Meta Writing: "Finding balance as a television viewer and academic, a look at viewing under the narrative lens versus the psychological lens"

I’ve spoken on Supernatural’s utilization of a mirrored narrative to tell the repressed story of its main characters many times. My blog is full of these essays and discussions.  As a meta writer for Supernatural, this is what I've focused on writing over the years because I found this to be where the complete “full picture” of the story of the show was to be seen.  If Sam and Dean weren't openly talking about their issues then one could simply look at the monster/victim character foils within the MOTW episodes and listen to them talk where Sam and Dean either wouldn't or couldn't.  If one wanted to understand the main characters and their situation better, the show practically forces one to do this.  Or rather, I should say, I felt it forced me to do this.  And for a long time I got used to looking at the show through this type of narrative lens, where practically everything told the story of something else.  I wasn't looking at Charlie Bradbury anymore, I was looking at a narrative mirror for the issues of Sam and Dean in 9x04, where the witch symbolized codependency and Dorothy wasn’t a woman trapped by her own mechanics, but rather a sounding board for Sam and Dean trapped by their own.  

I must say, it's not a terribly fun way of looking at the show, but I thought, back then, a practically necessary one. Supernatural is post modern, after all, and frequently has episodes pointing out its own function as a story.  Robbie Thompson did this a lot (9x18 is forever one of my favorite episodes) and I remember someone asking Robbie about the mirrors of 8x11 on Twitter back in the day, where 8x11-8x16 represented one of the most blatant romantic coded arcs Dean and Cas has ever been given in the structure (as viewed through the "narrative lens", but I'm getting there!).  The person asking Robbie what his intent with the mirror was was clearly viewing the show the way I was (with the narrative lens) so I was curious as to Robbie's answer.  And when Robbie did answer, I remember being disappointed.  He told the person, "That's just how I saw the story of Charlie and Glinda."  This was a recognizing of the what I’m going to call the psychological lens (the surface, real life), but not the narrative one.  No acknowledging of how they functioned in that arc as a narrative mirror for Dean and Cas, nothing.  I felt that as a writer using such a structure it was almost his duty to at least acknowledge it.  But it was like... none of them ever did. Supernatural clearly used it, hell, still uses it, but it's only ever mentioned in passing, in showrunner interviews and the like.  

Probably every documented case of anyone with creative content creation control referencing it (the mirror narrative) is on this blog.  Back then, I was very obsessed with validating what I was seeing in any way I could.  It was like figuring out a secret, a mystery, a truth I absolutely knew to be real and then gathering as much evidence as I could to prove it because people were telling me that I was wrong and I knew I wasn't.  Stuff like 9x15 even bent characterization to cater to it, to sometimes the complete confusion of the actors.  And so that's what meta became to me.  Using the narrative lens I viewed and wrote on the narrative structure at length, writing standalone essays on the matter, discussing it in threads and speculating using the structure to extrapolate how likely certain plotlines were.  Sometimes you're right, sometimes you're wrong, but usually not about the big stuff, the stuff a season was building towards.  The longer I studied the show the better the better I got at recognizing its patterns of repeat.  And for minds like mine, with autism, which are best suited for pattern, these patterns just come so naturally.  For me Supernatural is honestly so predictable, for many reasons, the most of damning of which is right in the structure and its inability to go past a certain point.

I say this word a lot, "structure".  My family hates it.  What I really mean is its overall design.  When I talk about the structure of a car I'm talking about how it looks: the color, the features, the durability, the points of safety, whether it drives smoothly or not.  Things like that.  When I talk about the structure of a story I'm talking about how it looks as well: how it is paced, the significance of the characters involved and whether they and the themes involved within the story itself "teach" the main characters anything, what relationships are formed and how they transform each individual character, (and for visual mediums) the overall visual presentation of light/color, how the setting visually informs what the characters are doing or saying, what the characters are designed to learn through the show pointing out such steps in various ways and then cleanly implementing traditional arcs that change them in some way (usually to betterment, but not always).  All this is structure, a story's design.  Visual mediums like theatre and television have an obvious visual element meant to be incorporated, designed to support (and not work in place of) the story being told. Analyzing a book is not the same thing as analyzing a television show.  Analyzing a television show is much, much more complicated.  Books contain one author and one editor (usually).  Intent and meaningful storycraft is usually easy to decipher. If design in detail matters, the author provides that information. Television, on the other hand, involves hundreds of people refining and creating on a tight deadline. This makes deciphering meaningful story intent particularly tricky.

Discussing the structure, the story telling elements, using that knowledge to speculate or write essays giving a reading of the text (what the term “meta” generally refers to) is what we'd call viewing the show through a "narrative lens", or rather, in the case of television, a "television lens".  It's when you watch the story and realize that you are not looking at real life.  This is easier for something like cartoons (moreso when humans are completely absent), but a little harder for the brain to actively distinguish when looking at something that could *almost be real* (as in, live action people in a familiar setting).  Understanding how fictional rules are different from real life is only half the story though because real life must be accounted for in visual storytelling. I’ll explain what I mean because I’m not talking about behind the scenes stuff. Since being sent an ask about the current state of the meta community (which I still occasionally write for but don’t personally follow anymore aside from following my friends @mittensmorgul and @elizabethrobertajones) I’ve been thinking about this a lot. The fact that we’ve lost a lot of voices over the years as a community of narrative academics is, I think, the root of the challenge currently facing the meta community.  With so many lost voices and angles there's a significant sort of echo chamber that begins when you get people together that all view the show through the same lens against a lack of diverse readings.  In this case, the narrative lens and the Destiel reading.  You see, the problem is the show, as it exists now, isn't always so rigidly written through the narrative lens like it was in Carver era, it's now written primarily through the real life lens.  I find this to be especially true in Dabb era showrunning.  

Regarding the meta writing community and the fandom's two main shipping sides, there’s also a huge disconnect, fostered over YEARS of discord in acknowledging subtext designed by writers for both factions, both readings, and, of course, the arguments over intent (which is usually unknowable unless a public record is made and even then a lot of academics ascribe to “Death of the Author”, particularly given the collaborative nature of television production, so...). Wincest subtext gets scoffed at or ignored, derided for not standing a chance at being canon by the Destiel side and the Wincest side often mocks the Destiel side in such a profound way (pun intended) as to suggest (or outright say) the subtext isn’t even there at all to mean anything in the first place (which is ridiculous).  Again and again I also see (and it's never really worded this way) a disconnect over the lens the show is viewed with: narrative (televison) vs psychological (real life).  The most major arguments I see are between fans watching for the Wincest reading and using the psychological lens versus fans watching for the Destiel reading and using the narrative lens.  

There’s rarely any common ground between these two distinct groups, with the Wincest psychological viewers acting more as critics than providing anything resembling essays of their own.  Maybe they are out there.  I haven’t seen them.  Most “good” Wincest meta died out relatively early. We, as a viewing and academic community, are a house divided in so, so many ways, even on each side of the chasm.  Maybe I have no right to make this post. I don’t know. I don't like things that treat fandom like it's something to be picked apart and examined. This kind of examination makes me... uncomfortable. I keep thinking about that ask the other day asking me what is going on in the meta community though. So I'm going to try and tackle it.  The fact is... we are not a whole and we are not supposed to be. That’s the point. Getting a single exact read off any text, let alone getting a group of people on the same page to watch with the same lens, is practically impossible.  But lately the divide and inbalance has gotten to be so bad that we aren’t even talking to one another anymore, not really. We are all just yelling a lot of misunderstandings back and forth. So... what is happening to the meta community? I'm going to try and talk about it.

Okay.  So I've explained what structure is and what a lens is.  So now I'm going to talk about balance because the current issue plaguing the meta community is a lack of voices discussing and viewing things in balanced way. And I'm going to focus on ship related meta writing because let's face it, that's where a lot of the most passionate arguing is.  Since meta is usually written with a bias for a certain reading we most often get four distinct readings:

A --The Narrative lens: Wincest

B --The Narrative lens: Destiel

C --The Psychological lens: Wincest

D --The Psychological lens: Destiel

Post S12 when Dabb era started I personally made the decision to switch from writing/watching through B to D instead.  A narrative lens focuses on things like mirroring, set design, character arc reading.  A psychological lens focuses on things like characterization (usually with a focus on where a character is and not how they are designed to change), seeing the characters as real people, rather than narrative constructs.  Lynn from Fangasm is a good example here and I don’t think she’d mind me mentioning her here.  Lynn, as a psychologist by trade and J2 fan by choice, views the show through a Wincest psychological reading, in total opposite from me in Carver era Supernatural, viewing with a narrative Destiel lens.  We disagreed on a lot on stuff as you can imagine.  I read her from time to time but she didn’t read me. Now, sometimes viewing one lens too much can make you blind to other things (not limited to readings).  Frequently she’d hate and not understand things that I felt were explained perfectly as viewed through my lens.  It's the difference in seeing Charlie Bradbury personally go through some stuff vs seeing Sam and Dean's issues elaborated on in the complex abstract.  However, for me, post S11 I found myself way too stuck in the narrative lens.  I felt I wasn't even seeing or experiencing the show the way it was designed anymore.  And I wasn't.  And being that Supernatural is part of my job I knew I had to reorient myself.

In Dabb era in particular, there's text and communication between the characters, which means that a narrative lens isn't strictly needed for viewing anymore.  When S12 was airing I had the absolute pleasure of meeting Robert Berens and talking to him at length about meta.  My friends @ibelieveinthelittletreetopper​ and @nicky36​ were with me and the post is on my blog somewhere.  Berens is my absolute favorite writer for the show.  I talked to him about the narrative lens and how stuff like what he wrote about Mary leaving in 12x03 lost its emotional resonance with me because I knew she was leaving for contractual reasons, rather than general characterization ones.  It was a problem with me, rather than a problem with the writing itself.  It's watching a puppet show and instead of paying attention to the story, staring at the strings the whole time.  I knew I had to learn to stop that even before talking about it to anyone.  We also talked about 9x06, which was my favorite S9 episode as a Cas fan!  I remember I talked about the season's theme of consent issues and I mentioned something from the divine reviews I wrote about a consent reference 9x06 made through a pop culture reference about the sex practices this random island had.  He wrote the episode and chose this island to reference.  I thought surely he knew what I was talking about.  I was complimenting his cleverness, after all.  And I'll never forget what he said to me: "You know, meta writers are often far more clever than the writers are themselves."  It means we, as pattern seekers to themes (in the case of S9, consent themes), can pick out any kind of pattern if we are simply looking hard enough for it.  And some things that we think are intentional, are simply coincidental, even within the written screenplay. After talking to Robert Berens that day I never looked at meta writing the same way again and began to work towards switching my viewing lens.

That's not to say viewing the show through the narrative lens is bad, or wrong. It's valid and a fucking important way to view the show, but equally important is realizing that sometimes you need to take a step back and consider other readings and lenses, too.  So I stopped focusing on pop culture references and their thematic associations.  I stopped looking at the set design as a primary storytelling point and regaled it to a secondary support point.  I stopped looking at who Dean and Cas were mirroring and started looking at what they themselves were actually saying to each other, doing together.  I realized that all the mirrors in the world didn’t matter if Dean and Cas weren’t actually talking to one another and physically in the same scenes together.  All the romantic coding in the world through the visual presentation and mirror structure would not take the place of real life escalation.  And I found looking at it and talking of the show in this manner, was getting beyond exhausting, especially when I ended up saying the same thing over and over.  Carver era made the narrative lens necessary to view Destiel, while Dabb era has made it practically irrelevant. Even now I can still see these storytelling elements and comment on them in passing but mostly for me they started working like an overlay in tandem.  And it provided something I hadn't had in a lot time watching: clarity.

Concerning mirroring, I've seen that often the Cas!fan Destiel side focuses too much on this (like I used to) through the narrative lens because Misha isn’t a lead therefore Cas isn’t in every episode so he often exists in this narrative space within the mirrored structure of the show (also called us seeing Destiel parallels).  Through the continued use of the mirrored narrative, the show makes it so Cas fans (who watch primarily for Cas) must look for him there when he’s not physically present in the episode, desperately so in some cases. A Wincest reading, however, has the benefit of J2 being leads and present in every episode, with the reading enjoying touchstone psychology updates/deepening usually in every episode (though yes, Sam/Dean scenes have been cut drastically this year because of contractual reasons). Mirrors for the brothers (good and bad) are easily ignored completely (unless extremely heavy handed) because they are physically there for each other in every episode. Because of this priority watching divide (and handicap on the Cas fan’s side) I believe this has lead some meta writers to focusing too heavily on this element of Supernatural’s storytelling (or otherwise the symbolic narrative), to the point they sometimes even focus on it over Cas’ physical presence without really realizing it.  And other fans do the opposite and/or ridicule them.  And both types of fans and focuses are what I'd call being "out of balance".

On the flip side of discussing the impracticality of viewing primarily through a narrative lens, I'm going to also discuss how it's impossible to view solely through a psychological one, like so many “antis” in Supernatural fandom do.  How many times have we heard, "You are disrespecting the character's sexuality by doing your analysis!  Dean says he's straight so you must accept he is!"?  I know I've seen it a lot.  It's heavy on the fans that favor a Wincest reading through a psychological lens. This type of argument treats the character, Dean in this case, as REAL, instead of a fictional construct subject to other mechanics within storytelling.  This is because the fan is viewing the show primary through a psychological lens and thinks the same ethnics of real life people apply to fictional constructs such as Dean Winchester. This is simply not true.  You don’t judge a real life person’s sexuality based on the colors of their shirt!  What’s wrong with you?  It is quite impossible to disrespect a fictional character. As a viewer/academic, you can only really feel your understanding of them is being disrespected.  In the end, Dean is still very much a fictional construct and thus, is not subjected to being viewed strictly under a psychological lens especially since a medium of storytelling like television and screenplay use visual elements and other narrative devices to also tell the story of the character.

Mel sent me several old posts with some examples. In real life the mailman damaging my mail and delivering it late one day isn’t symbolic of my messed up internal issues as a person. It’s just a crap thing that merely happened one day (even if I muse it feels like my own personal symbolism). I, unlike Dean, also don’t put on the same shirt every time I’m about to make a bad decision.  When May rolls around I don't worry about the world maybe coming to an end each year, but Sam and Dean probably dread it.  When I decorate and paint my walls I'm looking to create a certain pleasing aesthetic for the sake of it being pleasing, not for the sake of displaying the current problems plaguing my inner psyche. Or maybe some people do this to some degree, idk.  Mostly, no.

Supernatural does indeed put storytelling clues in the wallpaper, but usually the intention is not as far reaching as some people conclude.  And it’s in it’s own created language. Regardless, you can’t write a story with wallpaper alone.  At most, you can simply look at it and guess something small ahead of time (like hourglasses signifying time travel). I'll use 11x06 as an example. In this scene we have a demonic liar getting interrogated in a room with Gabriel’s wallpaper from Changing Channels because the demon is trying to trick Sam and Dean into releasing him and saving his meatsuit instead of kill him (since Carver realized he needed to refocus the Winchesters onto saving people after S10, which, idk, maybe he realized how heartless they were seemingly becoming by choosing each other over the world so much, anyway...). Anyway. In 5x08 Gabriel used that entire episode to trick and trap Sam and Dean in a fabrication. Trick and lies.  There’s your thematic tie in. I remember some people just immediately saw that wallpaper and thought it meant Gabriel was coming back when instead it was a simple "beware of trickery" thematic callback. Under the show’s silent storytelling language when this wallpaper is used, it means we are being lied to and tricked.  This is all the wallpaper is meant to invoke.  Sam immediately realizes this in the same scene.  The silent storytelling here is just a fraction ahead of the textual storytelling.  And that’s what silent storytelling is designed to do.  Looking at wallpaper for clues on character development is a whole different analysis problem because Supernatural, by very much all appearances, want Sam and Dean to develop as slowly and as little as possible because the bulk of fans watch for their issues, not to the resolution thereof.  The show doesn’t know what Sam, Dean, and Cas look like past a certain point of development and they are wholly uninterested in exploring that.

But back to wallpaper, interpretation, and 11x06.

A request for this wallpaper was probably not in the script.  Screenplay usually puts as little detail into the script as possible because they simply trust Jerry Wanek and his design team to do their jobs (and Jerry, in fact, usually disregards certain script directions in favor of his own ideas as better symbolically worked into the show).  AU!Michael’s church was originally a concrete bunker and Billie’s minimalistic fate library in 13x05 was originally a country cottage.  Jerry is given extreme leeway on SPN (with I think only like 6 of his decisions have ever been vetoed he told us), but only because he’s so in sync with the show’s thematic presentation.  I’m going off topic again because I’m supposed to be talking about fandom.  Sorry.  Back to 11x06 (again). Gabriel is such a fan favorite, however, that this (look out for tricks) was not the basic thematic message a lot of fans took away.  No, the message they took away was Gabriel was probably coming back soon. I remember speculation continued about that for weeks.  When at the time there were absolutely no plans for that during production. This reading, I can say with confidence, was absolutely unaccounted for.  Jerry Wanek’s whole department is quite literally kept in the dark about future storylines. He’s told me this himself. By the time production for an episode rolls around they have a few scripts ahead maybe, nothing more. This is why Jerry was confused as hell about Asmodeus being a shape shifter in S13, because he didn’t know Gabriel was definitely coming back and that Asmodeus was siphoning Gabe’s powers. Poor Jerry just thought Buckleming was just butchering the canon for fun (I mean... this does happen so...). If there’s an intentional visual motif present, it either draws on some simple visual theme from earlier (tricks and 5x08 vs 11x06) or it’s part of the language of the show as written in the screenplay.  It is very much something Supernatural does.  Just not in such a complicated way, and one that definitely doesn’t conform to real life.

Real life ≠ Fiction and Fiction ≠ Real life

Do we see yet the limitations of relying too heavily on one lens over the other when viewing and analyzing media?  How staring at the wallpaper can blind you to your psychological understanding of the characters, and how likewise, thinking of the characters as real people can just as well blind you to what the story is trying to tell you using a complete framework as a thoughtful examination of human expression and experience? You have to see it all and all at the same time to get a good picture.  If you are going to write about the show then somewhere you must find balance or risk going blind. Television, most of the time is about creating stories that feel real, fourth wall breaks aside.  The average television viewer is honestly not sitting there seeing Charlie Bradbury as Dean and Cas', Sam and Dean’s issues or whatever.  They see her simply as Sam and Dean's nerdy little red headed friend who is coming to help them out with something.  Writers often write through the narrative lens, but realize that most people watch through the "real life" one.  

This psychological lens is not only accounted for, but it is generally catered to all of the time.  Significant storytelling is therefore always in the psychological lens because the truth is television rarely wants you sitting there figuring out futrue storylines.  It operates on you wanting to WATCH to see what’s next.  They hate fans like me who can guess major plot points ahead of time. The truth is they want you to suspect certain things, but not expect them.  The difference is a bit complicated and I extracted my discussion of speculation based on structure out of this post for cohesion.  I hopefully make a separate post on it because I think I pretty much got the S14 finale figured out at this point.  As much as I love, LOVE and have written on the narrative lens, it is not how the show delivers its primary narrative, especially here in Dabb era.

Go through and rewatch S8-S10 of Castiel (or better yet, Dean/Cas) only scenes and really look at what the show is giving itself. Then look at the difference in S11-S14, paying close attention to the difference in S9 over S14.  For those immersed in the subtextual and mirror narratives with Destiel, this is an extremely good exercise, especially if you are someone who really believes or hopes the show will (eventually) convert the subtext into undeniable romantic text at any point (hint: Cas and Dean have to be physically together in scenes in a way that allows for escalation). Note that I don’t say canon here for a reason. Based on compounded narrative character mirrors (meaning mirrors repeated at least three times by various writers and can be deemed "significant" because they are witnessed by either Dean or Cas, though lbr usually Dean because we most often get these in the physical absence of Cas in an episode) and subtext (used to compare and explain Dean and Cas’ feelings towards one another), Destiel is already subtextually canon. Hell, without the mirrors, it’s this almost through romantic tropes alone.  Supernatural is way past something like Korrasami, that got declared canon through subtext, mirroring, and Word of Gay.  Destiel has honestly been way past this point for a long ass time, just like Dean being a canon drug user.

Both things are subtextually canon through different visual/dialogue/mirroring storytelling elements, but I'd consider each canon nonetheless, yet still easily ignored/misunderstood due to various degrees of disbelief or ignorance, usually based in a gap of the viewer’s understanding as informed by their own experiences and/or a lack of understanding concerning how television writing works differently from real life experiences of the same nature. The term "psuedocanon" is something I adopted back in S10 (I believe it was) to talk about the exact undeniable/deniable nature of Destiel within the split academic writing/viewing community.  There’s no right or wrong about something being subtextually canon and television writing accounts for this viewing disparity in every significant narrative. Read that, then read it again because it’s so often the core of so many fandom arguments to the point I wanna rip my hair out. Right now, Destiel is not a significant narrative in the show.  It’s not an obvious plotline.  It’s what we’d call a secondary plotline, yet one that often drives action (usually in the form of Dean and/or Cas moping around in various ways). You don’t really need text of either (not the nature of Dean and Cas’ relationship nor the true nature of Dean’s relationship to drugs) to watch and understand the show on the primary surface level, well... except lately when the show points out how Sam doesn’t understand certain things between Dean and Cas (13x03, 14x12) but even then the show seems content to let us be just as oblivious as Sam there.  

If I’m going to make a comparison here, the show is content with you selling you a car, but it is also content with you not completely understanding whether or not it has cruise control even as an option. The important thing is that you understand they are selling you a car.  Personally I really want and need cruise control, but it’s not a deal breaker for me like it could be for some.

Now, we don't have Word of Gay like Korrasami, but I think... I think a lot of people need to stop trying to prove themselves right about Destiel being subtextually canon through continuously, in a way that denotes hyperfocus, pointing out the new ways in which it is by discussing the show mostly (or even solely) through the narrative lens.  I honestly believe we, as a community, have written enough on it over the years.  It feels... exhaustive at this point. Meanwhile, the psychological lens is right there and, as I can attest, helps keep your analysis' merits grounded in a way that is more easily explained and personally examined.  The future of Destiel lies there. I don't think there are many of us out here writing on the nature of the Destiel narrative that are doing it because it's popular anymore.  If we are still writing on it and have been for a while, it's because we genuinely care and we find it fun.  That or we are frustrated.  For me, it’s a little of both.  When meta used to be written, back when queer reading and codings stayed in the subtext, there wasn't all this pressure being put on meta writers about possibly leading people on.  This post by @bakasara​ from back in the day perfectly sums up the situation we, as a community, keep finding ourselves in, only now the situation seems worse. Since these storylines never got text, the fact that they wouldn't was a given.  Now that the television landscape has changed, and Supernatural still remains, with one reading (Destiel) having a chance of going canon over the other (Wincest), the meta writing community of the show is in a particularly interesting place in fandom history where apparently meta writers can be blamed for somehow leading fans on in place of the narrative itself doing this.  

I used to think this was wholly rubbish, but when you have meta writers ascribing writer intent to a product that deals with hundreds of individual intents, some of which have nothing to do with the writing's main intent, in a way that denotes the meta writer somehow knows best, then we do have a genuine problem.  I feel like I’ve been here long enough and studied this fandom and this text to such a degree that I can say that. I don't personally know of any meta writer who does this, whether they are hyperfocused on viewing the show through the narrative lens or not.  Doesn’t matter. I've already said I don't read other meta writers anymore since meta writing as an art form of expression made for enjoyment has shifted beyond my tastes from writing academic essays on a reading into this kind of weird meta writing subset that either simply tags discussions (anyone’s opinion post) as "meta" or otherwise uses this weird analysis/speculation blend in a way that is not clearly separated and/or defined.  Just because I don't follow it, doesn't mean those voices aren't out there.  I think they probably are.  

And it's no secret that I personally lament what the meta writing community has become, even though it still imo has its essay gems.  There are simply a lot of people inexperienced in many things concerning the analysis of media and they are out there telling people that certain things matter that don't and that certain things are right that aren't.  These I have seen.  I remember back in S10 having to correct someone that thought the title of "Story Editor" meant that another writer could edit a script they didn't write.  Television writing isn't like a school yearbook staff.  I don't remember who they were.  But I do remember thinking, "Dear LORD, this person is talking like they know something when they have NO CLUE!  And what's worse, people are believing it!"  The “story editor” title is literally a pay grade distinction on Supernatural. I think most people would be shocked to know Supernatural doesn't even have a traditional writers room.  The writers get together a few times a year and that's IT.  There’s some collaborate efforts made among themselves but it's not like episode meetings among the whole staff are made.  They aren't. They have a certain piece to write and they write it. The writer's room is a dictatorship overall.

So to sum up... While yes, language and knowledge among certain meta writers is a problem, there's also a growing problem with how different readings are coming to depend too much on a single viewing lens. None of that invalidates any of the meta being written if it is what can actually be classified as meta. We need to stop associating discussion/speculation with meta across the board.  If we want people to stop speculating intent over possible future relationships using meta, then say that.  People won’t do it, but say it like this, I beg you. To this hope, I feel like I might as well be talking to a wall on this point. And like I said earlier, many voices have been lost.  And for that, there's really nothing we as a community can do at this point.  Those people are pissed, bitter, or have been driven away at this point. When I first joined the meta writing community in S8 we were very diverse, and now we simply are not.  And I wrote this not to sound like a policing or patronizing wake up call to anyone.  I fucking love meta writing.  It’s important.  I was asked what was happening in the meta community. Here I attempted to answer that in a general way. I tried very hard to talk about my own experiences writing meta, how I viewed it, how I saw the community on tumblr as it started and how I feel it has since irrevocably changed.  Meta is supposed to be fun, providing a certain point of view, nothing more.  By merit, it can't promise anything and shouldn't be confused with speculation.  In my next segment I'm going to discuss speculation, how writing is designed to create suspicion and not expectation.

Thanks for reading and a special shout out to @justanotheridijiton who had to view this meta in its raw unreadable form and who encouraged me to rewrite it and publish it despite my initial desire to write all this out for myself, then just delete it.

This segment features artists who have submitted their tracks/videos to She Makes Music. If you would like to be featured here then please send an e-mail to [email protected]. We look forward to hearing from you!

Xena Glas

Xena Glas is a creator attempting to explore new areas of the artistic world and unravel her human experience through her work. Interested in art of all forms including music, visual art, and poetry, Xena loves experimenting, pushing boundaries, and creating interdisciplinary and thought provoking art. Her music flows through different styles including experimental electronica and indie folk. Often, she finds inspiration in causes dear to her, including mental health, autism, sexuality, and human rights. Her influences and favorite artists include Moses Sumney, Burial, James Blake, Haley Heynderickx, and Lianne La Havas. Her EP Body is out now. "My EP Body describes my experience as a woman with autism, each track dedicated to a different body part and portraying my unique experience with the world,” says Xena. “The title track describes reclaiming my body from objectification and victimization from society and using it as my own source of creativity." Listen below.

Xena Glas · Body

Riches

Intercontinental collaborators, Catherine McCandless and Wynn Holmes, are welcoming 2022 with the release of their second song featuring production from Dan Lissvik (Studio/Atelje). ‘Light Of Dawn’ uses the metaphor of a maypole dance to bring sunlight and celebration into the repetitive and insular routines of our pandemic lives. A child-like, desirous, and imaginative voice sings above pastoral folk, harmonizing with Riches darkness. This song serenades the wash of the creative headspace over the lost and meaningless one. The duo say of the song: "'Light Of Dawn' began as deeply, classically folk, it's lyrics of utter devotion creating a tone that was quite romantic. We sought a discordant tone, achieved by pitching the vocals into a child-like voice, which added an element of darkness to the sweetness of this track. We hope that you enjoy its transcendence." Listen below.

Riches · Light of Dawn

MYTRIZA

Stockholm-based musician MYTRIZA discovers her songs by going through portals to theor worlds. She weaves together electronic dance elements with choir, world instruments and cinematic flavours, with imagery from nature, fairytales, myths and long forgotten magic. A true selfmade artist, she creates and engineers everything herself, and she playfully combines different art forms into a limitless and unique expression. She has just dropped her new single 'Lavender'. 'Lavender' is an eclectic eletro-pop track with ethereal vocals, deep bass and big synths. Her debut single 'Motion' and now 'Lavender' are the first two songs from her upcoming album State of Wonder which will be released later this year. Listen to ‘Lavender’ below.

MYTRIZA · Lavender

Mear

Mear is an indie pop collaboration between singer-songwriter Frances Miller and electronic composer Greg Harrison. Together their music combines catchy melodies and poignant lyrics with their shared love of experimental music. “In 2014, I lost the ability to do a lot of things I'd previously taken for granted,” explains Frances. “I wrote ‘The Order’ during my early experiences living with a post-viral chronic illness, at a time when I was grieving the loss of my health. I found I couldn't read for more than a few minutes a day and a short walk around the block could leave me bedridden. ‘The Order’ was an attempt to voice some of the pain and loneliness of that; of not understanding what was happening to me. This single is from our upcoming full-length album, which will be released on April 22. Being diagnosed with a chronic illness is often a long and painful journey full of misdiagnosis and gaslighting, "when nothing's right and nothing's wrong." The song's title is a reference to the loss of control that comes with no longer being able to count on your body.” Listen below.

Mear · The Order

Lou Mclean

Lou Mclean has released her new single ‘Shelf Life’. It marks a fresh musical direction for the singer-songwriter. Gone are the confessional folky ballads of last year’s ‘Locked Down in Leith’: ’Shelf Life’ is a blast of perfect, political pop. In a collaboration with production by Berta Kennedy, Lou tells a story of glossy objectification through a riot grrl pop lense. This song is representative of the emerging sound of ScotPop: fresh, feminist and fun. “Lockdown really allowed me to develop as an artist, and find a network of women in Scotland outside of my own scene, through groups like PopGirlz Scotland,” she says. “The concept for the song came from a writing prompt set out in the GRS SongCircle” (Mclean co-founded the venture with Lorraine Rahmani in 2017). In a space of women and non-binary songwriters, we get to be completely, authentically ourselves. We don’t have to soften our experiences, debate our existence or creativity.”Listen to ‘Shelf Life’ below.

Ex-Nemesis

Based in south-east London, UK, Ex-Nemesis is an up-and-coming singer-songwriter and producer marrying pop, rock and indie influences. Her desire to stay anonymous has allowed her to delve deep into the joys and anxieties of navigating your late teens/early 20s in this day and age. After years of recording demos on GarageBand then Logic Pro X in her bedroom, she has decided to start sharing her musical journey with the world. ‘Lessons’ is her debut single, out now. “I started writing 'Lessons' in June 2020 as my birthday was approaching and I was reflecting on the last few years,” says the artist. “'Lessons' is about feeling behind in life. Feeling like everyone your age is moving on with their lives but you are still stuck in the same place. But it isn’t meant to be a sad song. More of an acceptance of a flawed past and the celebration of a hopeful future. You can’t go back in time, so you might as well forgive yourself for the mistakes you've made.” Listen below.

Ex-Nemesis · Ex-Nemesis - Lessons

ASHERAH

ASHERAH is the electronic pop alias of Miami-based singer, songwriter, producer, and composer, Ariel Morer. Produced in collaboration with left-field electronic music composer, Medulasa, ASHERAH’s debut EP, Ephemeral, is a coalescence of unexpected creative forces telling a highly personal tale of the grief process, through shimmering echoic sound design and haunting vocals with nods to Purity Ring, Lights, and Grimes. ASHERAH’s debut single, ‘Holy,’ is out now and her subsequent EP, Ephemeral, is due out March 11, with cover art by 3D artist Mea Adoryan. Listen to ‘Holy’ below.

Allie Lune

Allie Lune is a Spanish-Colombian multi-instrumentalist and singer-songwriter whose poetic musings have a wholesome and youthful charm. She began writing music as a young teenager, experimenting with her self-taught guitar skills and exploring the world of putting together poetry and sound. Having developed her musical abilities since her days of writing soft songs in her bedroom in southern Spain, Allie’s heartfelt lyric writing and sweet, memorable melodies are nothing short of captivating. She aims to reach her listeners’ hearts through her music, encapsulating the hardships of becoming an adult but without taking herself or the world around her too seriously. Born in the UK and raised in a multicultural household, Allie’s inspiration can be found in a number of different artists, such as George Harrison, Natalia Lafourcade and Cariño. She is most heavily influenced by the indie popscene in Spain, as her own music sits happily in  the ‘tontipop’ genre. She writes in both English and Spanish. Allie’s debut single, titled ‘all the things i would do’, is out now. This song offers warmth and optimism and is sure to resonate with anyone who has been in love. Written in late 2019, it illustrates the honeymoon phase of a relationship with lighthearted and witty lyrics as well as a catchy melody. Listen below.

Nikkita

Hailing from the suburbs of Perth, budding artist Nikkita brings a raw sense of honesty to the pop EDM landscape with her debut single ‘Looking Up,’ out now. Toeing the line between somber storytelling and anthemic banger, ‘Looking Up’ feels like the song we all need when the difficult edges of aloneness set in. Borrowing from the influences of Flume, Vera Blue and Alison Wonderland, Nikkita wraps her heartfelt words in the heavy undulating synths and thudding beats of future bass. It is chaotic, yet uplifting, countering muted isolation with an air of hopeful defiance. It is a song you can both walk listlessly to and lose yourself dancing to. Recorded between Viking Studios and Grove Studios, Nikkita spent a year trying to unlock the true sound of her debut single before collaborating with Izaac Wilson (DZ Deathrays, Tia Gostelow, Chillinit, Huskii). Nikkita's melodic brilliance and Izaac's unique textures and tones combined to unleash a brooding dance track that builds to euphoria. The results are simply spellbinding. Listen to ‘Looking Up’ below.

Nikkita · Looking Up [Debut Single] - Nikkita

Putrika

Following the success of her first single release, Jakarta-born and raised, Sydney-based Alt-Soul Electronica music producer, singer and songwriter Putrika, is thrilled to release her second single ‘Rain On Tuesday’. It is a song about slowing down when you are moving fast. “’Rain on Tuesday’ was created on a rainy Tuesday morning during lockdown last year in my home studio in Sydney, Australia. Growing up in a big city like Jakarta and currently living in Sydney, there is always an urge to move fast. This song is about appreciating the time and learning how to slow down”, Putrika explains. ‘Rain on Tuesday’ is a combination of multi-layered synths, percussive and groovy beats, ambient soundscapes combined with soulful vocals. Listen below.

Putrika · Rain on Tuesday

Check out more of our latest submissions in the playlist below!

Lauren Lakis - Lead Us On A child of Baltimore, Lauren Lakis grew to embrace the fatalistic spirit of the city with an ever-present and fearless approach to her work and art. The hand-crafted rawness of her sound bellows deep and true, unscathed by the prevailing winds of today's polite rock. Lakis's persistence and growth in the Los Angeles scene can be attributed to her previous bands Hobart W Fink (vocals), Slow Coda (vocals & keys), & LA Nova (vocals, keys, bass, programming). Inspired by the challenges that life throws at you, Lakis purposely immersed herself into experiencing arduous and uncomfortable situations. Having looked up to fearless women as a child, the songstress was determined to live her life as raw, real and unapologetic as possible. “I always aspired to embody those qualities, to strike out on my own, boldly go where no one in my family has gone, to love harder and more passionately” reveals Lakis. Wanting to discover what it’s like to lead the lives of as many different types of people in the world, Lakis spent nights writing poetry with junkies in abandoned warehouses, taught English in Prague, worked as both a stripper and yoga teacher in Tokyo and helped as a mentor for kids with Autism. These challenges gave her a whole new understanding, opening her eyes and learning empathy and compassion for others which ultimately infiltrated her songwriting. FEROCIOUS, her first full-length solo album, is a product of passion. The album is a culmination of these past experiences folded with a recent personal tragedy. In collaboration with producer Billy Burke, Lakis explores the full spectrum of the grieving process against a backdrop of shoegaze inspired guitars, haunting synth swells, deep-driving beats, and lyrics imparted with true candor. All instrumentals were written and performed by Lakis with the exception of AJ Brown on drums and additional guitars by Chris Garcia and Alex Stills. Additional engineering tasked to the talented Chris Kasych (Adele [Grammy], Phantogram, Cee Lo Green), with mixing and mastering also performed by Billy Burke. Thematically, the album narrates the stages of grief in chronological order. With the desire to express something human and honest, Lakis takes it upon herself to say the things that most people feel uncomfortable to say, “whether it’s a lost love, or a new love that sets me ablaze, both are equally inspiring to me”. Leading single ‘Lead Us On’ shines with gritty guitars, resonating melodies and ethereal vocals. While on the track 'Ferocious', simple melodies, prominent drums and haunting vocals highlight the authenticity in Lakis's songwriting. The video for the poignant single features stunning choreography between two lovers, with their motions resembling the trials and tribulations that relationships go through. With candid storytelling, unique vocal prowess and commanding stage presence, Lakis is an artist to watch. FEROCIOUS, the album, is set for release June 22nd via Cavity Search Records. Links: http://laurenlakis.wixsite.com/laurenlakis/epk https://www.instagram.com/laurenlakis https://www.facebook.com/Lauren-Lakis-147064835905359 https://soundcloud.com/laurenlakis

Apple really wants you to replace your laptop with an iPad

New Post has been published on https://soulcrazy.org/apple-really-wants-you-to-replace-your-laptop-with-an-ipad/

Apple really wants you to replace your laptop with an iPad

For the ones nevertheless mourning the lack of the MacBook Air, Apple’s latest advertising push, which tries to convince the arena that the iPad Pro is a complete substitute for a computer or laptop, has likely now not been nicely received. Over 2015 and 2016, Apple refreshed its computer line, introducing a 12-inch MacBook, and upgraded MacBook Pros, seemingly leaving the Air, which has now not even visible a hardware refresh in years, for dead. It’s not clear whether the Air could be revived, but Apple is currently pushing customers to both shells out at the least $1,300 for a brand new MacBook, or $six hundred for the base-model iPad Pro (which genuinely jumps to $850 when you add in its keyboard cover and stylus) for its ultra-modern hardware. Although the iPad and MacBook lines are nevertheless kept separate at the organisation’s internet site, it refers to the iPad Pro as “Exquisite. laptop.” in advertising and marketing on its homepage. There has been no comparable push for its new Mac laptops.

MacBook

Apple’s current advertising campaign for the iPad Pro revolves around answering “real problems” from laptop customers: It highlights real tweets with proceedings people have had approximately their computer systems and responds that an iPad Seasoned might not have comparable problems. It units the iPad Pro up as Apple’s maximum approachable, and beneficial, laptop for the average individual—people who just want to print a single piece of paper, who don’t need to lug heavy laptops to class, or who need to declutter their lives.

Whether or not an iPad Seasoned can truly take care of the same normal tasks as easily as a PC is controversial, but it’s where Apple appears to assume the future of the iPad lies. Sales from the iPad have been trending downward, and what become as soon as Apple’s 2nd-biggest Revenue phase, pulling in over $eleven billion in a single sector in 2013, is now trailing behind the iPhone, Apple’s services enterprise, or even the Mac. For the reason that the iPhone has been getting large in current years (and there are rumours that there will be an even bigger 5.eight inch display phone this year), it’s probably that fewer human beings have a propensity to hold a smaller iPad with them as nicely. The iPad Pro, with its stylus, keyboard, and more effective processor, is greater differentiated from iPhones than different iPad models, so it makes the experience that Apple could try and push it as a 2nd tool to clients. And it’s likely that we’ll listen extra about its future inside the coming weeks.

Apple regularly has a product release occasion in March or April, and reviews suggest that one is coming at the end of this month. Just like the rumours of there being three iPhones launched this year, Apple is reportedly making plans to release three new iPad Seasoned fashions—inside the present nine.7 and 12-inch sizes, and a new 10.5-inch length, in step with MacRumors—all with slimmer profiles than the prevailing fashions. There’s scant extra information available, Although there are rumours that Apple may also take this time to announce an updated iPhone SE—its smaller iPhone, primarily based on the design of the iPhone 5. Apple declined to comment on its launch plans.

Usually, Apple sends out invitations to the media more or less 10-12 days earlier than an occasion, which means that even though invites went out nowadays, the occasion could probably no longer be before March 24. Or Apple should spend its playbook, name a snap press occasion, and send anyone right into a tizzy as they rush to cover something new devices the corporation show offs. Or there might be no event. This 12 month is anticipated to be a bumper 12 months for the business enterprise, that is celebrating the tenth anniversary of the iPhone, and it’s possible that it won’t stick to the same old script it’s followed in recent years. However irrespective of what smooth new aluminium merchandise Apple releases this 12 months, it appears increasingly more probably that the destiny of casual computing, at the least as ways as Apple is involved, appears loads extra like a pill with a keyboard attached, than a conventional laptop. And Apple isn’t alone—Microsoft has been strolling with its Surface tablets longer than Apple has had the iPad Seasoned, and Samsung these days announced the Galaxy Tab S3—each of that have comparable keyboard-and-stylus.

laptop

For Apple customers who certainly use laptops as meant—as computer systems which could take a seat to your lap—it seems the handiest add-on accessories inside the future may be machines that value over $1,000. At the least, they come in some satisfactory steel shades, though.

Computers have constantly been an outstanding device to facilitate conversation and learning for kids with autism spectrum ailment. However, with the advent of the iPad from Apple, autistic youngsters now have an extra opportunity for enhancing their cognitive, conversation, and best motor competencies.

Across the world, several nonprofit institutions and national stage add-ons are offering direct help to households having autistic kids. Those corpora IAD accessories, in conjunction with some tech agencies, have developed some of the satisfactory mastering apps for children that have proved to be tremendous equipment for autistic children. These apps can run on the iPad and sell conversation and learn among autistic children.

Why iPads?

Apple’s iPad gives unequalled flexibility and portability over traditional computer systems and laptops. That is perhaps the biggest reason behind the tool’s recognition. Young kids locate it some distance simpler to run the satisfactory studying apps for kids on an iPad than on a PC. They frequently find computers too bulky to operate. Except, the iPad uses a touch screen that is extra available to kids with coordination and mastering difficulties. Most children, who run the first-rate getting to know apps for youngsters on iPads, locate swiping motif accessories and tapping tonnes less complicated than typing. The device also can go anywhere the child is going. This indicates an autistic baby can continue mastering even as at the go and live calm and targeted.

Helping in conversation

The iPad has proved to be a super device for communique and training. This is one of the motives why many non-authorities organizatiaddaccessories support apps strolling on the device. The fine getting to know apps for children that run on iPads have customizable add-on alternatives and may be tailor-made to the unique needs of an autistic infant. This makes iPads a greater attractive studying tool than the traditional computer systems. Many children, in reality, study the usage of iPads quicker than adults.

The sector of autistic kids is full of imagery in preference to phrases. Using the high-quality studying apps for children on the iPad, an autistic baby can form sentences or even tales using the usage of a string of pictures. In this manner, the child can talk with instructors, mother and father, caregivers and others with none frustration. The iPad’s mobility allows youngsters to apply the first-rate getting to know apps for children anywhere they go.

iPad

Computer systems have turn out to be an important a part of our lifestyles in recent times, and it’s far not possible to assume life without them. The majority use laptops as computing device computers are pretty huge requiring a lot of areas. Also, they do not provide portability which could be very important nowadays. A computer may be effortlessly carried anywhere you go and can be your supply of leisure and staying linked to the world. I will list some steps that will help you discover a computer that is ideally suited to your requirements without burning a hollow to your pocket.

Ask Circle of Relatives and Friends: The easiest manner to research for a PC is by using asking your Family and Friends as they could provide you honest and sound advice. They understand your desires tonnes higher compared to a salesperson who will need you to shop for a steeply-priced computer. Maximum people have a geek pal or acquaintance in our circle who can provide excellent insight and assist you in finding a laptop that meets most of your necessities.

Test it Online: The high-quality reviews and scores can without problems be observed Online on era and product assessment websites. Human beings also write evaluations and maximum of these opinions are written using clients who’ve already used Those merchandise. Except you may usually double Check matters Online earlier than creating a very last selection. Do now not turn away from calling a logo or organisation and get in touch with on their toll-free number to get more information about a particular PC you could have liked. This is a good way to shop money and time and find an excellent laptop at a good buy rate.

Functiaddaccessories: Some other very important element is to understand the add-ons and configuration you need in a PC. If you plan to apply it to such things as going On-line, watching films and a bit paintings it’s far higher to buy a computer that isn’t always too expensive. Most of the laptops in the marketplace nowadays come with respectable configuration and provide excellent overall performance. Take into account that a medium sized PC like 14″ goes to provide a higher battery existence and portability as compared to a fifteen” or 17″ laptop. Compact laptops are less complicated to carry, and this could be an essential issue If you are a common visitor. A few netbooks offer excellent Features, and performance and the high-quality part is that you may get them at surely comparatively cheap charges. Do not pay for Capabilitiesaccessories which you are not going to use and ensure that you get a true cost for your cash while buying a new PC.