#this was specifically in the context of contemporary farces

[novelhater]

finished kaleidoscope of death volume one by xi zi xu

the translation leans toward barebones localization rather than preserving exact original meaning which i think is fine, although it's generally not my preference. there's exactly one footnote in the whole volume. as a result, there are a few things that are probably hard to understand if you lack the requisite context, which many english readers probably do. the most unfortunate of these is the discussion around ruan baijie's name which occurs in the first couple of pages and probably comes across as strange to anyone who doesn't get the joke. the fact that it happens so immediately makes me worry that it might be an impediment to getting into the rest of the novel. but then again, it's a fairly minor thing, all things considered, so maybe not. oh well.

i don't exactly have encyclopedic knowledge of the original so i can't speak to accuracy, but the rest of the volume flows smoothly. there are a few distinctly english phrases and sayings that pop up here and there but they don't come off as strange or forced. the use of "all work and no play makes jack a dull boy" was particularly interesting since this has its own horror-specific connotations. even the "hooman," though i resent it in general as a colloquialism, fits the context.

as for the story, i've already read kod all the way through and loved it (though i, like many, have mixed feelings about the ending). it was a first for me in many regards and has a special place in my heart as a result. in particular, it was the first infinite flow novel i ever read. and i love ruan nanzhu/baijie.

(immediate caveat that the following is about the first volume only because my memory of the rest of the series is just not detailed enough orz)

i think it's tempting to judge ruan nanzhu's gender and the way it's treated in the text against contemporary online standards regarding trans expression and discussion, but i don't think that's entirely fair. for one thing these kinds of positive gender presentations are EXCEPTIONALLY rare in bl/yaoi/shounen ai. there is a whole backdrop of casually transphobic "okama" characters that appear behind ruan baijie in the timeline. these characters are often the butt of the joke, and when they aren't, they're almost universally relegated to side roles. on the other hand, ruan baijie/nanzhu is the leading love interest. lin qiushi's perspective adds a somewhat conservative filter - he conceptualizes ruan baijie as a crossdressing man and considers those who view her as a woman as unwittingly deceived - but the narrative runs subtly counter to this construction and lin qiushi subconsciously accepts the gender-swapping as normal fairly quickly. (i'm also uncertain how much of the grammatical gendering is an artifact of translation.)

ruan nanzhu makes it clear from the start that this is part of his identity rather than a deliberately constructed farce (it's his "hobby" i.e. something he enjoys doing for its own sake - he quite literally plays with gender presentation) and only secondarily brings up the fact that it has benefits. the gender-swapping as something akin to bigender identity is further reinforced throughout. for example, an exchange between ruan baijie and another girl is described (free of lin qiushi's perspective filter) as a "mutual exchange between women." and as lin qiushi notes - because he finds himself missing ruan baijie! - ruan baijie and ruan nanzhu behave as if they were very similar but distinct individuals. ruan nanzhu isn't merely putting on a disguise - he's becoming ruan baijie.

well, it's a fairly complex discussion, and ultimately i wouldn't describe ruan nanzhu/baijie as stellar "representation," but his/her existence as an object and agent of desire is honestly pretty unique and radical with the context of the genre and i really think it's wrong to dimiss it because it's not perfect. (my opinion on this is also strongly influenced by the story's conclusion, but more on that amother distant day in the future...)

in regards to the horror elements, i don't find kod very scary, but i'm also aware that my horror threshold is pretty high compared to most people. at the very least, the concepts are distinct and vivid. could the plot be improved from a structural and logical standpoint? yes, undoubtedly. but i've given up in irritation and disgust (and not the good kind) on nine out of ten of the contemporary horror novels i've tried to read in the last five years so i consider this to be batting a thousand. at the very least kod doesn't belabor the point and insist on explaining each and every minor spook, even when explanation only serves to draw attention to their faults.

*deep inhale and exhale as i let go a belly full of unrelated complaints*

[louisironson]

my professor and i forming an agreement for her to watch at least one episode of frasier and for me to watch at least one episode of modern family… we get each other

[thesevioletdel1ghts]

these are all valid points you bring up but I think people are already blowing this “Eddie mocking Oz” thing out of proportion?

they are at a fighting ring. wrestlers dress in ridiculous attire. it’s a show, a farce for the lower masses and farces often include bringing well known contemporary figures to stage.

mocking is exaggerating the features of the person and if Ed wanted to do a costume that immediately evokes the image of Penguin, what are the features that have to be present? the nose, the umbrella, the coat and obviously the limp. now, we can’t tell from the pictures yet if he’s actually gonna do the limp, but to me the nose and the getup is more Ed trying to look like the Penguin in general than specifically singling out his disability or features. Even the nose looks more like a theatrical prop than a fake nose. Now we still don’t know what the actual “mocking” will entail - it might focus more on Oswald’s actions or public appearances than Ed waddling across the stage.

I saw people already saying that he will mock Oswald for being gay which is just wild conjecture. Gay and Jewish are labels that don’t exist in Gotham or at least are never used as identifications for characters, which is why I find it difficult to see “antisemitism” in this portrayal. Oswald has a long pointy nose. Ed dresses up as Oswald, so he has a long pointy fake nose. Even though to the viewer Oswald is coded as a Hungarian Jew, it never had an influence on how people perceive him and he never faced discrimination for it in Gotham (nor for being in love with another man for that matter). If you remove the context, then you might find the implication problematic, but since Oswald’s heritage is never stated outright or treated as a big deal, I think that in the context of Gotham’s world and society this mockery isn’t hugely offensive - yet. Depends on how it plays out in the actual episode but currently I’m more excited about Ed taking his obsession with Oz to a whole new level, I mean daaamn talk about being So Not Over It :D

I feel like I’m missing something. Isn’t Ed making fun of Oswald’s limp/appearance just Ed being a villain? Shouldn’t he BE awful? I feel like people are holding him to good-guy standards. I hope this isn’t offensive. I’m just confused why people are mad that a villain is being a villain.

That’s a fair question, and I can absolutely tell that it was asked in good faith, so don’t worry!

I 100% agree that, as literal super-villains, the members of Gotham’s rogues’ gallery have to be interpreted a little differently than standard “good guy” characters… Oswald’s return to form after Arkham involves murder and cannibalism, and you kinda just go “oh hey, he’s back!!” Trying to keep track of who cut whose hands off so you know what to expect out of future alliances isn’t necessarily a ‘normal’ thing.

Let me see if I can try to explain why mocking someone’s disability or tapping into anti-Semitic tropes for a costume feels different to me…

Keep reading