BTS ladies night out while shooting the season finale! Love and am inspired by these women. Photo by: Michelle Nolden

WHATS UP WITH THE KEY IN ANNE'S ROOM??

So I was wondering if Nathaniel had any way to escape Lucy's prison in Anne's room, and there are two methods.

Thus far, the wiki says the only way for the prisoners to be freed is if Lucy deactivates her ability.

But, it also says that the second way is with a key. Apparently it turns into some kind of beast when anyone tries to use it, and even Lucy herself doesn't know how to.

And correct me if I'm wrong, but I don't think she's ever used it?? If she isn't going to use it, and if it isn't going to be used, why is it a thing? Is it just there to make Anne's room more mysterious? Or will it be used in the future??

There's a rule in writing I can't remember the name of, but basically it says that if you mention something it'll have to be used later. For example if you mention a gun is in the living room, you're going to have to shoot/use the gun in one of the acts

So is Asagiri going to use it in the future?? Or?? Maybe it has been used and I missed it.

Pollyanna McIntosh as Jadis in The Walking Dead: The Ones Who Live promos.

Another thing the BSD fandom doesn't talk nearly enough about: Fyodor and Nathaniel. What happened there? Surely more than the bits we got in canon; and just this very screwed up dynamic of Fyodor with his Jesus complex and Nathaniel being a martyr first for faith, then for Margret, for sin, there's so much potential there that we aren't realizing!

TLDR: if you make any sort of DOA content/AUs, please, please, please include Nathaniel!

Just finished j.l.b duology debutantes and…..WOW

IF YOU THOUGHT THE HAWTHORNES HAD FAMILY DRAMA/TRAUMA/CRAZY FAMILIAL RELATIONS/ AND PATERNITY PROBLEMS YOU HAVE NO IDEA WHAT THE TAFT AND AMES FAMILY HAVE. IF YOU THOUGHT THEIR FAMILY TREE WAS CONFUSING IDK EVEN KNOW HOW THEIR ALL RELATED AT THIS POINT. ITS A ROLLERCOASTER.

IF YES IS NO AND UP IS DOWN WHO ARE THE COUSINS AND WHO ARE THE HALF SIBLINGS.

WHO IMPREGNATED WHO?

WHO DID WHAT? AND WHEN? WHY!?

Honestly it reminded me that the ship is the least of our worries when it comes to j.l.b ……im truly terrified

Also Sawyer Ann Taft is my favorite person ever. She is now replacing Nikolai Lanstov on my top 5.

Also poor Swayer got into a whole mess but she isn’t getting 49 billion only half a million

Last read:

Title: Supernatural Horror in Literature

Author: H.P. Lovecraft

Translator: Gabriela Ellena Castellotti

Number of Pages: 167

Rating: ★★★★☆

First published: 1927

Read: 22 - 30 December 2022

Thoughts:

Well, I had this book in my tbr list for the longest time and after two attempts I finally got around to read it.

Looking at the title, it makes me think that my professors at university would have never let me get away with a title like that. "Supernatural Horror in Literature" is a really broad subject and Lovecraft, not surprisinly, only mentions European (German, English and French) and United States authors. So his views are rather limited. In my opinion, he should had mention the countries and the time periods that he was going to refer to.

The requisite to be listed and comented favorably by Lovecraft is simply his subjective taste. I didn't find further arguments other that what he liked and what he didn't.

While I didn't expect Lovecraft to mention many women writers, I was still unsatisfied that he only recognized the talents of a handful, such as: Anna Laetitia Barbauld and Mary E. Wilkins Freeman.

In fact, the essay didn't contain much about gothic horror history that I didn't already know, thanks to courses I've taken and books I've read on the subject. However, I think it's a good place to start for someone just beginning with this kind of literature.

“An Authoress and a Viscount”, by Ann Hathorne

This book was kindly offered to me by its author in exchange for my opinion.

⭐️⭐️⭐️

I did not know Ann Hawthorne before she contacted me and I had not read anything by her. So I went into this book knowing only little details of its plot. I did not know whether it was intended as a full book or if it was intended as a novella but my thoughts go along the latter. This book has only one big mistake; its length. And because of that, the book lacked in other aspects. It’s not long enough to have a build up of the romance, there are almost no transitions between the moment the couple meets and the moment they know they want each other. And most of the times the subplots ate the love story when it should have been the other way around.

I am deeply sorry and sad to say this because the writing is exquisite. The story has so much potential that I could see tiny bits of chemistry between Lavinia and Hugh. I would have been delighted to see more because the setting is unique, the characters have potential to be unique, but it’s hard to see where the love comes from, and I don’t mean spicy scenes at all, I don’t need them to enjoy a story, I’m ok with closed door romances or clean, whatever you prefer to name it. But the passion must be there for me too feel it, to make this book memorable.

Lavinia is a successful authoress with one hit book who is suffering “writers block”. She has been working as a second dressing maid for the queen Charlotte for three years. Hugh is a viscount who works for the mad king George III where he meets this young maid whose name he recognizes as the famous authoress and who is being bullied by her superior. He takes pity on her and offers her his aid in finding an escape to court, possibly, by finding her a suitor.

Now that “Queen Charlotte” is being a massive success on tv, this book could have been a suitable recommendation for readers who wanted more of that world, of court plots and gossip… As it is, the book is readable and enjoyable. But it could have been so much more if only it was of a more appropriate length. I insist, the writing style is impressive.

i have no explanation for this au

like matryoshka, one inside another inside another inside another.

Birthright, George Abraham // tumblr user dogsmouth // The Complete Poems of Anna Akhmatova: White Flock //Anne Carson, Nox // A Crash Course in Molotov Cocktails, Halyna Kruk // Herman Melville, from a letter to Nathaniel Hawthorne //tumblr user eridan-amporna // tumblr user boyflesher(deactivated) // For Your Own Good, Leah Horlick // Elizabeth Robinson, Brothers

tag dump! nana's version - 04.

Our days on set with Baye McPherson and Anne Hawthorne are full of joy! Photo by: Spencer Twins

A Lady and a Publisher, by Ann Hawthorne (sweet Regency short story)

Author: Ann Hawthorne

Narrator: Mary Jane Wells

Genre: Sweet Regency romance

An Authoress and a Viscount by Ann Hawthorne - Refreshing Regency Romance

An Authoress and a Viscount is entertaining, well-written, and refreshing Regency Romance with many Regency details and amazing characters. An Authoress and a Viscount by Ann Hawthorne Publication Date : May 4, 2023 Publisher : Ann Hawthorne (Self-published) Read Date : June 21, 2023 Genre : Historical Romance Pages : 142 ⭐⭐⭐⭐ Rating: 4 out of 5. Synopsis A heroine eager for an escape.…

View On WordPress

Interesting Deleted Scenes/Details from The Menu

Lillian wasn't completely exaggerating when she said she put Chef on the map: He had another high end restaurant before Hawthorne, called Tantalus. Got 2 Michelin stars 2 years in, then closed up shop. Isn't heard from again until 3 years later, running a taco truck in Portland. He agreed to the interview only if he could keep his privacy, his own land, and it had to be by the water so he could source his own fish.

It's established the movie star has a peanut allergy during the tour, and this turns out to be setup for the menu's eighth course, where Felicity is ordered to force feed him a dish completely comprised of peanuts so as to kill him through anaphylactic shock.

Anne (wife of man who paid Margot to look like his daughter while jacking him off) actually couldn't eat The Island as is due to a shellfish allergy. Hers was salmon.

The broken emulsion gag escalates to where the servers literally waterboard Lillian with it.

The restaurant has hidden cameras in the dining room, so even if Elsa missed something, it still got caught.

The taco truck Chef was running was, according to him, the happiest he'd ever been, but Margot call him out on it later, asking why he parked his truck at a Food Expo where he KNEW food critics were going to be, if he wanted to be left alone.

Man's Folly was supposed to have more details about a woman chef's actual experience in the kitchen, from harassment to stereotypes.

The women DO get bread with Man's Folly, and it IS as delicious as promised. You can even see Tyler chewing on bread when Chef comes up to confront him afterwards.

Not only did Tyler bring Margot knowing she would die, he sincerely thought Chef was going to spare him. And even when called out on it, he STILL didn't apologize or take it back, because all he cared about was experiencing the menu.

Them all coming to the kitchen to watch Tyler screw himself over wasn't originally in the script. They were just supposed to watch from the dining room.

Margot makes another bid for her life before being ordered to go get the barrel. Which Chef appreciates enough to tell her so.

Margot smiles upon seeing Tyler's hanging.

Lillian realizes she's never going to get to write about this last experience, and THAT ends up being her real just desserts.

Instead of dropping the ashes to set it all on fire, Chef originally drops a match.

We never found out Margot's true fate. The boat literally stopped a half mile away, so she was stuck there.

The last scene is of firefighters combing through the burnt wreckage, and the very last thing we see is the one photo of Chef as a young man, flipping a burger, but happy.

I do find it interesting how people genuinely believe Dazai's going to be the one to defeat Fyodor.

Let's just look at who's defeated major villian's in the series so far.

Fitzgerald was defeated by Atsushi and Akutugawa. Goncharov was defeated by Atsushi and Akutugawa.

Akutagawa kicked Hawthorns ass and than Lucy had him imprisoned in Anne's Room.

If it weren't for time travel shenanigans Atsushi would've killed Fukuchi. Atsushi killed Shibusawa in Dead Apple. Atsushi defeated Gabriel in 55 minutes.

And so on and so fourth.

Atsushi is also the one Fyodor's been trying to get his hands on from the beginning. Fyodor literally just left Dazai behind in France to go to where Atsushi is currently.

And it seems like the dude from the epilogue we saw fighting Atsushi (and than Akutugawa) is what's being summoned.

Not saying Dazai's never contributed to a fight but when it comes to taking villian's down, it's not him doing it.

And even if your talking about Fyodor's ability, there's no guarantee it would even work on Dazai to begin with.

And Atsushi has the ability to seperate a person's ability from themselves. Which would be a neat callback to Dead Apple but I doubt it'll be that simple.

I know it's apparently very easy to forget but Atsushi is the main character. He's the cat and Fyodor is the rat like... Come on.

Advice/hard truths for writers?

The best piece of practical advice I know is a classic from Hemingway (qtd. here):

The most important thing I’ve learned about writing is never write too much at a time… Never pump yourself dry. Leave a little for the next day. The main thing is to know when to stop. Don’t wait till you’ve written yourself out. When you’re still going good and you come to an interesting place and you know what’s going to happen next, that’s the time to stop. Then leave it alone and don’t think about it; let your subconscious mind do the work.

Also, especially if you're young, you should read more than you write. If you're serious about writing, you'll want to write more than you read when you get old; you need, then, to lay the important books as your foundation early. I like this passage from Samuel R. Delany's "Some Advice for the Intermediate and Advanced Creative Writing Student" (collected in both Shorter Views and About Writing):

You need to read Balzac, Stendhal, Flaubert, and Zola; you need to read Austen, Thackeray, the Brontes, Dickens, George Eliot, and Hardy; you need to read Hawthorne, Melville, James, Woolf, Joyce, and Faulkner; you need to read Tolstoy, Dostoyevsky, Turgenev, Goncherov, Gogol, Bely, Khlebnikov, and Flaubert; you need to read Stephen Crane, Mark Twain, Edward Dahlberg, John Steinbeck, Jean Rhys, Glenway Wescott, John O'Hara, James Gould Cozzens, Angus Wilson, Patrick White, Alexander Trocchi, Iris Murdoch, Graham Greene, Evelyn Waugh, Anthony Powell, Vladimir Nabokov; you need to read Nella Larsen, Knut Hamsun, Edwin Demby, Saul Bellow, Lawrence Durrell, John Updike, John Barth, Philip Roth, Coleman Dowell, William Gaddis, William Gass, Marguerite Young, Thomas Pynchon, Paul West, Bertha Harris, Melvin Dixon, Daryll Pinckney, Darryl Ponicsan, and John Keene, Jr.; you need to read Thomas M. Disch, Joanna Russ, Richard Powers, Carroll Maso, Edmund White, Jayne Ann Phillips, Robert Gluck, and Julian Barnes—you need to read them and a whole lot more; you need to read them not so that you will know what they have written about, but so that you can begin to absorb some of the more ambitious models for what the novel can be.

Note: I haven't read every single writer on that list; there are even three I've literally never heard of; I can think of others I'd recommend in place of some he's cited; but still, his general point—that you need to read the major and minor classics—is correct.

The best piece of general advice I know, and not only about writing, comes from Dr. Johnson, The Rambler #63:

The traveller that resolutely follows a rough and winding path, will sooner reach the end of his journey, than he that is always changing his direction, and wastes the hours of day-light in looking for smoother ground and shorter passages.

I've known too many young writers over the years who sabotaged themselves by overthinking and therefore never finishing or sharing their projects; this stems, I assume, from a lack of self-trust or, more grandly, trust in the universe (the Muses, God, etc.). But what professors always tell Ph.D. students about dissertations is also true of novels, stories, poems, plays, comic books, screenplays, etc: There are only two kinds of dissertations—finished and unfinished. Relatedly, this is the age of online—an age when 20th-century institutions are collapsing, and 21st-century ones have not yet been invented. Unless you have serious connections in New York or Iowa, publish your work yourself and don't bother with the gatekeepers.

Other than the above, I find most writing advice useless because over-generalized or else stemming from arbitrary culture-specific or field-specific biases, e.g., Orwell's extremely English and extremely journalistic strictures, not necessarily germane to the non-English or non-journalistic writer. "Don't use adverbs," they always say. Why the hell shouldn't I? It's absurd. "Show, don't tell," they insist. Fine for the aforementioned Orwell and Hemingway, but irrelevant to Edith Wharton and Thomas Mann. Freytag's Pyramid? Spare me. Every new book is a leap in the dark. Your project may be singular; you may need to make your own map as your traverse the unexplored territory.

Hard truths? There's one. I know it's a hard truth because I hesitate even to type it. It will insult our faith in egalitarianism and the rewards of earnest labor. And yet, I suspect the hard truth is this: ineffables like inspiration and genius count for a lot. If they didn't, if application were all it took, then everybody would write works of genius all day long. But even the greatest geniuses usually only got the gift of one or two all-time great work. This doesn't have to be a counsel of despair, though: you can always try to place yourself wherever you think lightning is likeliest to strike. That's what I do, anyway. Good luck!