#tuberculosis representation

[cripplecharacters]

Hi, 

So, I have written expression disorder and dysgraphia, which means this might be a bit rambly or unclear but I’ll try my best to stay on as clear and as brief as I can. 

I’m currently writing a fanfiction for Wynonna Earp as a way to improve my writing skills without needing to stress about it. Background on the show: It’s a supernatural show based around a descendant of Wyatt Earp who was a legal officer in the wild west and got involved in a massive feud. It also has his friend Doc Holliday becoming immortal and being a love interest for the main character. The primary reason I’m doing this is because I dislike how they portrayed Doc Holliday in the series (often outright the opposite of the reality) and also because they just left out the fact he was disabled completely. Due to a gunshot wound when he was fairly young, probably along with weakness due to having tuberculosis for most of his adult life, which did eventually kill him, he used a cane part time. He also had a cleft lip and palate that was surgically corrected and he got surgery for it as an infant and had speech therapy, which doesn’t really seem to have impacted his adult life much in what I’m writing.

 I do have chronic pain due to an injury which was pretty bad when I was younger, so having a character who’s portrayed as dealing with that and continuing to be brave and selfless would have meant the whole world to me at that point in my life and still will. But as I was doing research I ran into a few things I knew very little about. 

My own disabilities are invisible, which means that I don’t have much experience with how people respond to seeing mobility aids. It would be interesting to show people’s responses, especially since he pretty famously took offense easily and didn’t leave things alone. There’s a fun scene there but I’m not sure what a common response to set it off would be. The biggest problem I have, that I haven’t been able to find a lot about: according to a medical article I read even when it’s cured people who had tuberculosis typically have some lung damage. I haven’t been able to find a lot on how that would impact someone day to day. He was cured of it magically but the idea of there still being damage makes sense based on the in universe rules and also someone being magically cured is generally considered not good. So how would it impact someone on a daily basis?

There’s some things in the research I did that make me think he was autistic (namely literal thinking to the point where he almost killed someone due to not understanding that a duel was meant to be a joke as a teen). Or maybe I’m just projecting because I am. Any ideas for how somebody who grew up in a time where nuerodivergence just wasn’t known would accommodate himself and be helped by friends? How would they understand it at that time?

How in general do friends respond to disabilities and try to help now?

There’s a few other things but they’re mainly just me being a beginner writer who doesn’t honestly. Thank you so much for reading through this even if you don’t end up responding!

[part 2] clarification: I meant the cleft palate wouldn't come up in what I'm writing because he's an adult and it didn't seem to have huge bearing on his adult life. I'm so sorry I left out part of that sentence in my ask bc I have a learning disability! didn't mean to! I'm so sorry and thank you again!

Hello!

People respond in many ways. In the modern west a lot of it involves random strangers being intrusive as shit ("what happened to you??") but in historical times I think it would be more of avoidance, especially if he has visible symptoms of tuberculosis. People still think that "visibly disabled person coughing = plague". If you're going for historical accuracy, it wouldn't really surprise me if strangers didn't want to sit next to him.

Long tuberculosis (affecting 25% of those who had TB) seems to be very similar to COPD, so the main day-to-day effect would probably be fatigue, being out of breath after physical exertion, etc. COPD is an incredibly common disability so you should be able to find a lot of info about it and how it can be managed.

Friends will also respond in many ways, and it also depends a lot on the disabled person. This guy sounds like the "hyper-independent physically disabled man" type and in my experience most of them don't talk about their needs much, especially not with the boys. In this case the accommodation is often just silently agreed on after spending some time together (e.g., after a few times going out they can see how annoyed he gets when they suddenly change plans so they learn to tell him as soon as they know, if he drops something they pick it up for him without saying anything since they know it's tiring for him to get up, etc.). If they know him well enough to know he takes offense easily they probably wouldn't bring up his inability to do something to not upset him and try to work around it instead.

I don't have enough historical knowledge to answer the second question, so I'll leave it to other mods. But I think it'd make sense if they just thought he was eccentric or weird rather than having a medical condition.

Hope this helps,

mod Sasza

Hello, thank you for your ask! In regards to the second question, it would depend on his symptoms, how well/if he could mask, and how other people view(ed) him.

I'm assuming he's level 1 / low support needs, as you don't mention him having a caretaker or difficulty doing tasks. Some of the examples include specific autistic traits that he may or may not have/used to have, they're mostly there to be examples. These are also assuming you're writing him as an adult only, if you want some info on how it would be like growing up during this time let us know!

Without good knowledge of autism, most people would think he's very strange if he cannot [fully] mask. Flat affect, lack of social understanding and other symptoms would make most allistic people uncomfortable, with responses ranging from thinking he's just weird [and would want to avoid him] to believing he's angry at them specifically [and would either want to avoid him or get aggressive themselves]. Most people will probably just see it as character quirks rather than symptoms of anything, or even think he's choosing to act the way he does. His friends would most likely be other neurodivergent people who either experience the same symptoms or don't have enough of a social understanding to realize he's not acting 'correctly' if he doesn't mask.

Unless his friends/family experience similar symptoms to him, they probably wouldn't understand why he does/reacts the way he does. This isn't to say they wouldn't try to accommodate him still, that moreso depends on the individual, but those who don't understand might try to push him to 'get over it' more than someone who gets it. Like Sasza said, over time his friends would be able to accommodate him by noticing what makes him upset/happy and how to help. 'Doc likes to keep his hands busy so I gave him my butterfly knife to spin' or ' the yelling in the hall was bothering him so I asked if he wanted to go to outside with me' could be ways of accommodating him without realizing, basically seeing his symptoms and trying to find an easy solution to help, wether or not they understand them. They could also give him unhelpful solutions while trying to accommodate, which would probably just further stress Doc if given in a stressful situation. Essentially unless he knows what helps and tells them it would be a guessing game for them [if he does that or his friend[s] respect it depends on them]. Try to think of his symptoms and what might be available at the time to help [like stim toys didn't exist back then but butterfly knives did, and ear defenders weren't a thing but he could walk away if needed].

As to how he'd accommodate himself, he wouldn't know words like 'stim' or 'overstimulated,' but if he doesn't care about/understand social norms he would be more likley to 'move in odd ways' or exit an upsetting area. A more socially conscious person might try to hide it, like using small tactile stims [i.e. rubbing a cloth or tapping his foot] or making excuses to leave an upsetting area. He might also be able to mask and try to just bear it, only unmasking around friends or in private.

Also the wiki said he was born in 1851 but died in 2020, and although autism would be named during his lifetime I'm not sure he would identify with it. The first medical documentation of autism was in 1877, and at the time it was called developmental [r-slur]. I doubt he'd want to identify with that, and even later on autism was only ever studied in children, and of course was not thought of well. It was thought to be caused by cold parenting or a form of psychosis/schizophrenia exclusive to children in the early to mid 1900's. For many, many years the only idea of autism he'd have would essentially be that. Because most studies at the time thought autism could be 'grown out of' [with exception to higher support needs people] he'd have lived most of his life at that point believing it was a child only disease. Even if he hadn't heard about autism until the late 1900's-early 2000's, it was still thought of as a stigmatized childhood disease by the public until recently [even by people today, hence the blog's existence]. If he's the type of character to be less set in his opinions at an old age then maybe later he could read on modern autism and identify with it, but I find older people tend to prefer dismissing disability for the sake of avoiding any change.

I hope this was at all helpful!

Mod Rot

[heavenlymorals]

Red Dead Redemption 1 and 2: Realism Vs Romantacism

(Warning: Spoilers for RDR2 and RDR1 and that this is a long post.)

But first, let's get a better idea on what these genres and philosophies actually entailed.

During 19th century America, there were two famous genres of literature that became wildly popular- Romantacism and Realism. These genres shaped many philosophies and are interwoven into so many famous stories that it is kinda insane, but today, for this retrospective, I want to speak on how these two genres shaped both RDR1 and RDR2.

Romantacism came as a sort of critique of the Enlightment Era. The Enlightment Era was a period of reason and rejection of spirituality. It focused a lot on what was real and in front of a person rather than the experience and interpretation of an event or thing. Dutch represents this idea in this line to John where he says:

"Real. Oh how I detest that word. So devoid of imagination."

And to Arthur:

"We are dreamers in an ever duller world of fact, I'll give you that."

Romantacism is such a broad subject but there were generally three aspects of it that was generally consistent- the relationship between man and himself, man and nature, man and god, and how those experiences create the essence of life. The idea of the oversoul in Romantacism is a deep understanding of nature and spirituality that makes someone as equal to God himself, or that's the simplest way that I can explain it. Romantacism is also about the experience between man and man and ideas of hope, dreams, new beginnings, friendships, life, and love. (Dark Romanticism is way more gloomy, but many of the characteristics are still the same. For this post, though, we'll focus on just Romantacism.)

But what romantacism is about overall is the authentic experience of life and the personal interpretation of it- no matter how imaginative it is. This is where romanticisation occurs. Of war, of historical periods, of certain types of living, etc. etc.

Since that is romantacism, what is realism? Well, I'm sure you already know, but realism is supposed to be a representation of what life actually is and usually in a negative way. Realism isn't concerned with the imagination of an event as it is more concerned with what life is actually like and how it affects people. There really isn't much more to say then that. Realism is about real life and usually in a negative way. For context, realism became popular in the US after the Civil War as for the first time, a lot of people saw such intense pain and death and debauchery.

Like, If "Pride and Prejudice" by Jane Austen is a romantacised story of a woman's love life during a historical time period, then Kate Chopin's "The Awakening" is a story soaked in the constructs of realism. This is just one comparison of the two genres.

So what does this have to do with Red Dead Redemption? Simple. Each game represents one of the genres as its main focal point for story telling.

RDR2 is a game that is all about romantacism, especially if you play it as it should be played as high honor Arthur Morgan.

Arthur's main storyline is about finding redemption, sure, but he finds that redemption through the authentic experience of life and his interpretation of it. Prior to his tuberculosis, Arthur saw himself as only a cog in the bad machine that was their life. He robbed, intimidated, and killed without much thought to what it actually meant for him because well, this is the way it is and how it always has been.

However, when he gets tuberculosis, his attitude changes. With the limited time he has left, he brings himself to ponder life itself and interprets it in a way that contrasts his previous thought process that the world is dark and gloomy and that he's just another part of it. In his limited time, he begins to see good. If not in him, than in others. In the love people have for others, in the strength that people have for others, in the passion that people have for others.

Arthur begins to appreciate life itself and that's also why the stranger missions in chapter 6 are so much more personal as a whole- Arthur's interpretation of life becoming better in the short time he has left makes him much more heartfelt and sentimental- a key component of romantacism. He helps a widow who could've died out there for no reason other than wanting her to live and live well. He becomes friends with a veteran and helps him out even though he knows that death is around the corner for him and his time with the man would be short. And of course, the debt missions and the helping of Edith. Arthur forgives the debts, gives money, and sees human life as far more valuable than the debt.

And in the end? Arthur saves John and dies knowing that he tried his best to not just survive but to live. That's his experience and his interpretation of it- becoming a better man and valuing people more than things. And then there is the epilogue- there is hope and happiness and a sense of accomplishment. All the pain feels over and a new light has been cast onto life.

In fact, this archetype in Romanticism, which is about finding redemption through the larger human experience, is quite famous overall. It's not unique to just Arthur Morgan. One of the most famous romantic stories of the era was Mary Shelley's "Frankenstein", and Victor Frankenstein undergoes a similar journey, albeit more subdued than Arthur's.

In the beginning of the book, Victor starts out as a representation of realism. He's obsessed with science and doesn't really care about his family and friends. He goes on for long periods of time just thinking about science because of his own hubris and desire to become famous and accomplished. He rejects art, love, and all the things that constitute the human experience for the sake of science, which represents realism. As he begins to see the faults in his actions and the mistake of creating his monster, things begin to change. He becomes more interested in his friends, his fiancée, and life itself as a concept rather than what it is in front of him.

Yes, Mary Shelley wrote the book as a criticism of the unregulated pursuit of science, but if you dig deeper, it's not just about that. It's about keeping romance, ideals, and the human experience in your heart, because without them, things will be worse than they already are. Many ideas and philosophies aren't realistic, but we keep them to enrich the human experience. That is what Romanticism is about, and that is what Arthur Morgan's story is about. Like Victor, his story could be boiled down to a rejection of realism and an embrace of Romanticism.

And besides just the story being a love letter to Romantacism, there is the scenery too. As stated, one big part of Romantacism is nature and RDR2's nature is just gorgeous. It's bright and scenic and beautiful like a lot of romantic paintings. Arthur connects to nature by living in it and drawing it and experiencing it. Even the ambiance of the landscape is calm and relaxing, adding to the beautiful experience of the American wilderness.

So what about Red Dead Redemption 1? Red Dead Redemption 1 is all about realism. It doesn't care about ideals or hopes. Its story is one of realism, portraying the realistic end of an outlaw. Where Red Dead Redemption 2 ends with John and his family finally getting the life they've always wanted and possibly starting over again, Red Dead Redemption 1 rejects that. The Pinkertons find John, and he is set out to kill his brothers-in-arms. He can't escape his old life, even if he wants to—it will always come back to haunt him. John has killed and robbed and done so many terrible things that the dream of him being able to settle down and just be a farmer in the end is just that, a dream. Even when John does what Edgar Ross wants him to do, he gets shot down like a dog in the end anyway. He has to pay for his sins, and in a sick way, this is justice for all the men he has killed before in his outlaw life. There is no other end for John realistically than to be put down like a dog. It is his tragedy, his fate, and a realistic fate for an outlaw.

John's path is lonely. Most of the people he meets are people that he does not want to be associated with. Seth is a creepy grave robber, Irish is a drunk bastard, and West Dickens is just a scamming piece of s*** who doesn't scam the rich and people who already have too much, but he scams the poor, the working man, the person who is uneducated. They are all very realistic criminals, and John has to deal with it because all he wants is his family and the men that the Pinkertons sent him to capture. The people that he does respect, like Leigh Johnson and Bonnie McFarland, are professional relationships at best. John has to rely on himself and only himself, which is a very popular theme in realism. Unlike in Red Dead 2, he has no one to turn to, no one to watch his back. He has no family and no friends. He is alone, and he has to deal with his sins because the world will not forget, as he mentions time and time again.

Romanticism is dead. Ideals are dead. A young woman's pursuit of God leaves her dead in the desert, and John can do nothing to help her. The idea of the noble West is torn apart by violent gangs that do nothing but rape, kill, and steal. Men come to exploit the pain of colonialism. Eugenics is a thriving science. The most apparent example that ideals are dead is the Mexican revolution. Abraham Reyes makes the people believe that he will be better, that he will be the Messiah for these peasants, but the reality is that he turns out to be just as bad or even worse than the already established dictatorship in the country. And John doesn't care. He's not there to be a hero for the people; he's simply there to grab Javier and Bill and then go. That's why he is just as comfortable working for the dictatorship as he is working with the rebels. He does not care. All he cares about is his family, and anything bad that happens to others pains him, but it is not his problem. That is what realism is about. It's not the interpretation of life, but what life actually is, and a lot of times, life is cruel and bitter and terrible. Things are unfair, and sometimes people have to pay with their life and identity.

John dies in the end, and like a lot of children and wives of these outlaws and criminals, Abigail and Jack suffer. Abigail does not last long, as she dies just a couple of years later, and Jack has to bear the sins of his father on his back, like many children of outlaws and criminals did. Even when Jack kills Ross, there is no sense of triumph, no happiness or joy; it's just an empty feeling of "what now?" Where revenge in Red Dead Redemption 2 is idealized and romantic, even beautiful in a sense, revenge in Red Dead Redemption is empty and grotesque, leaving the player with nothing but emptiness. There's nothing left; everything is gone.

And just look at the scenery of Red Dead Redemption. Yes, it's beautiful, sure, but it's dull and dark. There isn't a lot of color, there aren't a lot of people or animals; it's drab. If RDR2 is a field with a pretty Instagram filter on it, then RDR1 is the field without the filter. The ambience of the game is also dark and weary, putting the player on edge as John cannot relax like Arthur can. John needs to find his family as he has to pay for the sins of his outlaw life.

Although Romantacism isn't a very popular genre today, often overshadowed by realism, both genres of literature and philosophy are paraded in these games.

Arthur is the romantic hero- someone who finds his own meaning of life and turns hopeful and idealistic because of it. RDR2 is a romantic game.

John is the realistic hero- someone who deals with the cards that life gives him and is exhausted from it as he knows his singular efforts won't cause an end to his pain. RDR1 is a realistic game.

And I just think that's very cool. Understanding those two genres of American literature allows the player to understand the games on a deeper level.

(I ain't reading allat)

[doctorweebmd]

listen it is incredibly important to remember that one of the most common forms of non-genetic bronchiectasis (i.e. cystic fibrosis) is post-tuberculosis bronchiectasis. a single episode of active mycobacterium tuberculosis infection, even after treatment, can result in a loss of pulmonary elasticity and lead to worsened air trapping, poor mucociliary clearence, and in that manner, recurrent infections with risk for progressive lung function decline and even death. considering the time-period and geographic representation of the main characters of bungo stray dogs, as well as the canonical death of several main characters by way of tuberculosis, the design behind akutagawa ryuunosuke's character (his thin frame, hemoptysis, frequent cough, weak immune system) is a direct reference to this fatal infection.

in this essay i will -

[blacknedsoul-blog]

Lenore Vandernatch: the rogue, the gothic heroine and the courtly knight. A review of archetypes

Okay, after going over my notes, here we are again. In case you don't know what this is all about, here is the first of these posts where I'm doing a review of some of the archetypes that Annabel and Lenore seem to be taking notes on.

Just so this doesn't end up being another 3000 word post, let's get started.

The Rogue

In 1554, the first written version of "El Lazarillo de Tormes" was published, the foundational work of what would become known in Spain as the "picaresque novel": stories centered on the rogue, a poor rascal who uses trickery to ensure his survival.

At this stage of the game, we have rogues in a variety of flavors and colors. It would be difficult to make a comprehensive list, so let's talk about these characters in general.

The first thing to note is that rogues are, by definition, outsiders. In the traditional picaresque, the rogue is simply someone from the lower classes, but as this archetype has grown, it has become less about class and more about criminality.

Yes. Rogues are criminals: thieves like Robin Hood, swindlers like the Lazarillo...

Fraud, arson. You name it.

Getting back to the issue of the rogue as an outsider, they may have been one from the start, or they may have become one after attaining their criminal status. Regardless of the reason, these people operate outside of the law, the authorities generally give a shit, and, depending on your rogue flavor, may even actively fight against it.

One thing to note here: this goes a bit beyond Lenore's rebellious attitude. Like a good rogue, she derives enormous personal satisfaction from the thought of getting her way. The world has turned its back on the rogue, so the rogue will not hesitate to turn her back on the world.

In Lenore's case, this attitude of throwing all authority to the wind and actively ignoring any rules imposed on her is a mixture of personality and trauma. In the flashbacks, we see that Lenore has always had a certain disdain for protocol and formalities, but of course, after being locked up for at least a year because the rules of the society she lives in have decided to make her an outcast for her brother 's death, she no longer finds any reason to listen to what they have to say to her. The rules will never go beyond the feeling that she has agency over her life.

From this follows the methods of the rogues: opportunism is one of their hallmarks. Ingenuity, cunning, and creativity are common traits among these characters, something that is usually tied to their status as outsiders and criminals; they don't care about rules, so they think outside the box, either because they are highly intelligent or because they lack common sense.

Maybe both.

So, yes, when Annabel tells her dashing rogue, she's not wrong in the least. But there are more interesting things to look at here

The Gothic Heroine

When some theorists say that Gothic heroines are bland and uninteresting characters, it's...true. But there's a reason for that, so let me get that out of the way for a moment: the image of the maiden in this period is used as a symbol of purity, chastity, goodness, and her corruption, death, or disease works on both a literal and metaphorical level. It is like when you see grotesque religious images in horror movies, there is a powerful and disturbing charge in the idea of seeing something "pure" destroyed.

So the thing about gothic heroines is that, at worst, they are not characters who contribute to the story they are in, but tokens, quasi-sacred representations who are there to die, get sick, or fall victim to a villain who might sexually harass them. Yes, unpleasant.

But good gothic heroines (besides possibly having tuberculosis) are characters with arcs related to corruption, especially mental corruption. And this is where it gets interesting.

But we go from less to more. In her flashbacks, Lenore's physical appearance is almost exactly that of a gothic novel protagonist: pale, almost cadaverous, slender, languid in her movements (because, in this case, she's drugged a significant percentage of the time), and long hair.

Her background in this part of the story, like that of the best gothic heroines, is one of mental corruption: she is here, imprisoned, withering and losing her mind, giving in to despair. There are those who point out a rather strong resemblance between the scene where Lenore tears the flowered wallpaper from her room and the short story The Yellow Wallpaper by the writer Charlotte Perkins. And although this story is not gothic, it definitely retains the most important trope of the genre.

Another element in which we can find Lenore is in the Gothic ballad of the same name, written by Gottfried Bürger in 1773. This poem tells the story of Lenore, a girl condemned by narrative for blaspheming against heaven after the death of her beloved, who is later visited by the Grim Reaper himself to take her to him.

A heartbroken woman committing blasphemy in the name of a lost love? I wonder if that sounds familiar.

And if I had to point out one particular gothic heroine with whom Lenore shares important similarities, it would be Laura from Carmilla.

With the first, she shares two very important things: isolation and a penchant for women who can murder her, a complicated relationship with a gothic vampire.

Laura lives in complete isolation from the world, with the only company of maids and her father; within the first few chapters, we know that she can barely remember the last time she had the company of a woman her own age. Like Lenore in the flashbacks, Laura is something of a secret, hidden from the world (though for less horrific reasons).

And that isolation is broken by the arrival of an elegant, almost supernaturally beautiful upper-class lady who almost kicks in her door with a "Hi, I want to be friends. You'll like me."

Both Laura and Lenore are not afraid of the vampire, though they are not unaware of her strange behavior and will raise a puzzled eyebrow at her promises of affection, as well as her obvious tendency to insist on a fucked-up secret that they are in the middle of and can't share. Another important detail is that both characters have a certain difficulty in describing their feelings as romantic: both are very obviously obsessed with this mysterious lady who has come to interrupt their loneliness, but Laura never fails to refer to Carmilla as her "friend" (a behavior that the modern reader may interpret, with more than fair reason, as comphet), and Lenore is little more than that, at least until the mansion arch where the shingle falls on her.

Last but not least, just as Lenore is treated as "crazy," there are several events in Laura's life (such as her first encounter with Carmilla when she was a child) or that occur throughout the novel that are dismissed by those around her as her being a little touched in the head.

The courtly knight

Here it is necessary to make a distinction: knights are a far-reaching figure, but before and during the Middle Ages they mainly starred in two types of stories: the canta de gesta (which was intended to tell great deeds of inspiration for certain peoples, such as the Song of Mio Cid in Spain or the Song of the Nibelungs in Germany. This last one is the best Canto de gesta in history, I do not accept arguments) and the Novel of chivalry or courtly (focused on the individual story of the knight and introduces elements of the court).

What is the main difference between the knight of the canto de gesta and the knight of the court? Well... the latter is much more horny. And we are talking about Lenore, so you have until the end of this paragraph to imagine which of these knights we are talking about.

The first thing to keep in mind is that the Courtly Knight has a pretty strong moral compass: nobility, mercy, loyalty, and honor are values they firmly believe in; these characters are heroes, and that means that while they are not perfect, they represent ideals that are considered important in this time. And we're talking about vassalage, so you get it.

This is the first thing Lenore has in common with the knights of the court: her strong sense of morality. Yes, she's not afraid to play dirty like a rogue, but she's pretty clear about what things are important to her in that regard, and she's willing to uphold those ideals even in the context of Nevermore, which actively encourages its students to kill and betray each other.

However, the personal agendas of these knights have one important thing in common: the conflict between their own desires and their duty.

What are those desires? Well...

Good courtly knights usually have to choose between their love/sexual interests and where their personal loyalties lie, which, due to the era in which these stories take place, are usually their feudal lords or even kings.

We already established that Lenore doesn't give a shit about authority, but her personal loyalty is to her friends. And this is where it gets tricky for her: So far in the comic, Lenore has kept her relationship with Annabel a secret from her friends, and she has kept the fact that she wants to save her friends a secret from Annabel. A conflict that may eventually blow up in her face, and on the face of it, really befits a courtly knight (though if she were a real one, the Misfits might ask her to kill the Deans or something in exchange for accepting her relationship with Annabel).

To continue with this, we need to stop for a moment and talk about another little thing: courtly love. There are many definitions of it, but my favorite is the one that defines it as an attempt to reconcile mystical love with eroticism. Fun fact: these stories were written in the Provençal language, something that would associate romantic tropes with "vulgar language".

In any case, courtly love usually speaks of the beloved maiden as an idealized object, a figure who inspires an almost religious devotion. And the most recurrent theme within courtly love is what is called "love from afar": it focuses more on the journey in search of the beloved than on the couple's relationship as such (this journey can be literal or metaphorical), the knight has symbols associated with the pilgrim, there is a certain hatred of the image, the maiden is seen as an almost religious figure, and...

Yes, the color associated with the so-called "love from afar", specifically with the beloved maiden, is damn blue.

Now that we've got all that out of the way, it's time to break down why Lenore fulfills some of these things and why she doesn't.

Going with the tropes that are fulfilled, we can say that Lenore is on a more or less metaphorical journey. A journey to recover her memories and her identity. One at the end of which her lover waits for her "until the abyss claims them both".

Like a knight, Lenore is willing to make great personal sacrifices in pursuit of the things she cares about: she is willing to die for the people she cares about (the misfits) and for her lover (Annabel). The Living Long Thing is something the Knight don't know about, and since Lenore is in Nevermore, apparently neither does she.

With all that said, it's worth noting the biggest difference: courtly love features relationships based on vassalage and a huge power differential. Something that does not happen here. No, Lenore calling Annabel "my liege" doesn't count.

To explain this further -and to summarize, because it's a subject that bloody books have been written about-t he relationships in courtly love have two different levels of power: the knight must perform feats to be worthy of affection, and the maiden is little more than a prize to be won.

This unbalanced power dynamic is something that simply does not exist in the White Raven: an important part of their relationship is that both are equal in charisma, intelligence, and resourcefulness. The unstoppable force and the immovable object. Annabel is as willing to die for Lenore as she is for herself, and Lenore would probably go into berserker mode if anyone dared to treat Annabel as a prize.

Yes, you could argue that the balance of power is a bit weighted toward Lenore because Annabel is willing to make sacrifices for her that Lenore wouldn't make because she has some, you know, morals. But I think that has more to do with Annabel's character than her relationship with Lenore (that's another analysis I have a pin for when the season is over).

Conclusions

If the archetypes that Annabel seems to take note of are all quite related, Lenore, on the contrary, is much more like a mosaic: these characters have little in common and some (like the Rogue and the Knight) directly contradict each other. This woman is chaotic in her conception: opportunistic and rebellious as a rogue, pious and with strong values as a knight, and condemned by the narrative as a gothic heroine.

Another thing that stands out is that two of these three archetypes are traditionally male characters. Personally, I don't think Lenore is "like a man": her entire background and personal history is meant to work in terms of her status as a woman in the time period she lives in. She can do all the shit these male heroes do and better (though the hc that Lenore is somewhere on the non-binary spectrum is not a reading that conflicts with that).

And I use the word "hero" because another detail stands out here as well: yes, many of these characters are not only often the protagonists of the stories they are in, they are heroes within their historical periods and literary movements.

I'm going to do a third part of this comparing Lenore's archetypes to Annabel's because, believe me, there's some really crazy stuff to unpack there.

[cartermagazine]

Today In History

Dred Scott was born into slavery in Southampton, Virginia, around 1795, the property of the Peter Blow family. He was given the name “Sam” but took the name of his older brother, Dred, when the latter died.

In 1836, Scott who was approximately 41, married a teenaged slave, Harriett Robinson, at Fort Snelling who was owned by another U.S. Army officer, Major Lawrence Taliaferro of Virginia. Scott and Robinson gave birth to their first child, Eliza, in 1838 and a second daughter, Lizzie, in 1840, and their two children were born free.

In 1843, Emerson died and left his estate to his widow, Irene Sanford Emerson. When Scott offered to purchase his freedom for $300 in 1846, Emerson refused his offer. He then obtained the assistance of two St. Louis attorneys who helped him to sue for his freedom. His 1846 lawsuit was filed in the St. Louis Circuit Court and went to trial in 1847.

Scott lost this case, but later that year he won a second trail. By this point Scott received financial support and legal representation from the sons of Peter Blow, his former owner, who had become anti-slavery advocates, Irene Sanford Emerson’s brother, John Sanford, and her second husband, Dr. C.C. Chaffee, a Massachusetts abolitionist. To all of them the Scott case as an important challenge to slavery.

On March 6, 1857, the United States Supreme Court finally ruled in Dred Scott v Sandford [Sanford was misspelled by a court clerk]. In a 7-2 decision written by Chief Justice Roger B. Taney, the majority of justices said that Scott and all slaves and free blacks were not citizens of the United States and therefore had no standing in the courts. The backlash to this decision strengthened the abolitionist movement and further divided the North and South, leading four years later to the U.S. Civil War.

After he was freed, Dred Scott went to work as a porter in the St. Louis area. He died from tuberculosis in September 1858. Harriett Scott died eighteen years later on June 17, 1876.

CARTER™️ Magazine

[ptseti]

Have you seen “The Gods Must Be Crazy”? 🎬 N!xau, a San from the Kalahari Desert, was discovered by director Jamie Uys and cast in the lead role of the 1980 film. Despite the film and its sequels grossing over $40 million, N!xau was paid only about $300 for the first film and an undisclosed amount for the subsequent ones. The Namibian actor and farmer appeared in several other films but continued to receive only a fraction of the earnings. N!xau lacked proper representation and did not fully understand contracts or currency. Sadly, he reportedly suffered from tuberculosis, and in early July 2003, Namibian officials confirmed his death in the remote Kalahari region where he lived. The exact cause was unknown, and his age was estimated to be around 59, as even N!xau himself wasn’t sure of his birthdate. N!xau’s story reflects the experiences of many talents from the motherland who have been exploited by foreigners and left behind.

[1ndus]

Fight Club Movie Personal Interpretation and Analysis

Some of this is about the actual meaning of the movie, and some of this is stuff about the plot. Watch the movie first, this will not make sense and spoil a bunch if not.

“I don't understand. Why does a weak person have to go out and find a strong person... to hang onto?”

The Narrator is constantly led by Tyler Durden, doing everything he tells him to do, inevitably going along with all of his ideas, no matter how much he doesn’t want to. Tyler saves him in his most vulnerable moments, is his only friend, and then abandons him. Then the Narrator goes on a hunt to find him, only to discover that he IS him; he saved himself, he was the “strong person,” and at the end of the movie, got rid of him. A weak person does not need to latch on to a strong person. If you are determined, you can always save yourself. The message is not don’t get help, or that the things you suffer from are your fault, but instead that, when it comes down to it, it’s up to you to have the will and drive to fix your problems.

“His name was Robert Paulson!”

Everyone in Project Mayhem has been conditioned to abandon their sense of self in order to make them a powerful unified mass of destruction; they “live, work, and eat in teams”, but they use someone else’s sense of self to rally themselves and reach their goal. “He was a man named Robert Paulson”, who suffered the consequences of the people and society that they opposed. They appeal to the sympathy of someone with an identity to evoke emotion, and so they push to destroy. “When people think you’re dying, they “really listen to you, instead of just waiting for their turn to speak”; death evokes real emotion and can start revolutions, especially when identity is used to appeal to you and your people; it has more effect when something bad happens to someone who you see as similar to you; you can get so caught up in your own identity that you destroy, but you can also become so isolated from your sense of self that you are easily manipulated.

“It all started with a woman named Marla Singer.”

The first time the Narrator enters his “cave”, a penguin appears beckoning him to slide down the ice, to “let go”. The second time the Narrator enters the cave, Marla Singer appears, beckoning to “slide”, or confront both her and his attraction to her, in other words, to “let go.” She’s first seen in the support groups, and the Narrator can immediately sense that, like him, she’s not really dying. When someone is insecure of flaws in themselves it’s much easier to see them in other people, and this insecurity and guilt tears him up, and it distracts him from “letting go” in the one place where he feels he can, and because he can’t freely get everything off of his mind and heart, he can no longer sleep; he realizes his lifeline only works when his conscience which is heavily shaped by the society, which almost always tells him he’s a better person for “holding on”, so he leaves those programs and finds a new one, with a complete lack restrictions, a complete disregard for morals, and a complete feeling of freedom. Marla pushed the Narrator away from the support groups, and was another major push towards “freeing himself.”

Marla is also the model for what “letting go” looks like for the Narrator. She smokes in the tuberculosis groups, goes to the testicular cancer support group even though she’s a woman, is seen wandering carelessly and confidently through traffic, standing dead center in the road while she talks to the narrator, and is quick to get into a relationship with the Narrator without even thinking about the consequences. Marla lives her life “like she could die at any moment,” she’s bound by no morals, no care for her life; her personality mirrors that of Tyler Durden, and I think she was the inspiration for that character in the Narrator’s head.

“I am Jack’s…”

“...medulla oblongata.”

The medulla oblongata has an ancient spiritual representation of being an organ that brings a greater consciousness and perception. This is the very first “I am Jack’s…”, and it is read in the basement when he first moves in with Tyler Durden. This is the beginning of his journey out of the mentality that is weighing him down; “he is enlightened.”

“...colon. I get cancer. I kill Jack.”

This quote is said in the dirty basement of the Narrator’s new home, after losing his apartment, and the spiritual symbolism of the colon often represents dirt or filth, or a “dirty and filthy” experience, and colon cancer is often a result of a build up of years of unmanaged bad habits, much like the ones that led “Tyler Durden” up to exploding the Narrator’s apartment.

“...raging bile duct.”

This quote is said after Marla Singer is first seen in the Narrator's new home. When the bile duct malfunctions, it severely affects all of the rest of the organs; he feels as though Marla has affected all aspects of his life.

“...cold sweat.”

This quote is said as the detective is questioning the Narrator about his apartment. Cold sweats are often triggered by anxiety and thus have a cultural symbol of fear. The Narrator is on edge because, in the back of his mind, he knows that he was the one to blow up his own apartment.

“...complete lack of surprise.”

This quote is said in the office of the Narrator’s boss of his office job, as the boss is about to fire him. He is expecting this, and he does not care, because he does not try to control anything anymore. 

“...smirking revenge.”

This quote is said right before the Narrator frames his boss and gets the fight club sponsorship as compensation, taking revenge.

“...wasted life.”

This quote is said after the Narrator acquires sponsorship through framing and blackmailing his boss, and he’s in the fight club, watching two people fight. He framed and stole money from a man he once respected and wouldn’t dare stand up to, “the volume is turned down” for him, and everything before it was, is meaningless.

“...inflamed sense of rejection.”

This quote is said after several members of Project Mayhem threaten the reporter who is investigating and exposing them into keeping his mouth shut about the fight club. All of this is against the Narrator's wishes, he is losing control of his life, the thing that keeps him sane, the fight club, is slowly evolving into something bigger and worse, and his only friend, Tyler Durden, is growing more and more distant from him as he creates Project Mayhem.

“...broken heart.”

This quote is said after the Narrator realizes Tyler Durden, his only friend, is gone.

“Stop trying to control everything and just let go. Let go!”

The Narrator's life before the fight club is meaningless to him. He already has everything he’s been told he needs to have a “successful life”; a well paying normal job, a somewhat put together appearance, hot water, furniture, a clean apartment, etc., he worries about his identity, thinks about “what kind of dining set defines him as a person”, but he’s still not happy. He has no hobbies outside of consumption, he has no loved ones, and no goals he came up with himself, and, as a result of this, he feels that dull feeling you get of doing the same thing over and over again every single day, without anything to make him feel anything, to feel like you are a human that is alive and real; he’s “never really asleep, and never really awake”, he worries about things that don’t really matter, and he’s been subconsciously conditioned to suppress all of his urges; don’t scream, don’t shout, don’t run, don’t play, don’t fight. This pushes him to free himself of his materialism and his superficial “purpose.”

Tyler Durden’s character, like he appeals to the Narrator's fantasies, is built to appeal to yours with his raw freedom. He thinks about anything that you probably think about in your daily life; he doesn’t care about the way people perceive him, he doesn’t care about his safety, he doesn’t have a sense of materialism, he only works to live, and he ignores all moral and legal restrictions that you probably abide by. When you watch the movie, he does things that you know are terrible, and yet, you crave it. You watch him fight, you watch him destroy things, you watch him drive at full speed opposite of traffic, and you want to do these things. Deep down, we all want to be free, and we all want to fight, because we are so contained by our societies that our souls feel crushed. Just like the Narrator, we want to “let go,” and we shouldn’t be as restricted and worried as we are. You shouldn’t spend time worrying about your identity, the things you own, or the way people perceive you. “You are not your job, you're not how much money you have in the bank. You are not the car you drive. You're not the contents of your wallet. You are not your fucking khakis,” but you probably, whether consciously or not, believe the exact opposite because that is what you were taught, unlike Tyler. He isn’t tied down by the things he’s been told, the “volume is turned down” for him, however, what he gets wrong is his lack of care for his and others lives. He doesn’t think about the consequences of his actions, and he hurts people. He comes up with bad ideas, and instead of sitting on them and thinking about them like you or I probably would, he acts on them immediately, and he does because the Narrator is tired of controlling all of the things he doesn’t have to, to the point where he doesn’t want to have to control anything at all; he believes he no more than “god’s unwanted child.”

The Narrator’s brain is like a slingshot pulled back by society and what he’s been taught, staying that way only to avoid the consequences of releasing it, and Tyler Durden is what happens when you let it go, forfeiting all control and letting its contents hit whatever’s in front of its path. I think the point of the movie is that true freedom comes from learning to find a balance; to learn to let the slingshot rest, to not feel the need to consume, to not try and control things you can’t, to learn a way to deal with and find peace with your inner urges to do things like fight, to pay attention to and question everything that you are subconsciously taught, to not lose your sense of self, nor be so tied down with it that it affects your decisions. Do not give in to your own fight club, your own Project Mayhem, nor your own shopping catalogues, fancy apartment, and nice office job.

[thelampandshield]

Illuminating Liberation

Domenico Fetti's Moses and the Burning Bush and Essential Reads on Resistance in Abrahamic Faiths

Domenico Fetti’s Moses and the Burning Bush (1613) captures one of the most significant moments in biblical history—the divine call of Moses to lead the Israelites out of bondage in Egypt. Created during Fetti’s tenure in Mantua, the work exemplifies the Baroque fascination with dramatic storytelling, emotional intensity, and the use of light to symbolize divine presence. In this painting, Moses kneels before the miraculous burning bush, which is enveloped in glowing, otherworldly flames that do not consume it—a powerful visual representation of God’s eternal and unchanging nature.

Fetti rose to prominence during his time at the court of Mantua, a historic city in the Lombardy region of Italy, which is now a UNESCO World Heritage Site for its significant role in the Italian Renaissance and Baroque periods, particularly as the seat of the Gonzaga family. The Gonzaga court’s support allowed Fetti to experiment with devotional imagery, exploring sacred themes with human emotion until his untimely death at the age of 34, likely from tuberculosis.

Fetti’s depiction is characteristic of Baroque art, with its rich, dynamic use of chiaroscuro (the interplay of light and shadow) to highlight Moses’s awestruck expression and the supernatural glow of the bush. The painting also reflects the Catholic Counter-Reformation emphasis on personal, emotional engagement with biblical narratives, encouraging viewers to reflect on themes of divine justice and human obedience. Historically, the story of Moses and the burning bush became a symbol of resistance and liberation, particularly resonating with oppressed communities who saw in Moses a model for standing against authoritarian power and leading movements for freedom and justice.

Abrahamic Religious Scholarship on anti-authoritarianism

There is a rich field of non-fiction literature and theological analysis exploring themes of resistance to authoritarianism within the Abrahamic faiths (Judaism, Christianity, and Islam). These works often focus on scriptural interpretations, historical events, and ethical frameworks that speak to the ways in which each faith tradition has engaged with political authority, justice, and social resistance.

Here's a reading list of some works that examine these themes:

1. "God and Empire: Jesus Against Rome, Then and Now" by John Dominic Crossan

Crossan, a prominent scholar of early Christianity, explores how Jesus’ teachings and actions represented a subversive response to Roman imperialism and authoritarian power structures. Crossan argues that Jesus’s message was one of nonviolent resistance against the oppressive rule of Rome and that this anti-imperial stance has important implications for contemporary Christian social ethics.

2. "The Prophets" by Abraham Joshua Heschel

Heschel’s classic work focuses on the prophetic tradition in Judaism, highlighting how prophets such as Isaiah, Jeremiah, and Amos spoke out against injustice, idolatry, and the abuse of power. Heschel argues that the Hebrew prophets were deeply committed to resisting social and political corruption, presenting them as models for ethical resistance to authoritarianism in all ages.

3. "Jesus and the Disinherited" by Howard Thurman

Thurman’s work connects the life and teachings of Jesus to the experience of marginalized and oppressed communities. Written during the Jim Crow era, this influential book argues that Jesus’ teachings provide a blueprint for resisting social injustice and authoritarian oppression, emphasizing love, nonviolence, and solidarity with the poor and disinherited.

4. "Islam and the Challenge of Democracy" by Khaled Abou El Fadl

Abou El Fadl is a prominent scholar of Islamic law who argues that Islamic ethics support democratic values and resistance to authoritarian rule. In this book, he addresses how Islamic teachings on justice, human dignity, and accountability can be mobilized to critique and resist political authoritarianism within Muslim-majority societies.

5. "The Politics of Jesus" by John Howard Yoder

Yoder, a pacifist theologian, argues that Jesus’ life and teachings exemplify a radical, nonviolent form of resistance to political power and violence. Yoder’s work has influenced many Christian movements advocating for social justice and nonviolent resistance, framing Jesus’ message as fundamentally opposed to authoritarianism and state violence.

6. "The Cross and the Lynching Tree" by James H. Cone

Cone, a foundational figure in Black Liberation Theology, explores the connections between the suffering of Jesus on the cross and the historical suffering of Black Americans under slavery and segregation. He argues that the Christian cross should be understood as a symbol of solidarity with the oppressed and a call to resist systems of authoritarianism and racism.

7. "Religion and Resistance in America" by various authors, edited by Allan D. Cooper

This anthology examines the role of religion as a force for social resistance in American history, focusing on various religious movements that have resisted authoritarian and oppressive systems. The essays cover a range of Abrahamic perspectives, including Jewish, Christian, and Muslim perspectives on resistance to authoritarianism in the U.S. context.

8. "The Powers That Be: Theology for a New Millennium" by Walter Wink

Wink’s work examines the "principalities and powers" mentioned in the New Testament as forces that seek to dominate humanity. He interprets these as both spiritual and institutional powers that people are called to resist. Wink explores how individuals and communities can resist these powers nonviolently, drawing from both biblical theology and contemporary social movements.

9. "The Islamic Roots of Democratic Pluralism" by Abdulaziz Sachedina

Sachedina examines democratic principles within the Qur'an and Islamic ethics, challenging authoritarian interpretations of Islamic governance. He highlights the role of justice, consultation (shura), and human rights within Islam, advocating for political systems that respect pluralism, accountability, and the inherent dignity of all people.

10. "Render Unto Caesar: The Struggle Over Christ and Culture in the New Testament" by Christopher Bryan

Bryan examines the New Testament’s treatment of political authority, focusing on passages like “Render unto Caesar” and exploring how early Christians navigated their obligations to the Roman Empire. He argues that while the New Testament acknowledges earthly authority, it also critiques the abuse of power and emphasizes the sovereignty of God over human rulers.

11. "God’s Revolution: Justice, Community, and the Coming Kingdom" by Eberhard Arnold

Arnold, founder of the Bruderhof community, draws on Anabaptist and early Christian traditions to argue for a nonviolent resistance to authoritarianism. His work emphasizes the need for Christians to embody an alternative, justice-oriented community that challenges worldly power structures.

12. "Sacred Resistance: A Practical Guide to Christian Witness and Dissent" by Ginger Gaines-Cirelli

This book offers practical advice for Christians seeking to engage in social resistance while staying rooted in their faith. Gaines-Cirelli discusses how biblical teachings can inspire action against authoritarianism, injustice, and other social ills, with a focus on nonviolent witness and advocacy.

13. "The Jewish Political Tradition, Vol. 1: Authority" by Michael Walzer, Menachem Lorberbaum, and Noam J. Zohar

This volume explores Jewish thought on political authority, autonomy, and resistance to tyranny throughout history. Drawing on classical and modern Jewish sources, the authors discuss how Jewish communities have interpreted and responded to political power, including themes of resistance and critique of authoritarianism.

14. "Islamic Liberation Theology: Resisting the Empire" by Hamid Dabashi

Dabashi explores the roots of Islamic liberation theology, analyzing how Islamic teachings support resistance to imperialism and authoritarianism. He argues that Islam offers a framework for anti-colonial and anti-authoritarian resistance, connecting the Qur'an’s themes of justice, liberation, and the prophetic tradition with contemporary movements for freedom.

15. "Faith-Rooted Organizing: Mobilizing the Church in Service to the World" by Alexia Salvatierra and Peter Heltzel

This book provides a framework for faith-based social activism, drawing from both Christian and Jewish teachings on justice and resistance. The authors offer guidance on organizing efforts against oppressive structures, emphasizing the role of faith communities in advocating for systemic change.

16. "Exodus and Revolution" by Michael Walzer

Walzer’s analysis of the Exodus story in the Hebrew Bible interprets it as a foundational narrative of liberation, justice, and resistance to oppression. He argues that the Exodus has been used throughout history as a powerful model for resisting authoritarianism and envisioning a just society.

[scotianostra]

On the 1st of March 1819, the teacher and researcher of physiological phonetics Alexander Melville Bell was born in Edinburgh.

Alexander Melville Bell was the father of the now much better know Alexander Graham Bell. He was the son of a shoemaker turned elocutionist, Alexander Bell. He is much less well known now than his son, but in his lifetime achieved fame for his creation of ‘visible speech’. Its aim was to aid the teaching of spoken language to deaf children.

Before the family migrated, Melville invented a graphic representation of the speech sounds based on "articulatory" positions. He called his phonetic alphabet “Visible Speech” and used it as a method for teaching individuals with problems of articulation, stammering, and deafness to speak more clearly. Bell first developed his system in 1864 and published it in 1867 under the title: Visible speech: The science of universal alphabetics.

Melville Bell married Eliza Grace Symonds, a painter of miniatures and a pianist. Eliza Bell had a severe hearing loss, which strongly affected the interest that Melville had in designing methods for teaching the deaf and others with communication difficulties. Melville and Eliza had three sons, Edward (Ted), Alexander (Aleck) and Melville (Melly). Both Ted and Melly died of tuberculosis. Aleck also contracted the disease, so his parents decided to emigrate to Brantford Ontario, in 1870 to help him in his recuperation. Aleck was 23 at the time. They later moved to Washington, D.C

Melville Bell’s Visible Speech proved incredibly popular in helping deaf people learn to speak as by learning to shape their mouths according to the symbols they would produce the right speech sounds. When Alexander Graham Bell joined him in 1868, he toured America demonstrating it and used it to help teach students, ultimately opening his own deaf school.

[quixoticanarchy]

chronic lung issues are bad and i would not recommend at all but it's also given me an invaluable avenue to understand the appeal of sad and pathetic little men in media. it can be anything from magical origin to like, tuberculosis but what's critically important is that he be sick and miserable so i can have #representation

[just-chaotically-me]

Joan of Arc-Jules Bastien-Lepage-1879

Joan of Arc, the medieval teenaged martyr from the French province of Lorraine, gained new status as a patriotic symbol when France ceded part of the territory to the German Empire after the Franco-Prussian War (1870–71). Bastien-Lepage, a native of Lorraine, depicts the moment when Saints Michael, Margaret, and Catherine appear to the peasant girl in her parents’ garden, rousing her to fight the English invaders in the Hundred Years War. Critics at the Salon of 1880 praised Bastien-Lepage’s use of pose and facial expression to convey Joan’s spiritual awakening, but found the inclusion of the saints at odds with his naturalistic style. Like Joan of Arc, he was a product of a poor family from the rural province of Lorraine in the northeast of France. How to represent an otherworldly moment in the everyday life of an extraordinary girl? How to represent an otherworldly moment in the everyday life of an extraordinary girl? depiction of the thirteen-year-old Joan of Arc (ca. 1412–1431) hearing the voices of three saints while winding wool in her backyard in Domrémy. In preparation for the picture, Bastien-Lepage visited the village, not far from his birthplace of Damvillers The detailed garden setting is said to be based on the yard of his family home and it is informed by a careful study of the region’s plant life. Contrasting with this fidelity to nature is the miraculous apparition of Saints Michael (in armor), Margaret, and Catherine hovering in the air at the upper left. Joan is caught between these two worlds. Her seemingly-possessed wide-open clear blue eyes, feverishly flushed cheeks, suggest that she has been transported into a moment of mystical communion with the saints, who have come to convince her to fight against the English invaders in the Hundred Years War. Still, she remains tied to the earthly realm, wearing the traditional peasant dress of Lorraine: Her clenched foot betrays the tension of her body (and the intensity of her vision), while her proper left hand hangs on to the end of a tree limb, steadying her while she listens to the voices of the saints a friend of Bastien-Lepage’s, recalled that the composition was inspired by an incident in which the artist’s mother experienced a vision after returning from the fields, weary from farming. There are several historical and contemporary precedents for this formal arrangement that Bastien-Lepage may have known, including Léon Benouville’s 1859 picture, which hung in Joan’s family cottage in Domrémy and served as the frontispiece for Wallon’s biography of Joan Masters in Art: Bastien-Lepage (1908) indicated that the artist doubled the size of the work to incorporate the saints into the composition. If correct, this statement confirms that Bastien-Lepage started with the figure of Joan, perhaps intending that viewers would simply imagine her holy vision, and only later added the embodiments of the saints. Many critics appreciated Bastien-Lepage’s compellingly lifelike portrayal of Joan and his evocation of her inner state. numerous contemporary critics objected mightily to the disjunction between the representation of the saints, floating in mid-air, and the otherwise highly realistic scene Much has been written about Joan of Arc, both factual and theoretical. That at a young age this medieval figure had visions of the saints that brought her to her calling as a warrior for her people appears to be fact, but the source of those visions has been debated. Recent scholars (both historical and medical) have discussed such possible sources as epilepsy, migraines, tuberculosis, and schizophrenia. In the painter’s time, critics compared the hysterics who populated the Salpêtrière sanitarium of Dr. Jean-Martin Charcot with Bastien-Lepage’s own image of Joan

The subject of Joan of Arc had been popular throughout the nineteenth century, but the Franco-Prussian War of 1870 provided the catalyst for the fervent revival of her cult. Part of her native region of Lorraine was annexed to the German Empire at the end of the war, making Joan an ideal symbol of France’s hoped-for resurgence in the wake of a crushing military defeat. Even as late as 1879, when Bastien-Lepage painted this picture, postwar morale throughout France was low, and sculptures and paintings of Joan of Arc flooded the Salons of the time. As Bastien-Lepage was also from Lorraine, he would have been keenly aware of Joan of Arc’s legendary power. However, rather than take up the more typical image of Joan dressed for battle in a man’s metal armor, leading French troops to victory—he seized on the story of her patriotic awakening, a fitting subject given France’s sunken national spirits.-The Metropolitan Museum of Art

[heavenlymorals]

The Deeper Meaning of Loan-Sharking

Warning: spoilers for both Red Dead games

The complexity of RDR2's story blows me away every fucking day because oh my god- the characters, the themes, the symbolism, the call backs to other medias and so on and so forth.

But here is one thing that stuck with me when I realized it for the first time-

The deeper meaning of the loan sharking missions.

The main purpose of those missions were obviously to show a change of character in Arthur Morgan- from a heartless enforcer, a plague to the down-trodden, to a heartbroken man, ashamed of his actions, and trying to remedy what he can without the hope for forgiveness because he knows he doesn't deserve it.

The loan sharking missions are the most obvious and in your face representation of Arthur's redemption arc.

But at its core, it felt like a nod to criticisms that the 1800s romantics and naturalists had towards the concept of civilization, a direct call back to Dutch's philosophy all throughout both RDR and RDR2.

What do I mean by this?

All throughout the game, the gang tries to fight civilization in an almost Robinhood esque way- these American knights wrecking havoc for the dreams of their outlaw king. They rob the rich, who Dutch sees as the reason for America's moral failure, and those who protect these rich men because they add to those men's power. It all sounds very noble but it's a useless and bloody fight.

Mac and Davey get killed, Jenny gets killed, Sean gets killed, Kieren gets killed, Hosea and Lenny get Killed, Molly gets killed.

This gang life for a dream that'll never be realized kills people and consumes them until there is nothing left but husks of people who had dreams of their own.

The romantic dream will only be a dream and the only place it can be a reality is in books and philosophies. Civilization is the truth- it saves humanity from the hell that is anarchy or so it seems.

The gang fought against the encroaching civilization that threatened to devour the West and Arthur followed Dutch and showed the same sentiments regarding civilization- and by following Dutch, he followed that same ideal, even if his heart wasn't fully in it.

The gang life- coming to an end and no longer sustainable- showed the impossibility of this beautiful dream as it destroyed everything but that wasn't the thing that killed Arthur in the end.

Tuberculosis killed Arthur. Tuberculosis from loan sharking.

"It's legal work, Mr. Morgan." Strauss to Arthur.

The legal work killed Arthur in the end, not the shootouts or gang feuds. The civilized work killed Arthur in the end. The civilized world beat Mr.Downes, a poor, dying man trying to do his best for his family. The civilized world killed Arthur Londonderry.

The civilized world and this legal work sucked the life out of the poor so rich men can get richer and take everything they can around for their greed can not be satiated.

The civilized work, the legal work killed Arthur Morgan.

The hypocrisy of it all is so heartbreaking because despite all the bad things the gang did, the philosophy, the too idealistic and romantic philosophy they fought for, that could never be realized in the world they lived in, held truth.

And that small monocum of truth kept Dutch fighting and fighting until he no longer could by commiting suicide.

Good God I love this game.

[myrightslawgroupcriminal]

Experienced Sex Crimes Lawyer in Jess Ranch, Apple Valley, CA

Jess Ranch, nestled within Apple Valley, California, is a community that seamlessly blends historical charm with modern amenities. At My Rights Law - Criminal, DUI, and Injury Lawyers, we are dedicated to providing exceptional legal representation to the residents of Jess Ranch and its surrounding areas, ensuring that individuals facing sex crime charges receive the vigorous defense they deserve.​

About Jess Ranch, Apple Valley, CA

Jess Ranch boasts a rich history that contributes to its unique character. Established in 1910 by Dr. Harris Garcelon and his wife, the original 160-acre homestead was advertised as having an ideal climate to cure asthma and tuberculosis. It later became a sanatorium for World War I shell-shocked victims and served as a guest ranch where early cowboy movies starring Tom Mix and William S. Hart were filmed. ​

In recent years, Jess Ranch has evolved into a vibrant community featuring residential developments, recreational facilities, and commercial centers. The area is home to the Cinemark Jess Ranch movie theater, offering residents and visitors a modern cinematic experience. Additionally, the Jess Ranch Marketplace provides a variety of shopping and dining options, enhancing the community's appeal. ​

Defending Against Sex Crime Charges in Jess Ranch

Facing charges related to sex crimes is a serious matter that can have profound implications on one's personal and professional life. At My Rights Law, we specialize in defending individuals accused of sex offenses, including sexual assault, indecent exposure, child pornography, and solicitation. Our experienced attorneys understand the complexities of sex crime cases, including the sensitivity of the subject matter, the intricacies of consent, and the severe consequences of a conviction. We are committed to providing a vigorous defense, challenging the prosecution's evidence, and advocating for your rights throughout the legal process.​

Contact My Rights Law - Criminal, DUI, and Injury Lawyers

If you or a loved one is facing Sex Crimes Lawyer Jess Ranch or the surrounding Apple Valley area, My Rights Law is here to provide the legal support and representation you need.​

📞 Phone Number: (760) 490-0308 🌐 Website: My Rights Law - Victorville Criminal Defense Attorney 📍 Google Maps: Find Us on Google Maps​

At My Rights Law, we are dedicated to protecting your rights and achieving the best possible outcome for your case. Contact us today to schedule a consultation and take the first step toward a strong defense.

[nursingwriter]

¶ … Ray Technology in Medicine How and why did x-ray technology come to be used in medicine? In a period spanning more than the last century, the medicine world has been able to maximize totally on technology. X-ray technology has been in existence since 1895 and did not take long before introduction to the medicine world. These rays halt movement on hitting mass and the color depends on the type of body part. There was a strong need for this technology because of the internal problems that occur within the body. There are diseases in the body that cannot be found by diagnosis, and a picture is of considerable importance. This was why it was imperative that there was an introduction of such technology. It still is of the same use as the days of the invention where it examines living tissues for any discrepancies. There have also been cases where the technology has been applicable in the treatment of diseases. Therefore, the application of X-ray technology is still an essential aspect in the world of medicine and human life. Use of this technology does not mean that there is change in the diseases that are examinable by X-rays. This can be seen in the treatment of tuberculosis. This is an old disease that has long evaded a method of cure. On the introduction of the use of this technology in medicine, tuberculosis is now looked at in another perspective. This explains why the basis of the search for the cure is now how X-rays can be used to look for a cure (Pasveer, 1993, p89). The disease itself is no longer a basis of research. This representation of the disease, however, did not change its nature in any way, and it was the same. It was the use of X-rays that vividly provided the traces for the spread of the disease. Scientists determined that the infection of tuberculosis was not only determinable by some physical characteristics as was the misconception. They were able to determine this after years of research with the technology. The disease starts in the hilum and not the apex of the lung. This is the root of the lung specifically, a point that was not determinable with the use of the earlier methods. With the knowledge of the source of this disease, it would be extremely easy to curb its spread. Also, the research proved that it was not only adults who were at risk of this deadly disease. Children were at a risk of contracting the disease as much as adults. This information is now beneficial because it avoids any risks in the disease spread. It is imperative that the disease is detectable early before it spreads and reaches the chronic level. Therefore, checkups using X-ray technology are the only way to avoid the risk of contracting deep-rooted tuberculosis (Pasveer, 1993, p92). One of the major killers of women was maternity. This was because of the dilemma in the midwifery process where it was unclear as to what extent of technology could be used to interfere with the normal process of birth. However, it was imperative that there was intervention to minimize the risk of mortality and complications. There was no estimation of the pelvic length which meant that it was hard to determine the possibility of a Caesarean section on women. X-rays were later utilized to determine the pelvic length of a human. This was a breakthrough in the medicine world particularly in this obstetrician aspect which was not famous for its prospects. This invention was hugely valuable to the development of prenatal care. It also reduced significantly the levels of Caesarean section use which was most likely the leading cause of mortality. It was also now possible to treat the diseases that were related to the pelvis especially amongst the women. This technology was also able to detect any discrepancies and proved as a preliminary to the process of birth. Up to date, use of X-rays is imperative in prenatal care. It is, however, unclear as to what extent of the technology is suitable because of the effects that it may have in the health of the patient (Howell, 1985, p129). However, the importance of the technology cannot be underestimated because of the benefits that are accrued which go a long way in even avoiding deaths. X-ray technology is crucial in the medical branch of orthopedics. This is the branch that deals with treatment of bones especially the dislocations that occur around the hip. In the use of this technology, it was not viewed only as a diagnostic tool to the disease. In fact, it was a part of the therapeutic process which was mainly dependent on the preference of the surgeon. Also, the use of this technology brought invention of new theories as to the level of satisfaction in the treatment process (Hiddinga, 1992, p135). They were able to provide a visual evidence of the problem which to some extent was the ultimate level of transparency. The German practitioners adopted the move quickly and were using it in their work as early as 1896. X-ray technology offered the chance for the surgeons to track the changes that occurred within the living joint in a long period. Therefore, it was now possible that the whole information concerning the transformation was collected. This was as a result of long-term comparisons that could give conclusive evidence. A picture before the diagnosis of the problem could show the severity of the damage and give the leads as to the process that was most suitable in treatment (Hiddinga, 1992, p135). Consequently, a picture after treatment served to provide insight as to whether the surgery had been successful. In between, the pictures show the response of the patient to the treatment and show whether any modifications were necessary. The visual impression that they provide was also evidence as to what the process was capable of doing. This process has been in use up-to-date and is particularly pivotal in the modern medical world. This is because X-rays provide an evaluation of the success of the surgical and non-surgical operations in the dislocation of hips. One of the problems in the heath cares was in the determination of fractures. It was singularly unclear how to diagnose a fracture and most of the time a manual method was used. However, this method had its own flaws. This was because the process was likely to lead to more damage than before because it was manual. It was thus necessary that an efficient and painless method was invented. The use of X-rays provided a relief to this sector. This is because it was a painless method and the examiner was able to use the technology to diagnose the discrepancy. The efficiency that this technology provides was a point of interest because there was the detection of the simplest fracture unlike the manual method which only displayed the greatest fractures. The knowledge on the fractures was pivotal in determining the fitness of militants especially during the time when the war was rampant. It was also practical in law as it provided evidence especially in cases that involved bodily harm (Warwick, 2005, p4). The impact of the X-ray technology in women health is indisputably large. This is particularly during pregnancy and birth. The rays have the capability to determine the positioning of the fetus when still unborn. This process is superior because it involves no physical contact. This means that the patient does not expose any of her body parts, and the vagina is not manipulated in any way. This can be viewed as a protective aspect of the woman compared to conventional methods, which are likely to lead to uneasiness. X-rays are also extremely essential in providing the correct diagnosis of pregnancy. This is because it has the capability to show the fetus which is a certainty of pregnancy (Howell, 1985, p127). This is better unlike other observatory methods which leave room for errors. The health for women is better followed where the best care can be implemented to detect any discrepancies in the pregnancies. Early detection is beneficial as it provides a chance for correction before serious damage. Different authors have their own opinions on the purpose of this technology in medicine. Anja Hiddinga focuses on the estimation of the pelvis as the primary purpose of X-rays. The author states exceptionally clearly that in the early days, it was extremely hard to determine the measurement of the pelvis, especially in women. This is the reason why the focus is on the pelvis which determines the suitability of the Caesarean section (Hiddinga, 1992, p134). JD Howell concurs with this approach and certifies that the best use of the technology was in assistance of women. The author says that this is the only sure way to diagnose pregnancy. Also, the learning of the position of the fetus with the help of an X-ray picture is a basis of prenatal care for the woman. These two authors try to explain that the main reason why the technology was adopted remarkably fast could have been because of the need to change the system of women health care. Some sources also offer a different insight for the emergent increase in need of this technology. Bernike Pasveer follows the idea that it was because there was a need for efficient diagnosis methods (Pasveer, 1993, p89). It was only after the introduction of X-rays that there was a determination of the nature of tuberculosis. The need for an efficient method that disputed the myths was necessary, and that was achieved on the introduction of X-ray technology. This is supported by Andrew Warwick who claims that the reason why this technology is still significant was due to its diagnostic properties. However, Andrew differs from Bernike by instead using fractures as his example. Andrew explains the role of X-ray technology especially in Germany where the surgeons undertook this process to determine fractures and diagnose bone discrepancies (Warwick, 2005, p4). Incidentally, this is a role of the technology that is still in practice. Conclusion In conclusion, there are many reasons as to why the technology became so popular. This is because the inventor did not have medicine in mind as he was inventing. People in the health care industry have been able to sustain the technology and it has become an indispensable part in the operations within hospitals. One impact is that it has offered assistance to women in diagnosing their pregnancy safely. The X-ray machines also give the position of the fetus which gives the women a chance to gain prenatal care. Another role in medicine is the diagnosis of some diseases. This has assisted a lot in the determination of cases of tuberculosis. This is an improvement since it was earlier unclear on the nature of the disease. The diagnosis of fractures has also become easier and effective using this technology. Unlike the claim of some quarters that it is dangerous to use this technology, it is essential to look at its positive attributes. Therefore, the use of X-ray technology is beneficial to the medicine world, and it has brought more favor than harm in general. References Andrew Warwick (2005), X rays as evidence in German orthopedic surgery. Anja Hiddinga (1992), X-ray technology in obstetrics: Measuring pelvis at the Yale School of Medicine, in J.V Pickstone ed. Bernike Pasveer (1993), Depiction in medicine as a two way affair: X -- ray Pictures and Pulmonary Tuberculosis in the early Twentieth century, in Ilana Lowy ed. (Pasveer, 1993, p89). https://www.paperdue.com/customer/paper/ray-technology-in-medicine-how-56386#:~:text=Logout-,RayTechnologyinMedicineHow,-Length6pages Christopher Lawrence (1985). Incommunicable knowledge: science, technology and the clinical art in Britain, 1850-1914. Journal of contemporary history pp 503-20. J.D Howell (1995), Technology in the Hospital, Baltimore, John Hopkins University Press. Keith Wailoo (1997). Drawing Blood: technology and disease identity in Twentieth -- Century America, Baltimore, John Hopkins University Press. Read the full article

[literaturereviewhelp]

In the early 1990s, the number of hungry people reduced; but it is ascending again. The second goal was to ensure universal primary education. It was found that children in rural areas are less likely to attend school. Also educational gender gap phenomenon stays. Five developing regions are approaching universal enrolment.Net enrolment ratios in primary education have increased to 86 per cent in the developing world, ranging from 95 per cent in Latin America and the Caribbean to 64 per cent in sub-Saharan Africa. Although the sub-Saharan region has made significant progress since 1990/1991, fewer than half the children of primary-school age are enrolled in school. Faster progress will also be needed if Oceania and Western Asia are to achieve universal education. Southern Asia, in contrast, has made great paces, especially over the period 1999-2004, when enrolment rose from 72 to 89 per cent largely as a result of progress in India. As far as encouraging gender equality and empowering women is concerned, gender gap is shrinking, but tardily. Women's political participation has increased markedly since 1990.Though progress is being arrived at; women still miss equal representation at the highest levels of government, occupying meagre 16 per cent of parliamentary seats worldwide. There has been an observed inequality in the labor market limiting women's economic advancement. When it comes to cutting down child mortality, again death rates in children under age 5 are declining but not rapid enough. More children are surviving their early years of life, though sub-Saharan Africa falls behind. Three out of four children are protected against measles, which still kill approximately half a million children yearly. The vaccination of three quarters of the world's children has proven to be one of the most cost-effective public health interventions on record. Latin America and the Caribbean made the greatest paces in immunizing children, with sub-Saharan Africa showing important progress as well. Sub-Saharan Africa also accomplished the largest deduction in deaths from measles. The statistics show that half a million women die every year during pregnancy or childbirth. Some advancement has been made in abbreviating maternal deaths in developing regions. Another aim is to combat AIDS, malaria and other diseases. AIDS is the fourth largest killer worldwide. Prevention efforts are being surmounted against diseases like Tuberculosis, malaria, AIDS. Prevention efforts have demonstrated success in some places but ironically deaths and new infections persist to increase. Moving on to environmental sustainability, many countries have committed to the principles of sustainable development. But this has not caused ample advancement to nullify the loss of environmental resources. Steps have been taken to prevent declension of ozone layer. Approaching safe drinking water has become more easier but half of the developing world still lack basic sanitation. Although speedy deforestation persist, but the gross loss of forest area is declining. Forest planting, landscape restoration and natural expansion of forests have importantly Read the full article

[rmelster]

Hello friend

How would Philippa Gregory Write, Isabella of bourbon, Charles the bold, Margaret of York, Isabella of Portugal and Philip the fair.

Hiii! regarding your question, I think PG would write them as:

-Isabelle de Bourbon: She is very likely to be a carbon copy of her representation of Queen Anne Neville due to their striking similarities (both discreet women of good dowry, both having a single child and both dying of tuberculosis at the young age of 28); therefore, I think PG would make her long and painful illness into a chronic thing and her most remarkable character trait, because, of course, that is the sole reason to explain why Isabelle did have a single daughter and not a brood of boys, and then died young (because of course, fertility issues don’t exist in healthy people, or in people that may have gone through very stressful emotional situations, or men who have fertility issues don’t exist, or men that don’t like bedding their wives much, you name it). Perhaps she would go for a Melanie Hamilton-esque archetype (a benevolent but not very pretty character, overshadowed by another, of ill health, whose untimely death serves as a catalyst), but who knows.

-Charles the Bold: Be sure he would be a mommy’s boy, violent man-child, probably with a weird and borderline non-con religious kink, sadistic in battle and in bed; in real life, however, Charles was notoriously chaste (perhaps even sex adverse), which would be a trait that would be very interesting to explore in relation to his marriages to both Isabelle de Bourbon and Margaret of York: was he uninterested in sex? Disgusted? Frightened? How did he felt on consummating his marriage with Isabelle? Was it solely duty what drove him to do so, or was there something else? He seemed attracted to Margaret of York, both intellectually and physically, but they were not close; was this aversion a cause of it? Perhaps he suffered from ailment that made it painful for him to do such things, perhaps not (I am me inclined to believe he didn’t). His obsession with expanding, the same obsession that consumed him, did it marred his feelings towards his family too? Did those many years of war caused him mental distress (therefore turning him in the paranoid man we know about)? Besides, his relationship with his daughter Mary is CHIEFEST; did they see each other often? Was he fond of her? Did he fear for her to die in childhood, her being his only child? Did he dote on her, or was he as stern in raising his daughter as he had been in raising his armies? He seemed to have a kind of avoidant attachment (don’t take my words for the truth, since I am no expert on this field of psychology and human behaviour), that may have conditioned his relationship a lot. His alliance with Yolande of France (Duchess of Savoy) and his animosity towards king Louis XI would too be delightful to explore. Well, those are questions that shall remain unanswered if PG writes the book.

-Margaret of York: TSP’s Katherine of Aragon. In real life, Margaret of York was an incredibly complex woman, very much cultured, tall and fair yet not deemed ‘beautiful’, patron of arts, who loved her (step) daughter Mary to madness and was left broken by her untimely passing, busying herself with the upraising of her surviving orphaned grandchildren (Mary was pregnant when she died, and her third born son, Franz, died soon after birth; but Philip and Margaret of Austria made it to adulthood). I want to see how did she felt about Charles. Was she scare about his obsession? Disappointed about his lack of passion, about his absences? The peregrinations she partook to conceive at last the long-awaited heir to Burgundy, how her prayers for a child were met with indifference… And during her widowhood, her involvement in the whole Perkin Warbeck affair. Did she truly believe that he was her kong lost nephew, or king Edward’s bastard at least? Or was it a perilous political move to dethrone Henry VII? So many things to do with her! (I personally headcannon her as a passionate woman who crashes with Charles Martin’s more chaste and avoidant tendencies, which causes her a great deal of frustrations, but upon knowing her husband better, she ends up understanding him, and maybe they even reach some nightly agreement).

-Isabella of Portugal: evil mother in law, boy mom. Of this I am dead sure. TWQ’s Cecily of York kind of vibe. In real life, though she had raised Isabelle in her court and had kept her close, she was very upset that the Duke of Burgundy had ruined her glorious plans of an English marriage alliance with princess Anne of York and Isabella’s sole surviving son, Charles Martin (then Count of Charolais), and refused to pay homage to the bride; however, soon, after Charles left soon after wedding to manage some political / war matters, both daughter and mother in law reconciled and got well together; Isabella was there when Mary was born, and was Isabelle’s sole companion in her deathbed. As for with Margaret of York, she was very fond of her and let her inherit some of her most beautiful properties. But I am sure in a PG book she would be an evil boy mom.

-Philip the Fair: TSP’s Young Harry (VIII) kind of swag. I would much rather headcannon him as a man whose main personality traits are being overly amorous and enjoying dance and music, as he did. Besides, I feel the abuse he made Joanna I of Castile endure would be kind of… Brushed off, in a PG books, but this is a very bold statement that I won’t defend.

Hope you find this ones useful!