#having some scholarly merit
Text
An AMENDED Rundown on the Absolute Chaos That is First Quarto Hamlet
O, gather round me, my dear Shakespeare friends
And let me tell to ye a tale of woe.
It was a dark and drizzly winter night,
When I discovered my life was a lie...
This tale is a tragedy, one of Shakespeare sources turned into gardening websites, "misdated" quartos, and failed internet archives. It is also a story of the quarto itself, an early printing of our beloved Danish Prince's play, including an implied Hamlet/Horatio coffee date, weird and extremely short soliloquies, and Gertrude with a hint of motivation and autonomy.
But let us start from the beginning. Long ago, in the year of our lord 2022, I pulled a Christmas Eve all-nighter to bring you this post: https://www.tumblr.com/withasideofshakespeare/704686395278622720/a-rundown-on-the-absolute-chaos-that-is-first?source=share
It was popularish in Shakespeare circles, which is why I am amending it now! I returned to it tonight, only to discover a few problems with my dates and, more importantly, a mystery in which one of my sources miraculously turned into a link to a gardening website...
Anyhow, let us begin with the quarto!
TL;DR: Multiple versions of Hamlet were printed between 1603 and 1637 (yes, post-folio) with major character and plot differences between them. The first quarto (aka Q1) is best known for its particular brand of chaos with brief soliloquies, an extra-sad Hamlet, some mother-son bonding, weird early modern spelling, and deleted/adapted scenes with major influences on the plot of the play!
A long rundown is included below the cut, including new and improved sources, lore, direct quotes, and my own interpretations. Skip what bores you!
And continue... if thou darest!
What is the First Quarto? Actually, what is a quarto?
Excellent questions, brave Hamlet fan!
A quarto is a pamphlet created by printing something onto a large sheet of paper and then folding it to get a smaller pamphlet with more pages per big sheet (1).
First Quarto Hamlet was published in 1603 and then promptly lost for an entire two centuries until it was rediscovered in 1823 in the library of Sir Henry Bunbury. Rather than printed from a manuscript of Shakespeare, Q1 seems like it may be a memorial reconstruction of the play by the actor who played Marcellus (imagine being in a movie, memorizing the script to the best of your ability, writing it down, and then selling "your" script off to the print shop), but scholars are still out on this (2).
Are you saying that Hamlet comes with the stageplay equivalent of a “deleted scenes and extra credits” movie disc?
Yep, pretty much! In fact, there are even more of these! Q2 was printed in 1604 and it seems to have made use of Shakespeare's own drafts, and rather than being pirated like Q1, it was probably printed more or less with permission. Three more subsequent quartos were published between 1611 and 1637, but they share much in common with Q2.
The First Folio (F1) was published in 1623 and its copy of Hamlet was either based on another (possibly cleaner but likely farther removed from Shakespeare's own text) playhouse manuscript (2, 3). It was an early "collected works" of sorts--although missing a few plays that we now consider canon--and is the main source used today for many of the plays!
The versions of the play that we read usually include elements from both Q2 and F1.
So... Q1? How is it any different from the version we all know (and love, of course)? What do the differences mean for the plot?
We’ll start with minor differences and build up to the big ones.
Names and spellings
Most of the versions of Shakespeare's plays that we read today have updated spellings in modern English, but a true facsimile (a near-exact reprint of a text) maintains the early modern English spellings found in the original text.
For example, here is the second line of the play transcribed from F1:
Francisco: Nay answer me: stand and vnfold your selfe.
For the most part, however, the names of the characters in these later versions (ex: F1) are spelled more or less how we would spell them today. This is not so in Q1.
Laertes is “Leartes”, Ophelia is “Ofelia”, Gertrude is “Gertred” (or sometimes “Gerterd”), Rosencrantz is “Rossencraft”, Guildenstern is “Gilderstone”, and my favorite, Polonius gets a completely different name: Corambis.
(This goes on for minor characters, too. Sentinel Barnardo is “Bernardo”, Prince Fortinbras of Norway is “Fortenbrasse”, Voltemand and Cornelius--the Danish ambassadors to Norway--are “Voltemar” and “Cornelia” (genderbent Cornelius?), Osric doesn’t even get a name- he is called “the Bragart Gentleman”, the Gravediggers are called clowns, and Reynaldo (Polonius’s spy) gets a whole different name--“Montano”.)
2. Stage directions
Some of Q1's stage directions are more detailed and some are simply non-existent. For instance, when Ophelia enters singing, the direction is:
Enter Ofelia playing on a Lute, and her haire downe singing.
But when Horatio is called to assist Hamlet in spying on Claudius during the play, he has no direction to enter, instead opting to just appear magically on stage. Hamlet also doesn't even say his name, so apparently his Hamlet sense was tingling?
3. Act 3 scene reordering
Claudius and Polonius go through with the plan to have Ophelia break up with Hamlet immediately after they make it (typically, the plan is made in early II.ii and gone through with in III.i, with the players showing up and reciting Hecuba between the two events). In this version, the player scene (and Hamlet’s conversation with Polonius) happen after ‘to be or not to be’ and ‘get thee to a nunnery.’ I’m not sure if this makes more or less sense. Either way, it has a relatively minimal impact on the story.
4. Shortened lines and straightforwardness
Many lines, especially after Act 1, are significantly shortened, including some of the play's most famous speeches.
Laertes’ usually long-winded I.iii lecture on love to Ophelia is shortened to just ten lines (as opposed to the typical 40+). Polonius (er... Corambis) is still annoying and incapable of brevity, but less so than usual. His lecture on love is also cut significantly!
Hamlet’s usual assailing of Danish drinking customs (I.iv) is cut off by the ghost’s arrival. He’s still the most talkative character, but his lines are almost entirely different in some monologues, including ‘to be or not to be’! In other spots, however, (ex: get thee to a nunnery!) the lines are near-identical. There doesn’t seem to be much rhyme or reason to where things diverge linguistically, except that when Marcellus speaks, his lines are always correct. Hm...
5. The BIG differences: Gertrude’s promise to aid Hamlet in taking revenge
Act 3, scene 4 goes about the same as usual with one major difference: Hamlet finishes off not with his usual declaration that he’s to be sent for England but with an absolutely heart-wrenching callback to act 1, in which he echoes the ghost’s lines and pleads his mother to aid him in revenge. And she agrees. Here is that scene:
Note that "U"s are sometimes "V"s and there are lots of extra "E"s!
Queene Alas, it is the weakenesse of thy braine,
Which makes thy tongue to blazon thy hearts griefe:
But as I haue a soule, I sweare by heauen,
I neuer knew of this most horride murder:
But Hamlet, this is onely fantasie,
And for my loue forget these idle fits.
Ham. Idle, no mother, my pulse doth beate like yours,
It is not madnesse that possesseth Hamlet.
O mother, if euer you did my deare father loue,
Forbeare the adulterous bed to night,
And win your selfe by little as you may,
In time it may be you wil lothe him quite:
And mother, but assist mee in reuenge,
And in his death your infamy shall die.
Queene Hamlet, I vow by that maiesty,
That knowes our thoughts, and lookes into our hearts,
I will conceale, consent, and doe my best,
What stratagem soe're thou shalt deuise.
Ham. It is enough, mother good night:
Come sir, I'le prouide for you a graue,
Who was in life a foolish prating knaue.
Exit Hamlet with [Corambis/Polonius'] dead body.
(Internet Shakespeare, Source #4)
Despite having seemingly major consequences for the plot, this is never discussed again. Gertrude tells Claudius in the next scene that it was Hamlet who killed Polonius (Corambis, whatever!), seemingly betraying her promise.
However, Gertrude’s admission of Hamlet’s guilt (and thus, betrayal) could come down to the circumstance she finds herself in as the next scene begins. There is no stage direction denoting her exit, so the entrance of Claudius in scene 5 may be into her room, where he would find her beside a puddle of blood, evidence of the murder. There’s no talking your way out of that one…
6. The BIGGEST difference: The added scene
After Act 4, Scene 6, (but before 4.7) comes this scene, in which Horatio informs Gertrude that Hamlet was to be executed in England but escaped:
Enter Horatio and the Queene.
Hor. Madame, your sonne is safe arriv'de in Denmarke,
This letter I euen now receiv'd of him,
Whereas he writes how he escap't the danger,
And subtle treason that the king had plotted,
Being crossed by the contention of the windes,
He found the Packet sent to the king of England,
Wherein he saw himselfe betray'd to death,
As at his next conuersion with your grace,
He will relate the circumstance at full.
Queene Then I perceiue there's treason in his lookes
That seem'd to sugar o're his villanie:
But I will soothe and please him for a time,
For murderous mindes are alwayes jealous,
But know not you Horatio where he is?
Hor. Yes Madame, and he hath appoynted me
To meete him on the east side of the Cittie
To morrow morning.
Queene O faile not, good Horatio, and withall, commend me
A mothers care to him, bid him a while
Be wary of his presence, lest that he
Faile in that he goes about.
Hor. Madam, neuer make doubt of that:
I thinke by this the news be come to court:
He is arriv'de, obserue the king, and you shall
Quickely finde, Hamlet being here,
Things fell not to his minde.
Queene But what became of Gilderstone and Rossencraft?
Hor. He being set ashore, they went for England,
And in the Packet there writ down that doome
To be perform'd on them poynted for him:
And by great chance he had his fathers Seale,
So all was done without discouerie.
Queene Thankes be to heauen for blessing of the prince,
Horatio once againe I take my leaue,
With thowsand mothers blessings to my sonne.
Horat. Madam adue.
(Internet Shakespeare, Source #4)
First of all, the implication of Hamlet and Horatio's little date in the city is adorable ("Yes Madame, and he hath appoynted me / To meete him on the east side of the Cittie / To morrow morning.") It reads like they're going out for coffee!
And perhaps more plot relevant: if Gertrude knows of Claudius’s treachery ("there's treason in his lookes"), her death at the end of the play does not look like much of an accident. She is aware that Claudius killed her husband and is actively trying to kill her son and she still drinks the wine meant for Hamlet!
Now, the moment we’ve all been waiting for! My thoughts! Yippee!
On Gertrude:
WOW! I’m convinced that she is done dirty by F1and Q2! She and Hamlet have a much better relationship (Gertrude genuinely worries about his well-being throughout the play.) She has an actual personality that is tied into her role in the story and as a mother. I love Q1 Gertrude even though in the end, there’s nothing she can do to save Hamlet from being found out in the murder of Polonius and eventually dying in the duel. Her drinking the poisoned wine seems like an act of desperation (or sacrifice? she never asks Hamlet to drink!) rather than an accident.
On the language:
I think Q1′s biggest shortcoming is its comparatively simplistic language, especially in 'to be or not to be,' which is written like this in the quarto:
Ham. To be, or not to be, I there's the point,
To Die, to sleepe, is that all? I all:
No, to sleepe, to dreame, I mary there it goes,
For in that dreame of death, when wee awake,
And borne before an euerlasting Iudge [judge],
From whence no passenger euer retur'nd,
The vndiscouered country, at whose sight
The happy smile, and the accursed damn'd.
But for this, the ioyfull hope of this,
Whol'd beare the scornes and flattery of the world,
Scorned by the right rich, the rich curssed of the poore?
The widow being oppressed, the orphan wrong'd,
The taste of hunger, or a tirants raigne,
And thousand more calamities besides,
To grunt and sweate vnder this weary life,
When that he may his full Quietus make,
With a bare bodkin, who would this indure,
But for a hope of something after death?
Which pusles [puzzles] the braine, and doth confound the sence,
Which makes vs rather beare those euilles we haue,
Than flie to others that we know not of.
I that, O this conscience makes cowardes of vs all,
Lady in thy orizons, be all my sinnes remembred.
(Internet Shakespeare, Source #4)
The verse is actually closer to perfect iambic pentameter (meaning more lines have exactly ten syllables and consist entirely of iambs--"da-DUM") than in the Folio, which includes many 11-syllable lines. The result of this, however, is that Hamlet comes across here as considerably less frantic (those too-long verse lines in F1 make it feel like he is shoving words into too short a time, which is so very on-theme for him) and more... sad. Somehow, Q1 Hamlet manages to deserve a hug even MORE than F1 Hamlet!
Nevertheless, this speech doesn't hit the way it does in later printings and I have to say I prefer the Folio here.
On the ending:
The ending suffers from the same effect ‘to be or not to be’ does--it is simpler and (imo) lacks some of the emotion that F1 emphasizes. Hamlet’s final speech is significantly cut down and Horatio’s last lines aren’t quite so potent--although they’re still sweet!
Horatio. Content your selues, Ile shew to all, the ground,
The first beginning of this Tragedy:
Let there a scaffold be rearde vp in the market place,
And let the State of the world be there:
Where you shall heare such a sad story tolde,
That neuer mortall man could more vnfolde.
(Internet Shakespeare, Source #4)
Horatio generally is a more active character in Q1 Hamlet. This ending suits this characterization. He will tell Hamlet’s story, tragic as it may be. It reminds me a bit of We Raise Our Cups from Hadestown. I appreciate that this isn't a request but a command: put up a stage, I will tell this story.
Closing notes:
After over a year, it was due time this post received an update. My main revisions were in regard to source verification. Somehow, in the last year or so, one of my old sources went from linking to a PDF of Q1 to a garden website (???) and some citations were missing from the get-go as a result of this being an independently researched post that involved pulling an all-nighter on Christmas Eve (but no excuses, we need sources!)
I have also corrected some badly worded commentary implying that the Folio's verse is more iambic pentameter-y (it's not; in fact, Q1 tends to "normalize" its verse to make it fit a typical blank verse scheme better than the Folio's does--the lines actually flow better, typically have exactly ten syllables, and use more iambs than Q1's) as well as that the spelling in the Folio is any more modern than those in Q1 (they're both in early modern English; I was mistakenly reading a modernized Folio and assuming it to be a transcription--nice one, 17-year-old Dianthus!) Additionally, I corrected the line breaks in my verse transcriptions and returned the block quotations to their original early modern English, which feels more authentic to what was actually written. A few other details and notes were added here and there, but the majority of the substance is the same.
Overall, if you still haven't read Q1, you absolutely should! Once you struggle through the spelling for a while, you'll get used to it and it'll be just as easy as modern English! If you'd prefer to just start with the modern English, I have also linked a modern translation below (source 5).
And finally, my sources!
Not up to citation standards but very user-friendly I hope...
1. Oxford English Dictionary
2. Internet Shakespeare, Hamlet, "The Texts", David Bevington (https://internetshakespeare.uvic.ca/doc/Ham_TextIntro/index.html)
3. The Riverside Shakespeare (pub. Houghton Mifflin Company; G.B. Evans, et al.)
4. Internet Shakespeare, First Quarto (facsimile--in early modern English) (https://internetshakespeare.uvic.ca/doc/Ham_Q1/complete/index.html)
5. Internet Shakespeare, First Quarto (modern English) (https://internetshakespeare.uvic.ca/doc/Ham_Q1M/index.html)
And here conclude we our scholarly tale,
Of sources, citation, and Christmastime too,
Go read the First Quarto! And here, I leave you.
#shakespeare#hamlet#first quarto#first quarto hamlet#classic literature#revisions#hey look at me#having some scholarly merit#i have so much left to learn#which is a darn good thing#how else would i spend my evenings?#the worst part about this#is that it all started because i thought a got a date wrong#but it turns out i didn't#so HA!#but then i realized i got everything else wrong so....#corrections it is!
25 notes
·
View notes
Text
A Refutation of Claims Made by Professor Basil Dyer in the Minas Tirith Review
for @silmarillionepistolary | M | ao3
It has come to my attention that The Minas Tirith Review has recently published an essay by one Professor Basil Dyer detailing and reinterpreting letters exchanged between Fingon, son of Fingolfin, and Maedhros, son of Fëanor, in light of recent translations and publications of long-censored exchanges. In his composition, Dyer claims the letters show evidence of long-established homoaffective relationship between the two, beginning shortly after Fingon’s arrival and in Beleriand, and continuing until his death.
This turn in the discourse is troubling, both because of the undue and perverse attention which it may attract to this noble publication and for the aspersions which it may cast upon the already well-sullied reputation of the historiographer. Perhaps if there was any academic merit behind them such faults may be forgiven, but they consist of nothing besides applying an all-too-modern understandings of customs (and the ever-loosening morality of the age of Man!) onto the long-gone age of the Eldar.
That said, I shall begin by laying out the terms of the engagement. Let us assume, for the sake of simplicity and brevity both, that there is no doubt on the matter of authenticity of the letters exchanged between our two principal figures during the Long Peace. Even the most recently recovered—and most hotly contested—of these letters, dated F.A. 345, referred to in the previous publication by the first lines (“Concerning the matter of honey…”) and sometimes abbreviated as the “honey missive” (alternately, in particularly tasteless publications, the “honey-thigh letter”) in such discourses, shall be accepted into our metaphorical evidence box (though indeed any reader familiar with my previous publications might be predisposed to hold its veracity in some doubt). I shall also reference the K. M. Singer translation of all available letters as the most widely-accepted and aspire to make no reference to the probable inaccuracies in Singer’s understanding of Quenya terms of endearment and vocabulary regarding parts of the body.
It may be wise to note before we begin that ladies of a delicate composition and children may find frank discussions of homosexual activity unnerving and inflaming. I would urge readers to exercise caution.
And so, our terms of engagement well-laid, I shall begin by establishing the reasons any romantic or sexual entanglement between Fingon of the House of Fingolfin and Maedhros of the House of Feanor is entirely impossible, then move on to a sensible and scholarly interpretation of the letters.
First, I draw the attention of noble reader first to the matter of cousin-marriage among the Eldar. While laws prohibiting cousin-marriage may appear novel and controversial to the modern Gondorian—indeed even a generation ago such unions were common among Men—the Eldar have once again proved perceptive beyond the ancient days during which they lived, and our betters in matters of morality and purity.
I will not bore the reader with a recounting of the Fall of Gondolin, but work only to draw the reader’s attention to the doomed romantic entanglement at its center. Maeglin, the nephew of the King, coming out of savage darkness, saw Idril, the king’s daughter, and loved her. Given the depth of infatuation he purportedly developed it seems likely to the modern sociologist that for some time she encouraged this attention. Of course, as a highborn Noldo raised among a peoples of impeccable moral discretion, she had known for the beginning that such an affair could not bear any fruit. Such knowledge could not be expected from Maeglin, and many attribute his eventual decline and betrayal of the city to a broken and aching heart.
That such an understanding was so plain to her and yet not to him may seem strange. Were they not both elves, living in the first of age of Arda, and nearly of the same blood? The answer to such a query might come from the relative moral tightness of Noldor society. Recall that Maeglin was no native Gondolian, but a son of the house of Eöl, and so of mixed Sindar and Avar heritage. All recording of first-cousin marriages among Elven Kin, as few as they are, come from lowborn elves among these two tribes. Recall that neither grey-elven nor dark-elven tribes, as their names suggest, had ever journeyed to the sacred light of the Blessed Isles, nor received council from the Valar. Their traditions and customs, then, may seen as more akin to those of Men than elves, lacking the moral rigor of their light-elf counterparts.
Though I do not claim to liken homosexual acts to the sacred institution of marriage, one must admit that the act of bodily union is shared among the two, and so may be held in common as forbidden under the laws of the Noldor.
With those facts in mind we must return to the matter of Fingon of Hithlum and Maedhros of Himring, famously first-cousins through the lines of their fathers. There is no question that that both were elves full-grown upon their departure to Middle-Earth, that according to all sources Fingon was a particularly devout follower of Aran Einior, the lord of air and great judge. Though the latter acts of Maedhros indicate a rather tenuous connection to the sacred laws of his people, Fingon’s devotion did not waver in his lifetime. Raised in such a morally upright culture, neither of them likely would have been able to conceive of engaging in any unholy union. Indeed, such a thought must have been so far from their minds as to allow a certain looseness of the tongue and purity of platonic intimacy, as evidenced by some of the exchanges I address.
Next we must discuss homosexuality among the Eldar. For years the historical establishment has maintained that no homosexual activity had ever existed among elven-folk; indeed, it is an affliction that appears to trouble only the modern Man. That school of thought has been challenged recently, with very little justice. Basil Dyer and Feya Patrice, two of the most infamous names subscribing to this school of thought, point to articles of elven art which they claim contain themes of same-sex entanglements. Most notable among these are Fragment #221 by Daeron the Bard, which appears addressed to a male lover, surviving recreations of Lalwendë and a Friend in Bed by an unknown artist, and a series of oil lamps recovered from Eregion which seem to depict various sexual acts between elves. This evidence is scant, and spurious at best. More detailed refutations of the first two—clearly expressions of deep platonic affection or affectation of a different character—may be found in my earlier bodies of work, while the last is plain done in the spirit of parody.
Indeed writings by earlier historians indicate that no desire could occur between elves without procreative desire, plainly rendering same-sex unions impossible. Relationships which modern historians sometimes interpret as homosexual are indeed better described with the elven understanding of melotorni and meletheldi, translated as chosen love-brothers and love-sisters respectively. That some form of platonic physical intimacy might have existed within these bonds is inarguable, but plainly it did not rise to the unholy stirrings of the flesh.
All of the surviving letters available to us are those addressed from Maedhros to Fingon. Though these do not use the term meletorni directly, it is plain to see that many terms of brotherly affection to enter their forms of address. The opening of letter #5, addressed F. A. 302, has been much maligned, for to a modern reader it appears rather excessive in its affection. “Most beloved of cousins,” Maedhros writes, “how I miss thy kisses, and the weight of thy body atop mine, and the sweet softness of thy ear-tips beneath my mouth” —and on, in such a fashion, for a time. A modern reader may see conventions of a love-letter within these words. A historian intimately familiar with the details of the correspondence of the eldest son of Feanor would argue otherwise. Indeed, Maedhros appears often expressive of his affection.
Of his surviving letters only remains which is addressed to Maglor the Bard, the eldest of his brothers and his second in command, mailed in F. A. 456, pleads with him to “take heart, and hold close my kisses.” Similarly, journals kept by contemporaries note nothing unusual in exchanges of kisses between friends, brothers, cousins, and so forth. A later elven play following the events of the Fall of Nargothrond features a kiss between Finrod and Orodreth in parting; similarly, artistic depictions of Finwë’s death often show his son kissing his face and his lips. What may seem unthinkable to the modern Gondorian was indeed quite commonplace among the Noldor.
Which brings us to another turn of phrase in letter #5, which has gained some level of infamy among those determined to read perversion into the intimacy of their friendship. Lines 304-314 read as follows: “I have received thy handkerchief, with the sweet scent of thy sweat and thy perfume, and the imprints of thy lip-paint kisses. Know that I have sewn it now against the heart of my sleep-robes, so each night I might feel thee upon my breast, and that a hundred times now I have kissed the same cloth as thou hast.”
I would not blame the modern man whose mind conjures a young woman pressing lipstick-kissed onto a postcard for her beloved, but in cultural context the meaning of these words changes. While it may appear rather odd in our time, lip-paint was common for men and women both among the Noldor. Being, for all their nobility, at times a vain people, the Noldor historically likened physical beauty to battle-prowess. The sending of lipstick-prints can be read as a show of force and physical ability between two young men, somewhat akin to bragging. The answering kisses, then, signal not a desire for intimacy but answering show of strength and of power.
I may go on for some time to discuss each mention on kisses in the surviving letters, I would assume any discerning reader would be able to understand them by now as brotherly affection. And so, without further delay, I will move on to address the honey missive.
First, let us examine lines 2-13 of the honey missive, the most hotly debated in meaning:
“Concerning the matter of honey; while I should be glad to sample any taste of the spring of Hithlum thou shouldst be willing to share with me, we have no great need of in trade. The wiry clover and harebell of Himring make for surprisingly subtle yet fragrant honey, thick and amber-gold. But indeed so taken with thee I am that even thoughts of trade I return to thee, and of honey; how I sit and think of thee bare before me—of how I might take such sweetness and spread it upon thy handsome thighs, to work clean with my mouth. I would be much obliged if thou wert to write to me of how thou wouldst stir beneath me, and call my name—indeed nothing now could make me happier.”
In interpreting this passage, we must remember the positions of the Noldor as craftsmen and admirers of art. Despite being remembered now primarily as a warlord, Maedhros was born the son of a gem-smith and a sculptor, and was raised in a society which placed much appreciation on both masculine and feminine beauty. That in his time Fingon was considered beautiful is undoubtedly true. The rest, while resembling a sexual act to some readers, is plainly ridiculous, meant in all likelihood as a joking exaggeration. It is common among young men even in our time to joke crudely with each other; if we had Fingon’s letter of response I am certain we would see a laughing refusal.
Having examined the scope of the evidence before us, I believe any reasonable reader would be forced to yield to the rightness of my position, and to admit there is nothing at all to the claims of those like Dyer, who seek to introduce perversion into the annals of history. We must then examine the motivations behind these claims, and wonder if Dyer and his ilk might not mean to work backwards, seeking justify their modern-day inclinations by creating precedent where is none. It is said, after all, that Basil Dyer has not cohabitated with his wife since the first two weeks of their thirty-year marriage.
66 notes
·
View notes
Note
Hey Reid!
I'd like to ask for some academic advice:
The extended abstract of my first paper ever just got accepted to a not unnotable conference (speaking people in my field know it by name) and with it come the reviews/ guidelines to be included for the full paper version of it which are... mixed.
On one hand I'm elated beyond to have a my paper accepted by a reputable conference a semester into my master's degree, on the other some of the reviews feel really mean?
Do you have any tips on dealing with imposter syndrome in the face of negative reviews? I feel like I've been unmasked as a fraud
Ahhh, good ol' Reviewer #2 and their crippling effect on one's self-esteem. Right now it seems like the criticism is steep, which is difficult because this is a piece you are proud of, and (of you're like me) your self-esteem is tied to academic performance. Based on your undergraduate experience, you may not have received criticism like this before (I know I didn't).
All of that is valid, but might I suggest looking at the situation a little bit differently?
You have, by all accounts, written a piece very early in your career that was deemed to have intellectual merit by a significant scholarly body! That's huge! It means that somebody read the piece and thought that your argument was good and would make a significant contribution to the existing body of literature! You have already won by making it past the first (and hardest) part of the selection process.
In fact, someone thought your piece was good enough that a couple of other people (qualified professionals) should read it to give some feedback. That's pretty cool, right? I certainly think so.
I'm sure you're well aware of the values of peer reviews and the revision process, so I won't expound on that. Perhaps some of the reviewers were not as tactful as they could be, but that doesn't change the fact that you did good work.
Here is my humble prescription for the revision process: take a day to celebrate the achievement of having your paper accepted! Do a little something to make yourself happy and enjoy the moment, whatever that may be. This is for you. You are going to Be Happy™ about this. Do not think about Reviewer #2. Then take a day preparing to go back into the comments. Get yourself in the right mindset, but don't force yourself to engage. Dive back in on day 3 (or whenever you're ready, deadlines permitting) with the confidence that you have a good idea, and you are going to respond to any criticism with productive intention.
-Reid
P.S.
Dr. Dad, an academic with 25+ years in his field and a CV that is over 50 pages long, celebrates every time he gets a revise and resubmit. The single hardest thing to do is not to get desk rejected. Nobody gets through the process with no revisions, and often the comments are quite harsh. You're in good company.
26 notes
·
View notes
Text
Becoming Lady Moon
SUMMARY | You’ve been summoned back to the capital after a successful campaign, only to get married to Taeil, a scholarly man that the emperor himself has chosen.
PAIRINGS | Taeil/Fem!Reader
GENRE | scholar!Taeil, warrior!reader, historical fantasy au, saeguk/wuxia inspired au, smut, unprotected sex, oral (male giving/female receiving), fluff
RATING | Mature
LENGTH | 5,075 words
AUTHOR’S NOTE | Finally managed to get this one done. I’ve had a minor case of inspiration block for this one lol. This is kind of inspired by a mix of Chinese and Korean historical styles lolol. If that even makes sense.
Also made Taeyong, Mark, Jeno, and Haechan siblings because their last names are Lee lolol. And I used Haechan’s real name and Mark’s korean name lolol.
Hoping it turned out okay haha.
"Is that her? The new lady of House Moon?"
"She looks too unrefined to be a lady."
"Haven't you heard? She grew up fighting bandits at the northern border since she was very young.”
"Oh my! And House Moon isn’t ashamed of taking in a warrior for their daughter?"
"My father says she's a general. Imagine being a female general."
"Oh, I can't! Imagine being surrounded by male soldiers and covered in dirt, blood, and grime."
"But isn't she from the illustrious House Lee? The house full of generals and officials?"
"She's from House Lee? No wonder she looks so intimidating and bold."
You rolled your eyes as you led your horse through the gates, your soldiers following behind. After accumulating merit and successfully defending the borders, the Emperor summoned you and your troops back to the capital city. You were eager to see your family but you dreaded the moment you would meet your new husband to be and his kin.
As you were defending the borders, your family made the arrangements for your wedding. You came from a family of military officials and generals that served the empire through the generations. So it didn't surprise anyone when you earned the title of captain at the age of sixteen. The more admirable trait of yours was that you fought alongside your men rather than staying inside your quarters like some people. When the conflict erupted, you took part in all the battles.
You were nearing your thirtieth year and had already been named the first female general of the empire, earning high respect among the male officers. It didn't matter if they called you a man, woman, or beast; everyone respected you regardless of your gender. But what really surprised the kingdom was how the sons of generals treated you as an equal.
Your father was concerned about your future. You were considered "old" to marry off and become a mother by societal norms. He thought you should find someone who could provide you with a steady income and build you a family. Most of the sons of noble military families would have jumped at the chance of having you as a wife, but your father was looking for a noble from a non-military family that would balance the dynamic. It would be bad news for both sides if there was constant bickering over how to run the family army.
So he went to great lengths to ensure you found the right match. Your brothers helped search for suitable candidates while trying to keep you out of the process. You were too busy overseeing the military operations to be dragged around meeting potential suitors, so you left all the choices to your family. At first, they started sending only minor aristocrats. Then after years of disappointment, they tried a random combination of other noble houses and powerful merchants. Eventually, after hundreds of trials and failures, your father and siblings decided to ask the Emperor for help.
Your father and the Emperor were sworn siblings after all. The Emperor saw you as his own daughter and officially bestowed you the title of "Maiden of War."
With all those rejections, you couldn't believe your luck when the Emperor himself personally picked out the candidate you were to marry. His candidate? Moon Taeil, son of the royal advisor to the late Emperor. Your father and brothers immediately knew it was perfect. The man had almost all of the qualities they thought would match: handsome, smart, well spoken, fair, and polite. As far as you were concerned, the Emperor must've seen something special in him to make this particular choice. Of course, you hoped it wasn't because of his noble status. You didn't want to marry someone because of their social class or status. You'd rather have someone who loved you, not because of your position or wealth. You had no time to think about it any further because your family rushed you to prepare for your wedding.
You spurred your horse towards your residence and approached the entrance. Your parents and brothers rushed out to greet you, ecstatic that you were home. You let them fuss over you before standing up straight and smiling politely. “I hope everything is well.”
They all nodded happily. Your older brother Taeyong said, “Everything is fine. We’re all looking forward to the wedding.”
One of your younger brothers, Minhyung, chimed in, “Yes. Father has invited many important nobles to witness the event. Everyone is happy to finally see you settled down.”
“Our noona is finally getting married!” Donghyuck jumped up and down with Jeno.
“Finally!” Jeno called out. “You think noona's future children will grow up to be generals or military officials?”
Minhyung laughed. “I don’t see why not. Lord Moon might be scholarly but our noona is a general after all. Who knows what her children will be able to accomplish.”
You let out a small smile, your mother latching onto your arm and pulling you into the manor. She smiled fondly, tears threatening to spill from her eyes. “Now we won’t have to worry about finding you a good husband anymore.”
Her voice caught as she trailed off, clutching onto you tighter. Your hands wrapped tightly around hers, bringing her close to you. “Mother… Are you alright?”
She sobbed softly. “Oh, dear. I'm just feeling emotional seeing you leave us. You're grown now. Soon, you'll live on your own and work hard for our family.”
"You've never been this emotional when I go off to war or do my military duties." You gave your mother a small smile. "It's because I won't be living at home now, isn't it?"
"You're my only daughter. Of course I'm sad that you won't be living here." Your mother pouted and you couldn't help but laugh. "I'll be stuck here with your father and your brothers. They get into too much trouble when you're not here."
"So Donghyuck and Jeno are causing mischief, are they?" You teased her.
"Always!" Her eyes lit up at the mention of your two youngest brothers. "You would think that they would have grown up now that they're in the Imperial Guard but I swear, they cause chaos everywhere they go."
"Well, it's a good thing they aren't in my command." You laughed, your parents and Taeyong joining you. "I don't know what I would do if they started pranking the other captains."
"We would never do that, noona!" Jeno chortled, leaning against your shoulder. "We know you'd beat us up."
Donghyuck, not wanting to be left out, jumped into the conversation. "Knowing her, she'll tie us to a tree. Maybe even feed us grass until we learned our lesson."
You rolled your eyes and clapped your hands together. "That sounds like fun. But you both should be glad you're serving with our father."
"Now, now," Your father chuckled from the amusement of his children. "Y/N needs her rest. Tomorrow is her wedding day after all."
You didn't know what to expect when you met your soon to be husband waiting for you outside of his manor. This would be the first moment that you would lay eyes on your new husband and you wondered what kind of man this Moon Taeil would be.
You heard that he was a scholarly man, his father having been the advisor of the former Emperor, but you weren't sure what kind of character you would find. Could he be arrogant or vain like the other nobles of the country? Or perhaps strong, principled, honorable, and loving like you? The idea of marrying someone completely different than yourself worried you. How would you manage working with someone whose opinions differed from your own? It was impossible to tell based on appearances alone. It seemed that this decision would test the limits of your patience.
"You look nervous, Y/N." Taeil said as he took your hand in his. "Are you scared?"
"A little." You sighed, your gaze falling on his handsome face. "I never expected my new husband to be this handsome."
Taeil let out a small laugh. "I never expected my new wife to be this beautiful."
"Even if she's adorned with battle scars and hardened by battle?"
He gave you a sweet smile, his thumb brushing against your knuckles. "The memories of the past always fade away."
You raised your eyebrows at his strange response. That sounded... oddly poetic. If anything, you thought the scars you bore were evidence of your bravery and determination. Perhaps this marriage would prove to be interesting after all. "We'll be the talk of the capital after today. The popular Lord Moon and the Maiden of War joined in marriage. A marriage bestowed by the Emperor himself."
"Everyone loves a storybook romance." He grinned as you let out a scoff.
"Are you the damsel in distress?" You let out a small laugh.
"Perhaps you're the knight who saves me from my impending doom."
You shrugged as you gazed into his brown eyes. "Maybe..."
Taeil pressed his lips against your forehead gently, sending shivers through your body. This was...different. You've never had anyone showing this kind of affection towards you before. And it felt...nice. The tenderness in his touch made you feel...protected. As if nothing could hurt you. Even if you were scarred from battles and battles still loomed ahead, you suddenly felt safe.
“Come, Y/N,” Taeil took your hand in his. “Let’s go show the world the new Lady Moon.”
The guard escorted you into the grand hallway leading up to the banquet hall where the festivities would take place. Every member of the court lined the halls with various dignitaries, their lackeys scrambling around to take care of their needs. Several guards stood guard at each door, ensuring only the guests could enter. Once you reached the main entryway, the ceremony began.
You bowed deeply to the Emperor, following in his footsteps and respectfully greeting everyone else present. You walked to your seat next to Taeil and looked over at him with a smile. The nervousness that threatened to overwhelm you earlier seemed to dissipate and you took comfort in his presence. After the pleasantries ended, the feast began.
While the soldiers enjoyed the delicacies prepared by the chefs, you were focused on the conversations going on around you. Some of them involved business ventures and other social activities, but most of the conversations revolved around the ceremony itself. There was the occasional topic about you and your new husband, questions regarding your compatibility with one another. You and Taeil answered their inquiries politely, smiling and nodding to the nobles who showed interest in your relationship.
"Lord Moon," one of the nobles started. "I'm surprised your family is accepting of you marrying such an unusual woman."
"Unusual woman?" Taeil questioned. "How so? Our marriage was approved by the Emperor himself."
"Well, to be honest, your bride has quite a history. No nobleman of our caliber would want to marry a woman who fights wars. Their only purpose in life is to become wives and mothers. To settle down and start families. To serve their husbands and raise their children."
"Yet I didn't see you in the last battlefield, Count Kang." You said, a few of the other nobles snickering in agreement.
"If we could see a maiden like you, I wouldn't mind enlisting. But how can I protect my wife when I'm dead? The only way to truly save a maiden is to keep her protected at all times." Count Kang gave you a disapproving look. You didn't want to hurt his feelings but it did sound somewhat sexist. "In my experience, women love being taken care of. It gives them a sense of security."
"But not all women share the exact same sentiments." You commented coolly. "I am proud of what I've done and I don't need a knight to protect me. I've proven myself time and again and I won't apologize for that. I am not a fragile little flower who needs to be sheltered. I'll continue doing what I do best and protecting those who need it. All I ask is that you respect my decisions and treat me with dignity and kindness. Do not judge me or try to change me because you're blinded by your own preconceived notions of what women are supposed to be."
"Well said," Taeil nodded, a beam of a smile gracing his features. "My new wife is indeed what you call a heroine. The Emperor himself knew of your strength, courage, and compassion. No wonder you are his god-daughter."
Count Kang gaped at you. "Really? You are His Imperial Majesty's god-daughter?"
"I thought everyone knew this?" You blinked at him. "Yes, I am his god-daughter since my father is his sworn brother. If you doubt it, you can always ask His Imperial Majesty yourself. He is here at the wedding after all."
Your comment struck fear in Count Kang's heart. He immediately returned to a respectful demeanor. “I am sorry, I never meant to question your abilities, milady. I didn't mean to dampen everyone's spirits on this most joyous day. May God bless your union with many happy years.”
“Thank you,” you bowed to the Count. “I pray the same for you.”
With that, the conversation between you and the count came to an end. The conversations continued amongst the nobility throughout the meal but Taeil pulled you aside as the last dishes were cleared.
"I'm sorry that you had to deal with that unpleasantness. You handled it very well."
"I didn't mean for this to get out of hand. The Count is just so infuriating."
"You don't need to defend yourself to those people." He whispered softly, taking your hand. "They're jealous of you because you are unique and different. You've never let anyone dull your sparkle and no one will ever change that."
You glanced at Taeil and saw his caring expression. "I do sparkle, don't I?"
"You do. More than any other woman or man I've ever seen."
You blushed and laughed at his compliment. You had a lot to learn about proper etiquette yet but it wasn't going to stop you from acting as true to yourself as possible. "This will be a good marriage. The beginning of something wonderful."
You ran a hand through your hair as you watched the commotion in front of you, your older brother Taeyong chuckling next to you. It had been a few months since your wedding to Taeil and you were enjoying the peace and quiet of married life until your siblings decided to drop by your new manor. Taeil looked surprised as Donghyuck and Jeno clung to his arms, while Minhyung hovered closely by. They seemed to have taken a liking to your new husband and couldn't seem to stay away from him.
"Stop bothering your brother-in-law." You berated your younger brothers. "Don't you all have training to do?"
Donghyuck pouted and tugged on Taeil's shirt. "Please, noona. Can't we just play a game or two? We haven't seen you since you got married."
"It's been months and you're neglecting us." Jeno pouted, Minhyung nodding his head.
Taeil let out a laugh, your brothers looking at him with confusion. "Why don't you have a sparring match with your sister? I'll be the judge and see which one of the Lee siblings is the strongest."
"No fair," Minhyung frowned. "Noona is the strongest."
"If it was a match between Taeyong-hyung and Y/N-noona," Jeno mused aloud. "Then hyung will win."
"Nah..." Donghyuck shook his head. "It's noona for sure. What do you think, Taeil-hyungnim?"
Taeil let out a laugh, giving you a soft look. "Am I being biased if I said that my wife will win?"
Donghyuck and Jeno both groaned and glared at you. "So unfair!"
"My husband doesn't lie, boys." You smiled brightly, winking at Taeil.
Donghyuck huffed and tugged on Taeil's arm. "You have to judge fairly, hyungnim. Don't just pick noona just because she's your wife. That isn't right."
Taeil laughed and shrugged, the amusement radiating off of him. "Fine. The rules are simple. Whoever is the last one standing is the winner."
As the brothers bickered over the rules of the fight, Taeil glanced at you and you gave him a sheepish smile. He took your hand in his, wrapping his fingers around yours as he leaned closer to whisper in your ear. "Let's make this fun for them, okay? Give them a bit of entertainment."
You tilted your head and narrowed your eyes at him. "You aren't serious, are you?"
He gave you a lopsided grin. "Of course I am. I think it'll help distract them. They might even have fun if they lose."
Your eyebrow twitched at his ridiculous suggestion but you were quickly distracted when Donghyuck charged forward with a fierce attack. Jeno was quick to follow, trying to pounce on you from behind. Both of them attacked with the speed and ferocity of a leopard. You dodged left and right, dancing around them as they tried to hit you with a kick.
Taeyong and Minhyung leapt into the fray, both also wanting to see who the strongest Lee sibling was. Taeyong took a cautious approach, trying to determine who his opponent was before rushing in with full force. He managed to trip Donghyuck who crashed to the ground with a loud thud. Minhyung was darting towards you, determined to take down his older sister.
"Donghyuck eliminated!" Taeil called out. He patted the seat next to him. "Now come join me and root for your favorite sibling to win."
Donghyuck frowned as he made his way to his brother-in-law. "No fair! Taeyong-hyung did me dirty!"
Taeil laughed. "Root for your sister then."
Donghyuck scrunched his face before yelling, "GO NOONA! GO!"
You shook your head, a small smile gracing your lips. You weren't worried about winning this fight. Not when you were surrounded by loved ones. And that's exactly what you found once your siblings joined you. Your siblings were great fighters, having grown up fighting alongside you.
Despite their efforts, you still managed to beat them easily. Taeyong was a bit harder to beat as he was more agile and better coordinated than the others, though his weight was more evenly distributed making him harder to topple. But in the end, you managed to beat him and came out as the strongest Lee sibling of them all.
Once you finished the sparring match, everyone cheered and clapped for you. Even Taeil was amazed at how fast you reacted to every move your opponents made. It was no wonder you were praised for your military feats. You had years of combat training under your belt and you didn't show any signs of slowing down. When everyone dispersed, Taeil offered you a soft kiss. "Congratulations, my darling wife. That was quite a display."
"Thanks, dear husband." You smirked, giving him a loving peck on the cheek.
The rest of the evening passed quietly as you ate dinner together and talked to your family. You felt incredibly blessed to have such a supportive husband and siblings. At first, you weren't sure how this marriage would have played out but it ended up working out much better than you could have hoped.
It was getting late and your brothers all went home. You were getting ready to turn in when Taeil gently pulled you onto the bed. He reached out for you, pulling you close to his chest. You nestled against him, savoring the warmth of his body. His arms wrapped around you tightly, holding you securely against him.
"I know this marriage was bestowed on us by the Emperor himself," he began in a soft voice. "And we owe our loyalty to him. Yet I wanted to let you know how grateful I am that you've become part of my life."
Your eyes widened and you turned to face him, your heart beating rapidly in your chest. "Me too, Taeil. Having you as my husband has been amazing."
His hands moved up your back and he nuzzled your neck, nibbling on your skin. "It feels like we've known each other for longer than just a few months. And despite all the differences we have, we still manage to get along and understand each other. Being with you makes everything else feel easier to bear."
You sighed, leaning against him. "What will happen if I have to go to war? Will you go with me?"
Taeil smiled softly. "If the Emperor allows it, yes. In fact, I plan on staying by your side wherever you go."
"Are you sure that's wise?" You raised an eyebrow at him. "What happens if there is a chance that you'll die during battle?"
He pressed his forehead against yours. "That won't happen. I know you won't let that happen. I know you're strong enough to protect yourself and everyone else."
You kissed his nose. "Even when the odds are stacked against you?"
He gave you a hard stare. "I wouldn't have it any other way. I know that the future holds a lot of trials and tribulations for us but I want to experience them all with you."
Your heart melted as you gazed into his beautiful eyes. "Taeil, thank you for marrying me. I don't think any other nobleman would accept a warrior like me as their wife and still be understanding of her duty to the Empire. Thank you for showing me that I can be myself without worrying about rejection."
He smiled and cupped your cheeks. "Anytime. Let me tell you, I am eternally grateful that I married someone as extraordinary as you."
He leaned in, brushing his lips across yours. Your eyes fluttered shut as his tongue traced your lower lip. You moaned softly as he kissed you passionately, not wasting a moment to enjoy each other's company.
The kiss deepened as Taeil ran his hands down your back. You gripped his shirt, feeling the coolness of his bare skin beneath your fingertips. He sucked your bottom lip into his mouth and trailed kisses down your jawline.
Your heart raced as he kissed down your neck. His breath was warm against your skin and goosebumps broke out all over your body. He placed soft kisses against your shoulder blade and chuckled.
"How about we put those worries aside for now?" He murmured. "We can deal with those things later. Right now, I just want to take care of you."
He positioned himself between your legs, kissing you again. As he moved lower, your breathing became ragged and shallow. He shifted so that his knees supported him, sitting up slightly as he undid the ties of your clothing. With gentle hands, he pushed your clothes aside, taking a moment to admire your naked form.
"Mmm...you are so beautiful." Taeil hummed.
"My battle scars don't bother you?" You asked hesitantly.
He shook his head. "They add character to your beauty."
You blushed at his compliment and Taeil slowly kissed his way down your stomach, lingering over your abdomen. You squirmed beneath him, gasping at the exquisite sensation of his lips on your skin. Your eyes closed, relishing in the passion he brought forth within you.
You felt his tongue trace the scars that marred your skin. Every time his tongue touched the scar, you gasped. The touch was so tender and sensual, igniting your desire to please him. You writhed beneath him, wanting to bring pleasure to his body.
Taeil sucked in a breath as he licked one of your scars. A moan escaped your throat as you arched your back, pressing against him. He pressed another scar and repeated the action, moaning as you clutched at his hair. You let out a quiet whimper as he traced a third scar, running his tongue over it.
You grabbed his head, gripping his hair tightly. "Taeil..."
"Hush, my darling wife. Let me pleasure you."
"But-"
"No buts. Just relax."
You opened your eyes and nodded at him. It felt like he was undoing something deep inside of you, exposing you to him fully. And yet, it felt wonderful to finally be seen by him.
He lowered himself until he could bury his face between your thighs, inhaling deeply. Your juices flowed freely down your inner thigh, glistening as he breathed in your scent. He ran his tongue over your swollen lips, bringing forth shivers throughout your entire body.
Taeil nipped at your sensitive skin, sending shocks of pleasure through your body. You cried out loudly, almost collapsing as he continued to torment you. Taeil paused long enough to place his palms on your hips, steadying you before returning to ravage your body.
"Please..." You whispered hoarsely. "Taeil, please..."
Taeil smirked at your pleading. He was beyond happy to hear your pleas for him. He'd never imagine that his warrior wife would find pleasure in being treated like this. This woman he held in his arms would do anything for him and he couldn't wait to discover what she was truly capable of.
He pulled away from you, placing light kisses against your inner thighs. You were panting as you watched him, waiting impatiently for him to return to your needy body.
"Do you need something, my sweetheart?" He asked, gently teasing your folds with his fingers.
You nodded. "Please...inside of me. I want to feel you inside of me."
He grinned, moving so that he could straddle your hips. You spread your legs, eagerly awaiting the contact of his skin against yours. Taeil grabbed your hand, kissing it gently before positioning it between your legs.
"Touch yourself."
You complied, your fingers slipping easily between your slick folds. You moaned as you began rubbing your clit, quickly becoming wetter with anticipation.
You heard Taeil groan as he slid inside of you, meeting you with perfect synchronicity. You cried out, wrapping your legs around his waist, pushing him deeper inside of you. You thrust against him, meeting his every movement with your own. Taeil picked up the pace, guiding you through the pleasurable waves of ecstasy.
Your hands caressed his back, pressing yourself against his firm body. He glanced down at you, seeing the lustful expression in your eyes. He leaned down, nipping at your collarbone. "You look so good lying underneath me."
"Yes...Taeil...please." You panted, unable to form words properly.
He chuckled, his eyes gleaming mischievously. "Tell me what you want, my darling wife."
Your mind was clouded by the sensations pulsating through your body. Everything seemed to blend together, creating one glorious feeling. You couldn't think clearly and you just needed him to fulfill your desires. So you whispered the only thing you could think of: "I want you."
"I love hearing that. Tell me again."
You squeezed your eyes shut and whimpered as he rocked his hips, hitting just the right spot. "I want you."
He placed kisses along your shoulders and neck. "Again?"
You nodded, rocking your hips against him as he buried himself deeper inside of you. You didn't want this to end, ever.
Taeil stroked your hair soothingly, whispering sweet nothings to you as you clung to him. You'd never felt so alive before, in your entire life. This man consumed you completely, driving you mad with passion. He knew exactly what you needed and he provided it flawlessly.
As he made love to you, he silently contemplated his feelings towards you. All his feelings for you came flooding back as you embraced him. He'd fallen in love with you over the past few months and nothing could keep him from falling more in love with you with every passing day.
"I love you, Y/N." Taeil murmured softly against your ear as he rocked into you. "There is no other person I'd rather make love to than you."
Your eyes met his, your heart racing as you stared into his mesmerizing eyes. Those simple words filled you with such joy and relief. He loved you and he wasn't going to stop loving you even after the night was over. That was all you needed to hear.
Taeil grasped your chin, pulling you close so that your lips were mere inches apart. He kissed you gently, then with increasing fervor. The friction between your bodies drove you wild as you reached a fever pitch, feeling yourself getting closer to climax.
You gripped his shoulders, trying desperately to hold on. He thrust harder into you, his breath hitching as he felt you tightening around him. He whispered your name, sending shivers down your spine. You cried out as your release flooded over you, leaving you feeling content and utterly fulfilled.
Taeil remained within you, his breathing labored as he recovered. You could see his desire mirrored in your eyes and that alone turned you on further. You gently brushed his lips, feeling the tingles spread throughout your body.
Taeil bit his lip, breathing heavily. He slid out of you slowly, reluctantly breaking your intimate connection. You wrapped your arms around his neck, burying your face against his chest. You could hear his heartbeat, speeding up due to your closeness.
You pressed your cheek against his chest, listening to the sounds of your husband's beating heart. "I never knew that my scholarly husband could make love like this."
Taeil grinned and pressed a kiss to your forehead. "That's because I've never been with anyone quite like you."
"I'm glad." You looked up at him. "Did you really mean it?"
"Hmm?"
"About how you love me."
He gave you a soft smile. "I meant every word. I fell in love with you, my warrior wife, since the moment I laid eyes on you at our wedding. I don't expect you to love me in return but..."
"Shh..." You pressed a finger to his lips. "I already do. I love you, Taeil."
"Oh, thank God." He captured your lips once more, enjoying your warmth against his.
"Who'd have imagined a scholar and a female general would fall in love?" You said.
Taeil laughed and nuzzled your nose with his. "It's no surprise that we fell in love, my precious wife. We are fated to be together."
You smiled and closed your eyes. "Fate or not, I'm incredibly lucky to have you, Lord Moon."
"And I am very fortunate to have you, Lady Moon."
28 notes
·
View notes
Note
People have probably asked you this before but what is your personal interpretation of The Battle of Red Mountain? Personally, I love the idea of Dagoth being tempted by the heart despite him being the one guy to urge the tools not be used. (Nerevar too to an extent but he’s bad at making decisions)
I just love my tragic six council.
*rubbing my hands together* This is the perfect question for me! I have already given this much thought because I too love drama. So you're getting a bit of an essay; I hope you are ok with that :D. Skip down a bit if you just want just my thoughts on my interpretation, but I'm gonna start by laying out the options and my thoughts on some of the different interpretations first.
So first of all, I don't think there is a canon for it. Both in the sense that I don't think Bethesada or the Morrowind team actually have a solid canon idea of what went down, and that I don't think any one retelling has overwhelming evidence that blows the others out of the water completely (although some have more merit to me than others).
The other strong opinion I have is that I dislike the Dragon Break explanation (at least in the way I see most people present it). Despite Dragon Breaks being one of the more interesting pieces of lore (and one of my favorite watsonian explanations for an in-game thing ever), I think it is the most boring interpretation of the BoRM. I know there's some canon support for it, but it just doesn't speak to me. Like, if every version of the battle could have happened "simultaneously" because of a Dragon Break, then that means that there's a chance no one is lying because the version they tell is truly how they experienced it, even if someone else experienced something else. Where's the fun in that? We're here for tragedy and lies and drama.
So I sort of see there being 6 main versions of what happened that we've been given (with some details changed depending on the exact source): 1) the Ashlander version (descended from the account of Alandro Sul, 2) the Temple version, 3) the Nord version (from the Five Songs of King Wulfharth), 4) the version in the 36 Lessons of Vivec, 5) Vivec's version (as told to the Dissident Priests and the Nerevarine), and 6) Dagoth Ur's version.
The Ashlander version (x) (x) (x) has the Tribunal outside of the mountain fending off the Dwemer army while Nerevar and Voryn fought Dumac and Kagrenac in the Heart Chamber. These put Voryn (and presumably House Dagoth) on the side of the Chimer. Progress of Truth claims the Dwemer destroyed themselves, while Nerevar at Red Mountain claims Azura showed Nerevar how to "use the tools to separate the power of the Heart from the Dwemer people" (whatever that means) and turned them to dust. After that, Nerevar is kinda fucked up, so while Voryn urges him to destroy the tools, he tells Voryn to guard them while he get's the Tribunal's opinion. They're like "let's keep 'em" and he's like "actually never mind I want Azura's opinion" so they poison him, take the tools, and kill Voryn. This one is interesting because the Ashlander mythology and culture seems to be mostly based on oral tradition, so the versions we see of their accounts have been written by scholarly outsiders (obscuring the truth even further). Additionally, they claim this version was passed down from the the account of Alandro Sul, but that leaves a lot of time for this version of the story to change and morph. These are probably, like, 30th level accounts of what happened.
The official Temple version (x) (x) (x) (x) (x) claims Nerevar was martyred in the BoRM, dying of his injuries, and puts House Dagoth and Voryn on the side of the Dwemer. Most of these claim Nerevar killed Dumac and then died from his own injuries (Saint Nerevar specifically claims these were injuries inflicted by Voryn), but don't specify what happened to Voryn or what was going on with the Tribunal during the battle. This version is much more vague about pretty much everything than the Ashlander or Vivec versions. The thing to note with these sources is they are either obviously biased propaganda from the Tribunal Temple or are drawing from obviously biased propaganda from the Tribunal Temple.
The Nord version (x) is way different from the others and for that reason I kinda ignore it to be honest. So in this version (as far as I can tell?) after the War of the First Council kicks up, Voryn drags the Nords into it by telling them he knew where the Heart of Shor (Lorkhan) was. This version seems to put the Nords and House Daogth (including Voryn) on one side and the Chimer and Dwemer on the other. Nerevar and Dumac are still buddies here and fight Voryn and Wulfharth in the Heart Chamber. Voryn kills Dumac. Nerevar kills Voryn. Lorkhan kills Nerevar. Nerevar kills Lorkhan. Alandro Sul is blind now. Vivec might be there.
The 36 Lessons of Vivec version (x) is also one I kinda ignore in terms of what happened during the BoRM since it too is essentially propaganda and largely lies (also I have a hard time understanding it). From my understanding, Vivec puts the Dwemer and Nords against the Chimer. There's sort of an overall placing of the "Sharmat" against the Chimer/Nerevar as well, but no explicit mention of what Voryn or House Dagoth is doing. The Tribunal destroy the Dwemer and "remove them from the world", while Nerever "went too far inside [Red Mountain], seeking the Sharmat [Voryn]" as it exploded. I guess that's how Nerevar dies? Of course, there is also that infamous secret message in the lessons: "He was not born a god. His destiny did not lead him to this crime. He chose this path of his own free will. He stole the godhood and murdered the Hortator. Vivec wrote this."
Vivec's version to the Dissident Priests (x) is probably the most detailed, and one of two that are first hand accounts. In this version, he claims that during the battle Nerevar and Voryn went into the Heart Chamber and fought Dumac and Co., where Nerevar killed him. Kagrenac did something with the Heart and *poof* all of the Dwemer are gone. Voryn tells Nerevar they should destroy the tools, but Nerevar wants to get the Tribunal's opinion. They tell him to keep them, and he agreed under the condition that "the tools would never be used in the profane manner that the Dwemer had intended". Nerevar and the Tribunal go to get the tools from Voryn, but he refuses to give them up, so the gang fights him, gets the tools back, and Voryn escapes. The Tribunal keep their oath for years (Nerevar nebulously stops existing during this time) before using them and pissing off Azura.
Daogth Ur's version (x), claims that he loyally served Nerevar until the end, and Nerevar betrayed him by killing him after telling to him to guard the tools. "Yet beneath Red Mountain, you struck me down as I guarded the treasure you bound me by oath to defend. It was a cruel blow, a bitter betrayal, to be felled by your hand." What a wordsmith!
The one depiction we have of Nerevar's murder is a sketch Kirkbride did for Morrowind's 10th anniversary and it doesn't match a single one of the other versions we have, but because it's visual (and dramatic) it is burned into the fandom zeitgeist so it's worth mentioning.
So none of these line up completely, but there is some significant overlap between a few.
Interestingly, the Ashlander version of the build up to the War of the First Council and the events of the battle itself up until Nerevar goes to chat with the Tribunal is pretty much the same (with the exception of how the Dwemer disappeared) as Vivec's account to the Dissident Priests. Where they differ is in what happened to the Dwemer, Voryn, and Nerevar. To me that makes that sequence of events the most likely of all of the options from a "which is most likely canon" perspective, and the differences between the two come down to bias, with the Alandro Sul and the Ashlanders trying to bolster Nerevar's accomplishments and portray the Tribunal poorly, and Vivec trying to dissuade any suspicion that he killed Nerevar.
Also interestingly, Dagoth Ur's account matches Vivec's pretty closely, with Vivec claiming Nerevar (and the Tribunal) had to fight Voryn to get the tools back, and Dagoth Ur claiming Nerevar killed him (presumably to get the tools back), despite their completely opposing biases. That's gotta mean something. I'm not sure Voryn ever actually says the Tribunal murdered Nerevar now that I'm thinking about it (please correct me if I'm wrong), rather just implies they betrayed him (which could of course include murder though). Meanwhile, Vivec's secret message in the 36 Lessons is basically a murder confession.
This is so messy (in the best way).
SKIP HERE FOR JUST MY THOUGHTS!
So which one do I like? It depends. Like I've said before, I'm here for interpersonal tragedy among Nerevar and Co., so the version I prefer depends on what part of the tragedy you want to focus on. If I want an interpretation of the story that focuses mostly on Nerevar and the Tribunal's relationship, the Ashlander version where they murder him is the most juicy. But a version where he dies from his fight with Voryn, and the Tribunal watch him die, might be the most tragic. If I want the focus on Nerevar and Voryn's messiness, then perhaps his version where Nerevar kills him is the best fit. If I want a focus on Nerevar and Dumac, perhaps Nerevar dies from those wounds. One of my favorite things about Morrowind is that there is no right interpretation, so you can mix and match for the circumstances of what kind of story you want to tell! You don't even have to be consistent. So much angst potential! So much fun to be had!
If I had to create a best ""canon"" interpretation though based on all of those versions I just detailed, it would be this: Following the Ashlanders' and Vivec's account of the build up to the battle, with the Dwemer (and Nords and Orcs are there too I guess idc) on one side and all of the Chimer houses and tribes on the other, Nerevar, Voryn, and Alandro Sul (among others) end up in the Heart Chamber while the Tribunal lead the charge against the bulk of the Dwemer army outside of the mountain. During the fight in the Heart Chamber, Nerevar and Dumac fight one-on-one, ending with Nerevar very injured, but having killed Dumac (it's tragic and emotional. Poor Nerevar). With Dumac's death, the direction of the battle turns to Kagrenac, who is messing with the tools and the Heart. Knowing everything is about to close in on him, Kagrenac does... something... to the Heart and the Dwemer all disappear (I personally like to think it was a lot less planned and perfected than most like to think. It was a panic move). His tools are left behind, and Voryn gets them and tells Nerevar they should destroy them, considering what they just saw and what he knows personally of Kagrenac. Nerevar is pretty delirious and distressed, and doesn't trust himself enough to make the decision. Knowing he hadn't trusted the Tribunal as much as he should have about the Dwemer leading up to this point, he decides it would be best to get their input. He tells Voryn to stay with the tools, and while Voryn is hesitant to be there alone (that could be because he is nervous to be in the presence of the Heart with the tools, or because he doesn't want Nerevar alone with the Tribunal or getting their advice), Nerevar trusts him fully. He is helped out of the mountain and to the Tribunal, who are dealing with the aftermath of the Dwemer disappearing. Note that at this point in their lives, they are annoyed and frustrated with his leadership, and don't trust his decision making too much. They urge him to keep the tools, and he is not thrilled about it, but relents because he is tired. They all rest a few hours, and then go back into Red Mountain to get Voryn and the tools. There, for whatever reason, Voryn won't give them back (I'll get back to why in a minute), and things escalate very quickly, with the situation ending with Nerevar having killed him. Nerevar, now having killed two of his closest friends over this, changes his mind and decides against using the tools, making the Tribunal swear an oath to never use them, period. They aren't thrilled about this, and their animosity towards Nerevar just grows. They either bide their time and wait for Nerevar to die, or kill him themselves sometime after this, after which they use the tools and piss off Azura.
So back to the topic of Voryn, your point about him is interesting. I feel like there's so many ways to interpret him in this situation and how exactly he was invovled. How did he find out about what the Dwemer (or at least Kagrenac) were doing? What side was he on during the war? Was House Dagoth on his side? Did he mess with the tools when he was left alone with them? If he did, why?
Knowing he was probably closer with Dumac and Kagrenac (whether that be personally and/or politically) than most other Chimer, that could explain how he knew about the heart. I've had a thought in the past that perhaps one of them straight up showed him the Heart and the Numidium, which spurred him to warn Nerevar about it. What if that exposure to it fucked with his head a little, like radiation? Afterwards, he could always feels it's pull and beating, and it only got stronger when he got closer to the mountain. It's like a drug that gets you hooked instantly. My thought was perhaps that was the reason why 1) he is hesitant to watch the tools (and be alone with the Heart), 2) wanted the tools destroyed, knowing first hand how maddeningly powerful the Heart is, and 3) he gave in and messed with the Heart when left alone. There is a delightful irony to him being the first of the Chimer to use the tools despite being the one to most strongly urge not to.
On the other hand, it is from Vivec's account to the Dissident Priests that we get the idea that he had messed with the tools when left alone with them, and of course Vivec has reason to portray Dagoth Ur as insane and unreasonable and corrupted by the Heart to the priests. Perhaps though, Voryn had been faithful and hadn't done anything with them, and was instead unwilling to give the tools to Nerevar because he didn't want them in the hands of the Tribunal, who he believed wouldn't be so noble. Vivec only depicts this as an irrational and power hungry move as projection. On that note, I wish we could've gotten Almalexia and Sotha Sil's account of what happened. I'm sure they'd be just as dubious as Vivec's, but they would've been fun to analyze.
One last thing, I've always been curious about House Dagoth's involvement in the War of the First Council. While the Temple puts them on the side of the Dwemer, it's pretty safe to say this is a form of propaganda to make them look bad after their house was disbanded and essentially erased from history. Other sources give little mention of House Dagoth, but mention their leader, Voryn, as serving under Nerevar, so it's likely the house was on his side as well. I have had the curious idea before though that perhaps House Dagoth, having been more closely aligned and politically/culturally similar to the Dwemer compared to the other houses, had a fracturing caused by the war, with some following Voryn's leadership on the side of the Chimer, and others following the Dwemer. This could explain the conflicting accounts of whose side they were on (ignoring the propaganda angle). But that's more AU than a headcanon.
Anyway, TLDR: it depends! There is no one account that is particularly more canon than others (although i think some are more reliable than others). Different scenarios maximize different drama for different characters, so my interpretation depends on what you want to get out of depicting that battle!
Oh my god I am so sorry this is so long. I'm sure you didn't want this much, but I just have so many thoughts and I figured his would be a good opportunity to vomit them all into the world. If anyone actually read this whole thing, I appreciate you greatly!!
#mine#ask#a very wonderful ask!!#morrowind#tes#the elder scrolls#headcanon#avahkadoo#long post#so i have a fanfic i started drafting where the idea is each chapter is a different way nerevar couldve died#so i already had a lot of these thoughts on hand lol#i debated deleting most of this because writing this much is veryvery cringe of me but im being brave and making myself post it#im also kinda anxious posting any of my interpretations#so uh nervous about this one tbh
49 notes
·
View notes
Text
i had new thoughts about the validity of DNF book reviews and i want to share them
Something a friend said reminded me of A Book Review Incident I was involved in a while back, wherein a DNF review I wrote made some people angry both for a) not finishing the work, and b) what I had to say about the part I did read.
I'm not going to dredge up the review itself or name the book, that's not important. But thinking about it again while doing dishes (dish-thoughts is the new shower-thoughts) made me realize there's distinction between types of review and the expectations people have for them, and thus why some people absolutely cannot stand DNF reviews.
How I see it now, the problem is the gap between two styles of book review:
An analysis and examination of the work itself on its own merits;
A review of the experience the reader had reading the book.
For the sake of brevity, let's call these the "scholarly" and "product" reviews.
Back when I was a college student, even when I was not formally tasked with a book "review," I was expected to read the assigned material fully and engage with all of its content, in order to discuss it in class, or use it as a basis for a paper, or whatever else the class required. I could not not finish the reading and present my frustration with it as a valid form of participation for grading purposes. (I tried that once with a particularly difficult book in a particularly annoying class, and to no one's surprise, it did not go well.) This is what I mean by the scholarly review type: DNF reviews are unacceptable.
Product book reviews, on the other hand, are functionally like the review of any other product. I recently bought a handheld vacuum, and I read the reviews of several models before I chose one. I looked to see how many one-star reviews there were, and judged the reasonableness of the complaints. If Vacuum A was prone to weak suction or didn't charge quickly, while Vacuum B had attachments that were hard to fit to the nozzle, I wanted to know these things in order to make my decision. Likewise, if many readers of a certain book I might be interested in didn't like it, I want to know why, and DNF reviews are perfectly valid in this case, because not wanting to finish the book is a true experience the reviewer had, that gives me information about my possible enjoyment of that book.
To be honest, many reviews are some of both. I know I write both kinds, either on their own or combined, depending on the book. Most reviews I read are both types combined as well, generally weighted more towards product than scholarly, but still with aspects of each.
My galaxy-brain moment came when I realized that DNF-review haters want scholarly reviews when they're actually getting product reviews.
No, if I didn't finish the book, I can't credibly talk with someone about the full plot, its themes, the deeper meanings. I don't possess that information. But yes, my experience of not finishing the book is still potentially valuable to someone else who might be saved the trouble of reading it themselves because my review pointed out some poor qualities of the work, or potential unmarked triggers about sensitive subject matter, etc etc.
I don't expect to change anyone's mind with this or significantly alter the state of book review discourse--for the most part, people don't even interact with book reviews much, it's rare for me to get more than a few likes, barely ever a single comment or reply, and The DNF Review Incident only happened that once, quite memorably.
Also, I'd have to be posting reviews, which I'm not, again. I am still reading. I may start writing reviews at some point.
But I had these thoughts, and the way my brain works, they required expressing, and I decided to do it here in case my realization helped someone else understand (possibly) why the haters gonna hate.
90 notes
·
View notes
Text
Are libertarian scholars shills and useful idiots for the rich?
Are libertarian scholars shills and useful idiots for the interests of the rich? Many people are saying this. My take:
Big financial interests, such as Koch funding, are responsible for some growing hazards to the integrity and quality of some academic professions such as philosophy. My own academic philosophy department (BGSU) received Koch funding several years ago, which has been a catalyst for endless insanely complex controversies.
There is some scholarly work which is bad or flawed, but which financial interests cause to either (A) wrongly come into existence in the first place, or (B) attain a degree of high status and influence disproportionate to its objective value.
This adds to an already considerable pile of non-value-tracking biases which wrongly influence the status of many scholarly works—such as the Matthew Effect, various careerist biases, barriers to access stemming from systemic oppressions such as classism, ableism, sexism, racism, and transphobia, as well as social trend feedback cycles (e.g. many philosophers write about X because a bunch of *other* philosophers are writing about it, even if X’s objective importance is questionable), and the fact that many philosophers believe X or work on X because their department mentors or peers do, etc.
As one possible example: Why are there so many capitalist libertarian philosophers? Sometimes philosophers disproportionately support a minority viewpoint because the viewpoint has serious intellectual merit which the general public irrationally fails to recognize. For instance, I think there are a lot of philosophers who support ethical vegetarianism because the arguments for ethical vegetarianism are objectively very strong-- despite widespread popular disagreement by people who irrationally fail to recognize the strength of the case for vegetarianism. Is libertarianism like this? No, I think it is questionable whether libertarianism is objectively strong enough to merit this degree of philosopher support on intellectual grounds.
On the one hand, I think a lot of libertarian scholars have done good work—often they have noticed many flaws in popular and scholarly pro-redistribution (and pro-regulation) arguments, and a lot of them have made important contributions to critiquing drug prohibition, immigration restrictions, and anti-sex-work laws, and they’ve advocated for Universal Basic Income. Sometimes they have noticed evidence for significant downsides to economic and business regulations, which progressives ignored. Robert Nozick, Michael Huemer, and other right-libertarians have shown that redistributionist arguments tend to be sloppy and badly oversimplified. Bleeding heart libertarians of the Steiner-Vallentyne school have made powerful contributions to the case for Universal Basic Income and other good ideas, and have built on the legacy of classical liberalism e.g. by exploring the implications of the "Lockean proviso" (which sets limits on traditional capitalist assumptions). Many progressives have failed to give credit to the diversity and sophistication of the capitalist libertarian tradition.
Rightwing and leftwing capitalist libertarians have also inspired progressive scholars such as GA Cohen (analytical Marxist) to develop improved arguments for redistribution. I want to give serious credit for this, similarly to how I give some gender critical feminists serious credit (despite the evils of their ideas) for inspiring trans rights advocates to improve their arguments for pro-trans advocacy.
On the other hand, libertarianism is a weird and sectarian school of thought, in some ways quite fringe, with a strong connection to insane beliefs like “taxation is wrongful theft.” In fact, it is very obvious that the horrors of poverty are much more severe and vastly more important than the mild badness of stealing from the rich.
...No, seriously, give me a break. Why does the stupid contrary view hold so much influence despite its being manifestly stupid? Overall, stealing from the rich to give to the poor is blatantly good, cool, and based. Who could disagree?
It is highly plausible that libertarianism is so high-profile in large part because a lot of rich people see it as supporting their interests.
Now, are all libertarian ideas pro-rich? Are they all anti-poor? No, that is a common uncharitable misperception. Some libertarian scholars, even some right-libertarians, have been at pains to show that many of their ideas would support the poor and not the rich. I think libertarians support a cluster of policies--some of which would benefit the rich, and some of which would harm the rich.
If libertarians were to win totally (i.e. make all their policy ideas into a reality), it might or might not overall benefit the rich, and it may even harm them—such as by allowing more small businesses to fairly compete in the market, and by ending government subsidies (corporate welfare) for (or deals with) vicious and mass murderous industries like coal companies, the war profiteering industry, the various prison profiteering industries, some surveillance industries, and animal factory farms.
Total libertarianism would also plausibly benefit the poor in many ways, such as by drastically curtailing the power of police over marginalized poor people, cutting off support to various prison industries, combating conservative and progressive forms of puritanism and paternalism, and ending the terror of deportation and associated abuses that hang over the heads of many migrants. It may also end some forms of day-to-day terror against homeless people, sex workers, and some other groups.
However, this may depend on how much power it hands to big business, and on how much of an interest big businesses have in screwing over marginalized people. Such matters could be highly context-sensitive. For instance, some "hostile architecture" (e.g anti-homeless spikes on places to potentially rest in public) are created by private industry, some by government. If libertarianism wins, will there be more or fewer anti-homeless spikes than before? Well, I don't know. Still, there is a good chance that libertarian polices would overall help the poor a lot.
There is also the problem of many, many high-profile libertarian crackpots—such as Walter Block (of the Mises Institute) who has argued in favor of legalizing workplace sexual assault, and Murray Rothbard who has argued in favor of legalizing the right of parents to starve their children to death (although his views on adoption rights may complicate this reading of his view).
Moreover, many lay non-scholarly libertarians are also insane crackpots, such as the “Mises Caucus” people who have apparently taken over the US Libertarian Party (although most libertarian scholars condemn them). The one anarcho-capitalist who has gained power, Javier Milei, is also probably a crackpot who seems on track to reinforce authoritarianism e.g. by strengthening the power of police to crack down on protestors (despite this move’s obvious incompatibility with libertarian principles). Such issues present a serious black mark on the record of libertarianism as a movement, and strengthen the case for thinking that libertarianism as a movement is unable to improve the world (despite the fact that many individual libertarians have good intentions and actively promote good ideas).
Nevertheless, many libertarians are immensely more principled and clear-cut in their stances on immigration, drugs, and sex work than are many liberals and progressives, and they should be praised for this. For instance, many libertarians explicitly support open borders, while many liberals waffle on whether to condemn the Biden administration’s treatment of immigrants. There may also be some underappreciated convergence between libertarians and leftists in critiquing the corporate capture of government. For instance, I wonder if there’s room for more cooperation between Marxian ideological critics and public choice theorists.
All that said, plausibly some rich people see the advocacy of libertarianism as overall beneficial to themselves and their financial interests in actual practice—perhaps because they think that libertarians tend to succeed in implementing their helpful-to-the-rich ideas but fail to implement their harmful-to-the-rich ideas. This may explain why rich people tend to support libertarianism. And there may be some evidence for this combination of trends.
For instance, over the last few decades, libertarians & libertarian-adjacent scholars (such as Milton Friedman) succeeded in advocating some kinds of big business deregulation, tax cuts for the rich, and welfare-cuts (which helped the rich and hurt the poor), but failed in their advocacy of open immigration, medication patent reform (to lower drug prices), residential zoning reform (to lower housing prices), and the legalization of drugs and sex work—all of which would help the poor, and harm at least some of the rich, helping fewer of the rich. Much of this combination of libertarian success and libertarian failure constitutes what is commonly called "neoliberalism," which in practice consistently benefits (most of) the rich while hurting (at least many of) the poor.
Many of the global poor have also benefited from neoliberal globalization. If this is their best option, then it's a good thing overall, since we should aim to help the global poor the most. However, I wonder if better options (such as international unions, raising the floor of the race the bottom) may have been unduly closed off, to the benefit of the rich. Some comparatively good-for-the-poor deals may also have been implemented alongside bad-for-the-poor deal such as international debt traps. I'm not sure of the best empirical evidence on a lot of this and need to research it more.
I’m oversimplifying, but something like this overall view does seem likely to be a common pattern and plausible hypothesis. Libertarians have also failed in their mild advocacy for polyamorous marriage or civil unions (despite some version of this being obviously the correct position—anti-polyamory views are blatant bigotry), possibly because there aren't enough rich people who’d benefit from it.
Progressives have been uncharitable and mistaken in their view of libertarianism as a whole. However, progressives have been largely correct in their view of what effects libertarianism as a movement has caused. And, in some ways, this is more important than the nature of libertarianism as a whole. If libertarians resent being so negatively and unfairly judged, they should aim to improve the actual effects of their movement.
Here's what I suspect is really happening: Libertarians promote a combination of good ideas and bad ideas. In the real world, their bad ideas (the ones which only help the rich) are the ones that win—and the rich know this, and this is why the rich support libertarians. The rich have little to fear from libertarians’ harmful-to-the-rich ideas, because they can ensure these ideas won’t win. The rich can happily fund libertarian scholars to promote welfare cuts & deregulation and zoning reform & cutting subsidies to evil industries—perfectly content in the knowledge that the welfare cuts & deregulation will win, and that the zoning reforms & subsidy-cuts will lose.
(The zoning reforms, or immigration reforms, or whatever, may win if the economic situation changes so that these reforms will help the rich enough, but not otherwise—unless the poor can overcome their collective action problems and successfully fight for their interests and rights, which the rich want to use their power to prevent.)
In fairness, a similar pattern may apply elsewhere too. For instance, maybe bad (authoritarian) leftisms tend to win and defeat the good (non-authoritarian) leftisms, because e.g. (1) authoritarian leftists tend to be willing to screw over the non-authoritarian leftists (their former allies) after the Revolution (e.g. in the USSR), and (2) authoritarian leftist leaders may tend to more successfully prevent counterrevolution and/or imperialist regime-change, compared to non-authoritarian leftist leaders, via repression or suchlike. So maybe leftists, like libertarians, may also face a serious puzzle of how to raise the probability that their *good* versions, rather than *bad* versions, are the ones that will win—yet find that the bad versions have distinctive features which give them strategic advantages over the good versions.
I should also note that not all Koch-funded projects benefit the rich, some leftwing projects are also funded by billionaires (whether Koch or others, such as Soros), and it is disputable whether people should always turn down Koch or billionaire money when it is on offer, especially when other funding sources are scarce. Some people erroneously accuse Koch-funded projects of being objectionable even when they aren’t. For instance, Mich Ciurria insinuated that the Koch-funded project on “Grandstanding” (aka virtue-signaling) by Brandon Warmke and Justin Tosi was biased against leftwing radicals, and I argue she is badly mistaken. In several ways, Ciurria’s description of the “Grandstanding” book is misleading. I defend the Warmke-Tosi “Grandstanding” work as important, even valuable for progressive advocacy.
However, the broader system of funding by rich people in general is an enormous hazard. Rich people have the morally least important needs, and they are the fewest in number. For this reason, their interests are objectively the least important. But they are immensely more powerful than all the non-rich people combined, in most cases. This situation is egregiously unjust. The rich people fund scholarship, in philosophy and elsewhere, largely in order to serve their financial interests—even if not all these projects in fact serve their financial interests.
The rich diversify their investments, and presumably some of their investments don’t pay off for them. The rich may also finance some projects which aren't expected to serve their financial interests, for reasons such as to improve their public image. In light of such facts, I say not all recipients of rich people (e.g. Koch or Soros) funding should be assumed to be shills or useful idiots. Also, on the grounds of my actual engagement with the relevant scholarship, I assert that Brandon Warmke & Justin Tosi’s “Grandstanding” work will not likely function to discredit the viewpoints and advocacy of marginalized people or their allies (even though Brandon and Justin are conservatives), contrary to common allegations. Again, some leftwing scholarship is also funded by billionaires such as Soros, but this does not necessarily discredit it.
All that said, on the whole and in general, the rich are our enemy and we must fight against them. We should take a critical eye toward scholarship that they have an interest in funding.
19 notes
·
View notes
Note
What about the Papas x reader where it’s a young sibling of sin (About 18-19ish) that looks up to them and helps them out around the ministry whether it’s bringing them snacks/drinks when they can tell Papa is stressed or knows they haven’t eaten to helping out with paperwork. They also know when Papa needs someone to talk to leading to many conversations. Perhaps to a point where they become close friends and trust each other completely?
I can't see this specific scenario turning out in a romantic way because of how young the reader is. So this will be written with the reader being seen as a younger sibling/adopted type of platonic relationship! (Which I believe you were asking for platonic, Anon. I just need to make it clear with the use of 'x' as the relationship dynamic for other readers. :) )
This didn't quite end up coming out exactly like the prompt, so I hope this still fits what you were looking for! I tried to keep it as realistic as I could see it occurring in the ministry. With each Papa having a different type of role!
Please enjoy some wholesome goodness!
Mentor/Big Brother Papas x Student/Little Sibling Reader (Platonic/Familial)
Papa Nihil: For you, it was just supposed to be a job to help rub elbows and get some ass kissing points. No one REALLY wanted to be a caretaker for an old fart like Papa Nihil, right? There were very few opening positions for someone your age in the Ministry, and certainly FEWER for serving a Papa! So you were excited when you could snatch it up! You were the youngest in a group of siblings that would rotate watching over Nihil. Honestly, you were expecting him to be an unbearable grumpy old asshole... You couldn't have dreamed of practical Satanic Royalty being the wholesome grandpa you never had. Yes, Nihil could be grumpy and needy. He had constant wants of his movies being played, of his food prepared right, and never wanting to sit down. But he treated you and his closest staff like family.
Specifically you when he found out that you were still just a young pup in the clergy! Nihil constantly informed you that you were practically a baby and had much more important things to do than attend him. During his times when he is more mellow he has admitted you remind him of his own children when they were new to the world. You suspect he misses his sons, so you don't put up a fuss when you end up watching horror movies with him or taking dinner breaks with him. Nihil asks about your life all of the time, wanting to know about you and your interests. Sometimes he even brags to the visiting Sister Imperator about the accomplishments you've had in your life! (Sister has made it clear she watches you like a hawk, but is pleased at your ability to pacify the old man.) Eventually, it becomes less like a job to you and more like getting to hang out with your grandpa all day! And everyone who sees you both together actually just assumes Nihil has a grandchild no one knew about!
Papa I: Being recognized for scholarly merit or magic comes with incredible benefits. When you joined the ministry you had no idea that you were so gifted in the occult. You were instantly chosen for higher tutoring. When you excelled at learning you were handed off to one of the most prestigious circles in the entire Ministry- Papa Emeritus I's personal apprentices. This both excited and terrified you, considering how dark and serious the eldest Emeritus Brother was. Papa spit fire and brimstone during every sermon he preached, and rumors of his deadly magic were known to every clergy outpost in the world. Being inducted by Papa, you were expecting to get dunked in blood and needing to offer flesh to unlock your training. Instead, you met with a rather blunt yet pleasant Papa. Who was well articulated during his interview and gauging where your abilities would best be nurtured.
You discovered this scary old Antipope was very calm and eager to speak of knowledge. You and the other apprentices would gather weekly under the watchful eye of your mentor. Papa overseeing your collective academics and tests. You two especially became close in time due to your own thirst for knowledge and natural aptitude for magics. Soon you found yourself a proud direct apprentices to the Papa, who was happy to teach you more one on one. He was a brilliant mentor and your bond solidified considerably. He spoke to you closer to an equal than most others, watched over your well being in and out of studies. And sometimes you both shared meals just to speak about life and your personal interests. Papa is a proud mentor to such a fine student! And you found one of the people you trust the most in the entire ministry!
Papa II: You weren't exactly Papa's ASSISTANT! You were more like the errand runner and coffee maker for Papa's Assistant. Either way, it was a good job to have in the ministry with amazing pay and tons of perks! But you'd be lying if you said you weren't terrified in the beginning. Papa II was adored widely but that didn't mean people weren't afraid to work for him. He had a reputation for being precise, detail oriented, scheduled, and unwilling to work with those he deemed incompetent. His assistant even had to teach you his precise espresso order before allowing you to go into his office. You MUST have impressed Papa with your coffee. The first time you actually got to speak to the man was giving him his espresso. He took a sip, offered a 'hmm', and politely thanked you before you knew to leave. According to his assistant... THAT'S THE BEST REACTION YOU COULD GET!
The more you worked the more you joked about being in the Satanic version of The Devil Wears Prada. Your boss was this incomprehensibly powerful man everyone was afraid of. But, you were relieved to find he was quite the gentleman. Just no room for slacking. The more time you worked and proved yourself the more chances you had to speak to Papa. Sometimes he would go out of his way to ask you questions about your thoughts in the ministry and Ghost project. And you had his routine down to not even needing to be told when he needed a break, paper work filed, or to make reservations. His assistant ended up being let go, but you were told directly he trusted you to pick up the pace. So far you are his youngest assistant in record history, but you do your job well. You're not sure if you'd call your working relationship a friendship. But for him, it's pretty darn close. Considering how private he is, that's more than many can claim! And you know that means he trusts you more than he would any other sibling!
Papa III: It's no secret that Papa is the most popular among the younger generations of the clergy! His unconventional approach to tradition and open manner makes him the easiest to relate too. Papa loves to be hands on with his congregation and build rapport and trust with every sibling he meets. In fact, you both met during one of his many meet and greets after his sermon to speak to his adoring fans flock. This was your first time receiving a blessing from THE Papa III. You were so nervous you blurted out how he inspired you finishing your seminary courses and that you wanted to work hard to join the ranks. Papa laughed and offered you a job on the spot. Truthfully, you thought he was just being funny as he immediately gave you a blessing and you went on your merry way. Nothing could prepare you for receiving the paper work to apply for a spot in his direct administration.
You were floored that all of your seminary qualifications could even LAND you an entry level position for a PAPA! According to the hiring ghoul, Papa liked your spunk! You worked your ass off from being lower administration help to fighting for the opening of one of Papa's many assistants. He always considered you the junior and almost mascot of his personal office. Your relationship grew from friendly to sibling like the more you interacted. Papa had a soft spot for your bright eyed optimism and wanting to do good in the world. He often asked for your opinion when it came to relating to the younger siblings and learning new trends and technology. You found Papa to be a surprisingly guarded and private man- but he was honest and direct when speaking with you. But he always made time for you and even took lunch breaks with you. Papa is happy to have you around, and you in turn grew to have a protective and loving big brother figure in him.
Cardinal Copia/Papa IV: You were more or less adopted by Copia years before he ever became Papa. Back before you graduated seminary and had your induction into the Clergy. Copia was a very involved Cardinal in his home cathedral, where you grew up in your final teenage years. Despite being awkward and a huge dork to your peers, you had a soft spot for the Cardinal. He was like having a very nervous uncle who helped fund all of the best field trips. When you were having some difficulties during your studies Copia's office was opened to you. It went from a few check ups to you visiting whenever you needed the support. He listened to you during your bad days, times you needed advice, or were just feeling lonely and like you needed family. Hell, you even did a small summer program that was like an internship working for him!
You both became as close as he checked on you, helped you with your homework, and even volunteered to oversee your class events. You felt safe with Copia and he grew to adore you like his own child! You knew he wasn't able to have kids for a while, and you weren't really close to your own relatives. It was nice going into Seminary feeling like you had a real parent backing you up. He's practically still your dad these days, even with his new Papa schedule! Copia keeps up on your life, your new position in the ministry, and you've both joked about him adopting you so you could put 'Emeritus' on your driving license.
#the band ghost#ghost bc#ghost reader#reader insert#young reader#wholesome#papa emeritus i#papa emeritus ii#papa emeritus iii#papa emeritus iv#cardinal copia#papa nihil#sister imperator#teen reader
88 notes
·
View notes
Text
By: Aaron Sibarium
Published: Dec 11, 2023
Harvard University president Claudine Gay plagiarized numerous academics over the course of her academic career, at times airlifting entire paragraphs and claiming them as her own work, according to reviews by several scholars.
In four papers published between 1993 and 2017, including her doctoral dissertation, Gay, a political scientist, paraphrased or quoted nearly 20 authors—including two of her colleagues in Harvard University’s department of government—without proper attribution, according to a Washington Free Beacon analysis. Other examples of possible plagiarism, all from Gay’s dissertation, were publicized Sunday by the Manhattan Institute’s Christopher Rufo and Karlstack’s Chris Brunet.
The Free Beacon worked with nearly a dozen scholars to analyze 29 potential cases of plagiarism. Most of them said that Gay had violated a core principle of academic integrity as well as Harvard’s own anti-plagiarism policies, which state that "it's not enough to change a few words here and there."
Rather, scholars are expected to cite the sources of their work, including when paraphrasing, and to use quotation marks when quoting directly from others. But in at least 10 instances, Gay lifted full sentences—even entire paragraphs—with just a word or two tweaked.
In her 1997 thesis, for example, she borrowed a full paragraph from a paper by the scholars Bradley Palmquist, then a political science professor at Harvard, and Stephen Voss, one of Gay’s classmates in her Ph.D. program at Harvard, while making only a couple alterations, including changing their "decrease" to "increase" because she was studying a different set of data.
The four papers that include plagiarized material comprise a sizable portion of Gay’s academic work. Gay, who is Harvard's 30th president, has authored just 11 peer-reviewed articles.
"If this were a stand-alone instance, it would be reprehensible but perhaps excused as the blunder of someone working hastily," said Peter Wood, a former associate provost of Boston University, where he helped investigate several cases of suspected plagiarism. "But that excuse vanishes as the examples multiply," said Wood, who now serves as the director of the National Association of Scholars.
Some of the most clear-cut cases come in Gay’s 1997 dissertation, "Taking Charge: Black Electoral Success and the Redefinition of American Politics," which copied two paragraphs almost verbatim from Palmquist and Voss.
The paragraphs—from a paper Palmquist and Voss had presented a year earlier, in 1996—do not appear in quotation marks. One is unmodified but for a handful of words, and Gay does not cite Palmquist or Voss anywhere in her dissertation.
"This is definitely plagiarism," said Lee Jussim, a social psychologist at Rutgers University, who reviewed 10 side-by-side comparisons provided by the Free Beacon, including the paragraphs from Gay’s dissertation, which received a prize from Harvard for "exceptional merit."
"The longer passages are the most egregious," he added.
Academics say the pattern raises serious questions about Gay’s scholarly integrity and her fitness to lead the nation’s oldest university, which has been at the center of a political firestorm under her watch, particularly since Oct. 7. Student activists have blamed Israel for the Hamas terrorist attack and Gay herself offered equivocal testimony before Congress about whether calls for the genocide of Jews violate Harvard’s code of conduct.
Donors, alumni, and over 70 congressmen have called on Gay to resign. University of Pennsylvania president Liz Magill, who testified alongside Gay, tendered her resignation on Saturday.
"The question here is whether the president of an elite institution such as Harvard can feasibly have an academic record this marred by obvious plagiarism," said Alexander Riley, a sociologist at Bucknell University. "I do not see how Harvard could possibly justify keeping her in that position in light of this evidence."
Neither Gay nor Harvard responded to a request for comment.
Other cases of near-verbatim quotation occur in two peer-reviewed journal articles from 2017 and 2012, when Gay was a tenured professor at Harvard, as well as in an essay she published one year out of college, in 1993. Along with her dissertation, the decades-long pattern paints a picture of sloppiness, at best, and willful dishonesty at worst.
"It seems clear that Gay had a habit of using others' words in ways that violated Harvard's policies," a professor at a top research university, who received his Ph.D. from Harvard’s government department, told the Free Beacon. "And several examples would land any student in serious trouble."
Gay’s 1993 essay, "Between Black and White: The Complexity of Brazilian Race Relations," lifts sentences and historical details from two scholars, David Covin and George Reid Andrews, with just a few words dropped or modified. Covin is not cited anywhere in the essay.
In a section called "Suggestions for Further Reading," Gay does include Andrews’s 1991 book, Blacks & Whites in São Paulo, Brazil, 1888-1988, but not his 1992 paper, "Black Political Protest in São Paulo, 1888-1988," from which the offending text was drawn.
The 1993 essay "concerns me less," Riley said, given how early it was in Gay’s career. "However, it shows a quantity of plagiarism so egregious that minimally Dr. Gay should stop putting it on her CV."
The two peer-reviewed papers, by contrast, are "much more serious," Riley said.
In "Moving To Opportunity: the Political Effects of a Housing Mobility Experiment," Gay borrowed language from a 2003 report by eight researchers—three of them Harvard economists—prepared for the Department of Housing and Urban Development.
And in "A Room for One’s Own? The Partisan Allocation of Affordable Housing," Gay borrowed language from a 2010 book by Alex Schwartz, Housing Policy in the United States, and from a 2011 paper by Matthew Freedman and Emily Owens, "Low-Income Housing Development and Urban Crime."
Freedman and Owens are never cited, though Gay thanks them for letting her use their data. Gay does cite Schwartz and the eight researchers elsewhere in "Moving to Opportunity" but not in the sentences where their quotes appear. None of the passages have quotation marks, creating the impression that they are Gay’s own language and ideas.
Some examples are more borderline than others, scholars who reviewed them said, but clearly violate Harvard’s guide on sourcing, which requires citations even when using "ideas that you did not think up yourself," regardless of how much the language has changed. Plagiarism, the guide adds, is "unacceptable in all academic situations, whether you do it intentionally or by accident."
Even crediting a source in the wrong sentence, as Gay did repeatedly, is a serious offense under Harvard’s policies. The school’s sourcing guide includes multiple examples of "mosaic plagiarism," in which placing a citation too late or too early in a passage causes "confusion over where your source's ideas end and your own ideas begin."
Gabriel Rossman, a sociologist at the University of California, Los Angeles, said that several portions of Gay’s work met the definition of "mosaic plagiarism" outlined in Harvard’s guide. So did Steve McGuire, a member of the American Council of Trustees and Alumni and a former professor of political theory at Villanova University, who said the examples "violate the expectations Harvard has for its own students."
"As a professor, I would not have accepted this kind of work from a first semester freshman," McGuire told the Free Beacon. "It’s appalling to see it in the work of Harvard’s president."
Rossman, who specializes in quantitative research, noted that some of the examples involve technical descriptions of statistical methods, which "can require very precise wording" and are often repeated between authors, a potentially mitigating factor. But an editor at one of the five most-cited academic journals in the world pushed back on that notion, arguing that even that sort of duplication in academic prose is difficult to defend.
"The text duplication points to carelessness, sloppiness, and short-cut taking," said the editor, who has edited journals in both the natural and social sciences.
Some of the victims of Gay’s plagiarism were more sanguine. Jeffrey Liebman, one of the Harvard economists who prepared the Department of Housing report, said he and four of his coauthors did "not see any signs of plagiarism." Like Rossman, he argued that it was defensible for scholars to crib technical descriptions from each other.
Gay "had the right to use and adapt this common language," he said.
Voss, who coauthored the 1996 paper with Palmquist, said that although the paragraphs Gay quoted were "technically plagiarism," they were "not terribly important" to her argument.
"If I caught a student doing that, I would tell them it was inappropriate," Voss said. "But I would never consider taking action against the student."
But Wood, the former Boston University associate provost, said the feelings of the plagiarized are irrelevant.
The "willingness of the actual author to go along with the copying (whether before the fact or afterwards) doesn't change the deceptive nature of the act of plagiarism," he said. "The plagiarist is breaking the trust of the community of readers. In the case of scholarship, the whole university community is the victim."
It is common for plagiarized authors to come to the defense of their plagiarizer, Wood said. When Princeton historian Kevin Kruse was accused of plagiarizing Ronald Bayor, a historian at Georgia Tech, for example, Bayor dismissed the accusations as "politically motivated."
Other cases of possible plagiarism—all from Gay’s dissertation—were uncovered Sunday by the Manhattan Institute’s Rufo and Karlstack’s Brunet. Though the revelations are new, rumors of Gay’s plagiarism have been circulating on econjobrumors.com, a popular message board for social scientists, since at least January 2023.
"Most plagiarists turn out to be serial thieves," Wood said. "If the offense is discovered in one publication, typically it will be found in others."
In a statement to the Boston Globe, Gay said she stood by the integrity of her scholarship.
The Harvard Corporation, which held an emergency meeting over the weekend after Gay’s disastrous testimony on Capitol Hill last week, did not respond to a request for comment.
Update 10:10 p.m.: An earlier version of this story incorrectly stated that Gay had not cited Alex Schwartz in the paragraph where his quote appears. She did cite him in that paragraph, but not in the sentence where she quoted him.
==
This is what happens when you hire for DEI, not merit.
In spite of all of this, Claudine Gay should not be fired for plagiarism, any more than Kendi should be rejected for his financial mismanagement. Because this misses the point.
Harvard's own paper, The Harvard Crimson, reports that over 700 staff and faculty are in support of her remaining on. They cite "university independence." Which should reasonably be taken as an agreement to no longer accept public funding, even though that level of integrity is not what they meant.
What the 700 supporters does indicate is how far and how extensively the ideological corruption has set in. That's the reason she should be dismissed. She should be let go because Harvard has decided to abandon intersectional DEI garbage as its primary telos, and to reclaim its academic integrity and rebuild its - perhaps irreparably - damaged reputation.
The problem is that, unsurprisingly, its council have officially chosen the intersectional DEI garbage over any pretence to integrity.
#Claudine Gay#Harvard University#Claudine Gay is corrupt#academic corruption#plagiarism#eradicate DEI#diversity equity and inclusion#diversity hire#diversity#equity#inclusion#DEI bureaucracy#unethical#ethics violations
14 notes
·
View notes
Text
Historians and Hamilton (or a brief defense of Michael E. Newton)
There is a post out there that's something like "don't believe Michael E. Newton - he's not a historian and he's a finance bro." (I'm not deliberately vagueblogging - I just can't find the post and it's been weeks.) Now I'm not a Newton fan, and last I checked he was promoting an hour long youtube video on Alexander Hamilton's kindness (or some such nonsense), but he's conducted original research that merits review.
My concern with the post was two-fold:
That's just the old ad hominem fallacy;
2. Finance bro? - who do folks think Alexander Hamilton was?
There was a discussion on here about 1-2 years ago about who was/wasn't deserving of the title historian. "Historians" come from a variety of departments - journalism (Ron Chernow, financial journalist), English (Fawn Brodie, famous for biography of Jefferson and introduction of psychobiography), economics (Broadus Mitchell, still the gold standard Alexander Hamilton biographer) and so on. What ultimately matters is if they present their work for scholarly evaluation, and Newton does that. I have issues with some of his interpretations - though most are very limited anyway -but he's put his own or crowd-funded money towards finding and piecing together documents and put it out there for anyone to evaluate, as far as I can see (disclosure - I briefly interacted with him about a specific question about his research and he provided responses). The facts he's presented about Hamilton's early life are either right or wrong. He's also accepted by others wearing the historian hat, among them Richard Brookhiser (as the editor of National Review, maybe he's dubious, but he's certainly gotten awards and funding for history studies) and Stephen F Knott (can't really question his bona fides).
Now the great irony of Newton's discoveries about AHamilton is that they demolish the very argument that finance bros most want to make about the background of the man - that he was self-made, someone who rose up through his own merit, someone whose unfortunate background led to a lifetime of striving for the public good. Newton's AHamilton is a descendent of one of the wealthiest families in St. Croix, his mother - even post-divorce - had middle class wealth, the members of his extended family were the wealthiest people on St. Croix, he became a sort of business manager for an international shipping firm based out of NYC, he's gifted 15x the average salary of an American laborer by a relative, he arrives in the American colonies and goes to live with two of the wealthiest men in the colonies and attends schools that the wealthiest people in the colonies send their own kids to, and continues to receive opportunities through West Indian/American connections. And later, poor guy, his half-brother leaves him over 10x the average salary of an American laborer. This is not someone working their way up from the bottom, engaged in a struggle to overcome hardship and poverty. This is also not someone who is going to be personally insecure about his status. Compared to the average Anglo-American white man of that time period, heck let's even define it as the average Anglo-American middle class white man, Alexander Hamilton led a very privileged early life. But to repeat, that's not what finance bros - or those who love the Hamilton musical - want you to know about Alexander Hamilton, which makes Newton's work pretty interesting.
4 notes
·
View notes
Text
Climate change is a mental health issue
And part of a solarpunk present…
Content warning: this article briefly talks about depression, suicide, and self-harm
In the course of researching for my thesis, I read a lot of things: scholarly books, articles, essays… but also lots of pulpy science fiction (of course), and also a lot of recent online articles (usually news or journalism) about climate change and its effects.
The recent essays and articles that I read had a fascinating overlap: they were talking about climate, but they were also talking about mental health. Mental health issues such as depression and anxiety are a natural corollary of experiencing the climate changing.
(I have my own thoughts about how that leads to the very concept of the climate, or the environment more broadly, being a mental untouchable or taboo topic, that many peoples’ thoughts automatically shy away from; a way that their minds are helping to insulate and protect them from a negative psychosomatic experience. Thus, why it can be so difficult for many to address climate change because our very minds are refusing to allow us to face the scary thing directly, because it kicks up such a strong instinctual fight/flight/freeze response. But, this is a tangent, and one I am extremely underqualified to take. Someone call in some psychologists…)
Back in 2005, philosopher Glenn Albrecht coined the term “solastalgia”, which is a neologism that, according to the author in a 2007 article for PubMed, operates
As opposed to nostalgia--the melancholia or homesickness experienced by individuals when separated from a loved home--solastalgia is the distress that is produced by environmental change impacting on people while they are directly connected to their home environment.
When I started researching (only 8 years ago!), this was one of the only publicly accessible and known terms (in English) outside of a specific niche of (western) academia to describe this phenomenon of the way that climate change can be pretty entwined with significant mental health issues.
Albrecht is Australian. He used the examples of open-pit coal mining, or deforestation. In the almost twenty years since that publication, I think the global community can add phenomena such as catastrophic wildfires, persistent and ruinous sea-level rise, tailing ponds spillage, industrial water poisoning, widespread drought, melting permafrost, century floods, and more to that list.
This is part of why I was so keen to do an interview about climate grief chaplaincy, which I had never heard of before. Even now, only two years later, therapists and psychologists are starting to advertise climate-focused services. On the one hand, I am so very glad that assistance is being offered to those who need it. On the other, I’m big mad about how, yet again, the issue of climate change is being framed as an individual problem.
At least chaplaincy is very conscious of community—as Gabrielle explains in the episode, there is a strong tradition of movement chaplaincy among activist groups in the so-called United States that is tuned into a more collective experience and casts climate change in that light (more appropriately, I feel).
Solarpunk’s dream of a just, sustainable future isn’t solely for bodies. There’s an aspect of being human - our mind, our mental health, our intangible selves, our spirit, what some would call our soul - that merits careful attention as well. I imagine that any community that is truly solarpunk pays just as much attention to what cannot be quantified about the human experience as what can be.
And if we are to have a hope of attaining that care-ful attention to the human being as a whole, it would behoove us to begin practicing thinking about, caring for, and paying attention to that aspect of our selves in the present day.
One way to do this would be for any climate journalism, going forward, to include links and references to local climate helplines, actions, and groups as relevant to the discussion in the article, in the same way that articles dealing with suicide, self-harm, depression, and other extremely difficult topics are already doing.
Realizing the mental toll that a swiftly-changing-for-the-worse climate has on readers, especially young people, is to my mind a journalistic duty of care. It has been shown many times that an important mitigating factor of climate anxiety and climate grief is the chance afforded to do something, to act on the knowledge that the reader has just learned. Another huge mitigating factor is not feeling alone in the face of overwhelming odds and at the mercy of negative feelings.
In the midst of my studying, I began to volunteer at my local food bank, for example. Being in the community and having a tangible way to help other humans (and knowing that I was helping to ease their burdens of anxiety and stress, as well as cope with the food shortages induced by climate change and lend a hand to an organization struggling to help its members) was extremely helpful in mitigating my own dark night of the soul of post-apocalyptic despair and grief in that moment.
Did it solve everything? Nope. Did it make my climate anxiety disappear? Not a chance. But it helped ease it generally, and for four hours a week it banished my anxieties around the climate almost completely; in my experience, it’s hard to feel shitty when I’m not afforded the luxury of dread, but instead am in the midst of facing (a corner of) the issue head-on.
I discovered solarpunk on Tumblr back in the twenty-teens, and I was hooked. Part of why I like solarpunk so much is the emphasis on doing what you can, when you can, to make things better now - even if it’s just the corner of the neighbourhood you live in. The effect on mental health of even just picking up litter can be tremendous. Another reason I’m such a fan of solarpunk is that it is a shared experience, one where terms like ‘climate grief’ and ‘climate anxiety’ aren’t up for debate but instead are nuanced and treated seriously, and it is a diverse community to be part of, one that continually evolves and changes and isn’t afraid to have difficult conversations, respectuflly. Access to feeling better in the face of the denial and despair of the Anthropocene should be available to everyone, no matter where they are or who they are.
What do you do to mitigate your own negative climate emotions? I’m no longer able to volunteer at that food bank (I moved, and now I can’t lift things for health reasons, it’s a whole thing…), but I’m part of my local community garden, which helps to mitigate food scarcity and improve neighbourhood resiliency and community. Tell me what you get up to, or hope to get up to in future!
#solarpunk#solarpunk presents#climate change#climate#climate grief#climate anxiety#eco-grief#eco-anxiety#mental health#journalism#volunteering#activism
5 notes
·
View notes
Text
Okay, so, I was in the middle of a post about Blondie's mortal family but I've hit a bit of writer's block with that, so have a breakdown for the V20 Character Sheet for Eliza's sire. Hopefully I rolled him up properly, lmao:
Picrew
BASIC INFORMATION
NAME: Asher Leighton
CLAN: Ventrue
GENERATION: 11th
-
DEMEANOR: Guru ("Your enlightenment draws others to you. You may be a mentor or of a particular Path of Enlightenment, a priest with the Church, or merely an idealist. Whatever the case, your presence motivates and moves others to engage in spiritual or ideological pursuits.")
Demeanor: "Demeanor is the way a character presents herself to the outside world. It is the "mask" she wears to protect her inner self."
-
NATURE: Competitor ("The Competitor takes great excitement in the pursuit of victory. To the competitor, every task is a new challenge to meet and a new contest to win. Indeed, the Competitor sees all interactions as some sort of opportunity for her to be the best - the best leader, the most productive, the most valuable, or whatever...")
Nature: "Nature is the character's "real" self, the person she truly is."
-
D.O.B.: 1873
D.O.D.: 1903
HUMANITY: 6 ("People die. Stuff breaks...")
DISCIPLINES:
Dominate (•••)
Fortitude (0)
Presence (0)
NOTABLE ATTRIBUTES
Appearance -(••••) ("Exceptional: People go out of their way to make your acquaintance.")
Manipulation - (•••) ("Good: You never pay full price.")
Charisma - (•••) ("Good: People trust you implicitly.")
Intelligence - (•••) ("Good: More enlightened than the masses.")
Wits - (•••) ("Good: You are seldom surprised or left speechless.")
NOTABLE Skills ABILITIES
Knowledges:
Academics (•••) ("Masters: You could get a paper published in a scholarly journal.")
Finance (•••) ("Masters: You'd make a fine stockbroker.")
Law (•••) ("Masters: You can make a living of the practice, and probably do.")
Politics (•••) ("Masters: Campaign manager or talk-radio host; the clerk will help you navigate the forms you need to complete and tell you who needs the duplicates.")
Talents:
Leadership (•••) ("Competent: An effective CEO")
Subterfuge (••) ("Practiced: Vampire")
Intimidation (••) ("Practiced: Skinhead thug") (<- Thank you old WoD edge. Not a big fan of that description. )
Skills:
Etiquette (••) ("Practiced: You've been to a black-tie event or two")
BACKGROUNDS
Domain (•••) (+ Protection. •••) ("A highrise, city block, or an important intersection - a location or area that offers areas for concealment as well as controlled access.")
Resources (••••) ("Wealthy. You rarely touch cash, as most of your assets exist in tangible forms that are themselves more valuable and stable than paper money. You hold more wealth than many of your local peers (if they can be called such a thing.)")
Generation (••) ("Eleventh Generation")
Retainers (•) ("One Retainer")
Herd (•) ("Three Vessels")
MERITS & FLAWS
Elysium Regular (•) ("You spend an unusual amount of time in Elysium. You see and are seen to such an extent that all of the movers and shakers of Elysium at least know who you are. Extended time in Elysium also gives you extended opportunities to interact with the Harpies and other Kindred of that stature - and they'll know your name when you approach them.")
Prestigious Sire (•) ("Your sire has or had great status in her Sect or Clan, and this has accorded you a certain amount of prestige. Though your sire may no longer have any dealings with you, this simple fact of your ancestry has marked you forever. This prestige might aid you greatly in dealings with other vampires, or it might engender jealousy or contempt")
Concentration (•) ("You have the ability to focus your mind and shut out any distractions or annoyances. Characters with this Merit are unaffected by any penalties stemming from distracting circumstances (e.g. loud noises, strobe lights, or hanging upside down.")
BACKSTORY N' THE LIKE Minor Ramblings :)
While I don't particularly have an overly lengthy backstory written out for Mr. Leighton just yet, I would like to take a moment to ramble about the relationship between Eliza and himself. It's... a complicated one; being Blood Bound for the better part of 17 years'll do that to any relationship.
The two of them care for one another in their own, twisted ways - the blood curse of Caine (and a healthy dose of having to deal with other Kindred) having weighed on each of their emotional responses heavily. Leighton, for example, gave Eliza the 'choice' between being sent away to jail (with the implicit, underlying threat being that she may end up like her husband if she did) or to study under his tutelage, eventually joining him and his sire in the eternal night. In his mind, it was the just thing to do - many other Kindred, especially other Ventrue, would never have even given the line of thought the time of... day? night? You get the point. It was a kindness... A mercy... One that would've meant his head too should the craftiness she displayed in her initial gambit ended up being used against the Clan in any real capacity.
Then there's the bit where he would visit a ghouled Eliza at her home whenever he got a free bit of time in his schedule and wanted to kill time. He, I think, was genuinely interested in how she was living her life away from him as well as how the son he had held off on her Embrace for was keeping up - but, again, there was always an underlying threat therein; I know where you sleep, his actions would say where words would've easily sufficed. I know where your son sleeps; if you step out of line - there isn't likely much that you could do to step out of the way of my wrath. Not that she would've been able to recognize it - mind being addled by the blood bind as it was.
Then there's Eliza's side of things. After the blood bond wore off and she was Embraced, she wasn't particularly sure where her opinions on her sire began and where warped opinions from her addiction ended. She still struggles with it, but in the end, she decided to take it one day at a time - forming new opinions on him, unmuddied. She came to care for him in her own way, enough for her to be willing to diablerize a Lasombra at his insistence alone for some unspecified goal he hadn't shared with her at the time, in relatively little time at all.
I don't know where I'm going with this, I'm nodding off as I'm writing it, but they're awful for each other. Love that for them
7 notes
·
View notes
Text
Stopped back in camp. Since I'm accumulating quite a lot of gold at this point I blew a bunch of it on having Gale learn all of the spells he's able to from the multitude of scrolls I have him carrying around. I've never played a wizard in table D&D but the internet seems to indicate this is a good strategy. Gives him lots of flexibility.
Also went to talk to Lae'zel about the encrypted story we found. She approved for us telling her about it but did not seem very happy about its contents.
Narrator: The disc appears in your mind's eye. Lae'zel sees it too, and considers the vision.
"Tir'su markings. Ancient. I recognize them, but I can't make sense of...no, wait. The texts are enciphered, but I've solved the pattern. It's a story. About--" She pauses, and then her voice goes cold. "About Orpheus."
Narrator: Your head buzzes in concert with Lae'zel's, but it hardly matters. Even without the connection, you'd recognize her discomfort.
Hector is still not all that close with Lae'zel, but he knows her well enough to see the agitation that this discovery has engendered in her. So he's very careful as he prods further. "Tir'su, you said. What does that mean?"
"Githyanki writing. Every word a wheel, every letter a spoke. The most powerful texts are engraved in slate - some so ancient, only the most erudite gish can read them."
This gives Hector some pause. He has viewed Lae'zel primarily through the lens of her violent nature, but she was able to see this disc in a mental vision and translate it almost instantly. If this is indeed the provenance of only the most intelligent of the githyanki...then she is perhaps smarter, closer to his own scholarly nature, than he gave her credit for.
"I've read this one already," he says, his voice lightening a little bit, treating this now as a discussion one scholar to another. "What do you make of it?"
"Drivel, all of it," she snaps at once - and he can hear now some defensiveness in the answer. "Gith declared Vlaakith queen of the empire, and her own son defied her. Orpheus would have ceded control to the ghaik."
Hector has very little knowledge of gith history, but it is obvious that the story in this tome is anathema to the beliefs Lae'zel was brought up with - rather as Shadowheart's faith is anathema to his own. So he understands that defensive dismissal - but he speaks anyway, still eager to discuss the text, the merits of it. There hasn't really been much opportunity for academic debate since the nautiloid.
"And if it's true?" he asks. "It sounds like Vlaakith betrayed Gith and seized the throne."
She scowls, raises a hand as if to lash out, then lets it slowly drop to one side again.
"She did nothing of the sort," she snarls. "Thank your good fortunes I'm a tolerant woman, or I'd have sliced off a few toes for suggesting it."
Hector raises his hands placatingly and backs off the subject. His curiosity is still raging, though - and not just about the tome. This brief conversation has suggested a depth to Lae'zel that he was not aware of. It will bear watching.
6 notes
·
View notes
Text
On H.P. Lovecraft
After reading two of Leslie Klinger’s fabulous Complete Annotated Works of Lovecraft, various fragments from several of his own letters, and several of the kind of articles debating his merit or lack thereof in light of his flagrant racism and xenophobia that always crop up around the time any new adaptation comes out, I feel like I could write a fucking essay with sources and shit psychoanalyzing the scope and nature of this sad bastard’s damage.
I even thought about it, but I’m gonna try to keep it brief because this is fucking tumblr, not a scholarly journal. What I will say is this: I was afraid of Lovecraft as a child. Not his writing, but the man himself. After seeing his creations and reading his weird-ass fucking name at 8 years old, I paused in wonder at what kind of abyss-eyed fucking lunatic he must be. Google image Alan Moore and then imagine him built like a brick shithouse and racially ambiguous and with even scarier eyes and that’s basically what i pictured.
This was as a kid, of course, before I knew that horror writers were very rarely frightening people themselves and, by and large, tended to fall into two camps: the utterly ordinary (your Stephen Kings) and the anxious, phobic, neuroses-plagued wrecks that could barely step outside without having a panic attack (that would be your Poes)
Lovecraft, of course, falls in the latter camp.
Later, I learned that he of course was frightening for much different, more mundane reasons. Violent racism, a hatred towards most ethnicities on the globe (apart from, of course, Anglo-Saxon as well as a few hand-picked ones from around the globe he believed to be worth a shit, but still felt should stay far the fuck away from him) a lukewarm “well they’re ridiculous and going too far, but their hearts are in the right place” shrug of the shoulders towards the burgeoning nazi party in Germany, a sigh and shake of the head, with a “well, it’s unfortunate, but what do you expect these people to do?” towards lynchings in America, and a eugenicist attitude that wasn’t out of place at the turn of the century, but was noticeably more pronounced in Lovecraft than the average American citizen.
Lovecraft is often called “fair for his time”, but it’s a phrase I find disingenuous, unspecific, and unhelpful. A thoroughly unforgivable monster by today’s standards, he would at the standards of the time, be...roughly the equivalent of an alt-righter, tottering right on the line between socially acceptable prejudice to the more standard bigots and what was, even then, considered fringe lunacy. He may not have been the kind to storm the Capitol, but he would be the one only reluctantly and mildly condemning their actions and violently railing against any intimation of Trump’s involvement. That’s about where he would fall on today’s spectrum, roughly.
But the more I’ve learned about him recently, the more I realize he was, beyond his obvious and untreated mental illness, a deeply pathetic human being, with a racism and xenophobia founded mostly in an absolutely broken view of the world and his relation to it.
Of course can he be frightening in his hatred, his voice a weapon despite his personal squeamishness about violence? Of course. You can be pathetic and frightening at the same time. It’s remarkable, in fact, how often those traits coincide.
But I am able to take some comfort in it.
Now this is the part where I would back this up with a bunch of fragments of his writings and letters but I can’t be arsed so just do me a solid and give me the benefit of the doubt, but two things become clear from studying the man’s correspondences and his dream-cycle stories.
First, that he could see absolutely no unifying human condition, no allegiance to the species as a whole, no such concept as a brotherhood of man or a global community or anything of that nature. The goal of life, he stated in no uncertain terms, was to do your best to preserve the lifespan of your own kind, people just like you, your personal culture and way of life. There was nothing else. That was the way to make your mark on the world. Even when he admired other cultures, he felt the best thing they could do was keep away from HIS culture, preserve THEIR traditions, and refrain at all costs from intermixing THEIR blood with lesser ethnicities, a practice he said ruined both India and Egypt.
The second, that becomes evident once you read enough of his dream stories in a row, is that the man was fucking obsessed with reclaiming his childhood. I don’t know what kind of trauma this guy endured exactly eehhh i mean his dad going insane and dying of syphilis and his mother following suit for unrelated reasons probably had something to do with it, but anyway. Whatever his damage, it clearly left him, his whole life, so profoundly nostalgic for a time of innocence in his childhood that he could never recover and possibly never even existed that it bordered on an obsession.
The man died at 46 living with his Aunt in the same town he was born in. And that wasn’t because of circumstances of poverty, that was by choice. Desperate to recapture a ghost, grabbing at the smoke of some feeling he only thought existed because that’s what memory does to people.
We take these ideas, we mix them with his clear fear of the unknown and his anxieties of insignificance, and a clear picture of the psychology of his hatred can be ascertained.
He was a boy who never grew up. A terrified child, running from a world so much bigger than him, a world he felt insignificant and worthless in, a world that scared and confused him in its noise and chaos and change. All he wanted was the safety of his (privileged, sheltered, very very anglo-saxon) childhood back. And in his fear, he clung to white supremacy for dear fucking life, shrieking obscenities about the lower life-forms around him because if his genes weren’t special, if his race wasn’t special, if his culture didn’t deserve to be preserved....what was there? What was the point of being alive at all? The point of living, after all, was to preserve your kind, your name, your culture. Yet he moved to New York and was surrounded by people from a thousand other places and a thousand other cultures and none of them cared and he wasn’t special at all.
Like I said, it’s kinda pathetic.
And yet...he has endured. Not because of the racism he thought would save him, but in spite of it. Because the world is full of better and more forgiving people than him, people of different cultures and races who are willing to overlook his stupid, his pathetic bullshit and see the potential that is there.
The almost universally celebrated Mexican film-maker Guillermo del Toro makes absolutely no mystery about how much he adores Lovecraft and often cites him as an influence. The Japanese Junji Ito, whose horror manga’s images i guaranteed are seared into your brain even if you don’t know his name, has cited him as well, and of course there’s Victor Lavalle. Victor Lavalle, the black author who won the Shirley Jackson Award undertaking the fucking Herculean task of salvaging a decent story out of the spectacularly racist and simply quite bad short “The Horror at Red Hook”, a labor I, and I imagine most critics, would have dismissed as a waste of time.
A black author. Black folks being, of course, one of his most violently maligned races. And a black author turned one of his shittiest, most racist works into a worthwhile story and, for his efforts, was asked to write a forward for one of the definitive anthologies of his work, ripping him a new asshole even as it praised him.
And that’s the beauty of the thing. The final cosmic joke played on Howard Philips.
Lovecraft’s work enduring in so many styles, with so many people of different racial and cultural backgrounds, is in and of itself testament to how wrong he was. The more his stories are adapted or used as jumping off points by black or Latino or Asian (or Dutch, Irish, Polish, etc.) creators, the more they are not only saved from obscurity but improved by the addition of different voices, the more tiny and pathetic and childish his worldview of keeping himself safe by isolating to his Anglo-Saxon little corner of New England seems.
Some people feel Lovecraft is vindicated by his posthumous fame and growing global legacy. Personally, I feel like it spits in the face of everything he stood for. Lovecraft, in his way, was perfectly content to let his horror be weird and fringe and read and defended only by his friends, to die feeling like he was a misunderstood outsider.
He was proud of his race and his racism, proud of his lineage and xenophobia and embarrassed of his stories.
Now his work is celebrated by people all around the world who he would have fucking HATED, even as he is relentlessly posthumously bullied (in no small part by me) for his horrific worldview.
Every time Guillermo del Toro takes Lovecraftian influence and makes a fable about tolerance, he rolls in his grave again. And I find that kind of funny.
6 notes
·
View notes
Text
Comprehensive Biography of Zhao Yu
Zhao Yu, styled Yuanda (趙昱字元達; d. 193/194), was a civil official who was the Grand Administrator of Guangling Commandery. He was known for his benevolent demeanor. Later, Ze Rong killed him.
Ancestry
Zhao Yu came from Langxie Commandery.[1]
Childhood and Education
When he was 12 years old, his mother became seriously sick for three months. Zhao Yu, throughout the whole time, felt extremely concerned and stressed, as well as becoming more thin from it. It got so severe that did not sleep for days on end. He offered grain to the gods to receive divinations and while praying, he cried so hard it was like blood gushing out of a wound. All of this gained his fellow villagers' respect for such filial piety.[2]
He was taught the Gongyang Commentary by a recluse scholar, who was just called Gentleman Qiguan, while also doing other unspecified deeds. He became so engrossed in his studies that he rarely went outside or visited his family, and when he did visit his family, he only lingered for a short time before returning back. This described how dedicated Zhao Yu was to his studies.[2]
Early life
He was friends with Wang Lang and Zhang Zhao when he was young; he was already known for his scholarly deposition.[3]
Later, one of the Nine Ministers, Zhong Fu, recommended Zhao Yu as Filial and Incorrupt for his uprightness.[1][2][3] At some point, he was also nominated as Flourishing in Talent.[2]
He was often invited to serve in local posts, but he often declined out of illness. Soon, the Chancellors, possibly of Langxie; Tan Mo (檀謨) and the later Chen Zun (陳遵) both summoned Zhao Yu, to no avail. Zhao Yu's frequent refusals made some of the officials increasingly annoyed and angry, but Zhao Yu still declined to serve.[2]
Finally serving
He was implied to serve as a Gentleman in Luoyang. Before 185, Zhao Yu was appointed Chief of Ju, which was in Langxie Commandery, Xu Province, to fill in a vacancy.[2][4][5] There, he preached about proper courtesy between family, like sons having to be filial and younger brothers having to respect their elders. Apparently, his type of government was praised by the nation.
At the time of his tenure, the Yellow Turban Rebellion was in full swing. Five nearby commanderies and their counties all sent troops to defeat the Yellow Turbans. Soon, the rebellion was put down. The Inspector of Xu Province, Ba Zhi, later wrote in a petition that his merits were the best compared to others', recommending that he himself be promoted and bestowed rewards. Zhao Yu considered this shameful, resigned his post, and returned to his family.[2]
Entering Guangling
Around 190, Zhao Yu became a subordinate of Tao Qian after much difficulty. It is said that Zhao Yu refused the initial summon, claimed illness, and tried to avoid Tao Qian. Soon, however, Tao Qian sent Wu Fan (吳範) with a more demanding letter. Zhao Yu still declined, but when Tao Qian threatened to punish Zhao Yu severely, he relented.[2] While serving, Zhang Zhao also declined Tao Qian's summon, resulting in him being imprisoned by the slighted Tao Qian. Zhao Yu humbly asked Tao Qian to release Zhang Zhao, which he eventually did.[2] Tao Qian frequently ignored Zhao Yu in other times, however, because he disliked his honesty, and heeded the advice of less than moral men.[2] At this time, the Guandong Coalition formed against Dong Zhuo, forcing him to move the capital to Chang'an from Luoyang with Emperor Xian by his side. Tao Qian was hesitant to support either Dong Zhuo via Emperor Xian or the coalition, so Zhao Yu and Wang Lang suggested to Tao Qian,
"The righteousness of the Spring and Autumn Annals states that asking help from the lords pales to serving the King. Now the Son of Heaven is far away in the Western Capital, you should send an envoy to receive royal orders."
Tao Qian thus sent Zhao Yu and some others to receive orders to Chang'an. Emperor Xian admired the trip there, so he appointed Tao Qian to become General who Stabilizes the East. To replace the rebelling Zhang Chao, the court appointed Zhao Yu as Grand Administrator of Guangling.[5] Among Zhao Yu's actions in this post was to recommend Zhang Hong for being Filial and Incorrupt.[6] During Zhao Yu's tenure, however, one of Tao Qian's trusted men, Ze Rong, was sent to supervise the transport of grain via water routes, only to embezzle them into his own pockets. Whether Zhao Yu was aware of this is unknown (see second account of death).[7]
Death
Either in 193 or 194, Ze Rong fled from Xu Province when Cao Cao invaded it. He apparently led 100,000 people as well as 3,000 cavalry to Guangling.[6]
There are two accounts of Zhao Yu's death. Traditional history states that Zhao Yu welcomed them and treated Ze Rong like a honored guest. Zhao Yu perhaps was trying to take pity on what he deemed refugees. However, Ze Rong was greedy and when he noticed how rich Guangling was, he (most likely) invited Zhao Yu to a banquet, got him drunk, and killed him.[6] He apparently killed Zhao Yu's immediate family afterwards and later ravaged Guangling.[6][8] According to Xie Cheng, however, Zhao Yu led troops against Ze Rong when he encroached onto Guangling, but was defeated and killed.[2] This may hold some credence, as Ze Rong was known for embezzling resources out of Guangling's water supply routes and could have attracted Zhao Yu's attention.[7]
Postmortem events
Around 200, Zhang Hong, now Grand Administrator of Kuaiji, was grief-stricken when he heard of Zhao Yu and his family's death. He sent one of his registrars to deliver a message to Zang Xuan (臧宣), the Chancellor of Langxie, stating that he should set up sacrifices as well as continue Zhao Yu's lineage. Zang Xuan agreed, selecting a four-year-old boy from Zhao Yu's clan to receive the sacrifices.[6]
Personality
Zhao Yu was described as being respected and kind; such was his courtesy that his eyes never drifted elsewhere when talking. He was also known for his strict morality, refusing to listen to any "evil words".[1] He praised good deeds and often encouraged people to be virtuous, while also speaking against evil deeds and corrected any wrongdoings.[2]
His main trait, however, was his eagerness to study. He was so concentrated on studying that he rarely visited his family and friends.[1][2] Xie Cheng also stated that literally no one was able to disturb his studies.[2] Chen Deng praised Zhao Yu's personality, saying,
"...For possessing innate incorruptness and despising evil, also having knowledge and having righteousness, I esteem Zhao Yuanda..."
Chen Deng praised him so.[9]
Legacy
The death of Zhao Yu and Ze Rong's ensuing raid on Guangling Commandery devastated it. Cao Cao later appointed Chen Deng to be Grand Administrator of Guangling.
Personal info
Name: Zhao Yu
Style name: Yuanda[1]
Death date: 193 or 194[8][a]
References
[1] - 【昱字元達，琅邪人。清己疾惡，潛志好學，雖親友希得見之。為人耳不邪聽，目不妄視。太僕种拂舉為方正。】《後漢書•劉虞公孫瓚陶謙列傳》
[2] - 【廣陵太守琅邪趙昱，徐方名士也，以忠直見疏；(謝承《漢書》曰：昱年十三，母嘗病，經涉三月。昱慘戚消瘠，至目不交睫，握粟出卜，祈禱泣血，鄉黨稱其孝。就處士東莞綦毌君受公羊傳，兼該羣業。至歷年潛志，不闚園圃，親疏希見其面。時入定省父母，須臾即還。高絜廉正，抱禮而立，清英儼恪，莫干其志；旌善以興化，彈邪以矯俗。州郡請召，常稱病不應。國相檀謨、陳遵比召，不起；或興盛怒，終不迴意。舉孝廉，除莒長，宣揚五教，政為國表。會黃巾作亂，陸梁五郡，郡縣發兵，以為先辦。徐州刺史巴祗表功第一，當受遷賞，昱深以為恥，委官還家。徐州牧陶謙初辟別駕從事，辭疾遜遁。謙重令楊州從事會稽吳範宣旨，昱守意不移；欲威以刑罰，然後乃起。舉茂才，遷廣陵太守。賊笮融從臨淮見討，迸入郡界，昱將兵拒戰，敗績，見害。）曹宏等，讒慝小人也，謙親任之。】《三國志•卷八》
[3] - 【與琅邪趙昱、東海王朗俱發名友善。弱冠察孝廉，不就，與朗共論舊君諱事，州里才士陳琳等皆稱善之。...刺史陶謙舉茂才，不應，謙以為輕己，遂見拘執。昱傾身營救，方以得免。】《三國志•卷五十二》
[4] - 【時選三署郎以補縣長...琅邪趙昱為莒長。】《三國志•卷七》
[5] - 【除菑丘長。師太尉楊賜，賜薨，棄官行服。...時漢帝在長安，關東兵起，朗為謙治中，與別駕趙昱等說謙曰：「春秋之義，求諸侯莫如勤王。今天子越在西京，宜遣使奉承王命。」謙乃遣昱奉章至長安。天子嘉其意，拜謙安東將軍。以昱為廣陵太守，朗會稽太守。】《三國志•卷十三》
[6] - 【(《吳書》曰：初，琅邪趙昱為廣陵太守，察紘孝廉，昱後為笮融所殺，紘甚傷憤，而力不能討。昱門戶絕滅，及紘在東部，遣主簿至琅邪設祭，并求親戚為之後，以書屬琅邪相臧宣，宣以趙宗中五歲男奉昱祀，權聞而嘉之。)】《三國志•卷五十三》
[7] - 【謙使督廣陵、彭城運漕，遂放縱擅殺，坐斷三郡委輸以自入。】《三國志•卷四十九》
[8] - 【曹公攻陶謙，徐土搔動，融將男��萬口，馬三千匹，走廣陵，廣陵太守趙昱待以賔禮。先是，彭城相薛禮為陶謙所偪，屯秣陵。融利廣陵之衆，因酒酣殺昱，放兵大略，因載而去。】《三國志•卷四十九》
[9] - 【清脩疾惡，有識有義，吾敬趙元達；】《三國志•卷二十二》
[a] - Cao Cao invaded Tao Qian twice, both in 193 and 194, and Chen Shou does not specify which campaign it was.
7 notes
·
View notes
Text
Being their sibling - Savanaclaw
Leona - Younger (I also have ideas for being the older one, let me know if you wanna see that)
Insult to injury, he's also the middle child
You're probably a lot closer to Farena than you are to him
Because you probably took what little positive attention he was getting on merit of being the baby
If you're afab. You're probably a military powerhouse in the making, and also their little princess
Literally and figuratively
The youngest? and the only girl? You do the math
If you're amab, your parents are probably trying to steer you towards a scholarly type job (because they already have their heir and their spare by the time you're born)
Regardless, If you're more like Farena, he hates you
Don't worry, Cheka love you to bits
If you're more like him?
Welcome to the club
Don't worry, Cheka still loves you to bits!
Did I mention Cheka loves you? Because he does
I pray you aren't at NRC at the same time as him
Because Ruggie will make fun of him
And that will upset him
And he will take that out on you
Ruggie - Older
Respects you to the moon and back
You're probably breaking your back to keep a roof over your heads
Plus, you're looking after grandma
And you taught him how to pickpocket and steal
But... Nana doesn't need to know that
No matter how much older you are than him
He was always hiding behind you when he got in trouble
He still does (shhhhh)
You probably instilled a strong "Whatever it takes" attitude through example
Anything you give him is practically as valuable as gold in his eyes
Because you probably had to save up for forever to get your hands on it
Even if it's ugly
He probably hugs you as a hello and a goodbye
He loves you okay? Even if he won't say it
Jack - Older
You two are close
You're probably a good bit older than him (5-6) years
So by the time the younger siblings were born, you were busy as all hell with school
Depending on where you hc the siblings ages
I place them around Chekas age because I can
If you went to NRC, you probably left some sort of impression
If it's a good one? He wants to live up to that
If it's bad one? He wants to prove any assumptions about him wrong
Also, Leona knows you if you did
Hmmmm
He probably spent his childhood trying to keep up with you
Until he got the hang of being his own person
7 notes
·
View notes
Last Seen Blogs
