holding as a levy. Levy units require 100 population each. You can’t raise more levies than a holding has Size (a pop 600 size 4 holding can only raise 4 levies normally, despite the surplus population). Raising any levies during autumn or winter will cause a -10% penalty to your holding’s income efficiency for that year. You also have to pay upkeep for levies. If you can’t pay the upkeep, your levies disband. The amount of money it costs to keep a levy raised for a month should be around 20% of the base income of a holding, to encourage careful planning of military campaigns. Right now I assume that you earn about 100 livres a year from a size 1 population 100 holding.

The formula for holding income is:

Size of holding * ( Population of holding / ideal population ) * Efficiency

with the middle term being capped at 100%.

If a military unit is destroyed (not merely defeated, but eradicated in battle), the holding it was raised from loses 100 population.

As a rule of thumb, military holding improvements should be quite expensive; even modest holding improvements probably aren’t a positive sum investment until a few years after they’re built.

4. Knights

Knights are a kind of NPC resource. They represent petty feudal subjects, who form the core of highly-trained elite fighting forces, both cavalry and men at arms.

Knights are created in holdings you control. To create a knight, you grant them land; this has the effect of reducing holding size by 1 (and therefore ideal population by 100), so you can’t do it in a holding of size 1. Knights provide less income--10% of the ordinary amount, so 10 livres a year--but in return they allow you to raise 1 unit of elite soldiers. By default, this is a unit of men-at-arms. You can improve knights’ estates, to change the kind or improve the quality of these units, and maybe mitigate some of the loss of income further.

Knights have their own persistent identities and traits. When you create a knight, you’ll roll up one or two personality traits. You can name your knights. They earn XP: every battle they’re on the winning side of nets them 1 XP, and you can use this to buy military traits for them (up to 3 traits). If a Knight’s unit is destroyed, instead of losing population, the Knight in question is captured by the enemy. You can’t raise the unit again until you ransom the Knight.

If a knight is killed, the land either reverts to you; or you can install a successor of the same line, with new personality traits and no XP. Lists of possible traits for Knights (and other minor NPCs) to come.

5. Battles

Combat is designed to be fairly simple, although still interesting on a tactical level; right now terrain is not a major factor, but I’m open to including that later. Combat is also designed to minimize random elements, to make strategic choices more important, and to minimize the possibility of disputes about how it should be resolved (which I think is important, given I envision lots of players, and GMs being kept busy).

Every unit--knight or levy--has three statistics: its strength, its morale, and a bonus Skirmish value. Strength is ordinary combat effectiveness in a pitched battle. Morale is a defensive value: how long the unit can remain in combat while suffering casualties. Skirmish normally functions as a flat bonus to Strength; but if the unit is ranged (like Archers), it can use its Skirmish value to attack without the possibility of retaliation, if defended by another unit.

Units are grouped into armies for movement on the map. Armies are organized into lines, which are divided into rows. The first row is units in the front line; the second and following rows are units held in reserve. When an army isn’t in combat, you can rearrange it freely. When an army enters combat, its arrangement is normally fixed.

In battle, the armies are centered on each other; each unit can ordinarily attack only the unit directly across from it (unless they’re Maneuverable). Units have three abilities: Harass, Engage, Retreat. A front row unit with a greater Skirmish value than the unit it’s attacking can Harass that unit. This deals damage equal to half the Skirmish value rounded down (so a difference of 1 Skirmish is useless), to the morale of the enemy unit, without the possibility of retaliation. Engage means two units enter combat at close quarters. They deal their full Strength value in damage to the enemy unit’s morale. If at any time a unit’s Morale hits zero, it enters Retreat. A unit that’s Retreating, if it has any unit behind it in the line, moves to the back of the line; all other units in the line move up 1 row. When a unit has been retreating for 2 turns, it’s removed from the battle. If a unit is dealt full Morale damage again while retreating, it is Destroyed. It is removed from the game; if it’s a Knight unit, that Knight is captured. If it’s a Levy, the Holding from which it was raised loses 100 population.

Battles have three repeating phases: harass, engage, regroup. All units that can, harass; all units that can engage, engage; then you put units into retreat that have lost their morale, remove destroyed units, and begin the next harass phase. Units will always attack the facing unit, unless there is no facing unit and they can attack units to one side. If they can attack units to one side, they will attack the inner unit first, and then the outer unit if there is no inner unit. Ranged units on the second row attack using their Skirmish value, and take no damage in return. Ranged units further back can’t attack.

The exception to the deterministic nature of battle is if an army is commanded by a Player Commander. Player Commanders are physically present on the battlefield. They are represented by a special unit Players can always raise, their Personal Guard. Various player traits can affect the combat effectiveness of their Personal Guard, or even entire armies. Player commanders can 1) choose to alter the attack priorities of maneuverable units, and during the regroup phase 2) move units side-to-side along the same row, if space is available, 3) switch the order of two adjacent units in a column (a unit can only be moved in this way once per turn), or 4) order a unit or units to enter Retreat prematurely (this still makes them vulnerable to being Destroyed). Otherwise, as stated, the way an army is arranged can only be changed out of battle.

Units can have special abilities, like Ranged or Maneuverable; Knights who have earned military traits will increase the effectiveness of the units they command. All relevant traits should be provided in an appendix.

6. Laws

Players can group together into Realms. Realms usually have 1) a monarch, and 2) a number of Laws. Laws, created by the valid legislature of the realm (the monarch, the privy council, the Estates, or some other body), govern how the realm is organized. They create obligations for vassals in the realm. Vassals can violate those obligations, and the game doesn’t automatically enforce adherence to the Laws, but this is where roleplay comes in. Loyal vassals and the monarch might band together to punish disloyal vassals. Monarchs might demand a vassal be imprisoned for their crimes. Even executed, to force a succession.

Realms can contain other realms. If you have, say, four players organized into a Duchy, with one player Duke and three player Counts, that constitutes one Realm with its own laws. The duchy might be part of a Kingdom, with several other Dukes and Counts, and a ruling King overseeing them. The Kingdom will have its own laws. Vassals of the Duchy by default have the right of appeal to the Duke’s superior; and the Kingdom’s laws supersede the Duchy’s if there’s any explicit conflict between them.

Laws control how titles pass from one officeholder to the next; how taxes are allocated; what obligations in times of war might be; who the valid legislating body for the kingdom is; and so forth. This is essentially a nomic minigame, but many suggested laws will be provided in an appendix. A default setup for a standard feudal kingdom might look like this:

Elective succession: the next king is chosen by the immediate vassals of the king when the old king dies.

Privy council: the kingdom has a Privy Council, consisting of powerful vassals. The King can make laws, but the Privy Council can veto them by a majority vote.

Taxation: All nobles pay a tax of 10% of their income to the kingdom’s coffers.

War: Feuds between nobles are disallowed; immediate vassals of the king can’t go to war with each other (they can still declare war on outside powers).

Laws can also carve out explicit privileges for certain nobles or certain officeholders or certain holdings.

At the start of the game, when organizing player Realms, the default legislature is the Estates, a general gathering of all the nobles of the realm where simple majority rule prevails.

Minor nobles, even independent ones, controlling 2 holdings or less, start with a default set of laws, under which they cannot change succession and most other laws without the approval of a superior lord, or their religious head (if one exists). If they have no superior lord, they’ll be stuck with the default laws for the forseeable future.

7. Religion

Religious principles are a little like Laws, but in addition to organizing your religion, they also cover dogmas (general metaphysical beliefs that usually have little impact beyond roleplaying) and ethics (guidelines of behavior that should have big importance for roleplaying). Purely organizational laws are called Canons.

The available religions and their features can be created in advance by the GMs; or players can invent their own during setup. Religions will have a head (who may or may not be a major landholder in their own right), and may have internal organization like autocephalous churches, ecclesiastical provinces, bishoprics, and so forth. Much of this will be down to how you organize your religions. Some player traits and qualities interact with religion. If, for instance, you’re playing an avowed heretic, other players can and should treat you differently, especially if they are playing very pious characters. Some religious traits can have impacts on how your armies fight; can grant bonuses to your holding income; and can grant you other personal bonuses. Religious principles with a gameplay effect should cost points, and be chosen at game start via a point-buy system.

8. Player Character

Last but not least! Your in-game agent, for which you should develop a name, a background, a political and social position, and for which you should choose a number of positive and negative traits. At character creation you can also invest in additional holdings for more points, or higher starting wealth.

All players have a rank. Your starting rank will be determined in part by how players choose to organize their realm--you might get lucky and be elected King at the start of the game, for instance. Rank is a fairly abstract quality, though: as in history, a nominal Emperor might not control that much land; a Duke might rule the territory of a King. A general rule of thumb here is that Duke or better titles generally have to be legitimized by a nearby superior, like a King or Emperor, or by a religious head. You might be claimant to a title you don’t possess; the legitimacy of that claim will be determined by other players, not by specific mechanics. Coming up with flavorful in-character variations on noble titles within a realm might be a good way to add color to the game world: as in the real world, a French Comte was equivalent to an English Earl or a German Graf.

Players can purchase equipment to improve their personal combat effectiveness. One-on-one player combat (duels) is governed by the system outlined here. Certain traits may improve or reduce how good you are at dueling. It may also be desirable to let players improve their Personal Guard through equipment they can purchase directly.

Players can earn different kinds of XP. Winning battles gives you martial XP you can spend on making yourself a more effective commander. Fulfilling religious goals (determined by your religion’s Ethics) gives you a religious XP you can spend on related traits--or which you can use to found new heresies. (Religious heads can use them instead to reform religious doctrines, if the religion allows for that sort of thing.) Administrative XP is earned by completing administrative tasks in your holdings that increase income efficiency and population growth, and reduce the cost of improvements. Even if you are (say) a landless character who starts pretty poor, it should be possible to make yourself useful to other players as an experienced commander, administrator, or advisor.

Of course, you will eventually die. You will lose all your traits, you may lose some titles depending on the Laws governing them, and you may lose holdings associated with those titles. But your wealth, independently held holdings, and your remaining titles will go to your heir. Your heir can be another player, but usually it will be someone in your family: your family being a collection of NPCs that act as a kind of resource, like Knights, but for the domestic political side of things.

You can marry an NPC--either a specific NPC in your realm, or a randomly generated NPC. Every month you’re married, you have a chance to have a child. You can change succession laws like any other law; but by default, your oldest child is your heir. The chance of children goes down based on how many children you already have, your age, how many spouses you have (if your religion allows some form of polygamy), and based on traits. Mothers can’t bear more than 1 child in the same 12-month period.

9. Wanted rules

Naval combat

Sieges

Marrying or hiring other players�� NPCs

Making Knights of family members

Other minor NPCs (monks and priests? advisors?)

Treaties to conclude wars

Ways of declaring war (possibly unlimited?)

Detailed army movement; how they’re affected by forts

Plots and murder

Rules for landless player characters

Rules for dynastic extinction

Rules for non-dynastic succession (optional, use only if you are really sure you want a player to, for instance, always play as a religious head or the leader of a republic)

Special resources and commerce (n.b., all money in this game is a unit of account representing the value of revenues paid in kind; not sure whether this should even be added, though it should add an element of map control that could be fun)

Castellans: knightlike NPCs or PCs, who pay 90% (instead of 10) (player castellans pocket difference as salary) and whose traits can be used to boost holding income or levy quality or w/e

Privy council offices you can stick minor NPCs or PCs in that can give you realm-wide bonuses, & can give those characters XP increases they can spend on traits.

Challenging people to duels

Extramarital affairs & illegitimate children

Blood feuds, court cases (outlawry??)

10. Wanted lists

Purchasable items

Special items (e.g., religious relics); ways of distributing them

Holding improvements

Peasant levy types

Elite unit types

Knightly estate improvements

Personal guard improvements

Laws

Religious principles

Player character traits

NPC traits (for knights, spouses, children)

Terrain modifiers (optional)

Naval levies (require directly owned harbors; you can hire other players’ ships)

Special resources (if included)

Poisons

Combat stances and ability cards (for duels)

[imaginativecrime]

7 reasons The Witcher series is a mess (or damn I need to vent)

Unpopular opinion time! For the record, I’ve read the books, played the games, hell, I’ve binged the Polish movie and series (because my love for Michal Zebrowski and Zbigniew Zamachowski is undying, sue me), and I was super hyped. Then I spent the entire series yelling at the TV, so I made a handy numbered list of the reasons why I personally consider it mediocre at best.

Because I’m fucking disappointed and I’ll never not be bitter about it. Fact.

Be warned, there are all sorts of spoilers below.

Let’s look at some of the issues that affected the show as a whole:

1) Adaptation is hard work - but you have to do it right

Adapting a story from one medium to another is difficult, you inevitably have to change things to make it suitable to the new form of expression and also, everybody wants their adaptation to be unique, to emphasize points they think are important, to reflect on the current times, you name it. But changes in an adaptation should make sense and lend themselves to the storytelling.

Many changes in the series were arbitrary, nonsensical and contributed absolutely nothing. One such example is the Battle of Sodden Hill, a terribly executed “siege” with not enough extras to fill a classroom instead of a battle of 100 000 people. Writing out Redania, Aedirn and the Brotherhood of Sorcerers from the conflict doesn’t seem to have a point to it, while the delayed arrival of the armies of Temeria and Kaedwen is both unexplained, unlikely and underwhelming, not to mention that it completely undermines the Nilfgaardian threat as a whole. This, of course, is just the tip of the iceberg of all the things that are wrong with Sodden Hill in the series. 

Or take Foltest and his affair with Adda. It is perfectly clear in the books that after seven years of wizards, witchers and all manner of frauds coming and going while Foltest is obsessed with breaking the curse instead of killing his daughter, even the very last blind and deaf peasant knows about his shenanigans. It’s only logical, too. The story is relayed to Geralt in no uncertain terms at the very beginning. Now in the show the whole episode is too short to set up a murder mystery that requires Geralt’s incredible detective skills (uhuh) to unravel. What is worse is that you cannot make a big reveal of something that your audience actually has previous knowledge about. So why even bother to have Foltest deny it and have Geralt beat it out of Ostrit? 

Which brings us to point two:

2) We all know which way to Temeria, don’t we?

Even if you have popular source material, you cannot expect everyone to know it. An adaptation has to consider people who are just getting their first introduction to the sandbox. When your lore is as rich as that of the Witcher, you need time and careful effort to set up your world. The show made a total shit job of this one. As in the above example, sometimes the show ignores that we, as an audience, know things. 

Another example is Vilgefortz. We know him, his plans, abilities and allegiances, we have very specific expectations of his character. Besides completely failing these expectations (and doing a very unconvincing early reveal of his true colors), the show goes as far as taking Vilgefortz’s iconic sentence (You mistake stars reflected in a pond for the night sky.) and putting it in Fringilla’s mouth. Like did they actually think we wouldn’t notice? Or not be pissed?

At other times the show expects us to fill in its glaring blanks exactly by knowing our lore and characters. One obvious, overarching example of this is the issue of the separate timelines, that sometimes left even fans a little confused. Also, fun fact: one of my friends (who has no idea about anything in the Witcher’s world) for instance needed some time to realize Pavetta wasn’t, in fact, a grown-up Ciri, and he remains to this day very confused about Blaviken.

Basically, we are on a swing here, which is actually made even worse by another thing: bad pacing.

3) Hold your Roach for a moment

The first season wants to cram too much into its limited time and it has a severe negative impact on worldbuilding and character development. By bringing in all three timelines from the beginning, the show has to juggle time allotted to each. 

To be frank, Ciri’s timeline at this point consists of a lot of running and screaming, which in itself hardly merits all the time we spend with her. It could have been utilized in part to provide us with a view of the war from ‘below’, to show that beyond the high politics and heroic battles there are burned villages, dead peasants, people who lost everything, cripples, deserters, ruined fields, and so on. Instead, we get one refugee camp of neat tents, actual beds, food and complaints about Calanthe (though not of dead husbands, lost homes or winter). Though I guess it should come as no surprise that the shock value of paint being made from a woman’s reproductory organs (that never happened in the books) is more important than actual large scale human suffering.

Now giving Yennefer an extended back story is great. But by that level of extension once again time is being consumed that is taking other opportunities away. Opportunities like giving Geralt himself a bit more background, clarifying points for fresh faces in the audience, giving characters more time for meaningful interaction. Because there is not enough time to let the story breathe and progress naturally, episodes are often rushed, choppy, and shallow. 

4) Reverse worldbuilding, aka welcome to nowhere 

Another serious issue with worldbuilding is what I suspect to be a deliberate departure from the game visuals and aesthetic. One of the things I adore most about the games is that it built heavily on Eastern European history and folk tradition. Nothing compares to the feeling when you ride into a village and you feel right at home because things are inherently familiar, or you go out into the woods and hear the exact bird song you are used to.

Netflix is very careful not to even offer a whiff of this particular identity to its show, but it doesn’t seem to have a clear artistic vision beyond that. Thus while landscapes are nice enough, other settings such as cities, taverns, ballrooms and the like are horribly bland in that “this is how we imagine the middle ages in Hollywood” way and look exactly what they are: sets. While one is not likely to quickly forget the red rooftops of Novigrad or the wild beauty of the Kaer Morhen pass from the games, there is nothing memorable about the locations presented in the series. (Even more bewildering is the depiction of the elite boarding school of Aretuza as a creepy dungeon with elf skulls everywhere. I cannot even begin to address this one unless it is all in caps.) 

Point being that the show lacks an actual visual identity that would distinguish it from any other dime a dozen medieval fantasy.

5) My kingdom for a decent wardrobe

Sadly enough, the bland and flavorless visuals have a terrible effect on something else: clothes and armor. While some costumes are well done, there are way too many examples of the opposite. One very obviously is Nilfgaardian armor, which looks like fossilized trash bags with sad dick helmets. The fact that armor in the show is treated as the equivalent of cardboard is doing no one any favors. Please do your homework next time. Please?

Another inexplicable departure from the books and games is the appearance of the nobility, and most jarringly, sorceresses. That dress Yennefer picks out the first time? It’s literally the drabbest, ugliest thing I’ve ever seen, and the others are not much better. When it comes to period-accurate choices, the range is just so wide: we are talking cambric, velvet, silk, cloth of gold and silver. We are talking luxurious furs, embroidery, colorful feathers, bright dyes, coats of arms and jewelry. Brooches, necklaces, bracelets, rings, hat badges, belt buckles, hairpins, you name it. People wore their wealth. Making them look like sad orphans will not make them look any more medieval.

Peasant clothes also had their decorations, though to a lesser degree than nobles, obviously. But I guess it’s too much to hope that those would get any attention when queens are dressed like they lost a bet.

6) I see your people and I raise you mine

Including people of color in the casting choices caused a lot of heated debate amongst the fans, but at least it means that the show cares about minority representation, right? Right?

The world of the Witcher has its own minorities, and what we have seen of them so far is so incredibly pathetic that I haven’t the words. For one thing, they look so terrible that elves in the Polish series actually look better, and that was so not a high bar to exceed. To make matters worse, they again seem to lack any sort of distinguishing visual identity (except for the Dryads. I’m also willing to make an exception for Chireadan, as he actually looks right and he’s a settled elf.)

Sadly, unlike the games, the series also fails to establish even the beginnings of a compelling narrative for its minorities, which definitely needs to be in place by the time Thanedd happens at the very latest. What is more, we seem to be given something called the Great Cleansing, which is plenty obscure but comes across as a Night of Broken Glass sort of thing (though that could be just me). While still salvageable at this point, this shift in narrative is cause for some concern, and so far doesn’t make much sense.

7) Your villains are not my villains

Unlike the books and games, the Witcher series sadly doesn’t seem to excel at presenting opposing sides without the need to vilify one (which again, makes me worried about what they are going to do to the Scoia’tael later). 

Nilfgaard is now an Empire of Evil (TM) that lives for killing and religious fanaticism, Fringilla is a psychopath, and Cahir... Well, Cahir is a thousand shades of wrong all on his own. Stregobor and Istredd are now assholes of a whole different caliber, and even poor Eyck of Denesle gets to enjoy his five minutes of fame as a madman frothing at the mouth instead of a paragon of knightly virtue.

This is going so well.

[uh-velkommen]

A Speech About Skam for my Public Speaking Class

*note: has been dumbed down for disinterested americans and a 5 minute time limit*

When was the last time you’ve seen an accurate portrayal of Ramadan being celebrated in the media? Or an latina casually slipping spanish words into english conversations? When was the last time you’ve seen teenagers in t.v. shows look and act like actual teenagers? Most of the time when people are facing hardships in life, they look for solace in television shows or youtube videos. We as humans like to know that we are not alone in what we feel and go through. However, turning towards the media for such things has proven to be useless for marginalized people. Movies and television often fail to give the underrepresented a proper voice. When I was in highschool, struggling to understand why a love interest constantly wandered in and out of my life without remorse, I never thought that I would see a character from a web-series deal with the exact same experience. I never thought that I would come to understand said love interest because of something I had seen online. Something of which they knew nothing about. When I came across a Norwegian web series/tv show called Skam, I realized that I haven’t been giving enough attention to what I would see on t.v. I never gave thought to the possibility of seeing people I could relate to, deal with issues that I have dealt with. Skam was a show that had the realism and representation that a lot of media lacks nowadays. It showed me characters who used modern slang and celebrated cultural occasions. It showed me a diverse cast of African Americans, Middle Easterners, Latinx and Hispanic people, Every letter in LGBT including P. It showed me Muslims and Christians co-existing. I saw women and men of all shapes and sizes. It was eye opening.

Skam is created by Screenwriter, Julie Andem. Andem wrote, produced, and directed the show which aired season one of four in September of 2015. The show is basically a drama centering around a group of kids who go to the same high school. Andem's goal when coming up with this show was to give teenagers an accurate portrayal of what it is like growing up in the center of Norway. She had students who actually attended Hartvig Nissen High School (grades 11-13) audition regardless of their previous acting experience and then proceeded to use the school as a set location. Skam talked about many real topics that teenagers deal with such as, Relationships (Sexual, Romantic, Friendships, Family), Substance abuse, Eating disorders, Sexual assault, Feminist ideology, Religion, Intersectionality, Homosexuality, and Mental illness.

The way the show was presented was very different from what Norwegians were used to. Andem made the show as interactive as possible to allow viewers to fully immerse into the stories even to the point where normal people would mistake the actors for their characters on the street. Each of the characters had actual social media pages that were updated frequently either to progress the story or to add more depth to a character. The show would also release screenshots of conversations and group chats the characters would have with each other as a way to give the viewers access to the characters’ phones. Lastly, rather than making the viewers wait until the end of each week for a new episode, we would get clips throughout the week. The clips would correlate with real time so if something important were to happen to a character at 1 o’clock p.m. we would get a clip at 1 o’clock p.m. Usually the monday through thursday clips would act as build up to something dramatic that would happen on friday. Weekend clips were rare but whenever they were released, they wouldn’t contain plot altering details. The point of all this was to allow the viewers to coexist with the characters and it gave us a sense that we were part of the story.

The show became internationally popular during the third season in mid 2016. It was about a 16 year old boy’s struggle with religion and his sexuality. Because the show was only targeted towards norwegians, non-norwegian viewers could not get access to the show as easily. This led to people finding ways to save the episodes and photo releases, translate them to english or add english subtitles, and then re-release them through hard to find websites to avoid copyrights. After the show blew up all over the world, Andem, unable to keep up with such fame, decided to release one more season as a finale to the show in 2017. However, that was not the last time we would hear of Skam. In early 2018 there had been talk of making the show more accessible to it’s international viewers. This was done by creating carbon copies of Skam, set in different countries. The characters and plot lines would stay the same and the new show-writers, with Andem’s permission, attempted to maintain the essence of the original Skam and it’s realism. The best part of these remakes, is that they were adjusted to fit their countries’ cultures. Season one of the Skam remakes all aired throughout 2018, taking place in Austin, Texas. Paris, France. Rome, Italy. Madrid, Spain. Berlin, Germany. Antwerp, Belgium. And Utrecht, The Netherlands. Funnily enough, each of the remakes have become subject to the Skam treatment in which the episodes were all taken and translated by random polylingual citizens of said countries.

Skam and it’s counter parts have been excellent at displaying what it is like to be a teenager in today’s culture and society. Even if you find that you have aged out of its target audience you can still find comfort in the episodes. Older people have mentioned the nostalgia they feel from watching. The overall message that Skam has pushed to convey is Alt Er Love. Norwegian for, Everything is love. The show has taught us to accept everyone for their differences. It has shown us how to overcome our struggles and to seek help in others. Skam was truly created for everyone and that is why it will always have a place in my heart.

[hexiva]

Book Reviews

I’m getting back into reading fantasy, getting a bunch of random books out of the library if they look good. I thought I’d post my thoughts on them.

The Tiger at Midnight, by Swati Teerdhala Inspired by the culture of ancient India and Hindu mythology, The Tiger at Midnight by Swati Teerdhala features a cat-and-mouse game of deception and thrills between a rebel assassin and the reluctant young soldier tasked to bring her to justice.

Just finished this one. There were definitely times when I thought I was just going to stop and take it back to the library unread. It’s by no means a terrible book, but in many ways it feels too much like every other YA book I’ve read. I really like the concept of the central romance: it’s an enemy romance, which I love, the characters have a pretty equal power dynamic, and there’s no gross abuse stuff to put me off. It also felt like a gender-reversal of the typical YA dynamics - Esha is like the dark, handsome, conflicted romance hero, and Kunal is like the sweet, repressed heroine. I liked that, and I really liked Esha as a character. Kunal was by no means unsympathetic either. But the relationship between the two of them, which was central to the book, felt really under developed. The narrative informs us that they feel something for each other very early on, when they’ve barely spoken, and continues informing us of their feelings, but I kept wondering . . . why? There were a couple of points where there was a line like “It’s strange that I feel so strongly for him given we barely know each other!” and I feel like, when you find yourself writing a line like that, you should sit back and think a bit about why you felt the need to point this out. It felt like there were opportunities for them to be pushed together and bond, and the book didn’t really capitalize on them - or, rather, acted as if they’d already been pushed together. It felt like it was missing a key moment early on in the book where they bond. There’s a reveal halfway through the book (pg 300 out of 500) that they knew each other as children, but it’s too little too late.

5/10. I’m thinking of picking up her next book because I feel like there’s a lot of potential here and I’d like to read a more polished version of this book.

Akata Warrior, by Nnedi Okorafor A year ago, Sunny Nwazue, an American-born girl Nigerian girl, was inducted into the secret Leopard Society. As she began to develop her magical powers, Sunny learned that she had been chosen to lead a dangerous mission to avert an apocalypse, brought about by the terrifying masquerade, Ekwensu. Now, stronger, feistier, and a bit older, Sunny is studying with her mentor Sugar Cream and struggling to unlock the secrets in her strange Nsibidi book.

Awhile back, I was at SDCC, and I walked by a publisher’s booth, and they handed me the first book in this series, for free! They just gave me a whole book for free! I’ve had this happen before at cons, but it’s usually self-published stuff, or spin-off books of dubious quality. But this is a book that’s perfectly relevant to my interests, a YA fantasy novel with an exciting new setting, and they just gave it to me! What a wonderful thing to have happen.

Anyway, I was hooked, and I got the next book in the series out of the library. I loved it. The woman at the publisher’s booth told me this was “Nigerian Harry Potter,” and I definitely got Harry Potter vibes from it. It honestly took me back to my days reading the original HP books in a way none of JK Rowling’s subsequent books (or the movies) have been able to do. That’s not to say it’s a copy, or anything - this series is way more eager to dig into the big, magical mythical stuff that HP mostly only hinted at, and is conversely much more willing to spend time in the real world and discuss real-world issues. It’s . . . really really good.

Also, as a personal bonus for me, there are multiple cool magical creatures which are arthropods - mythical spiders, cool magic wasps, I just love it.

9/10. My mom stopped reading it halfway through saying “As I get older, I’ve had less patience for books that aren’t very good.” But then again, she never liked Harry Potter as much as I did either, so maybe she just doesn’t get our generation.

Click more for reviews of We Hunt the Flame, Bloodwitch, and The Throne of the Crescent Moon

We Hunt the Flame, by Hafsah Faizal Zafira is the Hunter, disguising herself as a man when she braves the cursed forest of the Arz to feed her people. Nasir is the Prince of Death, assassinating those foolish enough to defy his autocratic father, the king. If Zafira was exposed as a girl, all of her achievements would be rejected; if Nasir displayed his compassion, his father would punish him in the most brutal of ways.

I really wanted to like this book. I’ve been reading a lot of Middle-Eastern history and the thought of a fantasy inspired by that is 100% my jam. But this book is just . . . not that good. It’s not offensively bad, it just feels like the first draft of another, better book. I actually did not finish this book. I gave up and took it back to the library.

The main romance feels very predictable, and honestly, it was giving me big Reylo fanfic vibes. The exposition, of which there is massive amounts, is clumsily delivered. It feels like it ought to be the second book in a series, because there are so many past events being explained all the time.

The one thing I kinda liked was the bits of Arabic in the book, and the choice to not exposit the Arabic bits on top of the fantasy bits. And I learned a new Arabic word from this book! That’s a positive.

3/10. Wish they’d spent more time on the editing.

Bloodwitch, by Amelia Atwater-Rhodes (and its sequel, Bloodkin) Vance Ehecatl was raised with every luxury he could imagine in a beautiful greenhouse within the powerful empire of Midnight. Vampires are the only guardians Vance has ever known since he was abandoned by his shapeshifter family as a baby quetzal, and he is grateful to them for generously providing for all of his needs. When an act of violence forces Vance from his sheltered home, he is startled to meet Malachi Obsidian, a fellow shapeshifter with conflicting ideas about Midnight and its leader, Mistress Jeshickah.

This is a new book from an author I loved as a child. Atwater-Rhodes published her first book at 14, when I was four, and I came across her books when I was 11ish and first learning to write. Her book Hawksong was the first romance story I really enjoyed, and its sequel Wolfcry was one of the first times I ever encountered a queer romance in a fantasy novel, at a time I was starting to wonder whether I was queer.

This book still caught the same interest I had in her books all those years ago. Bloodwitch is set in the same world as Hawksong, but centuries later. Personally, I would have preferred a book set in the same timeline, but it was still great to return to this world and its conflicts and magic.

With that said, it wasn’t perfect, and this wasn’t one of those times where I returned to an old favorite author and was like “Oh my god, I never appreciated what a genius she was when I was a stupid kid!” I was particularly struck by Vance’s character arc in the first book, which felt uneven. Vance is raised by the villains, and believes they’re the good guys initially. And then, early in the book, one of them kills his friend in cold blood, shouts at him, tries to kill him, and chases him out of their stronghold. And then . . . he goes back to them, and there’s ANOTHER, separate moment where he suddenly realizes they don’t care about him and turns on them. I really didn’t understand why that first moment didn’t shake his loyalty, but the second one did.

I was also kind of disappointed by the lack of queer characters. A lot of my favorite straight authors, when I checked back in on their work in 2019, have included queer representation, and because I knew that Atwater-Rhodes is herself queer, I was really hoping for some of That Gay Shit.

7/10. Give me that gay shit, Atwater-Rhodes, I know you’re holding out on me.

The Throne of the Crescent Moon, by Saladin Ahmed The Crescent Moon Kingdoms, home to djenn and ghuls, holy warriors and heretics, are at the boiling point of a power struggle between the iron-fisted Khalif and the mysterious master thief known as the Falcon Prince. In the midst of this brewing rebellion a series of brutal supernatural murders strikes at the heart of the Kingdoms. It is up to a handful of heroes to learn the truth behind these killings.

This, this was the book I wanted when I picked up We Hunt the Flame. This is the quality content I want in my fantasy novel. I fell in love with the main character, Adoulla, almost immediately, and I was terrified he was going to die. I just love this prissy, hedonistic, idealistic, middle-aged, fat hero so much, and I will RIOT if Ahmed kills him off.

I liked the other older characters in this book a lot too. Ahmed clearly has a knack for making cool characters. Dawoud and Litaz are cranky old ex-adventurers. Adoulla’s love interest is a middle-aged sex worker who really wants him to commit and marry her or fuck off, and I am so rooting for them, I want them to live happily ever after, they deserve that.

The treatment of sex work and sex worker characters in this book is also a major plus. There’s a lot of moral ambiguity in this book, where I’m not sure which character we’re supposed to believe, but the one issue the book takes a firm stance on is DON’T BE AN ASSHOLE TO SEX WORKERS, THEY ARE PEOPLE TOO. This book is written by a man and is not the kind of feminist fantasy I read a lot of (like We Hunt the Flame and The Tiger at Midnight are) so I was pleasantly surprised by this strong pro-sex worker’s rights message.

On the downside, I did feel like the younger characters were less interesting than the older characters. They still felt like colorful, detailed characters drawn with a skillful hand, but they also felt much closer to the kind of characters you usually see front and center in a fantasy novel. What I loved about Adoulla and company is that you don’t often see fantasy heroes who are fat and old and tired. The romance between the two younger heroes is competently drawn and believable but I did find myself wishing the camera would pan away from them and go back to the cool characters.

Other notes:

I found out that Saladin Ahmed is a Marvel Comics writer and is writing a comic about my favorite superhero, Ms Marvel, and I couldn’t be happier with that news.

I was certain, reading this book, that Ahmed plays D&D and that this book was inspired by D&D, and HA, CALLED IT. My nerd-dar is ON POINT.

9/10. Adoulla is my dad now, no take-backsies.

[space-feminist]

rewatched the aladdin trilogy because i had free time and there’s a remake coming out and, boy, do i have thoughts:

section 1: aladdin is a normal silly disney movie that happens to be set in Middle-Eastern-Stereotype-Land

i remember there being this big uproar that the actors in the live-action version should be Middle Eastern and i was like, ah yes, this movie set in Middle-Eastern-Stereotype-Land full of scantily clad harem girls and shifty traders in turbans and beards is obviously going to be woke if it has middle eastern people playing the leads. sure.

i’m not saying whitewashing isn’t bad, i’m just saying that if we want to discuss the representation of poc on film in the context of aladdin, we might want to go a little deeper than “cast Middle Eastern actors”. people will argue that it’s not meant to be accurate because it’s fantasy-Arabia, but accuracy isn’t actually what’s at stake when people talk about racism in fiction, they’re talking about dehumanizing stereotypes. dehumanizing stereotypes like giving your villain dark skin and a turban and a beard and an accent while your heroes are coded more white. 

a) why is no one talking about this?

i like aladdin. i think it’s a good disney movie, full of fun characters and songs, and of course Robin Williams’s genie is a highlight. that’s probably why it hasn’t gotten the same criticism as other disney movies have. it is a fun movie that just happens to be set in a stereotype-laden world.

contrast, say, pocahontas, which is widely criticized for its representation of Native Americans and of American history. pocahontas just isn’t a good movie. it’s got pretty animation and songs, but pocahontas and john smith are fairly uninteresting characters, and the villain doesn’t have the threat level or aesthetic or motivation of a good disney villain. it isn’t really trying to be a fun movie, it’s trying to be deep and meaningful and real (after all, it’s set in ‘the real world’). when you take into account the actual historical reality, the entire movie falls apart because the setting and message are the only memorable parts.

aladdin doesn’t try to do what pocahontas does so it doesn’t fail in the same way. the plot of aladdin isn’t tied to its setting aside from the maybe the inclusion of a genie, which i believe is a figure specifically from middle-eastern folklore (i’m white though so don’t take my word for that). replace the genie with some other wish-granting magical being, change sultan to king, and you could set it in europe no problem. it’s both completely stereotypical about the middle east and also a totally white-washed version of it.

what i’m saying is that aladdin is an enjoyable story without the window-dressing, and i can’t fault you for enjoying that especially when i enjoy it as well. i also think this has somewhat shielded it from accusations of racism.

HOWEVER

b) the live action remake is going to be a disaster

these disney live-action remakes add new stuff to supposedly “fix” problems, but they also don’t deviate too far because then they can’t pump out the nostalgia dollars. there’s no way to walk that line with aladdin’s problems, so what we’re going to get is a shallow rehash of the original with maybe a token change that really does nothing to fix anything.

with 1992 aladdin, we can go “there’s some good bits in there despite the racism of the setting”, but all the good bits of the new aladdin will also be present in the earlier movie, rendering it devoid of any value at all.

section 2: you remember what i said earlier about how you can separate the story from the seting? now i’m doing that

a) misconceptions and bad takes

people rag on jasmine a lot for not recognizing aladdin at first but in her defense she 100% does and he denies it, plus she believes he’s dead. and then even after the carpet ride, she asks him about abu. she believes his second lie a little too readily, though, but despite being this spunky princess who defies norms she’s still been very sheltered.

this brings me to the thing people rag on aladdin for, which is lying to get into a girl’s billowy pants. this frustrates me similar to the hot takes that claim beauty and the beast is about abuse, like. it’s called a character arc. he regrets his actions and is about to come clean when jafar starts trying to take over the world. please. leave him alone.

b) An Analysis Of Aladdin Through The Lens of Class

“sometimes you just feel…trapped” aladdin and jasmine say in unison. jasmine is talking about the expectation to marry a prince, while aladdin’s talking about poverty and constanly running from police because he steals to survive. aladdin dreams about a life of luxury in the palace, while jasmine dreams of the freedom of living on the streets.

the fact that the movie tries to equate those two experiences is laughable. jasmine is a privileged person romanticizing and play-acting at poverty for fun, so disconnected from the realities of her people that she doesn’t even know that should have brought money when she escaped the palace. aladdin dreams of wealth because it will solve his material needs.

certainly from an anti-capitalist perspective, we can critique how aladdin’s fantasies reflect an embrace of the system that excludes him - rather than calling for an end to the wealth inequality between the people and the ruling classes, he instead dreams of joining the ruling classes. when the prince walks through the town, aladdin says “if i were as rich as you, i could afford some manners!” and in his princely guise the genie gives him, he throws handfuls of gold coins to the public. he seems to believe that it is possible to be both moral and rich. 

however, i am uncomfortable with leveling much of my anti-capitalist critique at the character who is in poverty rather than at the ineffectual government of agrabah. a weak, childish king, puppeted by a conniving, power-hungry advisor. the princess isn’t allowed even the smallest interaction with the people she will someday govern. the police force sends out an entire squad after someone who stole a loaf of bread. it’s basically pre-revolutionary france, and someone needs to guillotine the sultan.

in the end, the status quo of agrabah remains unchanged except for aladdin, who manages to achieve the capitalist dream. it’s unclear whether he’ll be able to enact any of the broad sweeping reforms agrabah desperately needs.

ultimately, this is a movie that brings up the issue of class divides, but offers the safe pro-capitalist answer that you’d expect of a major corporation like disney.

c) An Analysis Of The Aladdin Sequels Through The Lens Of Class 

in both sequels, aladdin finds himself advocating for a criminal - iago the parrot in “return of jafar”, and his father, casim, in “king of thieves”. jafar mentions rescuing iago from a cage in a bazaar. casim leaves his family to seek fortune, and ends up falling in with the forty thieves. aladdin advocates for them because he understands how poverty and desperation can drive someone to a life of crime. he was there.

he is now in a position where he thinks he can use his privilege to help people, but he doesn’t quite have the privilege he thinks he does. he’s distrusted for trusting iago, and the police force seems delighted to hear he’s related to the king of thieves and that they now have an excuse to chase him down again. notably, he’s called “the prince of thieves” by the police chief - he’s not just perceived as criminal because he’s helping criminals, but because of the circumstances of his birth. aladdin is jay gatsby, discovering that old money is unimpressed by new money.

but yet again, the ending stops short of pursuing this critique to its fullest. aladdin is, in fact, accepted by old money and he ends up marrying his Daisy Buchanan. iago and casim are never accepted into the upper classes. again, we end with aladdin maintaining the current power structures. it is yet again, the safe answer you’d expect from a corporation like disney, that created these direct-to-video sequels simply to pump more money out of the consumer.

section 3: this was super fun

honestly, these movies were legitimately delightful. maybe it was nostalgia or the robin williams, but i thorougly enjoyed myself watching them and writing this post. i’m not saying i recommend watching disney sequels (most of them are bad, and even “king of thieves”, probably the best, has its cringy moments), but i do highly recommend indulging in your nostalgia every once in a while.

[shakespeares-globe-blog]

The double self: Doctor Aldersen & Mr. Robot, the false myth of progress and the overthrowing of the capitalistic pattern through divided personalities.

Mr. Robot, the much acclaimed American drama thriller, is a television series created by Sam Esmail and aired for the first time in 2015.

Plot

The series revolves around the miserable and lonely life of Elliot Alderson, a young security engineer, who works for one of the richest and most powerful corporations in the world, the E-Corp, through his own point of view, which is heavily influenced by his social anxiety and his chronic paranoia. One day, he is recruited by a mysterious anarchist known as Mr. Robot and joins his team of hacktivists known as fsociety. They plan to cancel consumer debt by destroying the data of the E-Corp (which Elliot calls “Evil Corp”) and to inspire a revolution that will ultimately lead to an equal distribuition of wealth and to the downfall of the capitalistic pattern.

A double first-person narrator

The story of the revolution is told through a first-person narrator, which is Elliot himself, and through his thinking process. Elliot, however, has serious dissociative disorder, anxiety and paranoia, resulting in each episode being one big paranoid delirium, and the viewer shuffles from reality to illusion, not knowing what actually happen and what was just product of Elliot’s mind. Nonetheless, Elliot perceives the viewer as a product of his mind, talking to him and talking to himself at the same time, so that the narrator and the viewer are one and the same, two parts of the same mind.

Although Elliot's mind and his imaginary confidant is already a division of his mind, this is not the only way his personality gets split up. In fact, later in the series, after finding out Mr. Robot is his (supposedly) dead father, his sister Darlene and his friend Angela see him talking frantically to apparently no one, bleeding and severely hurt. When asked what he was doing, he admits he was talking to Mr. Robot, his father, whom he pushed out of a window in a rage tantrum - as his conscience comes back, he finds out Mr. Robot is no one but himself, and that he threw himself out of a window during one of his manic episodes. So, Mr. Robot is Elliot's alter-ego: he's the unconscious, instinctive part of his soul, taking over his mind to make up for Elliot's inadequacy and introversion; unlike Elliot, Mr. Robot is bold, irreverent, loud, a born leader. A modern Dr. Jeckyll and Mr. Hyde scenario, where Elliot hadn't known he'd been the one to plot the downfall of capitalism out of interiorized spite and disdain for the utilitarian society.

Mr. Robot can be cold-blooded, tyrannical, hateful, harsh; he hurts Elliot and the people he loves. Not unusually Elliot shows his willingness to free himself from his alter-ego, resorting to morphine and several other expedients, and even to the strict regimen of prison (calling himself guilty of hacking and privacy violation), ignoring him when he appears, not letting him take control. However, Mr. Robot is controlling and an undeniable part of him, as cruel and destructive as he is, and he can never get rid of him.

Although Mr. Robot, with his merciless and fierce behaviour, represents Elliot’s opposite, he is still part of him. Not to mention, Elliot perceives Mr. Robot as his dead father, whom he deeply loved and cared for - Elliot relies on him and never actually shuts him down. Mr. Robot saved him on several episodes, and Elliot loves him, as twisted as their relationship is.

Other characters

Even though they’re not clinical cases, every character in Mr. Robot needs to be mentioned, even if briefly, in this article, because of their divided selves. As a matter of fact, characters in Mr. Robot don’t change - they’re anything but dynamic - but as the story goes on - so, as Elliot progressively understands what is going on around him - they reveal their real personalities, and their real intentions, which might be the complete opposites of what the viewer thought at the beginning of the series. The clearest example might be Tyrell Wellick, Elliot’s “rival”, who in the first two episodes shows his cold, detatched manners. When you first see him, you might think he’s the typical ambitious and merciless villain, all perfect and with a heart of stone.

In reality, as the story goes on, his façade falls, and he reveals his extremely emotional and moody personality, levelling this impassible, god-like villain to a simple, flawed human being.

Another example is Whiterose: professional, calm Chinese Prime Minister of State Security by day, fierce and fearless leader of one of the most powerful hacker groups in the world at night.

The real illusion: the false myth of progress

Elliot: You’re not real. Mr. Robot: Is any of it real? I mean, look at this, look at it! A world built on fantasy! Synthetic emotions in the form of pills! Psychological warfare in the form of advertising! Mind altering chemicals in the form of food! Brainwashing seminars in the form of media! Controlled isolated bubbles in the form of social networks. Real? You want to talk about reality? We haven't lived in anything remotely close to it since the turn of the century! We turned it off, took out the batteries, snacked on a bag of GMOs, while we tossed the remnants into the ever expanding dumpster of the human condition. We live in branded houses, trademarked by corporations, built on bipolar numbers, jumping up and down on digital displays, hypnotizing us into the biggest slumber mankind has ever seen. You'd have to dig pretty deep, kiddo, before you can find anything real. We live in a kingdom of bullsh*t, that even you have lived in for far too long. So don't tell me about not being real: I'm no less real than the f*cking beef patty in your Big Mac. As far as you’re concerned, Elliot, I am very real.

One can argue that one purpose of the TV drama is that of showing how Elliot’s mind is no more messed up than the society he lives in: Elliot’s delirium blends in so well with modern society that the viewer is not sure of the dividing line between the two. He always expresses his disappointment and dissatisfaction of our unjust, contemporary society; the way we’re being controlled, the way we’re not even conscious of our enslavement, the fact that progress and materialism have made us nothing but brainwashed lapdogs, the fact that only a small percentage of the population can actually call themselves rich, the fact that money overcomes relationships. And at the same time, it’s the same reality that allows us safety and control. Our society is divided as well.

The representation of the Middle Eastern world in Mr. Robot

In a show that clearly shows today's multi-faceted Western world, it is impossible not to show the very different Middle Eastern reality, and talk about it. The main character, although born and grown-up in America, is of mixed race, and his feelings and problems are based on the creator's very own experiences growing up as a Muslim immigrant.

The best representation, however, is given off by two other characters: Sunil and Shama, two hacktivists of fsociety fighting to destroy the Western system that continuously discriminates them, to avenge the failing American Dream their families wanted to pursue but failed because of America’s interiorized racism. Many developments this season were extremely direct critiques of President Trump and his supporters. In an episode, Shama and Sunil, on the run, are framed by the Chinese as Iranian terrorists and used as scapegoats to cover their evil actions. Elliot knows the two of them weren't part of any terrorist plan, but what he doesn't know is that the Chinese set them up to divert attention from their leader&apos;s political plans and drumming up public support for the unlikely candidate she is backing in the upcoming presidential election in an effort to sow chaos and discord: Donald J. Trump. And the worst thing is Elliot knows he's powerless, since the medias are already targeting them as terrorists and people will unlikely question it, helplessly falling into the propaganda hole. Nearly through the end of the season, Elliot finds the courage to visit Shama and Sunil's families to give out his condolences. The episode is one of the most sentimental and meaningful of the whole serie. “This country now blames Muslims for everything,” says Shama's father as he sorts through their belongings, as they're about to move out. “There’s no room for us here anymore.” But later on, as Elliot decides to kill himself by the shore, he meets Mohammed, Shama&apos;s little brother, who asks for a trip to the movies. While there, Elliot recreates with Mohammed the same memories he once had with his own father, but the movies are his memory lane, not Mohammed's. The boy runs away, and Elliot finds him praying in the mosque, the happy place he and his sister grew in. There, they have a meaningful conversation — Mohammed calls Elliot out on his suicidal tendencies and on the Western society’s individualistic pattern (”Why do you always talk about yourself?”), and Elliot understands he has something to live for. Maybe for the first time, we don't see a place of indoctrination, but a loving place to go to find hope —and so Mohammed says: “Did you know I could be President of the United States? My sister couldn’t be. She wasn’t born here. My mom and dad couldn’t either. I’m the only person in my family who could be President. Isn’t that cool? If I were President, I would be able to stay here. In the house we live in. I would find a way to bring back my sister. I’d put the real bad guys in jail. And I’d make everyone eat Pop Tarts for dinner. And make everyone be nice to me.”, and Elliot realizes there are still things left that are worth living for.

[booksaroundtheworld]

A Very Large Expanse of Sea by Tahereh Mafi

3.5 STARS I have never once read a book about a girl like me - a Persian girl with immigrant parents who feels out of place. When I read YA books, I scrounge around, clinging onto anything remotely middle eastern. It was nice to, for once, be totally in tune with the culture I was reading and not have to be like oh that’s kind of like what Persians do! because everything in this book is what Persians do. And for that fact alone I want to thank Tahereh Mafi. Her book wasn’t perfect (quite honestly I had a lot of problems with it) and there were also a lot of things I didn’t relate to (for one, I don’t wear a scarf), but she gave me a Persian character. And that alone means the world. A Very Large Expanse of Sea is about Shirin, a 16-year-old Persian, Muslim girl who, in addition to facing the general awfulness that is high school, also has to put up with the racist and bigoted assholes at her school that subject her to constant microaggressions and actual aggression. Her life turns around, however, when she and her brother finally fulfill a lifelong dream of forming a breakdancing crew and she meets Ocean, a boy in her biology class that actually seems interested in her in a non-creepy, fetishy type way. I get what Tahereh Mafi was trying to do with this book. I also wonder how much of this book is based on her own experience going to high school in the US, because if it was, that’d truly be awful. I’m lucky that I never really experienced any racism growing up here, and neither have my parents. Like many other children of immigrants, I was just asked questions about my “weird” food or my “dangerous” home country, which, while obviously racist, have become so normal that at this point I barely blink twice. That being said, I think that Tahereh missed the mark in a couple of ways. One, she made some of the students so obviously racist and bigoted that they seemed like caricatures of real people. While I don’t doubt that each of these experiences happened to some Muslim girl at some point in time, the sheer amount of comments and incidents and general backlash to her relationship with Ocean seemed excessive. And on that note, my biggest problem was Shirin’s relationship with Ocean. I don’t have any problem with Shirin’s physical relationship with Ocean. It may seem “un-Muslim” to some people but I don’t find that to be true at all. For one, Persians as a whole are a different type of Muslim than other Muslims. Despite the fact that Iran is the only country where all women are required to wear a hijab, as a whole we aren’t very Muslim. There is actually a joke that we’re too Muslim for non-Muslims and not Muslim enough for Muslims, alienating us from both groups. And of the other Muslim girls I know, many of them are like Shirin, going out with boys and not really following the whole “no touching” thing. No, my problem was first with the insta-love. Shirin and Ocean probably had like one conversation before he was in love with her, and she followed suit shortly. Their conversations were also so…. weak. Half of it was Shirin educating Ocean on something, and the other half was him saying “Wow” or “I feel pressure from my family” or “I want to see you”. See her to do what exactly? Stare at her and say she’s beautiful? Okay lol. I also disliked the way she treated him. I get why she was so against being in a relationship with him, but she was so bitchy about it. Realistically speaking, I just don’t get why Ocean was so adamant on being in a relationship with her based off that one conversation and then be in such anguish whenever it didn't work out. Especially after she would ignore him for a week and then just say “Hi” like nothing happened. The fact that their relationship went from 0 to 100 in a matter of what felt like days was something I just couldn’t get behind. Then there was the issue that within a couple months of them hanging out, he was willing to throw away his whole life for her. The level of idiocy and lack of communication displayed by YA couples always astounds me. Furthermore, once she and Ocean started hanging out, everything became about him. Nothing more about the Persian experience, barely anything about breakdancing (which I feel, as a whole, wasn’t talked about enough), nothing about school or making new friends - it was just Ocean. I’m also always so annoyed when a female character only has male friends because apparently, girls are too bitchy to be friends with. Idk. Tahereh tried to fix that in the end, but too little too late. I also think that Tahereh introduced characters only to forget about them later. Navid’s friends and Yusef had great potential, but she included them only to raise Shirin’s self-esteem, and then didn’t include them again. The last thing I want to say is about the end. We resolved things way too quickly and I was left feeling profoundly unsatisfied. The last chapter literally felt like Tahereh was like alright well it’s time for this to end let me just put together a few summarizing sentences and leave it at that. After I had to read pages and pages of empty dialogue between Ocean and Shirin, I kind of expected something more than what we got. I’m so torn about A Very Large Expanse of Sea. While I love Persian representation and am grateful Tahereh decided to write about her own experiences, she ruined it with a dramatic romance that didn’t really need to be there. Not to be that girl but do we really need a white man to save the day and ~open our eyes~? Probably not lol. Honestly, after the emotional rollercoaster that was the Shatter Me trilogy, I don’t really know why I was expecting something different, although I have to say that Tahereh’s decision to NOT include the frilly flowery language of Shatter Me was an excellent one. I don’t think this is an important book the same way The Hate U Give was, but I also know that Persian and Muslim representation is so little that even this small education is better than nothing. Ultimately, this isn’t a book that you have to read. But it is one that, despite all its issues, is one worth reading.

[ayellowbirds]

Keshet Rewatches All of Scooby-Doo, Pt. 12: "Scooby Doo and a Mummy, Too"

("Scooby-Doo, Where Are You", Season 1 Episode 12)

AKA "We Forgot One Universal Monster Last Episode"

The episode opens on a view of a university campus, with the usual spooky musical sting in spite of nothing being visibly eerie... until we cut into a building identified “DEPARTMENT OF ARCHEOLOGY” (sic). Inside, a professor is introducing the gang to the mummified remains of Ankha, an ancient Egyptian ruler who was once “the most feared ruler”—though we’re never given a reason why he was feared. What did he do that was so terrible?

I’ll note that the subtitles spell the name as “Anka”, but the Scooby Doo wiki gives the more standard-looking “Ankha”. As is oddly typical of adults who are not the culprit in a given episode, the Professor is never given a name, though he introduces his colleague as Dr. Najib, who helped bring the mummy over for the university’s replica of Ankha’s tomb.

A middle eastern man with narrow eyes and permanently lowered brow, voiced by Vic Perrin in an almost exact duplicate of his portrayal of Jonny Quest villain Doctor Zin, Najib raises the subject of the curse of Ankha, relating his hope that it did not follow them. I’ll say it right here, because it’s not much of a spoiler when so many flags are triggered right away: Najib is the culprit, and it’s another example of casual racism this season. The thieving, scheming Arab was a popular villain trope of the day, and while Najib isn’t quite as overt as some other variations on the trope, he’s far from a deconstruction or a subversion.

As Najib makes his exit, the gang agree to help the Professor, and Shaggy lays his filthy mitts on an ancient golden medallion the entire cast identify as a coin in spite of a lack of any evidence that it is currency. As Shaggy manhandles priceless ancient artifacts, the Professor explains it’s part of an unsolved mystery, and suggests the gang pick up some sandwiches on his dollar in order to satisfy Shaggy’s appetite.

While they’re gone, the Professor hears a crash, and comes out to find the mummy gone and a mummy-shaped hole in the glass doors. Meanwhile, Shaggy receives an order of three burgers and three sandwiches—liverwurst, à la mode. The chef spoons bright pink ice cream onto three open-face sandwiches, and Shaggy hands him a dollar bill and a half-dollar coin... that is actually the ancient Egyptian coin! 

Shaggy has unconsciously pocketed it, demonstrating kleptomaniac tendencies that are never commented upon. The gang pay properly and Fred suggests they grab the sandwiches and get back to the Professor to return the coin. I’ll note that the food is clearly served on dine-in plates, rather than to-go containers, and when the food is taken from the counter off-screen, it makes a plate-rattling sound. Did they just walk out with burgers and open-faced sandwiches in-hand, sans any kind of container or wrapper?

When the gang return, they find the Professor in his office, where he’s been TURNED TO STONE! “14-karat stone”, Shaggy quips. Velma, bastion of rational, scientific skepticism, observes that only one person could be responsible: the mummy.

The gang look outside and find the busted glass, but Velma notes that it’s broken in rather than out, making it clear this wasn’t an exit. Fred orders the gang to split up and search for the mummy, and Shaggy soon accidentally discovers the bandaged terror hiding in the Janitor’s Closet. Locking him in, Shaggy, Velma, and Scooby flee in terror, instead of doing the reasonable thing and making sure the mummy is properly trapped.

Thus ensues the usual hide-and-chase sequence, although the mummy only groans and shambles slowly rather than running. Of course, there’s still extensive damage done to priceless museum artifacts by the B Team’s attempts to hide. Eventually cornered, the mummy begins to demand, “coin... coin!!” and nods and grunts in the affirmative when Velma suggests he means the old Egyptian one, and not the quarter Shaggy offers him.

When Velma insists they don’t give him what he wants, it falls to Scooby to defend them, and he demands a hefty price of Scooby Snacks.

I believe this is the first time we see a box of Scooby Snacks, which are drawn as being about half the size of previous appearances, and the box simply reads “SCOOBY SNACKS”. It’s also the first implication that “Scooby Snacks” is the name of a product on the market, rather than just what the gang call dog treats, or a home-made specialty.

Emboldened, Scooby tries taking a swing at the mummy with his left foreleg, but there’s a sound like a steel drum being struck, and Scooby’s metacarpals collapse and fold inward like a limp accordion tube. This does not deter the carb-loaded canine, who dashes offscreen and returns in a karate gi, and begins to yelp out kiais so badly stereotypical that the captioning refused to display them as he chops at the motionless mummy. It’s no more effective, so Scooby tries one last attack: 

A little of the old razzmatazz.

At first, the soft-shoe routine seems to be Scooby’s attempt at desertion, but in spite of Velma’s shock, the dog sneaks back in behind the advancing mummy and nails his rags to the floor with a hammer.

Once again, the trio flee without making sure that Ankha is captured, even though Velma says they’re going to tell Daphne and Fred that they just did that. Meanwhile, Fred and Daphne are exploring outside, having found what look to be the mummy’s footprints going into a construction area. They discover Dr. Najib’s car, with what appears to be the doctor turned to stone, and wonder if Shaggy and Velma have run into the mummy themselves, not seeming to be concerned that their friends could be turned to stone any moment.

Having returned, Shaggy and Velma find that the mummy has escaped and disappeared, and inspect the piece of bandage left nailed to the floor. They retreat to a laboratory to investigate the new-feeling wrappings and determine its actual age, where an unattended Scooby drinks three large glasses of a chartreuse liquid. There’s an odd screen-filling animation of an explosion that fades in and out, and Scooby’s head has turned into that of a frog!

He lets out a few confused ribbits, and the effect reverses, explosion included—without Shaggy or Velma noticing. Meanwhile, the mummy reappears, demanding the coin before Velma can finish her analysis. While the two humans flee the room in an improvised smokescreen, Scooby is left behind, and the duo only realize as Daphne and Fred rejoin them. The room is empty except for evidence of a struggle, and a window is left open in the back. Fred worries that he’ll end up like the Professor and Dr. Najib...

...and sure enough, the gang discover a stone Scooby back outside. As Shaggy mourns the loss of his friend, the real Scooby digs his way up out of the ground to join him in tearfully weeping over the sad scene.

“Look, Scoob! You’ve been turned to stone!”

Rather than questioning Scooby about what happened to him, the gang decide to backtrack and ignore the great huge clue right in front of them.

Investigating the Professor’s office, Velma learns that Ankha was also the wealthiest ruler of ancient Egypt, and thinks she’s discovered the solution to the mystery of the coin, finding a photo of a statue of a hippo-headed figure that may or may not be a badly rendered representation of the goddess Taweret (understandably lacking the usual large sagging breasts of images of that deity; this is a kids’ show). The likeness of the coin appears with some other symbols on the statue’s belly, but just as the gang realize it, Ankha busts down the office door.

Retreating to the second floor, the gang duck into the wood shop, where—i’m sorry, why is there a WOOD SHOP in a university’s DEPARTMENT OF ARCHAEOLOGY?

Fred tells Daphne to hit the lights so  that they can hide in the darkness of a room full of sharp objects and heavy machinery, but Daphne hits the wrong switch and turns on a handheld, corded buzz saw that spins to life and climbs up the wall by cutting through the surface of it.

Now, in addition to majoring in anthropology and library science, i took an elective class in the extremely well-appointed woodworking facility at SUNY Purchase College, and i have at least a basic sense of shop safety. So i speak from something of a position of experience when i say, WHY WOULD YOU PUT THOSE SWITCHES NEXT TO EACH OTHER?

As the saw cuts across the ceiling, back down the wall, and past the mummy, it moves on to circle the gang, cutting through the floor and sending the gang dropping down to the floor below... where there’s a swimming pool. 

WHAT KIND OF ARCHAEOLOGY DEPARTMENT IS THIS? A WOOD SHOP? A SWIMMING POOL? WHO DESIGNED THIS COLLEGE, MC ESCHER?

The enraged mummy tosses the saw down at the gang, and its improbably long power cord reaches far enough that the saw moves through the water, chasing the gang as they paddle for their lives. Kudos to the saw’s manufacturers for so extensively waterproofing it, but i really don’t think a 100 meter power cord is a necessity.

Continuing to flee the mummy, Shaggy and Scooby enter the construction area from before, stumbling into a work space where Shaggy notices bags of “Quick Drying Mold Cement”, and “spray molds” that actually appear to be just wooden crates with cement poured in around an empty space in the shape of a standing human being.

“Ruh-huh!” Scooby replies. You could’ve told them that, Scooby. It would have been helpful.

I’ll note that the mold is in the shape of someone standing or laying straight, and all the “stone” figures we’ve seen so far were sitting down. This is what happens when you don’t communicate plot details to your art department, people.

The mummy of Ankha catches up, and the boys flee into a groundskeeper’s shack. When Shaggy peeks out to see if the coast is clear, however...

FOR THE LOVE OF GOD! Yes, for the love of god.

Ankha continues to demand the coin, but meanwhile, Scooby and Shaggy find the Professor bound, gagged, and stuffed into a bag in the corner. Shaggy pulls down his gag, and asks, “are you alright, Professor?”

“I’m fine!”

“Groovy,” Shaggy replies, putting the gag back in place. “Be back for you later.”

The duo make their escape and the chase scene starts up again, now involving a ride on an improbably speedy lawnmower through an empty gymnasium, and a bit more in the way of trampoline antics. This show loves trampoline antics. Mid-bounce, Scooby, grabs onto a pair of gymnastics rings, and uses his hind legs to kick the mummy across the gym, dunking his bandaged butt into the basketball hoop.

It’s stuff like this that led to the Globetrotters crossovers, i’m sure.

The gang unmask "Ankha”, who, as i’d spoiled ahead of time, is Dr. Najib. He had faked his own petrification as part of a plan to get his hands on the coin—actually the key to the statue in the photo from the book. The gang and the Professor discover that a slot on the back of the statue serves as the keyhole, because apparently no-one was ever diligent enough to examine the back side of this stone figure, and its mouth opens to reveal a “glass beetle”.

Not quite, says the Professor.

There’s no resolution about what happens to this obscenely large “diamond”, identified as such at a glance without any kind of testing of its hardness. Scooby finds the whereabouts of the real mummy of Ankha, and the gang celebrate as Dr. Najib is probably in the midst of arguing his diplomatic immunity somewhere downtown.

And once again, no “meddling kids”, not even a scene of the authorities arriving. All we see of Najib unmasked is the usual silent, glaring fuming, and the explanation falls to the gang and the Professor relaxing calmly in the epilogue.

(like what i’m doing here? It’s not what pays the bills, so i’d really appreciate it if you could send me a bit at my paypal.me or via my ko-fi. Click here to see more entries in this series of posts, or here to go in chronological order)

[qqueenofhades]

Medieval cosmetics: The history of looking good

So, I recently saw a post on my dash with someone lamenting the fact that in the medieval era, they would have been considered ugly as there was no makeup, and someone else offering a well-meant attempt to reassure them: that since they’d have no pox scars, rotten teeth, filthy hair, etc, all medieval men would think they were amazingly hot. While I appreciate the sentiment, there’s.... more than a little mythology on both sides of this idea, and frankly, our medieval foremothers would be surprised and insulted to hear that they were apparently the stereotyped bunch of unwashed, snaggle-toothed crones who put no care or effort into their appearance, and had no tools with which to do so.

(Or: Yep. Hilary Has More Things To Say. You probably know where this is going.)

I answered an ask a couple weeks ago that was mostly about medieval gynecological care and the accuracy of the “mother dying in childbirth” stereotype, but which also touched on some of the somehow still-widely-believed myths about medieval personal care and cleanliness. Let’s start with bathing. Medieval people bathed, full stop. Not as frequently as we do, and not in the same ways, but the “people never washed in Ye Olde Dark Ages” chestnut needs to be decidedly consigned to the historical dustbin where it belongs. “A Short History of Bathing Before 1601″ is a good place to start, as it follows the development of bathing culture from ancient Rome (where bathhouses were known for their use as gathering places and influential centers of political debate) through to the modern era. Yes, common people as well as the nobility washed fairly frequently. Bathing was a favored social and leisure activity and a central part of hospitality for guests. Hey, look at all these images in medieval manuscripts of people bathing. Or De balneis Puteolanis, which is basically a thirteenth-century travel guide to the best baths in Italy. Or these medieval Spanish civic codes about when men, women, and Jews were allowed to use the public bath house. There was also, as referenced in the above ask, the practice of washing faces, hands, etc daily, and sometimes more than once. Feasts involved elaborate protocol about who was allowed to perform certain tasks, including bringing in the bowls of scented water to wash between courses. They associated filth with disease (logically). Anyway. Let’s move on.

Combs are some of the oldest (and most common) objects found in medieval graves -- i.e. they were a standard part of the “grave goods” for the deceased, and were highly valued possessions. Look, it’s a young woman combing her hair (that article also discusses the history of medieval makeup for men, which was totally a thing and likewise also suspected of being “unmanly.”) The Luttrell Psalter, now in the British Library, includes among its many illuminations one of a young woman having her hair elaborately combed and styled by an attendant. There were extensive discourses on what constituted an ideally attractive medieval woman, and the study of aesthetics and the nature of beauty is one of the oldest and most central philosophical enquiries in the world (as were beauty standards in antiquity). Having a pale complexion was a sign of wealth (you didn’t have to work outdoors in the sun) and women used all kinds of pastes and powders to achieve that effect. Remember the Trotula, the medieval gynecological textbook we talked about in the childbirth ask? Well, it is actually three texts, and the entire third text, De ornatu mulierum (On Women’s Cosmetics) is dedicated to makeup and cosmetics. What weird and gross sort of things do they advocate, cry editors of “7 Horrifying Medieval Beauty Tips You Won’t Believe!”-style articles? Well...

First come general depilatories for overall care of the skin. Then there are recipes for care of the hair: for making it long and dark, thick and lovely, or soft and fine. For care of the face, there are recipes for removing unwanted hair, whitening the skin, removing blemishes or abscesses, and exfoliating the skin, plus general facial creams. For the lips, there is a special unguent of honey to soften them, plus colorants to dye the lips and gums. For the care of teeth and prevention of bad breath, there are five different recipes. The final chapter is on hygiene of the genitalia. [...] A prescription said to be used by Muslim women then follows.[...] The author gives detailed instructions on how to apply the water just prior to intercourse, together with a powder that the woman is supposed to rub on her chest, breasts, and genitalia. She is also to wash her partner’s genitals with a cloth sprinkled with the same sweet-smelling powder.

Wait so... hair care, skin and facial creams, toothpaste, lipstick, and sexual hygiene?? With the latter based on that used by Muslim women??? Zounds! How strange and unthinkable!

L’ornement des Dames, an Anglo-Norman text of the thirteenth century, offers more tips and tricks, and explicitly references the authority of both the Trotula and Muslim women: “I shall not forget either what I learnt at Messina from a Saracen woman. She was a doctor for the people of her faith [...] according to what I heard from Trotula of Salerno, a woman who does not trust her is a fool.” So yes. The beauty regimes of Muslim women were transmitted to and shared by Christian women, especially in diverse places like medieval Sicily, and this was valuable and trusted advice. Gee. It’s almost like women have always a) cared about their appearance, and b) united to flip one giant middle finger at the patriarchy. (You can also read more about skincare and cosmetics.) Speaking of female health authorities, you have definitely (or you should have) heard of Hildegard von Bingen, a twelfth-century abbess and towering genius who was the trusted advisor of kings and popes and wrote treatises on everything from music to medicine to natural science (she is regarded as the founder of the discipline in Germany). This included the vast Physica, a handbook on health and medicine, and Causae et curae, another medical textbook.

Did the church grumble and gripe about women putting on excessive adornments and being too fixated by makeup and the dangers of vanity and etc etc? You bet they did. Did women ignore the hell out of this and wear makeup and fancy clothes anyway? You bet they damn well did. Also, medieval society was fuckin’ obsessed with fashion (especially in the fourteenth century.) The sumptuary laws, which appeared for the first time in the late thirteenth and early fourteenth centuries, regulated which classes of society were allowed to wear what (so that fancy furs and silks and jewels were reserved for the nobility, and less expensive cloth and trimming were the province of the lower classes -- the idea was that you could know someone’s station in life just by looking at them). These were insanely detailed, and went down to regulating the height of someone’s high heels. So yes, theoretically, the stiletto police could stop you in fourteenth-century England, whip out a measuring tape, and see if you were literally too big for your britches.

(”But, but,” you stammer. “Surely they had rotten teeth?” Well, this is probably a bad time to note that in addition to the five toothpaste remedies mentioned in the Trotula, there are even more. Jewish and Muslim natural philosophers and herbalists had all kinds of recommendations -- see Practical Materia Medica of the Medieval Eastern Mediterranean. Also, since there was no processed sugar in their diet, their dentistry was far better than, say, the Elizabethans, and white and regular teeth were highly prized. There would be wear and tear from grist, but since fine-milled white bread was a status symbol, the wealthy could afford to have bread that did not contain it, and thus good teeth.)

Of course, everyone wasn’t just getting dressed up with, so to speak, nowhere to go. What about sex? It never happened unless it was marital rape, right? (/side-eyes a certain unnamed quasi-medieval television show). Oh no. Medieval people loved the shit out of sex. Pastourelles were an immensely popular poetic genre which almost always included the protagonist having a romp with a pretty shepherdess, and anyone who’s read any Chaucer knows how bawdy it can get. Even Chaucer, however, is put to shame by the fabliaux, which are a vast collection of Old French poems that have titles so ribald that I could not say them aloud to an undergraduate class. (”The Ring That Controlled Erections” and “The Peekaboo Priest” are about the tamest that I can think of, but I gotta say I’m fond of “Long Butthole Berengier” and the one called simply “The Fucker,” because literally people are people everywhere and always. And yes, you perverted person, you can read the lot of them here.) This was incredibly explicit and bawdy popular literature that was pretty much exactly medieval porn (and like usual porn, did not exactly serve as any kind of precursor of feminist media or positive female representation, but Misogyny, Take a Shot.)

So yes. Once more (surprise!) the history of cosmetics goes back at least six thousand years, and is one of the oldest aspects of documented social history in the world. It existed broadly and accessibly in the medieval world, where women had other women writing books on it for them, and was just as much as a concern as it is now. People have always liked to look good, smell good, accessorize, dress fashionably, try weird beauty trends, and so forth. So if by some accident you do stumble into a time machine and end up in medieval Europe, you’ll have plenty of choices. Our medieval foremothers, and the men who loved them and thought they were beautiful, thank you for your time.