#when it comes to the mindset that fantasy characters all have to be british | Explore Tumblr posts and blogs

myrskytuuli · 5 years ago

Note

Please share the receipts about Harry Potter being a colonial fantasy! Reading stuff like that is so interesting 🙈 have a good day

I’m glad you both asked!

This argument will be divided into threemain parts. The subject of magical creatures in the wizarding world, thesubject of humans other than English wizards, and the subject of Harry’scharacterization in the novels. But before I can discuss the novels andRowling’s (probably mostly unintentional) colonial fantasies, we must look atthe background information of those colonial fantasies. To do that, I willoutline and explain certain elements of the 1800-century cultural and politicalsituation, reflected in the literature of the time. (See! This is why you don’tdismiss history as the unnecessary boring subject Rowling!!!!)

(In this text, I use the word wizard akin tothe universal man, as in mankind. I do this, because Rowling herself does this,referring to unisex groups of witches and wizards as “wizards”.)

Racial thinking in the British empire was heavily influenced by pseudo-scientific theories like phrenology and race classification theory. Humanist sciences like sociology were heavily influenced by “hard sciences” and there was a strong demand to find a scientific justification for the existence of the empire. This justification came with race classification, that was divided into two different equally racist branches of theory. The idea that different human races were actually subspecies inside the human main species, and that these subspecies had evolved to fulfill different functions and behave in different ways. Roughly divided, the Anglo-Saxon subspecies had evolved into a rational thinker and a natural leader, the Asian subspecies into servile and effeminate role, and African subspecies into manual labourer. Now, in order for society to live in perfect harmony, that society has to be built in a way that each human species can follow their natural predilections and follow their species-natural behaviour.

The other branch of scientific sociology argued that all humans had the same potential for civilization, but that all human societies were also in different evolutionary stages. Human societies were seen to evolve in a neat line, from promiscuity-matriarchy-transitional patriarchy-patriarchy. All human societies therefore started from hunter-gatherer tribes and would eventually turn into enlightened British style modern societies. As the British already had reached the top of the societal evolution, it was also their right and burden to protect the societies that had not yet reached this top evolutionary form. It is very important to remember that while the British empire was filled with straight up hateful and vile racists that saw genocide as a fun past-time, there were equally many people who believed the science of the time and condemned the mistreatment of the empire’s subjects believing that the empire was in truth necessary in order to help their less-evolved human compatriots.

Another important note to make about the imperial mindset is how these rational leaders were created; in boarding schools. The future leaders of the empire were all sent to a boarding school, somewhere around the age of 10. These schools, rampant with bullying, pressure and straight up rape, were not places that a young boy was supposed to become a scholar or an athlete; his job was to make connections and learn to become charismatic. Doing too well in your subjects was not desirable, as a book-worm is not what the empire needed. Being good at sports was good, but not if you had to sacrifice time to practice too much. Sports and sciences were there to support the student’s growth into a proper English gentleman, not as an educational goal themselves. Debating, public speaking, and aggressive confidence were much more important skills to master for the future overseer of a colony. Your job as a student in, for example Eton, was to network and grow a stiff upper lip. A terrible educational system for sure, which caused damage to the British psyche that people today are still trying to understand; with Boarding School Syndrome and its consequences important when trying to understand the problems in British politics today

How do these facts then relate to Harry Potter? Well, let’s start working our way through from magical creatures. In the Harry Potter universe, the world is filled with creatures with human-sentience that however do not, at least in Britain, mix with the dominant human population. We know that there are house-elves, working as servants, goblins, working as bankers, centaurs, keeping away in their forest, as do merfolk in their lake. Dwarves were employed as cupids (entertainers) in Hogwarts by Lockhart, and there are veelas that work as exotic dancers in the quidditch world cup.

At first glance, you might think that Harry Potter and Dumbledore are on the side of the creatures. Dumbledore is noted for being a great advocate for non-humans when defending their right to exist, as opposed to the more genocide-minded goons at the ministry. Voldemort is happy to employ creatures that he deems “dark” and ignore the rest. At first glance it would even look like the narrative is advocating for tolerance, and it is, but it is not advocating for equalitybetween humans and non-humans.

The centaurs and the giants have lost their native lands to humans, and have been forced to live in reservations, as most notably pointed out by Dolores Umbridge in Order of the Phoenix. “Ministry of magic permits you certain areas of land.” (p.665) At the same time, the books do not take the time to portray either the giants or the centaurs in particularly sympathetic light from the point of view of our characters and this point of view is never questioned. Centaurs are shown to be violent and even unreasonable towards any humans who would want to have contact with them. Giants are shown to be stupid and hostile, killing themselves into extinction. (Order of the Phoenix p.377) Meanwhile, the races that do mingle amongst wizards all have something to offer to humans who allow them in their society. Goblins are useful to have around because of their hold over the banking industry and their superior metal-working. House-elves are useful as domestic servants. The creatures that wizards label as “dark” are all creatures that do not have any filled role that they can perform for the benefit of humans, (vampires, hags, werewolves), segregated from the wizarding society proper, and are therefore shunned as undesirables. Veelas on the other hand are blatantly fetishized, and they are only shown in two roles in the books. Either as entertainers or as married to wizards. The narrative does not even hint that a veela might have any non-sexual role in the society. It would seem, that all the magical races have either been pushed out of the wizarding community, or they fill some niche purpose in society that the wizards find useful, and that the wizards themselves do not want to perform.This structure of society, built upon the assumption that there will always be creatures fulfilling certain roles for the society, is not questioned by any of our heroes.

Dumbledore is happy to advocate for tolerance, but not inclusion. He is happy to create a dialogue between humans and centaurs- as long as it is not humans who have to make any concessions in their relationship. Same goes for merfolk. Dumbledore advocates for their right to exists in their own segregated patches of land, and in return they will help Dumbledore. Merfolk will allow themselves and their home to be used as obstacles in the tri-wizarding tournament and the centaurs will let wizards traipse through their forest.

Inside the centaur society, we are supposed to see territorial Bane as the “bad guy” and the meek Firenze, who argues that centaurs should take sides in a human war and make defer even more to the wizards. Firenze eventually accumulates into the human society by becoming a teacher in Hogwarts, but only after he has been banished from the Centaur society. Therefore Firenze becomes completely subserviant to Dumbledore, as his own people do not accept him anymore and Hogwarts is the only place he can go. He does not have the backing of his own community that could allow him to make demands towards his human peers, which makes him a good ally for Dumbledore. Firenze placed the needs of humanity above the needs of his own species and that makes him the ‘reasonable’ centaur.

The same happens with goblins. Their prioritization of their own people is at every turn equated with them being unpleasant, unreasonable, and impossible to work with, and when Harry Potter shows the bare minimum of respect- acknowledging that goblins have their own legal system that defines ownership of an object differently than a human would, it is framed as the greatest height of progressiveness that anyone could ever show towards a goblin, instead of the bare minimum. Never-mind the fact that the books explicitly mention that goblins are denied the use of a wand by the dominant human government, and actively have to fight for the rights they have even now, which is neither an interest nor a concern to any of our heroes.

Note of interest is also that most non-humans taking action against the status quo are antagonists. There are no creatures in the order of the phoenix fighting against the dark lord, (Remus Lupin identifies as a human with an unfortunate condition.) but there are several under the command of Voldemort. (Order of the Phoenix p.88) The most positive attitude towards non-humans comes from the heroes who show tolerance towards non-humans, but who also do not try to reach any deeper understanding about non-human experiences in the wizarding society.

The house-elves are the most blatant piece of yikes when it comes to the issue of creatures. The enslavement of house elves is explained away as a natural order of the world. At the end the series, even the protagonist Harry Potter accepts this natural order and becomes himself a master of the house elf Kreacher (Half Blood Prince p.55). Harry’s slave-master position is accepted,because we trust Harry to treat his slaves decently, there is never anyquestion what the condition of being a slave-master can psychologically do tothe master, or that slavery as an institution is too immoral to accept, nomatter the conditions. The reader is shown that the elves are not capable oftaking care of themselves without a master by examples of Dobby and Winky, the only freed elves shown in the books. Winky, after being freed, becomes an alcoholic. (Goblet of Fire, p.564) Dobby, while enjoying freedom, would be unable to support himself without the help of benevolent Dumbledore, to whom Dobby works in the same way as the other slaves in the castle, even if he is namely free. (Goblet of Fire p.400) (Both alcoholism and “frivolity” were anti-abolitionist talking points in the southern states in the antebellum era). Theimplication is that some races are simply born subservient, and the morally decent thing to do is to keep them in slavery but treat them kindly.

Hermione Granger, who in the books argues that slavery as an institution is by itself something that cannot be accepted, is presented with her views as ridiculous and misguided. On the other hand, those who argue for the institution of slavery appear as rational and reasonable. There is no way for anyone to think of her S.P.E.W badges as anything but childish and stupid, a phase for Hermione to grow out of. In Chamber of Secrets, the readers do see Harry freeing the house elf Dobby, after Dobby has personally helped Harry. However, the implication is that Dobby suffered from an unfit master, not from the slavery itself, and that his freedom came as boon after he had done a personal favour to Harry Potter. In the world of Harry Potter, slaves are happy to be slaves, as long as their masters are decent masters.

But if you stop and think of all this, it should not be rationally possible for a society like this to exist. If the giants truly are so stupid and violent that they are accidentally killing themselves to extinction, they should also not be sentient enough for humans to breed (and even create emotional bonds, as Hagrid’s family) with them. If these creatures have managed to create a society, it should not be possible for them to be unable to “understand complicated matters” or “kill anyone who uses too big words” (Order of the phoenix, 429).

Same with the centaurs. Segregating an entire culture to a small reservation is not pretty, and it does not happen peacefully. Still there is never any indication that the wizards were actively doing anything to keep the centaurs in their reservation. Even though, overtly and less-overtly violent actions and policies are in reality always working to keep indigenous populations at check. No creature segregated in their little reservation wants to leave that reservation, choosing to rather waste away amongst their own kind than pushing for their species to either be integrated into the wizarding world, or gaining more land from the wizards. And assuming that the centaur population is too small and weak to do anything but accept their reservation, the heroes do not see anything wrong with this arrangement either. The mythical tale of the noble savage who quietly goes into the good night is real in the wizarding world.

Those creatures who do live and work alongside wizards are equally content with their narrow roles. No goblin wants to work anywhere else expect the bank, no house-elf wants to open a business, no veela wants to study in Hogwarts. Half-breeds might be allowed in, if the headmaster is eccentric enough, and as long as they are able to “pass” as humans. The fact that their creature parents would never have that change is not even acknowledged as the tragedy that it is. It is easy for the heroes to appear as progressive, when the only thing the creatures want is to be allowed to exist in their pre-ordained roles and be treated with the most basic decency.

We don’t know what Dumbledore’s answer would be if a young goblin wanted to apply as a student at Hogwarts. We don’t know what any of our heroes’ reactions would have been, if the centaurs demanded compensations for Hogwarts’ rights to use the Forbidden Forest. Or if Dobby would have started campaigning alongside Hermione for abolition. We don’t know, because the wizarding world is in perfect harmony, as long as the creatures are allowed to exist peacefully in their roles, without corrupt, dark wizards abusing them needlessly.

What about humans then. Not all humans are created equal either. We don’t really see about the state of the wizarding world outside of Britain, but we are given the implication that the political situation in Britain is equal to the fate of the world. Harry Potter is not fighting for a political cause in UK, he is saving the world. British politics are world politics. The international wizards we do see, are also almost as much stereotyped as the creatures are. The French boys and girls from Beauxabatons are vain and frilly, while the girls and boys from Durmstrang are brutish and coarse. And in the European stage, UK and France gets their own wizarding population, while the eastern Europe is apparently lumped together in a way that makes you suspect that the Soviet Union never fell in the magical world. (considering when Rowling was creating these stories, that is not impossible. Rowling started writing Philosopher’s stone a year before the Soviet Union was dissolved). In the world politics, these three are the only ones important enough to be included in the tri-wizarding tournament, (tournament that the British dominate easily), and therefore clearly hold the political cards of magical Europe. What we do know is that British wizards have no trouble finding work overseas, while we do not see any foreigners living or working in the British wizarding world. Britain’s importance as the centre stage of magical world politics is simply a given fact of the world.

(Note that I have decided to omit all nonsense that Rowling has added to Pottermore in her effort to world-build but rest assured that it makes the situation simply much much worse.)

There is also the clean divide between muggles and wizards. The wizards once again are honour-bound from their superior position to protect the muggles. The books make it clear that it was not for the safety of the wizards that the worlds were divided. It was simply that muggles in their ignorance kept burning other muggles during the witch-hunting times. The idea that muggles, if confronted with an existential threat like the death-eaters and their genocidal tendencies, were to win the fight, is not even floated as an idea. The moral implications ofkeeping the muggle world ignorant about a part of UK population that wants to kill them, and has succeeded in several terrorist attacks against the commonpopulation, is not discussed at all. The wizards simply have the right to sacrifice the lives of muggles in exchange of keeping their society hidden from the “common folk”. The wizards who do show any interest in muggles, do it in the most condescending way possible. Arthur Weasley, who has spent years working in the ministry of muggle-affairs, cannot pronounce the word electricity or know what a rubber duck is. How exactly does someone work for muggle-affairs if one is completely ignorant of said affairs? Why are muggleborn’s not automatically working for muggle-affairs? How is it, that muggleborns all simply choose to embrace the wizarding culture without there being any underground muggleborn culture running counter the pureblood establishment? Hermione Granger wants to be seen as one of the witches, not as someone whose cultural knowledge of muggles could in on itself be a strength. Rowling really wants you to believe that the British wizarding culture is naturally so desirable that no counter-cultures have born inside it, or that there ever could be any other problem expect that muggleborns are restricted from accumulating into it.

And then we come to Harry. Our hero. At first look, he appears to be the underdog fighting against the unjust establishment of the wizarding world. However, if one takes a closer look at the story, Harry Potter is not an underdog at all. In the beginning of the story, he acquires a great inheritance from his exceedingly wealthy parents. (Philosopher’s Stone p.85) In every other character exceeding wealth seems to be a negative trait, but curiously Harry’s status as an heir to a fortune is never properly addressed in relation to Harry’s moral character. Harry is also a son of esteemed and powerful magical parents, both highly regarded in the wizarding society. From his father’s side, Harry can claim a connection to an old pureblood house, giving him a claim to the pureblood wizarding establishment. Both the wealth and the bloodline inherited from the Potter family guarantees a place in the upper class of the magical society for young Harry. Even the extremely racist Draco Malfoy in the first book seems eager to make friends with Harry. (Philosopher’s Stone p.120). It is only Voldemort who has robbed him of his natural heritage and privileges and forced him into hiding with his brutish and cruel (muggle) relatives.

The story of Harry Potter is not of someone who fights for acceptance, but of someone who returns to his rightful place on top of the wizarding society. characters who do not naturally have this privilege, gain prestige by being helpful and loyal to Harry. It is a deliberate choice by Rowling to make Harry a heir to an prestigious family fighting for the rights of muggleborns and those lower than him in the wizarding societal ladder. He is the archetypical English gentleman hero, because he has both the privilege and the proper character to carry that privilege. Voldemort, Malfoy, and other “dark-siders” from the pureblood establishment have abused this privilege and are therefore unworthy of it.

Another important part of Harry’s character is that all his powers and abilities that help him champion against Voldemort are either inherited or inherent. Harry does no need to labour for his victory. His mother gives him “blood-protection”, his father and mentors give him magical items to help him on his journey, and he simply has skills that others don’t. His flying abilities making themselves known the first time he hops on a broom, and his inexplicable talent to resist the imperio-curse is never explained expect with “a strong will”. He even learns the patronus, a spell that for adult characters is explained as a very rare and impressive talent, in a matter of days. What he is good at, he doesn’t need to work for, and what he is not good at, he doesn’t need to improve on. If there is something he doesn’t have the innate talent for, he has friends who will do it for him. When Snape claimed that all of Harry’s successes were due to luck and more talented friends…he wasn’t wrong. And the kicker is, that that’s the point. Harry’s main strength is the fact that he is good at networking and having a brave heart. That is the ideal that thousands of young Englishmen tried to mould themselves into during the imperial days. Harry doesn’t need to be the “smartest wizard of his age”, he needs to be charismatic enough that others will follow him into the battle. He doesn’t need to be shrewd, or ambitious, or smart, or even kind, he needs to know how to apply his inheritance correctly and how to manage those in the lower position than him, in order to return the status quo of the wizarding world to what it was before Voldemort.

When both Harry’s already existing place in the magical society, and the question of how the books treat the magical creatures are considered, the main conflict in the book seems to be reduced to an inner struggle between the higher classes of wizarding society. Voldemort and the death eaters are evil because they misuse their power over the lower classes, and because they discriminate against other witches and wizards. Therefore, it is the duty of Dumbledore and Harry Potter to return the wizarding world to its former and rightful order. The narrative supports the idea that now that the proper people, the naturally noble-minded heroes, are once again in power all the social issues of the wizarding world will disappear. Those on the top of the social pyramid will treat those under them with tolerance, and those at the base of the pyramid will stick to their place.In other words, the world of Harry Potter has fulfilled the colonialist fantasy of the British empire, where everybody has their place in society, and the inferior races truly are without ambitions or nuances.

The wizarding world has the structures that the British empire had, but none of the problems that come with those structures. In the end, the wizarding world returns to peace. “all was well.” The house-elves are given laws that punishes a master that mistreats their slave. The goblins continue in their segregation. The centaurs and merfolk are given a promise of no genocide. The British muggleborns are promised a place in the dominant society, as long as they perfectly emulate their pureblood peers and don’t bring muggle culture (or values) with them. The superiority of British wizardingkind has been proven, and they benevolently reside over their less evolved subjects, making sure that they are allowed to fulfill their roles in the society, as they naturally desire, in peace. There are no troublesome creature-rights activists causing havoc on streets. There are no muggleborns who would wish to side with muggles against the wizards. There is no empire, there is only the natural order of things.

Bibliography

https://www.academia.edu/26667941/Crowning_the_King_Harry_Potter_and_the_Construction_of_Authority

https://www.lib.latrobe.edu.au/ojs/index.php/tlg/article/view/162/161

https://kb.osu.edu/bitstream/handle/1811/24083/H_and_F_book4print_final.pdf;sequence=1

https://www.verywellmind.com/what-is-phrenology-2795251

https://www.gresham.ac.uk/lectures-and-events/the-victorians-empire-and-race

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Johann_Jakob_Bachofen

https://kenanmalik.com/2014/05/15/the-forgotten-roots-of-the-first-world-war/

http://historymatters.gmu.edu/d/5478

https://www.naturepl.com/stock-photo-tableau-to-accompany-professor-agassiz-opening-sketch-on-the-image01388344.html

https://until-darwin.blogspot.com/2012/09/darwin-slavery-species-question.html

https://www.britannica.com/topic/race-human/Scientific-classifications-of-race

https://www.vanityfair.com/news/2008/11/hitchens200811

https://newrepublic.com/article/151232/britains-boarding-school-problem

https://www.theguardian.com/education/2014/jun/09/boarding-schools-bad-leaders-politicians-bullies-bumblers

https://anotherwasteland.blogspot.com/2008/05/robinson-crusoe-colonialism-and.html

https://neoenglish.wordpress.com/2010/10/17/colonialism-in-victorian-literature/

https://www.pbs.org/wgbh/aia/part4/4h3141t.html

#harry potter #Anonymous #long post #literary analysis #ask and you shall receive much more than you ever wanted

8K notes · View notes

baixueagain · 4 years ago

Note

I haven't read hp in a long time, so I may be wrong. But wasn't the thing about house-elves wanting to stay slaves also a critic of Hermione's behavior and how she thought that just she was doing the right thing in her mindset didn't mean it was the same thing for the people concerned, and that she was basically trampling over them to "enlighten" them?

Yeahhhh the house elf thing is...well, honestly I don’t actually think it’s nearly as bad as people say it is. The metaphor she’s using is (like the werewolf thing) insensitive and could’ve been handled way, way better, but the fundamental message of it isn’t actually that controversial or hideous.

First of all, there’s the whole idea that JKR invented a race of slaves. I’m leery of this statement, because throughout HP, especially in the early books when house elves are introduced, JKR plays a lot with classic folklore. House elves/fairies, while not being as well-known in America, are a pretty common trope in European and British folklore. There are dozens of stories and legends and folk tales about how people can leave out butter or other things for the spirits of the house (often elves or fairies), and that in exchange the spirits would clean and do other chores for you. So JKR picked that up and ran with it, and asked, okay, what if those stories were real, but wizards figured out a way to manipulate that traditional exchange into a form of exploitation?

JKR pretty clearly problematizes what’s happened to the house elves from the get-go when we meet Dobby. Those who treat elves as subservient and inherently lesser are consistently portrayed as straight up evil (Lucius Malfoy, the Ministry statue, etc). Harry isn’t actually that dismissive of Hermione’s views, either. He wrestles with it, too, and feels distinctly uncomfortable, but for some time he doesn’t really seem to know what else to do except to go along with it - which, while not a good thing, is a completely normal reaction for a young teenager to have when faced with that kind of situation. Furthermore, while in general house elves are “said” to be happy with their situation, the two major house elf characters (Dobby and Kreacher) are portrayed as distinctively unhappy about it from the moment of their introduction, though Kreacher has clearly internalised things. Even Sirius’s mistreatment of Kreacher is portrayed as a massive flaw in his character and a giveaway that he’s not exactly the perfect Cool Uncle Type that we originally see him as. Finally, don’t forget that one of the most triumphant moments of DH is Kreacher getting fed the fuck up with the way he’s been treated all his life and leading what amounts to a house elf revolution against those who would keep house elves completely and utterly subservient for the rest of time.

As for Hermione, IMO she’s portrayed as having her heart in the right place but going about things all wrong, to the point that her ignorance about the situation becomes comedic. Which...honestly, that comes across as a pretty apt criticism of the “saviour” types who really sincerely do want to fix the world but end up just talking over the people they’re trying to help - and ultimately pushing those people away.

JKR never actually questions whether or not slavery is a moral evil. What is questioned, however, is this: when someone in an unhappy situation says that they’re happy, how far can and should we go to help them without it becoming a violation of their consent and free will? And that’s not at all a new question in fantasy and sci-fi. Star Trek has asked it. Doctor Who has asked it. Even the Hitchhikers Guide books have asked it.

Example: I have women relatives who truly sincerely and whole-heartedly believe that women were put on this earth to be subservient to men. They were raised to believe this and have never questioned it. If you asked them if they’re happy, they’d say yes, and tbh, I believe them: they are lucky enough that the men they’ve married are legitimately kind and loving husbands. However, I still find their situation to be morally abhorrent and I fundamentally disagree with how they view femininity and marriage. So what can I do? I’ve had arguments with them about it, and they won’t budge. I’ve tried to expose them to literature on women’s liberation and they dismiss it. In fact, it’s only made them get defensive and dig in their heels, because they resented me telling them that their worldview was an unhealthy and wrong one. Who was I, after all, to tell them that they were wrong to be happy with their lives? Am I supposed to end their marriages by force and strong-arm them into feminism, or is that in and of itself a violation of their consent and free will?

There’s no easy answers to those questions. There never has been and never will be. And I think that’s what Rowling was attempting to wrestle with. Did she do it clumsily? Yes. Should she have chosen a different metaphor other than slavery? Very probably. Is it open to criticism? Yes again. Has she written other cringe-worthily bad and ignorant things into HP? Absolutely - Cho Chang is the shining example, IMO, though there are plenty more.

However, I also think it’s extremely disingenuous to paint the house elf plotline as promoting/condoning slavery, telling people that they should be content with their lot in life, or mocking those who try to challenge the status quo. That reading of HP ignores a metric shitload of evidence to the contrary, especially in the later books. And while I love literary criticism and think there’s plenty to be criticised in the HP books, this is one of those things that I truly do believe is not only unfair, but the product of extremely selective reading.

#jkr #jk rowling #house elves #harry potter #meta

479 notes · View notes

qqueenofhades · 3 years ago

Note

Hey, I loved your post about queerness in historical fiction. I was wondering if you could help me find a better way to explain (or know of someone who could) to the white (usually male) fans of Tolkien who are currently losing their minds because in the series for Amazon they have cast Sir Lenny Henry (a black man) as a hobbit. It feels like the exact same argument that was dealt with when Anya Chalotra was cast as Yennefer for The Witcher. It just seems like only white people are screaming that the entire cast must be white in both the case of the Witcher and Middle Earth in order to be "historically accurate to the Dark Ages" when it's all fantasy. I'm a white person and I don't get it. It's really frustrating that the only way to convince them that people of color should be allowed to play characters who aren't evil-doers is to bring up the existence of the potato in both Middle Earth and The Witcher. In this most recent fight, I've been called all kinds of names (one dude keeps saying I'm racist when I haven't brought up race or anything like that) and it's ridiculous because Henry was cast as a Harfoot who were hobbits with dark skin that they claim means Mediterranean not Black.

Ooof. I admire your initiative, I really do, but also: there comes a point where all good-faith efforts are totally futile, because these people don't actually WANT their beliefs challenged, and there won't be anything you can do about it except to exhaust yourself. You can throw all the material or documentary evidence at them that you want, but it won't work, because racism, white superiority, and the assumption of a monolithically white medieval history are a helluva drug. They are eager to split ridiculous hairs like "dark skin means Mediterranean instead of black" because, well, racism, whether or not they want to acknowledge that. Because Mediterranean is at least European, whereas for them, Black is Bad, Inferior, or otherwise Unacceptable. This doesn't even get into the types who want to claim that Ancient Rome (which was rather notably, y'know, Mediterranean and North African) was actually lily-white, because even dark-skinned Southern and Eastern Europeans can't ultimately make the racist cut.

Tolkien himself obviously had problems with his depiction of race and racialized people (witness the Haradrim, "men from the South," being the only people of colour in the story and generalized as an indiscriminate evil force fighting for Sauron against the white/Northern European heroes). That's not to say Tolkien was actively racist (see: the letter he wrote to the Nazi German would-be publishers of The Hobbit, inviting them cordially to get fucked), but it does mean that he was steeped in the usual assumptions and expectations of a white upper-class British man in the 1920s and 1930s, and not least the mindset that the (white) rulers of the (nonwhite) British Empire were superior, morally correct, and the privileged resisters of "evil" political systems. (This isn't even getting into how Germany was admired throughout the long 19th century for its perceived cultural and social superiority, the American eugenics movement directly influenced the Nazis, a lot of people thought that Hitler's only mistake was being too obviously crazy, and America and Britain only actively entered World War II when their territory/perceived global power was infringed upon.)

White people tend to assume that if they personally don't hold discriminatory attitudes (and they usually do, just because that's what society has taught them for almost all of modern history), they can't be racist, and it's a personal insult to call them that. They know that Racism Is Bad, but likewise, it's always someone else's fault, not theirs. See the huge brouhaha over the supposed plan to teach "critical race theory" in American public schools, which is really just acknowledging that centuries of racism and discrimination have created a system that disadvantages people of color at every level. This is absolute heresy for today's right wing (which has become ever more extreme, reactionary, and historically amnesiac) to admit. They can admit historical racism, sometimes, maybe, only in demonstrably "bad" people, but as far as they're concerned, there was no lingering effect whatsoever, and it's "un-American" (read: anti-white supremacist) to insist otherwise. Land of the free! Everyone treated the same! Etc. etc. The continued inferior or disadvantaged life outcomes of people of color is, according to these types, simply a result of them not being motivated/ambitious/smart enough to fix their own broken circumstances. Those centuries of genocide, cultural destruction, use as literal chattel slaves, etc, has nothing to do with it.

If this sounds ridiculous: well, obviously, it is. But as reactionary mindsets have become troublingly normalized and social media has allowed people to spread both passively and actively racist content to unprecedented degrees, it has also leaked into media. The type of white-man-fan you're arguing with won't accept any "historically accurate" argument for the inclusion of non-white people, even as they're staking their own (bad) arguments on that hill. This is because they want to claim the sole privilege to create a nostalgic/imagined/fantasy space that looks just like them. Their underlying belief is that people of color never had any power or consequential role in history, and shouldn't have, so they don't want to see a space, even an explicitly fantastic/non-historical setting (like LOTR, The Witcher, GOT, etc.), where this is the case. Whether or not they want to say it, or even if they're aware of it, they feel that even if they've been unhappily forced to accept a small lessening of their cultural power just because we no longer automatically accept that white men get to run everything, they at least can take comfort in a (white) past. And now, or so they think, the "politically correct" types also want to ruin their racist fantasy comfort zone. They can't even escape from multiculturalism in media, as it too has become steadily more diverse.

Basically: it's racism, Jan. It's many levels of racism, you can't argue those people out of it, and you have to identify and understand that, especially since their favorite diversionary tactic will be the schoolyard maneuver of going, "no, YOU'RE the racist!!!"

(Also: "historically accurate to the Dark Ages" should tell you everything you need to know. These people know absolutely nothing about history, but that won't prevent them from weaponising it in defense of the perceived threat to their cultural and racial domination. Besides, yet again, fantasy universes have no claim to historical accuracy, and if you say that, I assume you just want to feel justified in creating a fictional universe where the only powerful/consequential people are white heterosexual western European-coded men, because you not-so-secretly wish it was still that way in reality.)

#history #history of racism #medieval history #anonymous #ask

45 notes · View notes

eljackinton · 4 years ago

Text

Jack's End of Year Video Game Round-up.

There were many things I couldn't do this year, being in lockdown and all, which in turn meant I played a hell of a lot more video games than I normally do. Here's a quick rundown of what I thought of them.

Hitman 2

IO have sort of perfected the Hitman formula now, so future entries in the series simply have to ask the question of what new directions you can take that formula. In that regard Hitman 2 is a resounding success, setting sneaking and assassination in scenarios around the world from race tracks to holiday resorts, and thus making it the best entry yet. It's possible one day the Hitman conceit will wear thin, but today is not that day.

Thronebreaker

Most people will go into Thronebreaker just wanting a stand-alone version of the Gwent we played during Witcher 3. Thronebreaker is not that. Indeed, even beyond the changes to the mechanics brought in by the online version, Thronebreaker is more of a puzzle game which uses the mechanics of Gwent to concoct unique scenarios. Still, the story is pretty good and it is fun overall, even if it didn't end up scratching the itch left by Gwent.

Black Mesa (Xen)

I returned to Black Mesa after Xen was finally added, eager to see what the team had come up with. My feelings are complicated. The Xen portions of the game are really well designed, great to play and visually beautiful. However the levels hew so far from the Half-Life originals that it kind of stops feeling like Half-Life. I would have like to have seen a more faithful recreation to be honest.

Neon Struct

If you've been wanting a spiritual sequel to Thief that actually used the mechanics of Thief, here you go. Though low budget, and therefore having somewhat uninspiring visuals based on reused assets, it's still a really impressive game from what the team had to work with, and it's short enough that it doesn't outstay it's welcome.

Acid Spy

I'm generally usually okay at stealth games but this one was well beyond my skill level. Got through the tutorial but just got frustrated and quit on the first mission.

Salting the Earth

A wonderfully put together visual novel about the legacy of war and the nature of national identities. Also you date buff orc women. One of the best VNs I've played, but it does have some pretty bleak potential endings that clash somewhat with the rest of the story's tone.

Hedon

Speaking of buff orc women, Hedon is a vivid, perfectly designed retro-shooter that really uses the most of it's engine to bring it's world to life, with shades of Thief and Strife thrown in there. Wears its hornieness on it's sleeve, but if you can roll with that you'll have nothing but a good time.

The Painscreek Killings

I really really loved this immersive narrative game, where you explore an abandoned town to piece together a series of suspicious deaths. My only gripes are the town looks very British despite being set in the US, and the final confrontation adding a chase scene felt a little over dramatic.

Deus Ex Mankind Divided

There are many problems with Mankind Divided. Trying to find another story to do with Adam Jensen. Making the game more of an open world by taking away the usual Deus Ex globe-trotting. The clumsy use of racial metaphor being applied to cyborgs. All in all the game just didn't really come together, which is a shame, because the DLC showed such promise, and hinted at the real Deus Ex game we could have had.

Warhammer Armageddon DLC

I managed to complete the Salamanders DLC and got stuck near the end of the Blood Angels one. All in all it's simply 'more' of what the base game offered, and I'm not sure it really needed it.

Unavowed

Easily one of the most interesting games I played this year. So good It inspired me to write a cheesy fanfic. Sure the mechanics of applying squad mechanics to a point and click are interesting, but it's the world, the art and the characters themselves that really make this game. Highly recommended.

Devil Daggers

The ultimate distillation of classic shooter mechanics. One platform, one weapon, endless enemies. I didn't get all that far into it and I think most people won't, but I'm not going to complain for the price. Overdue a revisit.

Dream Daddy

A fun and fluffy dating game that actually does a good job of putting you into the mindset of a recently bereaved bisexual dad. Come for the hunks, stay for the really affecting story of a strained relationship between father and daughter.

Greedfall

Greedfall falls short of the mark in most aspects, but I have to give it credit for being one of the few games to give us a Bioware companion-centric adventure during this drought of Bioware games. It lacks the zing of something like Dragon Age, and handles the subject of colonialism really problematically, but if you can get past those issues, it's a fun ride, and a world I'd like to revisit.

Endless Legend

I've been wanting a game to scratch the Alpha Centauri itch for decades now and Endless Legend finally did it. There is a risk of being overwhelmed by the sheer number of unique factions to play, and I know I still haven't really scratched the surface even after 4 full campaigns. Is that a criticism? I suppose it depends if you think you can have too much of a good thing.

Space Hulk Deathwing Enhanced Edition

A valiant effort was put in to make a faithful FPS of the Space Hulk experience, but ultimately it falls far too short. The visuals look great and the game-feel of stomping around as a Space Marine really works, but the game lacks charm and character. Up against Vermintide, there's no comparison.

Sunless Sea

This is a game that feels like a bottomless abyss of secrets and mysteries tied up in a very brutal one-life-only system. I really enjoyed my time with Sunless Seas, with the music calling me like a wailing siren every now and again, yet in many ways I did find it a bit too unforgiving, and it could have benefited from having a bit more of a progression between lives than the almost solid reset it leaves you with.

Age of Empires / 2 / 3 Definitive Editions

The first Age of Empires has an important place in history, but is borderline unplayable by today's standards. Almost every aspect was improved in 2 and going back now feels like trading a car for a horse and cart. It's clear that the game was intending your slow crawl out of the stone age through hunting and gathering to be part of the game in its own right, but today it's just tedious, and the rest of the game is just so slow.

There isn't much to say about Age of Empire 2 that I haven't already said, but I will point out that multiplayer AOE2 has kept me sane over the course of the lockdown, and I'm glad the Definitive Edition enhanced that experience.

Age of Empire 3 tried too hard to reinvent the wheel. Instead of taking 2 and building on it, it instead contorted it around a colonisation theme, and it didn't really work. On top of that, the mechanics really felt they were built more for single-player story missions. The maps are too small, and the expansion factions clash with the rules badly. Still, there is fun to be had, and I'll be checking out the campaigns next year.

Hand of Fate 2

This game takes the original Hand of Fate and adds way, way too much into it. While I appreciate the addition of companions, a longer story mode, and optional side missions, the game is far too experimental with it's formula, and leaves me struggling with complex missions around being lost in a desert or evading barbarian hordes, when all I wanted was a straight forward dungeon crawl. I tapped out two thirds of the way through the campaign.

Wild Guns Reloaded

I love the style and aesthetic, but I just don't have the reflexes (or the gamepad) for these fast paced arcade games.

Vermintide 2 Drakenfels

Fatshark gave us an entire Vermintide campaign for free this year, at the cost of having to be subjected to obnoxious cosmetic micro-tranactions. Hard to say it was worth the price, but Fatshark really do continue to improve, bringing new scope and ideas to every new mission. As good as it gets.

Pendula Swing

A fun little game that apes the visuals of a Baldur's Gate style RPG but the mechanics of a point and click adventure game set in a fantasy version of the roaring twenties. A strong introduction to it's setting but definitely needs building on if we're to see a continuation. A lot of the world-building feels too simple and half-baked at times, and the gameplay feels like too much is going on too fast. Still, a charming story though.

The Shiva / The Blackwell Series

At first I had no idea that Unavowed was connected to a host of other Wadget Eye adventure games, so naturally I had to check them out. I'd known about The Shiva and the Blackwell games for years, but never actually thought about picking them up. Playing them all back to back was a great experience, and almost felt like a prototype to the episodic storytelling many games do today.

Lara Croft and the Guardian of Light/Temple of Osiris

Guardian of Light is a fun, inventive co-op game for killing some time with a friend. The puzzles are often unique and interesting and get you thinking, and the story, while nothing fantastic, is fun enough to keep you interested and have a laugh about with your co-op partner in a B-Movie kind of way. Temple of Osiris adds way too much to the formula, with more characters, mechanics and more open exploration and it absolutely loses the charm of the first game, and even then it's buggy as hell. Skip the second one.

Command and Conquer Remastered

Big chunks of my childhood are taken up with memories of playing Command and Conquer and Red Alert, so it's difficult to really gauge my thoughts on the remaster. On the one hand the art direction looks great and preserves the feel of the original, and the quality of life improvements to the gameplay help make it more playable. The nostalgia hit is also palpable. That being said, the mechanics have not aged all that well, with much of the game being far, far too hard. Probably the best way to experience the genesis of the RTS genre but just know what you're getting in for.

Superhot Mind Control Delete

I wrote a lot at length about how unsure I was about Mind Control Delete at the time, and that's because it does feel a little unsure about itself. Is it a continuation of the first game? A fun bonus mode? A mediation on the nature of addiction? A critique of video game content? A joke on the player? I don't know, but I do know one thing, and that is that Superhot is still as addictive as hell.

Opus Magnum

Zachtronic's steampunk alchemy game requires far too much maths brain than I am capable of , and so I had to rely on guides a lot of the time, but that being said, it's still amazingly put together and vividly presented. Really feels like a game that could be used in schools.

Necromunda Underhive Wars (Story Mode)

I'll be checking out Underhive's Campaign mode in the new year, but for now I just want to talk about the story mode. Much like Mordheim, this is a game that's not going to work for everyone, but I really dug it and like it's unique take on a squad based TBS. However, in many respects the game does feel like a missed opportunity. The storyline is fun enough, and the arsenal robust, but much of the character of the tabletop game, the weird, chaotic, and sometimes comical things that can happen over the course of a battle seems to have been lost in translation, as has the quirky character to a lot of the gangs.

Outer Wilds

There is little I can say about Outer Wilds that hasn't already been said by others, particularly that one should go into the game as blind as possible. A beautiful piece of interactive art, words would fail me in describing it anyway.

Life is Strange 2

Fantastically written, amazingly animated, wonderfully acted, and grim and depressing as all hell. I really love Life is Strange 2, but it it a tough game to bare witness to, especially in 2020. It treats it's subject matter with great maturity, but is so dark it's hard to motivate yourself to continue each gruelling episode. Also, I really think it would have fared better if it had not named itself Life is Strange 2, as not following Max and Chloe turned a lot of people away from a game I think they'd have otherwise enjoyed if they'd named it Wolf Brothers or something.

Half Life 2 / Episodes / Portal / 2/ Mel

After playing Black Mesa earlier this year I decided to revisit the entire Half Life 2 and Portal series. What I concluded is that Half Life 2 is not really all that good. A well told story wrapped around weak combat and average encounter design. This much improves across the episodes of course, but in the end I rather feel Half Life 2 is pretty overrated.

Portal, on the other hand, still feels fresh, though I was surprised I'd forgotten just how much was added in Portal 2, to the point Portal feels more like a game demo. That being said, I think the slowly growing mystery and menace of Portal has aged a lot better than the gagfest the series became with 2. Mel, a stand-alone mod that feels like could be a Portal 3 in it's own right, returns to a more serious tone, and feels all the stronger because of it.

Control

Control has gone from a game I didn't really care about all that much to one of my favourites of the year, if not the decade. Sure there are criticisms I could make, but the world has so much depth, the characters so much potential, and the gameplay such perfectly designed chaos, that it wouldn't really matter. A great time was had.

Icewind Dale 2

Finishing Icewind Dale 2 was the final banishing of the old ghosts of Infinity Engine games I never finished as a kid. Sure there was the nostalgia, but Icewind Dale 2 also feels prefect for the Baldurs Gate era's swan song. Beautiful environments, a well written story and great interface and design, only pulled down due to some overly long busywork at various points and the plot being dragged on a little too long. Still, sad to know I have no further Infinity Engine games left to conquer.

Elsinore

The first half of Elsinore is an absolutely great time-loop mystery, which seems to be an interesting interrogation of Shakespearian tropes and asks the question of how much of a Shakespearian tragedy remains the more you change it. The second half, however, quickly devolves into a cosmic horror story that feels a poor fit for the genre and far too grim for the art style, and that's even before it basically devolves into trying to do the same thing Undertale did but worse. A well put together game whose ending did not sit well with me.

Gwent: The Witcher Card Game

Since Thronebreaker didn't sate my appetite I started playing competitive Gwent. It is a wholly different game than the one that appears in The Wither 3, but is certainly fascinating in it's own right. After 200 hours I am officially addicted, somebody please send help.

And that's that. Not doing a top 5 games of the year because I played too many this year and I've spent too much time thinking about them already. Here's hoping I play less in 2021 and can get back to a more normal life.

#video games

4 notes · View notes

bongalways · 5 years ago

Text

Tintinizing India - A story of life

If you are a Bengali who thrived when a misguided economic well-being did not threaten your mother tongue to its core, there is absolutely no chance that you have not been a part of the love that we always showed for detectives. We had our own Byomkesh, Feluda, Kiriti Roy, we had Sherlock and his overtly British demeanour. All of them possessed certain traits that were either something we had or something we desired. But among them, was an intrepid reporter from Brussels, who, without being something resembling our desires, burst into fame and remained famous ever since. The impact was so huge that it startled the creator of the character itself. He, always proclaiming that Tintin was his soul and that the character will cease to exist after him, was shocked by the love Tintin received from this tiny part of the world.

"I receive a lot of mail from India. Here, in my office, are two letters from Calcutta. Now, what can there be in common between a boy in Calcutta and myself?"

Why or how this tryst with Tintin started, is still a mystery to me.

In fact, the whole of India has always been a big admirer of Tintin. So much so, it has been such a crowd puller that Sony decided to release Spielberg’s Adventures of Tintin (2011) in India six weeks before it’s official release in USA. The movie still stands to be the highest grossing animated film in the country and also the animated feature film to receive the biggest opening ever. The comic books, adapted in Hindi around 2010, became and instant success and still remains to be one of the most sold comic series of all time.

However, that has not been the first time when Tintin spoke an Indian Language. Thirty years before it’s Hindi translation, Tintin was translated in a Bengali magazine, called Anandamela, for the first time. Aveek Sarkar, the same person who recently became famous through the comments made by our honourable CM, was the person who travelled the distance to meet Herge and ask for the rights to translate Tintin in Bengali. Till today, all the 23 translated versions released by Ananda Publishers remains to be an essential part of a Bengali childhood. Coincidentally, the first time I came to know about Tintin was not from one his stories or any news article. It was through one of my childhood heroes, the detective I have mentioned previously, Satyajit Ray’s Feluda. Ray, one of the biggest representatives of Bengali mindset, was a huge admirer of Tintin himself. His wonderfully woven brainchild Feluda, not only speaks about Tintin in several occasions, but somehow loosely resembles him in a lot of ways.

But why has Tintin always been so impactful? To answer that, we must know who Herge was, in what period was Tintin created and what were the stories trying to tell. Being born on 1907 in Belgium, George Remi a.k.a Herge was always destined to be living in midst of everything the three unimaginable decades presented the world with. Yes, Herge was there all through the world wars and was allegedly arrested for being a Nazi collaborator. Tintin was first published in 1929, but his story starts before that, when Herge started creating illustrations for the first time. Sources state Herge started creating illustrations during his school days as a protest against the German troops who occupied Belgium back then, during the First World War. However, the first notable published illustrations of Herge was about a boy-scout named Totor, who was inspired from his teen days as a boy scout. We can, therefore, safely assume that Totor, was the stepping stone that eventually lead to creation of Tintin. But that is not the same version of Tintin we all love and admire. The first three books (Tintin in the Land of Soviets (1930), Tintin in Congo (1931) and Tintin in America (1932)) were created with the initial beliefs that Herge possessed. Land of Soviets was about the ills of communism whereas Tintin in Congo, a brilliant portrayal of the diamond mining in Africa, was in itself way too racist than what is acceptable today. Tintin in America was a masterpiece though, and it was the one that perhaps cemented Tintin’s position in the world on Comics. The books portrayal of Native Americans, the Al Capone resemblances along with the attention to details makes it the most selling telling book till date.

Then, in 1934, came Cigars of Pharaoh. For the world, it introduced Rastapopoulos, Tintin’s nemesis and who’s similarity with stereotypical anti-Semitic portrayals will be talked about for a few decades. For us, it introduced India through Tintin’s eyes when the reporter’s plane crashed in a deep forest and he had to find his way out by becoming the official doctor of an elephant herd. The caricatures were what you can expect from a European of that time. The main villain is half-naked Fakir who throws darts mixed in a poison called Rajaija and makes the victim mad. The king of Gaipajama opposes opium trade and almost dies, Snowy is almost killed for abusing a holy cow. Not the ideal eh? So, anyone with the slightest idea of the rift between India and China can understand what comes next when the poppies are mentioned. But that was never the case. Why? Because in order to study the Orient, Herge was introduced to a Chinese named Zhang, the man who later became his best mate and can be credited for helping Tintin find his way.

The Blue Lotus (1936) starts where Cigars of Pharaoh ended and talks about the real China that was never talked about. Starting with the opium trade, Herge slowly shifts away to talk about Japans invasion of Manchuria and eventually, the second world war. The portrayal in so overwhelmingly wonderful, specially from an outsider, that it can be categorised as masterpiece similar to Spielberg-Christian Bale’s magnificent storytelling of Empires of the Sun.

Before WWII started and Belgium surrendered to German invasion, Herge wrote two more books (The Broken Ear and The Black Island) where the narrative primarily focused on adventure rather than politics. In 1939, just when the world prepared for WWII, Tintin saves Syldavia from a fascist leader in King Ottokar’s Sceptre. But the war meant Herge would eventually work under Nazi supervision and that was the case. Tintin goes up against a rich American Jewish man in The Shooting Star (1942). However, the books that followed this, namely The Secret of the Unicorn and Red Rackham’s Treasure (1943-44), are considered to be his best works. Soon, WWII ended and Herge became a free man of the free world. Only, he was barred from creating Tintin because of his status as a Nazi collaborator.

Have you heard of a parody called Tintin in the Land of Nazis?

Fortunately, though, the world was lenient on Herge. After few years, he was allowed to write. Then came the Seven Crystal Balls (1948) and Prisoners of the Sun (1949), where Tintin meets the Incas. Land of the Black Gold (1951) talked about oil crisis way before it’s time, Destination Moon and Explorers on the Moon (1953-54) made Tintin walk on moon way before Armstrong, Calculus Affair(1956) showed us cold war and Tintin in Tibet (1960) was all about finding a lost friend Chang (or, should we say Zhang from China?). Herge was so magnificent with his imagination as well as realisation of the world, the none of these stories fall out of place when compared with real history. Here, in Tintin in Tibet, we see a picturization of a New Delhi bazaar, so accurate and mesmerising, that you can almost forget the pent-up anger from what you read about India previously.

So, after all this, why do we Indians still love Tintin when we are so bored to talk about the World Wars?

Maybe it is because of how we have lived over the years.

We, the modern Indians, are descendants of countless wars that waged within our boundaries for centuries and still, our recent history is all about the 200 years of colonialism and small battles for the sake of independence. In that time, towards the end of the British rule, the world wars waged from America to Turkey to Japan. We were the biggest army of WWII and yet none of the folklore reeks of India. So, like Eve’s never-ending quench for the forbidden fruit, we have always been attracted to the politics around the world that never affected our daily lives. Be it the world wars, the oil crisis or the cold war. Heck Armstrong is perhaps more popular than Rakesh Sharma today. That is what precisely Herge did to us. He talked about the biggest crisis in simplest of way. It was a mixture of satire, truth, fantasy and romanticism. We drank it all.

Or maybe it is because of what Tintin resembled.

He was not a superhero. He was a decent looking reporter from somewhere beyond kaalapani, who has no ill vices, does the right thing, dresses neatly and most importantly wander in the land of unknown without any fear. He has a job for which he earns enough money to sponsor his trips, without a father asking him about his goals in life and a mother asking him to tie the knot. Plus, he does not talk about romance, neither mentally nor physically. Isn’t he the perfect gateway to the dreams we have always dreamt for ourselves? In Bengal, he came early with the taste of wanderlust, mystery and subtle remarks about politics. The three things that catches our imagination within a second. Moreover, being an ideal representation of a Bengali mother’s perfect child helped him fly into a little child’s bookshelf. From where he never disappeared, just got passed down from one generation to the other.

Moving out of the literature, let us talk about the technicalities. With his brilliant brush and realisation of perspective, Herge talks about the society at large, it’s functions, barriers and all those hard terms an economist use in a such a simple words and pictures that makes you feel at ease while brushing through them. You don’t realise, but your subconscious does and stores it, and redirects you to that same picture over and over again. Remember the brilliant picturization of Moon, the detailed underwater see through the shark-shaped submarine, or, my favourite, the wonderfully detailed picturization of a make-believe Inca King’s Diwan-e-Aam when Tintin and co. accidentally barges in. The side characters did their part as well. Haddock was as funny as he was serious. He was honest, comical, painfully drunkard, yet something about him made you follow his footsteps. Or else, billions of blistering barnacles will head your way. Calculus was genius lost in his own life. Bianca was ever-reliable, Thompson twins were the ever-humorous.

Tintin was a mixture of everything.

He taught us politics, he taught us history, he taught us science, astronomy as well as companionship. Personally, he taught me what quarantine stands for, where llamas are found, why an elephant trumpets, why glasses break when Bianca Sings. He was also my primer to calculus.

For nation that has always aspired more than it could grasp, a small Polynesian boy became the ray of hope and continues to do so, with flying colours. For the young kids who either loved or hated to read, Tintin gave their imaginations the fuel it required.

So, as an ode to the millions who tread this path before me, and to the billions to follow after, I hereby raise my toast to celebrate yet another product of the war-stricken days. The one which made us believe.

Credits :

1. India's undying love affair with Tintin - Soutik Biswas, BBC(2011)

https://www.bbc.com/news/15680397

2. India first for Spielberg - Robin Bansal, Hindustan Times(2011)

https://www.hindustantimes.com/hollywood/india-first-for-spielberg/story-IrjJzfKtVzn53XCfC5URAL.html

3. [VoxSpace Selects] The Boy In Blue – 90 Years Of Hergé’s Tintin - Puja Sinha(2019)

https://www.voxspace.in/2019/01/30/tintin/

4. Tintin in India: The epic that wasn't - Atul Sethi, TOI(2007)

https://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/india/Tintin-in-India-The-epic-that-wasnt/articleshow/2094744.cms

5. All Wiki Links.

Rastapopoulos : https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rastapopoulos

List of Tintin media : https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_Tintin_media

The Adventures of Tintin : https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Adventures_of_Tintin

Tintin(character) : https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tintin_(character)

6. Basic Information Help : http://en.tintin.com/

7. A Tintin timeline: https://nationalpost.com/afterword/a-tintin-timeline

8. Dark Secrets Behind the Creator of Tintin : https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wUvxC8Qf3Bw

#tintin #herge #comics #comic #india #world #world war 2

6 notes · View notes

radiantresplendence · 6 years ago

Photo

Chamrand’ded (2018-) Season 1

So, I’ve been familiar with the Charmed series, probably since the early 2000s. I’ve even read some of the comics which are set after the series finale of the TV show. It was a show that my mother enjoyed and I, and my younger sister wound up picking the fandom up, at least to a degree. I’ve probably watched the entirety of the original series’ eight season run at least six times, likely more. In terms of fandoms that I’m a part of, it’s among the earliest in my repertoire, alongside the likes of Pokemon and Yu-Gi-Oh!

Consequently, I was mildly skeptical of the reboot, but told myself that I’d watch it in its entirety out of respect for the original, no matter the quality. For the most part, I think the reboot is a mixed bag. There’s some things that it does that I like, and other choices that it makes that I really do not. The show tends to give off a feeling like the writing staff was constantly at war with itself for the duration of the season.

I’ll start off explaining the premise, and then I’ll dip into spoilers.

The show is set in 2010s US, specifically a college town in Michigan called Hilltowne. The show tends to utilize the local college as a hub for a lot of the episodes. This works decently well for the most part, but has a habit of tending to shrink the world instead of expanding it. Essentially the majority of stuff of import happens to revolve around this college.

This is a modern fantasy setting, with the main cast of three being revealed as the chosen “Charmed Ones” after their mother is killed under mysterious circumstances. They’re each granted magical powers and begin to study witchcraft, under the guidance of a guardian angel called a “whitelighter”.

The main characters are as follows:

Macy Vaughn- The oldest sister, an estranged half-sibling who is separated from the family and was raised by her father without knowledge of her mother. Upon learning of the death of the women she suspected to be her mother, she makes contact with her siblings. She’s a bit awkward, nerdy and headstrong. A lot of the time she stays more independent than her siblings. Her power is telekinesis. Of the cast, I think she’s one of the stronger performers and generally tends to have fairly strong plots.

Mel Vera- The middle sister, who despite living most of her life as the elder sibling, fits neatly into the role of the defiant middle child. An outspoken lesbian feminist with a tendency to make rash decisions. She’s the staunchest defender of personal lives away from magic in the group and tends to dislike authority. A lot of her personal plotlines tend to revolve around her romance interests with mixed effectiveness; despite this, I think her plots tend to have the most intrigue as a whole. She has the power to control time. I find her to be very derivative of Piper from the original series, without the same kind of character development that Piper had to reach the comparable mindset. She has a very genuine, close platonic relationship with the sister’s whitelighter, Harry, that develops quite organically over the course of the season, despite originally being openly hostile to him. I like this relationship a lot, despite Mel being my least favorite member of the main cast.

Maggie Vera- The youngest sister, an empath who tends to be the glue that holds the group together. She’s more bubbly and outgoing than her siblings and is a freshman in college, unsure about what she wants in life. She’s reminiscent of Phoebe from the original series, but isn’t nearly as derivative as Mel is in regards to Piper. She’s portrayed as generally capable and quite stable, yet naive. Her plots tend to revolve around a sorority at the college, and honestly they get old quite quickly as it’s quite apparent from the onset that she won’t officially join the Greek system. Her better plots tend to involve her “bad boy” significant other, Parker.

Harry Greenwood- The sister’s guardian angel, assigned by the powers that be to guide the sisters. A resurrected British man from the mid 1900s. He develops a genuine relationship with each of the sisters as a friend and confidant. He often plays the role of the comic relief and the all-knowing cast member. He winds up living in the sister’s house for the majority of the season. He’s honestly the most complicated member of the cast, despite being rather upstanding. He follows the rules, but personally isn’t infallible. He has baggage and relationships with characters in the world. Despite being sometimes played for comedy, he’s never portrayed as incompetent. I did a longer breakdown of the character in the middle of the season. His powers include, age resistance, teleportation, healing, memory manipulation, limited clairvoyance, limited illusions, limited telekinesis and self healing. My second favorite member of the cast.

Minor characters include:

Parker- Maggie’s half-demon “bad boy” boyfriend. Believed to be the host of the Source of All Evil. Actually does almost nothing wrong all season but is often discriminated against by much of the cast, both good and evil. Reminiscent of Cole from the original series.

Niko- One of Mel’s romance interests. A police officer who’s presence tends to cause a lot of issues tangential to magic. Reminiscent of Andy from the original series.

Jada- Another of Mel’s romance interests. The forbidden child of a witch and whitelighter pairing who’s affiliated with an organization called the Sarcana. A character who I quite like.

Galvin- Macy’s romance interest. A geneticist who works with her, has a family background associated with the occult.

Charity- An Elder with a history that includes Harry. Somewhat untrustworthy, but competent.

Alastair- A powerful demon who wants to bring about the apocalypse. Often portrayed as the main villain of the first season.

Spoilers from here on out.

Generally speaking the first season revolves around the sisters coming into their powers and forming a bond, particularly revolving around Macy’s relationship with her sisters. The main plot points revolve around the Sarcana coven and the assassination of Marisol Vera, the sister’s mother, Parker and the Source, and Harry and Charity’s involvement in the loss of Charity’s sister, Fiona, a powerful witch known as the Keeper of the Sacred Flame.

Generally speaking, the plot is at it’s most powerful, when pushing the third narrative, as it is the most distinctive and intriguing of the three main plots. It gets wrapped up in the second plot when Alastair needs the Sacred Flame as a pawn in order to evoke the Source of All Evil. The first plot is largely resolved in the first half of the season upon it being revealed that Charity was responsible for Marisol’s death. It begins to bleed into the third plot when the Sarcana saves Fiona from her banishment.

It is revealed that Maggie and Macy are full sisters, not half, and that Mel is the one with a different father. It is also revealed that Macy is the product of necromancy and has the potential to develop a demonic power called the evil sight at the cost of her humanity.

Parker’s full-demon brother, Hunter acts as a recurring villain over the course of the series. The brother’s father is Alastair, who also owns the lab that Macy works for.

The strengths:

The season really shines in its ability to keep things interconnected. Parker’s parents are affiliated with Macy’s work, Niko is investigating the Sarcana, the Sarcana save Fiona, Fiona is needed to summon the Source, etc.

Additionally the character interactions tend to be fairly strong. I really believe the interactions between the members of the main cast, particularly Harry and Macy’s.

The reality warping that changes the timeline in order to save Niko might not have been the easiest, or obvious solution, but it was the most interesting.

There’s an episode with Harry and Mel where they go to the UK that really cements their relationship. It’s incredibly sweet and really shows how much Harry means to the Veras and the degree to which they trust him. It ends strikingly bittersweet and is likely one of the most well-written episodes of the season.

The reveal that the Sacred Flame and the Source are ultimately the same force that seeks an ideal host is very well done.

The last two episodes of the season are extremely strong and subvert expectations, particularly the penultimate episode. Macy takes on the Source, kills Alastair, prevents the apocalypse and essentially becomes a god with the power to massively manipulate reality at will. Maggie and Mel have to rely on the bond they formed with Macy over the course of the entire season to get their sister out of the corrupting influence of absolute power.

The weaknesses:

The show has a bad habit of flip-flopping on character relationships. Harry and Charity are on and off, Mel and Niko and Jada have a back and forth relationship all season. Maggie’s pilot boyfriend is on and off. Maggie and Parker are on and off. Macy and Galvin are also on and off. I just kind of wish that the series would portray a stable relationship.

The powers of whitelighters are somewhat inconsistent. They manage to be stronger than their original series counterparts, but also weaker. Essentially it creates a situation where I wonder why the Elders don’t create an army of immortal whitelighters to support do-gooders. They make more righteous dead people every day after all.

The show has a bad habit of taking back decisions on an episode to episode basis. It’s bad enough where there are episodes where it feels like you miss an episode in-between despite watching episodes back to back. It really feels like writers conflicting over what they want on an episode-to-episode basis.

The sorority plot is stupid. I like Maggie well enough, but Lucy should have shown up consistently in the first half of the season and like twice afterward.

I feel like a lot of the “demon of the week” episodes were wasted airtime because of the pace that the series has been taking. The original series could do that in the first season because the build up to the source took almost two seasons and happened in the middle of the series. The reboot pushed the Source as the big narrative that the first season is trying to overcome. It needed every second of the airtime it had to properly build that up, and I feel like it squandered a lot of it. The finale could have been pretty incredible if they focused more on the lead up to that the entire season.

The Conclusion:

Charmed 2018 isn’t necessarily for fans of the original; it’s for people who watch the CW. There are some cute nods to the original series that you can tell were snuck in by clever writers.

Honestly, I find a lot of problems with it. The show is certainly a little more rough around the edges than the original series. Despite this, I enjoyed almost every episode. It nods to the original, but tries not to copy it and explore its own ideas that branch off from the concept.

I honestly think that if make an effort to take more risks in the second season and branch away from college setting, they can recapture some of the magic of the original.

It’s a seven out of ten from me, but it has potential, especially if they’re willing to commit in the same way that they did in the last few episodes. I’d be all too happy to see more.

#charmed #review #charmed 2018 #charmed reboot #macy vaughn #mel vera #maggie vera #harry greenwood #the cw #chamrand'ded

39 notes · View notes

yvkkao-blog · 5 years ago

Text

Blackboard Prompts

One lump post - might be in other parts of the daybook, but should all be here:

#1:

I have answered this in other entries, but the image that I had of London was one of a fantasy. London is a place where supernatural things happen. It is the setting for books and films. It must be a fantastical place, near mythical. That rather contrasted with the things people would tell me about the weather and the food in London, but I found things like the London fog charming. It gave me a visual of a city draped in a perpetual shroud of mystery. That being said, I knew virtually nothing about London beyond what I know of any big city. I have traveled quite a bit, and big cities often share some things in common, such as public transit, noise, and crowds.

I’m not expecting much of the food or the people, to be honest, but that is because I have a lot of respect for hospitality customs in America. People are often friendly and open to conversation. The food quality is dependent on the place, but usually, big cities have better food options and more diversity. This is not my first trip to Europe, so I have some idea of what to expect. I have not, however, ever been to London, so I might be surprised. I have doubts, though. I fully expect it to be as beautiful as I’ve always imagined, but my faith in people and food is not as rose-tinted. At last, though, I will be able to say that I have been to London, and I cannot wait.

#2:

My experience flying to London was odd, yet typical—an interesting contradiction, which is amusing to me in recollection. I arrived far earlier than I need to at the Pitt County airport, and I felt bad for several reasons. It was nice to meet everyone again, but I can never sleep before a big trip, especially before a plane ride. This is deliberate. I need to be able to sleep on a plane, or the discomfort drives me insane (as do the pressure changes). Usually, I try to sleep for the majority of any plane ride, from boarding through landing. However, TVs were invented, and not only that, everyone gets one on a plane. To commemorate the occasion, I admit that I watched a good deal of British-based TV/film on the way to London. It was a long enough plane ride that I had time to watch TV and catch up on sleep. It was probably one of my more comfortable long plane rides, so I have no real complaints.

As for the first day in London, the first day is always hard to acclimate to. I try to adjust to the new time zone as soon as possible whenever I go anywhere. The first day is always difficult (yes, it bears repeating). People are tired, hot, hungry, overburdened, lost, and overwhelmed in general. I did like getting out to see some of London that first day, however. I want to learn the transportation system as quickly as possible, but I’m not worried. The London Tube is much easier to navigate, from what I’m seeing, than the Metro in Italy (or most other cities). It’s quite time-consuming, I’ve noted. I try to factor in travel time when I’m planning excursions, and this might cut into my plans somewhat. We’ll see how things go.

#3:

I have to say, my initial perception of London has not really changed, even over this past week. Maybe I am jaded from an excess of travel experiences, but I have not really been shocked by anything. I wasn’t even surprised about the scaffolding mummy that is currently Big Ben, the clock tower, and part of Parliament. The same has happened anytime I have gone anywhere; it becomes a familiar frustration and feeling of resignation after a time. You cannot change your timing to such a large degree, so maybe if I ever get the chance to come back to London, something else will be in the midst of restoration.

I have been a bit disappointed by British tea, I will admit. I can be a bit of a tea snob, but I grew up with strong Chinese teas. I entertained the myth that British tea is without peer, but mainly, it seems to be unmatched in expense. At least the pastries are good, and I got a huge kick out of trying London cuisine that I have read about in books, such as meat pies and British biscuits. I think the thing about London that is superb is the architecture, the buildings and structures of old. I would never want to live in a castle—too many steps, and that’s not a mindset that will ever change for me—but I love to tour through them. Seeing a castle in the middle of a modern city never fails to make me feel like I’m standing in a fantasy land. It’s so much fun, and there is history, and more, in every stone. I want to see as many castles, museums, and art as I can.

#4:

I once got into a discussion about “natural” vs. “supernatural” vs. “hyper-natural,” and I loved that topic because the words themselves have certain connotations, and nothing is easy. For me, I make the distinction between natural and supernatural as reality versus fantasy. I try to be honest with myself and to keep separate libraries about the real world and the fantastical narratives. Nature is natural. A magnificent waterfall pouring over a cliff. A bird building a nest. These things usually happen without human contrivance. When not reading fantasy books, I often think of human designs as unnatural. We often appreciate those human constructions just as much. Things like Stonehenge and the Great Wall are precious to us because they are not naturally occurring spaces.

I looked at the London Eye, and it is incredible, but it is the unnatural mimicking something natural. If we want a “bird’s eye view” of London, well, we can’t fly, but humans can build things that will accomplish supernatural goals. We create folklore legends to explain things that defy explanation. Supernatural is something not natural but more than human. I love discussing supernatural tales, learning about where they came from and why they came about. Science often takes away some of the mystery, which can be riveting in and of itself but boring if you like narratives.

#5:

I miss air conditioning. I knew to expect it, but AC might be the sole reason I never want to live anywhere other than the U.S. That lack never gets easier to bear (unless it’s not summer). If I were to create a monster in a novel, it would be wreathed in flames and too hot to bear to be around. It would also probably be from a swamp—with roots from living in a floodplains area, but such is inspiration. I don’t think I would feel bad about acknowledging these things, either.

As for things that have gotten easier, getting to and from the Tube, and the buses, has gotten easier. It is such a common mode of transportation here that it is beginning to feel natural. I’ve only used one taxi, and that was near day two. I miss my car, though. The Underground is terribly loud, stuffy, and generally uncomfortable. I have come to associate travel with discomfort, which makes me think of Richard and Door. They can’t fly like Peter Pan. Even though Door can open doors, they often have to get around the mundane way. It’s nice to come home to creature comforts after a long time away.

#6:

The “monsters” in the novels came as no surprise to me, particularly with A Monster Calls. Ursula le Guinn and Lloyd Alexander, to name a couple, did something very similar in their writing, although I must admit that Ness’s monster was far more three-dimensional as a character, which I approved of. I love narratives and studying narrative structures, but sometimes this makes things predictable, which is also usually fine. Twisting a trope on its ear must be done right. I most enjoyed reading about the conceptions of monsters from “Monster Theory” and then applying those constructions back to our readings. That gave everything more depth, and I loved burrowing into the history, the culture, and the folklore surrounding these “monsters.”

Since I prefer the fantasy genre almost exclusively to read, I often think of going to see plays as a special treat. The play might have the same text, but the company might interpret it in startlingly different ways. I laughed so hard during A Midsummer Night’s Dream; that has always been my favorite Shakespeare play. It was shocking, and it was glorious. The “monsters” were rather more difficult to pin down in those four plays, however. I can make several arguments, but it often boils down to human nature. The same could be said for the poetry anthology. Poetry interpretation is not my strong suit. I prefer to look at syntactical strategies rather than semantic interpretation. A lyric poem is a beautiful thing, and I know that I want the poems in my anthology to make me smile whenever I hear them. Cacophonous discord can be hard to appreciate without the right context.

Time is trickling away, and there is still so much to see and do. It is hard not to be able to read to my heart’s content when traveling, but I know it is important to do all you can when visiting a new place you may never return to again.

#7:

Synthesis for Essay:

I have learned/decided that I want to dedicate myself to the study of narratives. This was not necessarily a new revelation, but the work we have done here has helped to cement the decision. Experiencing London as we read novels and other materials—often featuring London—has been a novel experience, as it were. For my synthesis essay, I plan to use narrative as my theme. I will draw in the study of our readings and class discussion and try to make connections to multiculturalism, children’s literature, poetry, and folklore. Since our readings have covered that spectrum, the difficult part may be bringing in my experiences around London. I want to discuss the bridge between fantasy and reality, and reading fantasy while standing in a real London location might be the perfect time to do so.

I have learned a lot, and I value trying new things. I would like that to be reflected in the essay. I think it is important to be familiar with the place you are trying to write about and/or include in your writing, but more than that, I treasure the little moments when something incomprehensible happens. When the bus breaks down, when the giant raven eats your sandwich, things like that. Those are the moments that make life unique and exciting. The setting is spectacular, but the people and other things in it define those moments. That’s why I think that level of attention to detail is so important in a book, even a novel that is trying to teach an overarching life lesson or twelve. Sometimes, it is the small things that happen along the way that are the most memorable.

My essay will probably include snippets from my daybook entries and speculation on narrative themes and structures. Everything has a story. Everything is a story. The plays we’ve been to, the novels we’ve read, the poetry we’ve shared, and even the London Dungeon—those all are narratives or use narratives. As participants and observers, we make connections and try to delve deeper into these connections. These, too, create some wonderful moments, and I hope that my synthesis essay will properly convey my appreciation for studying narrative using multiculturalism, poetry, children’s lit, and folklore as frameworks.

#8:

Things I will miss in/about London List:

-stunning architecture

-the Thames

-Chinatown

-museums

-parks and gardens

-King’s Cross Station

Things I will not miss in/about London List:

-London Underground and the Tube

-city noises and smells

-lack of AC

-crowds

Some of these things might seem like they clash, but I have my reasons. Why will I miss King’s Cross Station and not the rest of the Underground? Simple. King’s Cross is a hub, and you can go to many other places from there. The Tube lines tend to be more limited, and they’re packed and stuffy. Similarly, I won’t miss the city noises, smells, and crowds of pushy people. I have had to wear ear plugs every time I so much as set foot outside the flat, and the cacophony of people noises makes me want to jump out of my skin. I hate being crowded. I will miss all of the beautiful gardens and parks and historical structures, though. I love how beautiful those are. And I will miss the museums. I think if a city has a museum, it really has something that people should want to come in droves to see, and they’re often splendid buildings.

I will NOT miss the heat. I need my air conditioning, and that’s that. I did love the Thames and Chinatown. The sound of the water is always a balm, and I can never get enough authentic Chinese food. Most of all, I will probably miss interacting with people. I am a bit of a recluse, so getting to spend time with people beyond the classroom is always welcome.

#9:

I’m packing many, many, MANY photos and memories. This has been a unique experience for me. I usually travel with family members. The last time I went on a trip with peers was more than a decade ago. I had forgotten how much fun it could be. Those photos and videos might not be physically in my travel backpack, but I had resolved not to get too many souvenirs this time. In the past, I have been careful to get at least one present for my loved ones, something special. However, we’re all grown now, and we don’t need anything random. We’re all more interested in putting money towards the next big trip. Consequently, I have only a few keepsakes.

What will forever be in my London suitcase is my London suitcase, as it were. I have a travel backpack that goes on every big trip with me, and it is vital to keeping my stuff where I can keep an eye on it. However, I will be toting home a couple of very nice scarves and some books. I will not be toting home a couple dozen protein bars. We always travel with rations, but I’ve never noticed this tactic doing anything except encouraging us to eat out (avoidance). I will be different, of course. I’ve learned and done so much in London, and I think this will have a huge effect on my as a student. I now know what I want to do for research. I keep mentioning this, but it is important to me. And I want to come back to London someday. That might be the best endorsement I can offer. I will always treasure the memories, the people I traveled with, and the things we did. Those cannot be replicated, and I’m eager to share my tales of adventures when I get home.

1 note · View note

abitterlifethroughcinema · 6 years ago

Text

The Wrap, Part II: Return of the Curse of the Creature’s Ghost!

Film Reviews from the 51st Annual Sitges Fantasy/Horror Film Festival

Lucas A Cavazos

It would be of utmost denial to oneself to not take part in the occasional puff of marijuana and/or odd glass or two of red wine whilst shuffling about Sitges during this type of festival. I tell you, in this gayest of cities (and yes, I mean that in both senses of the word), nothing says loving like soaking up sun and guts while having the right side of your brain open. To quote Henry Miller…”The aim of life is to live, and to live means to be aware, joyously, drunkenly, serenely, divinely aware.”

And it is in that vein, I present to you the latest film starring Nicolas Cage, Mandy ###-1/2…Could it be that Nicolas Cage might actually have something interesting to offer now that he’s well past 50 and ready to go beyond simple nut job roles and wannabe-buff, action hits and flops? Last year, this festival premiered the currently in-run and VOD film called Mom and Dad with Selma Blair, and if that was a thing of fun and delight, which is was, this film is much more darkly mirrored and rife with psychedelic imagery, and it must be discussed. To note, it does contain ye olde, ubiquitous screaming-whilst-having-a-psychotic-fit Cage scene, doubt ye not! Set in turn of the decade 80s, Red (Cage) and Mandy (Andrea Riseborough) have removed themselves from the majority of society and live a life of slight isolation, that is until one day, Mandy is abducted by some occult-like sect with grave intentions. Linus Roach (Priest) plays Jeremiah Sands, a man who can call forth demons and demonic creatures, and when psychedelia meets rancour, flames go up and and as they do, someone in them, as well. This is where the film turns into a contemplative narrative tale on revenge and turmoil, highlighted by a tinge of hallucinogens and wasp venom, and I cannot begin to tell you how eerily creepy it is to see Linus Roach after so many years in a role like this that sends chills down your spine in ways that create sheer panic and disgust. Watching Cage take revenge is a joy and wonder, and it should be noted that the film won two of the Sitges 51st Official Selection Awards for Best Director, which went to Panos Cosmatos and Best Actress going to Andrea Riseborough, who also comes up a bit later down below. A piece of rogue psychedelic modern art on celluloid if ever there was one, tinges of Wes Craven, Heavy Metal cartoon imagery and sleep paralysis demons make this Nic Cage vehicle one of the best things he has done in simply years.

Making my way over to The Retiro in the heart of bustling Sitges to screen the noir-like film The Dark ###, I realised that I was late and upon arrival, I was quickly ushered upstairs and had to make do with a single chair propped up next to an upstairs balustrade. The Dark is an eerie piece that preys on the power of the unknown to scare the viewer into wanting to know more about its strange characters…and then the film reveals those secrets in flashback. Despite its title, there is very little in relation to darkness other than the tone of the film and its narrative of teen spirit gone horribly awry. In a former entry, I spoke of how a screened premiere entitled Zoo had encroached upon fresh zombie territory, and until recently as just over a decade ago, zombie cinema was a mostly contained affair, and reserved to a select grouping of films annually. That all changed with the mid-noughties and this latest entry into its subject matter baits us with unexplained tidbits, starting when a one Josef Hofer (Karl Markovics), described as armed and dangerous, makes his way to a rather haunting locale, where death finds him in the form of Mina, perma-resident of this cursed abode in Devil’s Den, a forestal area with a history of hauntings and Mina is that person/monster haunting those very woods. But then she discovers Alex, a blind and also-scarred teen who had been Hofer’s captive, and together the two make off for a disturbing adventure, which borders on heartfelt while also sadistic. If anything, this piece certainly toys with emotions and good cinema ought to do just that.

The Sitges Fantasy/Horror Film Fest is divided into many distinct sections, such as the main Official Selections, Noves Visions,which promotes newer filmmakers and diverse subject matter, Melies Feature and Short Film sections, Asian Focus, Animated Fare, The Orbita promoting mixed big budget and indie fare, Fanastic Discovery Features promoting obscure (and often deeper) cinema, the B and Z-grade fare of the Midnight X-Treme selections, as well as, the Critics Jury Selection. All of that to say that there is nary a specific genre within the fantasy film/horror movie genres that is NOT touched on by this film festival. Winner of the Orbita Award for Best Picture went to the US studio outfit entitled American Animals ###-1/2 and what an astounding effort it provides its audience into a peek at the rather modern mindset of the ageing millennial. Telling a 2004 real-life story by British director Bart Layton, he of the haunting 2012 film The Imposter, this 2018 effort documents how four white youths from good, hardworking families failed to fully realise a masterminded effort to steal one of, if not, the world’s most valuable book. The multi-volume Audubon Society’s Birds of America, not to mention Darwin’s first edition copy of On the Origin of Species were just two of the books to be included in a heist that Transylvania University students Spencer Reinhard and Warren Lipka (played to perfection by Barry Keoghan and Evan Peters) foolishly decided to rob from the special collections library department. To say that the subject matter is mid-level at best might be a tad harsh but only just so; that said, the way Layton maps out the mental state of these middle-to-upper middle class boys should give all of us a hint as to where these boys, and millions like them, are coming from. The plan of a heist is bred with the idea that their spoiled lives have hindered their true creative identities, and so to tell the story, the director secured interviews with the actual perpetrators and spliced that with top grade talent re-enacting the actual events. The film cannot be heralded as a thing of wonder, as it truly details the dumbest snafu of a heist ever on American soil. But what it succeeds in showing is that insecurity, lack of identity, and seeds of doubt are rife amongst today’s young adults, and if we are not fomenting stronger individuals as siblings, educators, parents, et al…we will continue to create these spoiled races of highly non-autonomous individuals. Give them some tough love, for goodness sake. Worthy of a view for any parent or educator.

AND NOW FOR SOMETHING COMPLETELY DIFFERENT…Lars Von Trier, he of the Dogme 95 cinema movement and so many odd, jarring and sometimes good celluloid pieces…see Celebration and this film as examples please…he of the “understanding Hitler, I’m a Nazi” joke he pulled a few years back at Cannes, which then had him banned for half a decade, premiered his latest work last week at Sitges. It a doozy of a film that garnered some decent attention and a European and Spanish distributor, for sure. It’s been a hot minute since we’ve seen Matt Dillon on the big screen, and the brief time with Uma Thurman at the film’s beginning is a dark scene of beauty…and then not. Here’s the thing, as always we are dealing with the tortured mindset of a Scandinavian director who seethes out his demons onto celluloid, but that alone does not make it exceptional art, although I truly believe he thinks it is. In turn, I truly believe that von Trier is quite likely a mitigated sociopath. That said, while there is a bit of reverential awe to his masterful ways of movie manipulation, it is his use of dark comedy that sets this film apart from other recent fare he has brought us. Matt Dillon plays the titular character and while amusing at first, he soon grows languidly repetitive and chauvinistic, and while there are scenes of comedic brilliance, such as an OCD-related clean up job that leads to an incident with a policeman or the bang-down job he does trying to dispose of bodies in a freezer, it is impossible for this student and teacher of history to not associate the fact that we are watching a man, a DANISH man no less (do your research as to why I emphasise that, chirren) play out his darker inner recesses for our viewing interest, but it surely makes me aware that we are also likely dealing with his pathos. That’s what really makes The House That Jack Built ###-1/2 really scary.

Lastly this entry, Nancy ###-1/2 brings up the actress Andrea Riseborough again, and I would like to note that often at awards season and ceremonies, actors get rewarded for an individual work, which often plays testament to all the other work they’ve done in their field that year. As Riseborough won Best Actress at this year’s Sitges Fantasy/Horror Film Fest, I believe this piece was much more deserved than the aforementioned Mandy for that award. I also find it compelling that she as an actress chose to make two, back-to-back films about tortured women with their names as the movie titles. Nancy is a quasi-failed career woman tending to her mum who suffers from some neural disorder and who is unintentionally suffocating her daughter with complaints and stress…but when mum dies suddenly, what is Nancy to do but discover that she was likely abducted years earlier and soon begins to associate herself with a long lost child case never resolved that might fit her theory about herself, however strained it is. What ensues is a emotional tour de force involving the parents of the long missing child, played to award-level precision by J. Cameron Smith as Ellen and Steve Buscemi as her hubby Leo. When Nancy sets up an appointment to meet with them, they take a shining to her at once and while awaiting DNA results, take her in to stay with them, including with her cat to which Leo is allergic. As scenes go by, even though this might be more in order in an indie film fest rather than here at Sitges, you also understand that the fantastical elements lie in the mind of the titular woman, as well as, in director Christina Chloe’s softly brutal touch. A film meant for those who understand healing and suspension of (dis)belief, Nancy gives Andrea Riseborough a chance at becoming a celebrated actress to emulate.

#abitterlifethroughcinema #sitges film festival #mandymovie #TheDarkFilm #americananimals #the house that jack built #NancyFilm #matt dillon #steve buscemi #nicolas cage

1 note · View note

avoutput · 7 years ago

Text

Gaming And Film: The Tomb Raider Example

A golden opportunity has arisen. I get to make another example of the star crossed genres, Film and Video Games. Two narrative forces bound by their visual narratives, but separated by a single major mechanic: Control. But a new challenger has arrived, or rather a returning challenger, another gaming legend. Tomb Raider. The gods have deigned Square Enix another chance at the big screen after their massive flop at the box office over 20 years ago with their own classic title, Final Fantasy. Gaming has made its way back to the big screen with Tomb Raider “parenthesis 2018 film” starring the legend herself, Lara Croft. Well, it stars a real actress, Alicia Vikander, but you know what I mean. Gaming has its own stars. Previously, this role had been played twice before by Angelina Jolie in Lara Croft: Tomb Raider (2001) and Lara Croft Tomb Raider: The Cradle of Life (2003). This gave me a very unique opportunity to take a jump back in time to gaming’s initial foray into the world of the Third Dimension (3D), its replication of cinematic narrative structure, and all of the freedom that comes with giving the player the ability walk around in that space, instead of just watching. It was during this 3D polygon era that cinema took a fundamentally flawed stance to the translation from game to film; they tried to duplicate as much of the minor details as possible in effort to reanimate and profit from a movie going audience. In doing so, they sacrificed the heart of good cinema trying to capture the flavor of the game, hoping that the only thing fans would need is a the skeletal carcass of their favorite game.

By the time that first installment of Lara Croft: Tomb Raider (2001) had hit the screens, there had been 4 full games released, none of which would ultimately become the story of the film. They surmised that simply making a film that imitated its main attraction, a (British) woman who raids tombs for treasure, would suffice. And in a way, this might be the most correct course of action. There had already been series of similar action films to take from, including Indiana Jones, James Bond, Mission Impossible, and Jackie Chan’s Armor of the Gods. With the games already pulling inspiration from these existing films, intentionally or not, it doesn’t seem that unreasonable to think that a film version of Tomb Raider would succeed at the box office. All they needed was to eject the male as the lead and pop some abnormally large breasts on an otherwise perfectly attractive female figure. But then the real question becomes, why make this film based on a video game character at all? Obviously brand recognition and the all mighty dollar, both domestic and international, but wouldn’t they need more to really entice both the fans and the uninitiated alike? And this exposes an issue with the Hollywood mindset that, while I have come to understand, I can’t abide or come to terms with. Forsaking the heart of intelligible film making in favor of a return on investment. When art and capitalism mix in which the art comes second, the audience usually loses, and the house of Hollywood usually wins or breaks even. Because for the audience, what’s on the line is a chance to make a good video game into a great movie, and if that movie flops, then investors look at not just the game franchise, but all gaming films as a risky or unworthy investment. Stranger still however, is what ended up happening with Tomb Raider. It returned big on its initial run, almost certainly powered by Jolie’s star power. But when you make a cheap, flimsy version of a game into film, and it works, it becomes the model that all video game films run on. We end up being served a deformed representation of something that, in my opinion, never stood a chance of becoming anything more than a cash grab. (See: Resident Evil (2002) starring Milla Jovovich)

At no point does Lara Croft: Tomb Raider (2001) or its sequel try to become more than a cheap representation of its source material sewn together using existing action-adventure movie tropes. The original games themselves offer little more than an exploratory cave diving, gun slinging shell for people to play in. Games (at the time) were not as harshly criticized for taking huge leaps in story, tone, or realism, but the films never really took that risk. In the game, Lara shoots at bats, bears, and wolves while cave diving. Yet, both Lara Croft: Tomb Raider (2001) and The Cradle of Life (2003) look indistinguishably bland compared to other films of their era like LOTR: Fellowship of the Ring, Swordfish, Training Day, Jurassic Park III, Pirates of the Caribbean, Kill Bill, The Matrix Reloaded, and many more. Granted these budgets are a bit more inflated, even their smaller moments are better than Jolie’s biggest. In fact, some of the stunts seem to come right out of the Mission: Impossible series. Taking a game thats little more than an empty, fun action platformer and trying to build an entire film franchise around it without adding some spark of originality or building any sense of a larger world for its characters will ultimately lead to a lackluster, forgotten film. Anybody watching these movies today are only returning because they might be a fan of the franchise, which might be the only win under the belt these films, but it’s another loss for gaming, gamers, and film.

Moving into the next generation of consoles and computers, as games become more modern, they began to more deftly integrate cinematic techniques. Game creators can control the world, the camera, and the characters with complete freedom, unlike film which has to worry about pesky things like props, actors, and reality. In 2013, Tomb Raider was re-imagined by Crystal Dynamics and published by Square Enix. They created a more sleek and vibrant world that embraced a mixture of realism and paranormal. Lara was modernized, made a bit more youthful, and her skillset was more refined and deadly. She went from a caricature to a character and her adventure matured into something a bit more robust. Coupled with expert pacing, the new Lara Croft moves through her deadly environment and faces foes head-on in the same vein as Indiana Jones. Only she is a bit more willing to pull the trigger or sling an arrow. I don’t want to continuously gush about this game, so to summarize, I will just say this game was by far one of my favorite action games in this last generation. This reinvisioned version would become the basis for the recently released Tomb Raider (2018), and I was excited to see what kind of adaptation would spring forth. After the many, many Hollywood failures, had gaming finally caught up so completely to cinema, possibly even overtaken it, that it could allow for an easy transition from game to film?

As much as I don’t want to spend the entirety of this review discussing the differences between the film and the exact game it was based on, that is technically the point of this article. Still, I’ll spare you a lengthy diatribe and stick to the key differences between Jolie and Vikander’s Lara Croft. In this version, the realistically re-imagined Lara Croft is crafty with a bow instead of guns, inexperienced instead of an expert, and hasn’t attended any higher learning in pursuit of abandoning her heritage to find her own way. These also happen to be departures from the Crystal Dynamics’ Lara Croft as well. However, I found that these character changes spoke the language of cinema better, making for a more relatable character, especially for late millennials and gen Z at which this version is aimed.

Tomb Raider (2018) stars the new Lara Croft (Alicia Vikander) as she takes on the challenge of living life as a broke young woman in the big city. But, a twist, the young lady is broke by choice, turning down the opportunity to take up her family name and with it , the family business. Angry that her father, Lord Richard Croft (Dominic West), never returned from a business trip and is considered dead, she mounts a personal battle against her heritage. Through a series of turns, she finds a final message from her father in a secret bunker outside her family estate, warning her to burn all of his research just in case some bad guys come looking for it. Instead, of course, she sets out to find the last place he was said to have visited, enlisting the son of the man, Lu Ren (Daniel Wu), whose boat was to have taken her father to his final resting place. At this point the film finally takes a similar shape to the game, introducing Mathis Vogal (Walton Goggins) as the leader of digging team sent to find the treasure of Lady Himeko’s tomb. Vogal has been employing as slaves shipwrecks and treasure hunters who have come to the island in search of such a treasure.

At this point, I would like to praise this film for actually making a decent adaptation of the game. The actors are great, the story is pretty tight, and they do a pretty good job keying you into just how far Lara will have push herself to get what she wants. Unlike Jolie, who was characterized as a fearless expert, Vikander is an inexperienced young girl who struggles at almost every turn. Throughout the film, she misses, she loses, and she takes hits, which is similar to the game, except when you lose the game, it had some pretty incredible death scenes. But in a way, I personally liked her Crystal Dynamics video game persona better. She was both experienced and still struggled. She used her wit and cunning to elude her captors. In the 2018 film, Lara spends most of the runtime falling into situations and just kind of winging it, but not with tools or weapons found in the game, mostly just through luck. My only other criticism is a bit of a spoiler if you have played the game and not seen the movie or have seen the movie but not played the game. But here it is. The film rejects the concept of the supernatural, which is one of the biggest reasons I wanted to see the film after having played the game. The game continuously hints at the supernatural, but only towards the end do we actually see it in action, which totally caught me off guard. I half expected some ancient local tribe would be behind some form of sabotage from the shadows, like in an episode of Scooby Doo. But how does this stack up as a video game film? Can we build a new legacy from here?

Well, unlike the Jolie era, video games and film are not so different anymore. In fact, film often doesn’t have the runtime to contain an entire video game plot into a single movie. The golden age of television would be a better place for your favorite game stories. Japanese anime has been doing this for years with shows like Star Ocean EX and Persona 4 The Animation. In a very short time, film has been surpassed as an entertainment medium in size, scope, and runtime/playtime. But the one thing that you can feel has really changed in Hollywood is that they no longer underestimate the need for authenticity in the transition. Gaming films are getting better because gaming has become better. The stories they tell are taken more seriously, and triple-A titles have bigger budgets than some triple-A films. Gaming companies could be looking to invest in adaptations to film, seeing them as an extended product to their own. With that dollar power and some guaranteed butts in seats, we should be able to expect better films. I would like to imagine if both Godzilla and King Kong can be re-imagined into great films that also get to share the same universe as a plethora of tokusatsu monsters that gaming can get of its ass and produce some better films. Still, it was only 2 years ago that Resident Evil: The Final Chapter (2016) was released, ending a series of terrible video game films that did nothing to elevate games as critically good films. Assassin's Creed (2016) also didn’t help.

The thing is, we don’t need video games adapted into film. Gaming has its own thing going on, and when it’s done right, it does it all bigger and better. But, if we are going to continue to see them pushed into film, let’s at least get a few things straight. First, there is a balance between authentic and creative. Take care to have a vision for the film beyond simply taking a bird’s eye view of the game and applying that visual to the film. The old Tomb Raider was built on the back of action genre films we had already seen and for the most part lacked any sense of creativity. It was authentic to its source from afar, but up close it offered nothing for fans beyond a push-up bra and two guns. Second, be aware of the scope of the game’s world. More and more games are open world, meaning that the world is going to be as much a character in its own right, so don’t forget that it exists. Even older games can have a vibrant world. A good example is Castlevania, which saw an amazing mini-series produced by Netflix. The story was small, but it never betrays the world in which it takes place. Now more than ever, the lines between gaming and cinema have all but been erased, so narratively, you can take a much more direct approach to the translation. Feel free to rewrite the story as long as it doesn’t forsake the game’s characteristics. Games are no longer manufactured for control alone, they have well thought out characters, themes, and motifs, all with a joined motive. If Lara Croft has taught us anything, take calculated leaps, not blind jumps into the abyss.

#Film #Review #Articles #Tomb Raider #Gaming #Alicia Vikander #Lara Croft #Angelina Jolie #Playstation #Playstation 4 #PC Gaming #Steam #Streaming #Xbox #XBONE #XBOX 360 #PC

2 notes · View notes

tarragon-hq · 5 years ago

Text

Thank you, chef.

I don’t take inspiration for granted. When times are grim and the world is a sad and scary place, inspiration is difficult to come by. In bouts of depression, inspiration is a fantasy. I feel lucky to have had multiple sources of inspiration recently and realized all are women from the world of cooking. Julia Child, Niki Nakayama, and Nadia Hussein have all served as incredible sources of light. Each of them has a completely different background and impact on the world around them.

Julia Child was someone I became fascinated with in college after watching the Julie & Julia movie, as well as an almost constant stream of her cooking shows aired on PBS through Twitch. Growing up, my single greatest fear was peaking. The thought of amassing a boat load of “potential” in high school and college and then having none of it amount to anything was the most horrible possible future. Julia to me, was someone who had found her calling later in life, almost 40 years old, created an empire around it, and never stopped. She was known for her hard work and infectious personality and never peaked. Reflecting on this today, I am not as afraid of peaking anymore. The idea of it is still unpleasant of course, but the heart clenching fear has dissolved and is left with a quiet assurance that I will get to where I am meant to go. It’s interesting to have noted that shift within myself, and yet Julia still captivates me. Her inspiration to me now is in someone who lived fearlessly and unapologetically in pursuit of her dreams and passion. I think a lot of Julia’s motivation was pure personal drive to be the best and to be remembered for being so. That passion was not fueled by money or power, but personal growth both as a chef and as a human being.

I learned about Niki Nakayama while listening to an Asian Enough podcast during a midday podcast walk with ry in quarantine. I was immediately drawn into Niki’s story as someone who has thought deeply about her personal and intersecting identities and uses them as a source of expression in communicating her vision to others. When talking about her identities as Japanese, American, or queer, there is never any question of whether or not she is “enough.” She knows she is and uses it as her strength and roots.

Nadiya Hussein was the winner of the best season of the Great British Baking show. I cried watching her win. ry cried. Mary Berry cried for goodness sake. Nadiya is different from the other two women in that her journey has not always been rooted in a sense of self-worth. Nadiya is a star both because of her talent and character. Her self-expression is more community focused and a lot of what she does is centered around how she can provide for those that she loves. Caring for others is a strong part of her identity and it shows in the content she has produced that centers her family and uplifting the Muslim community. Her strength is rooted in the village that raised her and has blossomed into her own identity.

I am inspired by each of these women and hope to emulate the impact they had on me. I want to hold Julia’s fiery passion, Niki’s strong sense of self and authenticity, and Nadia’s absolute warmth and community mindset. It feels really good to see women, people of color, and LGBTQ communities represented and it gives me hope that I might be inspiring one day too.

-hcw

#byhcw

0 notes

davidjodonoghue-blog · 8 years ago

Text

Colonising Common Sense: The Right’s greatest victory and how the Left can fight back

In the political discourse of British politics at the moment there is a vision of a fertile, uninhabited political land which drips like honey from the mouths of political correspondents. Mystic, smoky visions of its verdant plains come back piecemeal in euphoric, Oxbridge-inflected descriptions from the brave explorers who venture to the dark and strange hinterlands from which the disastrous horror of Brexit has been the only audible communique in recent years. The modern missionaries of the City and Westminister have to daub the saliva from their lips when they think of this perfect, unspoiled potential political colony known only as “The Centre”.

This mysterious ‘centre ground’ is treated with reverence by the journalistic set which writes about politics not as a force by which to achieve positive change in the lives of ordinary people but instead views politics in the way one might view professional sports: a self contained system whereby a number of elite players attempt to wrest power from one another through the use of celebrity personalities and archaic systems of strategies. The most coveted play of all in this horse-race political reporting is the play on this ‘centre ground’, the supposedly objective and rational middle path between right and left ideological deviations. Of course this avaricious slobbering over the centre ground has emerged from the now reconfirmed leadership of Jeremy Corbyn, a figure portrayed as a raving, lunatic leftist out to seize our freedom and property.

This, of course, is an illusion.

Talking to any person who counts themselves as a member of the radical left will quickly throw up a view of Corbyn which is positive but also sceptical. The idea that Corbyn’s proposals, if not his historical political character, are somehow ravingly far-left is an absolute nonsense. Corbyn, much like his counterpart Bernie Sanders in the states, presents a vision of state-backed, welfarist social democracy that often is not meaningfully to the left of the domestic positions of the likes of Dwight Eisenhower. It is this sober-eyed look at the actually political coordinates of the positions of the supposed “raving Trotskyites” of whom the media warn us which reveals for us the true nature of the “centre ground” which the Corbyn leadership have supposedly ceded to the Tories: it is in fact intensely right wing.

The greatest victory of the right wing in the past forty years has been their colonisation of the ideas of “common sense” and “the centre ground”. The things which we regard as being “beyond ideology” or somehow objective and rational are in fact, by the standards of the post-war welfare state, intensely right wing propositions. The most famous proponent of the centre ground in recent political history was of course Tony Blair with his “Third Way” philosophy which was in fact an extremely right wing doctrine riven with rolling back the meagre protections the post-war state had built up for the destitute and unashamedly increasing state power when it came to surveying citizens and waging atrocious wars. The right has taken the supposedly apolitical idea of ‘realism’ for themselves, ensuring the reality that we appeal to is one of hyper-privatisation and endless war. The once lunatic doctrines of the fringe right, whether the law-and-order neoconservatism of Leo Strauss or the dream of corporate tyranny feverishly spewed from the mouths of Milton Friedman or Friedrich Hayek, have in fact become our political reality. The Right have captured common sense and by their mastery over what appears as our reality have allowed criticism of capitalism or imperialism not only to be portrayed as misguided or incorrect; but in fact as aberrations from reality, as arguments which are tantamount to critiquing the law of gravity.

But what can be done about this?

In the coming decades the revolutionary left is faced with two monumental crises which we must seize, talk about and respond to if democratic and left wing notions are to shape the new reality. The first is automation and the mass unemployment crisis. Political analysis is useful because it can reveal that things which we take as the factual basis of reality (Capitalism is an efficient economic system, war is necessary, women are inferior) are in fact feverish ideological statements which come from the paranoid fantasies of a privileged mindset. One of the most closely held tenets of modern capitalism is that everyone much be engaged in productive and directly profitable work in order to have value to our society. Our view of work and employment under capitalism has drifted beyond the rationalism into the fetishistic, we elevate work to the point where we murder the disabled in an attempt to manufacture them into worthy and productive citizens. But all that will soon change. The age of mass automation of at least the services sector of the economy will force us to rethink our notion of employment. Self driving cars and McDonald’s service kiosks are only the glowing larvae of a technological locust swarm which will eat away at our notions of the necessity of productive work as a moral force. Increasingly we are coming to believe that machines will soon replace human workers at a greater rate than people can be upskilled. We will soon be confronted with a future where many people will be unable to find employment and there we must make a decision, do we continue our moral belief that human beings must crush their spirits pouring hot water through beans on zero hour contracts in order to earn the right to a meagre existence, or do we absolutely affirm a human being’s right to exist by virtue of their birth and give them the space and resources to pursue their own interests and innovation? The first choice, the natural choice of our current right-wing paradigm, is a world of contradictions and misery where society is run by those who already have the wealth to control the machine-mind which has replaced human labour. The latter, the choice which the left can seize and consistently affirm, is the one which could lead to an age of endless creativity and genius, where human beings are unshackled by the moral requirement of soul-crushing and unnecessary employment.

The second great reality-shaking event in the coming decades will be climate change. The political centre ground has reacted to the scientific data and the emaciated polar bears first by shoving their fingers in their ears and lately by proposing corporate paydays posing as meagre reforms such as emissions trading. But the left can grasp this apocalyptic vision of environmental destruction in the same way the religious right of Ronald Reagan and Bush used the vision of Christian rapture to drive terrible wars in the Middle East The looming reality of climate change can be a useful tool to critique one of the centre ground assumptions of “rational politics”, that only the unending, vampiric exploitation of our global resources by corporate oligarchs can drive forward the engine of human technological progress which always has been, of course, a machine run on the blood and tears of the developing world, sucking in the lifeless bodies of Third World civilians and growing more sophisticated in its harvesting of their livelihoods and environments the more of them it cripples in its cogs. The left can use the first awful pangs of environmental destruction to articulate a new vision of human progress founded on eco-socialist ideas; intertwining human technological development with a push for environmentally conscious innovation that drives the tendency toward popular democracy as communities are intimately connected with the decision-making process surrounding the use of their land and resources.

For now ‘common sense’ is a barren idea, appeals to reality are merely the surrender to a reality created for us by the wealthy corporate elite. The left should not retreat into the comfort of the social democratic past, but seek to forge a new future by utilising global upheaval to make the reality of the coming decades a defiantly left reality; a reality of abundance, democracy, sustainability and justice.

1 note · View note

samjbatty · 7 years ago

Text

An exploration of the ways in which the narrative of Dracula responds to late-Victorian attitudes toward the “Other”.

Dracula is an 1897 gothic horror story written by Irish author Bram Stoker. It is one of the earliest novels in the Vampire Fiction genre and created many of the hallmarks of the genre still seen today. The novel tells the story of a group of Englishmen hunting down a Transylvanian vampire to prevent him from spreading the undead disease in England. Due to its context as a piece of Victorian literature written at the beginning of the decline of the British Empire, the book is often read as an allegory for immigration, reverse colonization and race mixing. Other critics have read the story as a criticism of the concept of a powerful “New Woman”. In this essay I aim to analyse both these interpretations, specifically with Count Dracula as an allegory for reverse colonization and the female vampires as criticisms of feminism.

It is important to note that Dracula (Stoker, 2008) is often categorized as a number of genres beside vampire fiction. These often include gothic fiction, horror but most importantly invasion literature. Invasion literature is a genre, popular between 1817 and 1914, which told stories of hypothetical invasions by foreign ‘others’. The genre was fueled by the anxieties of the British people as their Empire began to weaken. This is often where readings of Count Dracula as an allegory for reverse colonialism come from. Critic Arata believes, “A concern with questions of empire and colonization can be found in nearly all of Stoker’s fiction… [However] Only in this novel does he manage to imbricate Gothic fantasy and contemporary politics.” (1990) Arata also states that a reader cannot deny the political overtones of Dracula’s immigration to England. Lines such as “This was the being I was helping to transfer to London, where, […] he might, amongst its teeming millions, satiate his lust for blood, and create a new and ever-widening circle of semi-demons to batten on the helpless. The very thought drove me mad” (Stoker, 2008) seem to be written as to echo of the racist rhetoric of a jingoistic patriot. Stoker depicts the character of Dracula as savage, animalistic and uncivilized in his vampiric actions as a tribute to how vampires had been portrayed in the past but also to reflect the stereotype of foreign people in Victorian Britain. Arata (1990), calls attention to how the archaic, primitive forces unleashed by Dracula “threaten to overturn the progressive, scientific world of contemporary Britain.” Stoker highlights this in the character of Abraham Van Helsing, a doctor who performs many efficient and successful blood transfusions – a relatively new operation in 1897. Stoker also has many of the characters state that they cannot believe such events are taking place in the Nineteenth century. From these examples, Stoker seems to be very overt in his portrayal of Count Dracula as a primitive ‘other’ invading Britain.

However, I believe that Stoker’s portrayal of the anxieties of invasion in a much more subtle way by depicting Dracula as a gentle mannered aristocratic man when he is interacting with Harker earlier in the novel. This parallels the fear of the undetected invader, in which the foreign ‘other’ masquerades as something unthreatening before taking over from the unsuspecting victims. This concept is supported by the line “"Well I know that, did I move and speak in your London, none there are who would not know me for a stranger” (Stoker, 2008) in which Dracula explains that blending in in London would help him to be a better predator. Stoker’s Dracula was the first novel to include shape shifting in the vampire’s repertoire of abilities, lending further credit to this reading. This allows the character to transform himself into animals such as rats, bats and wolves as well as a sentient fog in order to remain undetected. (Stoker, 1990) Another interesting aspect of Stoker’s vampire is that he is one of the first who does not sleep in a coffin but in a crate of Transylvanian soil instead. This highlights the depiction of Dracula as an immigrant who must sleep in his home soil to gain the power he needs to corrupt the Englishmen.

An aside on this interpretation is that the heavy use of Christian symbols of faith, such as crucifixes, holy water, communion wafers and rosary beads, as means to weaken or defeat vampires implies a pro-Christian stance on religious conversion. This can bee seen in instances such as when Van Helsing “placed the Wafer on Mina's forehead, it had seared it—had burned into the flesh as though it had been a piece of white-hot metal” (Stoker, 2008). It is clear to see how the vampiric curse could be read as a new foreign religion and how Stoker utilizes the traditional vampire slaying methods to show that a strong faith in Christianity can overcome the ‘other’. This ties closely with the idea of reverse colonization as it takes the same concept of the ‘other’ but places their take-over in a religious context as opposed to a political one. Using this idea of religious conversion, Stoker creates a number of female vampires throughout the novel who seem to some critics to represent a criticism of the “New Woman” and the very early suffragette movements.

The female vampires in Stoker’s Dracula (2008) play a much larger role in the novel than one would assume. There are many more female vampires than male and the main plot centers on keeping Mina, Harker’s fiancée, from fully turning. Since the release of the book, critics have argued over Stoker’s position on the female characters. Judith Wasserman explains the “fight to destroy Dracula and to restore Mina to her purity is really a fight for control over women” (1977). Senf disagrees, praising Stoker for seeing beyond the dichotomy of “angels or monsters” (1982), in his portrayal of Mina. Senf believes that whilst Stoker is not misogynistic in his treatment of women, he is “ambivalent […] to a topical phenomenon – the New Woman” (1982). However, to most readers, this rings false with the treatment of every character but Mina Murray.

Many critics, such as Demetrakopoulos, believe the story can be split into two parts, each centering on a “different type of woman” (1977). The first vampire encounter in the novel is between Harker and three sisters. Harker describes the women as “thrilling and repulsive” (Stoker, 2008), using animalistic imagery such as “the red tongue as it lapped the white sharp teeth” (Stoker, 2008). This is typical of how all vampires are portrayed throughout the novel – they are primitive and carnal. However, Stoker also portrays the female vampires as very overt in their sexuality. The sisters are shown bending over, arching their necks and licking their lips in a suggestive manner. Swartz-Levine points out that as the female vampires become more sexual they become less and less humanized as Stoker switches from using possessive pronouns – “her lips” – to the definite article – “the lips” (2016). Swartz-Levine believes that the behavior exhibited by “Dracula’s brazen—and therefore monstrous— women do not adhere to standards of middle class morality” (2016). This behavior extends to the first ‘type’ of woman at the center of the novel – Lucy Westenra.

Lucy is a young English woman who is stalked and converted by Dracula when he first arrives in England. She is Mina’s best friend and Arthur Holmwood’s fiancée. Before she is turned Lucy is seemingly portrayed as a proper young woman, stereotypical of Victorian expectations, however during a conversation with Mina the reader comes to realize that she is much more naturally sexual than her friend. Stoker shows this through the way Lucy views marriage - stating “Why can't they let a girl marry three men, or as many as want her” (2008). Lucy’s ‘indecent’ behavior is implied to be the very reason she fell victim to Dracula. The result of this reading is that Stoker is condemning Lucy’s attitudes towards sex and as a punishment worsens them. As a vampire Lucy is portrayed very similarly to the sisters; she is violent and sexually aggressive. Stoker’s disapproval of an openly sexual, female character fits with Victorian attitudes, as Demetrakopoulos explains, “In the Victorian view, only fallen […] women enjoyed sex” (1977). Lucy’s sexuality reaches its peak in her death scene wherein Arthur pierces her heart with a wooden stake. Lucy becomes “The Thing” further dehumanizing her in the same way as the sisters (Swartz-Levine, 2016). Stoker begins to highlight Lucy’s mouth, using language that conjures images of sexual organs. With lines such as “Then he struck with all his might” (2008), and the phallic imagery of the stake, the scene is often read sexually. Despite the moment evoking images of an act of violation and an allegory of gang rape, it is clear that Stoker wants the reader to view the event as chivalrous. This suggestion is the “Victorian version of [the]‘blame the victim’” (Swartz-Levine, 2016) mindset that is seen so often today towards victims of sexual abuse.

The focus of the second part of the novel, which Demetrakopoulos refers to, is Mina Murray (1977). She is a schoolteacher who is engaged to Harker. It is often argued that Mina is the most complex character. This is perhaps because she is the only female character whose perspective we see certain events from. She is described as intelligent and caring displaying both stereotypically masculine and feminine qualities, underscored by Van Helsing’s comments that Mina “has a man's brain […] and a woman's heart” (2008). When the group slaughters Lucy, Dracula begins to pursue Mina as his next victim. It is interesting to note that when Mina is forced to drink Count Dracula’s blood, she is described as “a kitten”, which infantilizes her maintaining Stoker’s perceived notion that good, proper women are desexualized (Demetrakopoulos, 1977). Mina is severely idealised throughout the novel, acting as caregiver for most of the fully-grown men in the group. It can be argued that this is Stoker’s way of showing that Mina is a caring individual, who also has the competency to keep up and work well with Professor Van Helsing. Critics such as Demetrakopoulos argue whether Mina was truly supposed to be a feminist or “New Woman” as many of her references to the movement can be read as either mockery or discomfort. Swartz-Levine argues for the latter, stating “Stoker helps to characterise his heroine by her discomfort at [the “New Woman’s] frankness [toward sex]” (2016). She argues that having Mina be a “New Woman” but also less sexually open than other members of the group, creates a multi-faceted character. When Mina drinks the Counts blood she does not fully turn but instead has a telepathic link with him, which Dracula uses to control her. However Mina, despite being scared of the link, manages to reverse this with Van Helsing’s help allowing them to track Dracula down. In general, Mina seems to be Stoker’s attempt at a strong, feminist heroine yet his Victorian ideals of female sexuality and stereotypes of women as reserved caregivers prevent him from succeeding.

In conclusion, Stoker’s vampires are definitely indicative of Victorian opinions towards the ‘other’ in terms of gender and race. Count Dracula is depicted as a Transylvanian aristocrat who immigrates to England in order to spread his undead curse. This reflects the Victorian anxiety of reverse colonialism as well as religious conversion. Arata, in particular calls attention to the primitive forces, which Dracula uses to “threaten […] contemporary Britain” (1990). In the same way, Stoker’s female vampires reflect the Victorian attitudes towards women. This is a much more complicated allegory as the gender politics of the time were very complex. Stoker tries to create a complex heroine in Mira but ultimately falls into the trap of idealising her whilst presenting the other female characters with no depth whatsoever, as evil seductresses. I believe that supernatural beings will always be indicative of society’s attitudes towards the ‘other’ and that Bram Stoker’s Dracula follows this notion completely.

-----------

References and Bibliography:

Arata, S. (1990). The Occidental Tourist: 'Dracula' and the Anxiety of Reverse Colonization. Victorian Studies, 33(4), pp.p.621-645. Available at: Leeds Trinity University Library http://lib.leedstrinity.ac.uk [Accessed 25 March 2017].

Craft, C. (1984). "Kiss Me with those Red Lips": Gender and Inversion in Bram Stoker's Dracula. Representations, (8), pp.107-133. Available at: Leeds Trinity University Library http://lib.leedstrinity.ac.uk [Accessed 25 March 2017].

Demetrakopoulos, S. (1977). Feminism, Sex Role Exchanges, and Other Subliminal Fantasies in Bram Stoker's "Dracula". Frontiers: A Journal of Women Studies, 2(3), p.104. Available at: Leeds Trinity University Library http://lib.leedstrinity.ac.uk [Accessed 25 March 2017].

Light, D. (2012). New Directions in Tourism Analysis: The Dracula Dilemma: Tourism, Identity and the State in Romania. 1st ed. Abingdon, Oxon: Routledge. Available at: Leeds Trinity University Library http://lib.leedstrinity.ac.uk [Accessed 25 March 2017].

Morgan, S. (2007). A Victorian woman's place. 1st ed. London [u.a.]: Tauris. Available at: Leeds Trinity University Library http://lib.leedstrinity.ac.uk [Accessed 25 March 2017].

Pikula, T. (2012). Bram Stoker’s Dracula and Late-Victorian Advertising Tactics: Earnest Men, Virtuous Ladies, and Porn. English Literature in Transition, 1880-1920., Vol. 55(Issue 3.), pp.p283-302. Available at: Leeds Trinity University Library http://lib.leedstrinity.ac.uk [Accessed 25 March 2017].

Rose, A. (2008). Gender and Victorian reform. 1st ed. Newcastle upon Tyne, UK: Cambridge Scholars Pub. Available at: Leeds Trinity University Library http://lib.leedstrinity.ac.uk [Accessed 25 March 2017].

Scott, N. (2007). Monsters and the Monstrous. 1st ed. New York: Rodopi. Available at: Leeds Trinity University Library http://lib.leedstrinity.ac.uk [Accessed 25 March 2017].

Senf, C. (1982). "Dracula": Stoker's Response to the New Woman. Victorian Studies, Vol. 26(1), p. 33-49. Available at: Leeds Trinity University Library http://lib.leedstrinity.ac.uk [Accessed 25 March 2017].

Stoker, B. (1897). Dracula. [e-book] Oxford, Oxford University Press. Available at Planet eBook http://www.planetebook.com/ebooks/Dracula.pdf [Accessed 25 March 2017]

Swartz-Levine, J. (2016). Staking Salvation: The Reclamation of the Monstrous Female in Dracula. Midwest Quarterly. Summer 2016, Vol. 57(Issue 4), pp.p345-361. Available at: Leeds Trinity University Library http://lib.leedstrinity.ac.uk [Accessed 25 March 2017].

Wasserman, J. (1977). Women and Vampires: Dracula as a Victorian Novel.

Midwest Quarterly

, 18(405). Available at: Leeds Trinity University Library http://lib.leedstrinity.ac.uk [Accessed 25 March 2017].

#essay

0 notes