#how can a party that says it represents Britishness | Explore Tumblr Posts and Blogs

stagefoureddiediaz · 9 months

Text

RWRB costume/ colour meta!

Ok, lets do this!!

Man have I missed writing costume/colour meta, so its good to have something to write about again! This took me far far longer than it should have - I kept getting distracted by the film while I was working on this - I'd go looking for a clip or to grab a still and end up just watching the film again 😂😂😂 but I've finished it and I hope you all enjoy it! Grab a beverage of your choice because this thing is a beast coming in at over 7000 words - I totally understand if you want to skip, but I have ADHD and do not know how to be concise 😂😂😂

Red white and royal blue employs several fun and interesting costume and colour theories (also made use of in the set design) to help tell the story of Alex and Henry. I’m not going to write a detailed meta for each costume - I just don’t have the time - but I am going to look at some costume/ colour details in focus, especially for Henry and Alex as well as highlighting other interesting choices! I also do not have the picture limit (I need more than 30!!!) to include every image I would like to, so if you want to see what I'm talking about, you might have to go check out the relevant scenes (I'll try to give you timestamps where I can!) I’ve kind of tried to do things chronologically, but I’ve left Alex and Henry to the end so if I don’t talk about them very much in the rest of this meta - that is why! putting it under a cut because its so long!

The royal Wedding

There are a couple of key themes here, the wedding party (consisting Lady Martha, Bea and Henry) have a distinct colour palette - dusty blue, dusty pink and Ivory, with the exception of Prince Phillip who is in his red Dress uniform - they’ve used a red uniform to make him stand out, convey that he is more important than the bride (what with his being in line for the throne and all that jazz) and hint at power - red is a power colour.

I’m not sure what royal orders the collar and riband that Henry is wearing are supposed to represent as they don’t belong to a specific British order - if I had to take a punt I’d say his red collar is meant to be a AU version of a Knight Grand Cross of the order of the bath but the one he’s wearing certainly isn’t a real order in the UK (it isn’t meant to be an order of the garter as that is the highest ranking order and Henry would then also be wearing the light blue riband we see on Prince Phillip) the royal blue riband with the red edging is more i line with the night grand cross of the order of Victoria, although in real life that riband should be for in the opposite direction. My feeling is that they wanted a red collar on Henry to play into the red as a symbol of power theme they’ve used on Prince Phillip, placing Henry as having the ‘power’ in his conversation with Alex (as he is on home turf) and the royal blue sash is a deliberate choice that I will talk about later when I focus in on Henry and I think its actually pretty significant as a choice. essentially the order insignia he is wearing are not real orders which is totally fine as this is essentially and au royal family!

We do have to talk about that wedding gown - not royal in the slightest - spaghetti straps and a low back would never be allowed for a royal bride, the dress is also too long on her (but that’s a different conversation about budgets and rental gowns so we’ll let it slide here!!) and her hair should also be fully up - not in the half up do she has going on! The colour is also wrong - she would have been tied to a very limited colour palette of white or ivory - no colour in a royal wedding gown, so the blush colour we see is a no go! I totally get why they did what they did with her gown in terms of colour and I’m fine with that choice (i’ll explain more in the next paragraph), I even get the fairytale princess look they were going for with that dress - but when you’re trying to portray a family so stuck in tradition and history etc, I can’t help but feel that they missed a trick to show her as buttoned up, conforming to the crown etc, especially as we never see her again!

At the reception we see pretty much everyone in colour of some description, with the exception on Alex and Nora who are both in black - this is why Lady Martha’s wedding dress is a pale blush pink colour rather than white. The only reason that the men aren’t in colour (if they’re not in dress uniform) is because they are wearing white tie for the formality of a royal wedding, otherwise I think we would’ve seen coloured ties or some such on them. This is intentional because the room has a general (muted) wash of colour which serves to highlight Alex and Nora, making them stand out and look like they don’t really belong.

Its a way of creating a them and us vibe and helps to establish the rivalry between Alex and Henry - we have a British scene, full of colourful clothing and the only identified foreigners are in black and white. We actually only see a black and white colour palette for the clothing of the Americans until Alex returns from his PR fix it trip to London after cakegate, while nearly all the Brits all were colour of some description - we can see this clearly in the hospital - all the children in colour, Henry in blues and - Henrys security in coloured ties while Amy is there totally in black.

Alex himself does wear navy blue but its a dark navy and that jacket is actually two tone - black and navy and its paired with black trousers in this scene - we see it again later - paired with taupe trousers which really helps to establish this idea of colour entering Alex's world once Henry is in it.

Sets

I’m going to pause on clothing here to quickly talk about the sets in the film and their colour palettes because they fall into three distinct categories;

We have the sage dusty greens, gold and bright reds of the British spaces - they have a regency and victorian air to them, all very traditional, opulent and royal in feel - they are the definition of a gilded cage and are ostentatious and Henry’s bedroom even fits into this mould (its very telling that we only see very limited physical intimacy between the two of them in this space - because its a space that neither of them truly fit or belong in) with its sagely green walls that echo the green walls of the state room the big royal family showdown occurs in.

Then we have the creams, taupes and beiges (with a bit of minty green for the walls of oval office) of the America spaces combined with the very intentional colour choice of that rusty orange (there is also the red room but that is a whole other conversation - I’ll go into it later).

The Rusty orange is such a colour choice, its rich and eye-catching. All colours have meanings associated with them - these can vary wildly depending on where and how they are used and have both positive and negative connotations.

Generally speaking, orange is an attention grabber - its energetic and stimulating, but it also conveys transformation and endurance. This orange has brown undertones which means we should also reference brown colour meanings when thinking about what the colour means on screen - brown is a safe colour and it is also strong and reliable, but it can also portray a sense of loneliness - that is something I think is a really interesting concept - we see Henry in Alex’s world (through the text chats as well as in the first blowjob scene) on the rusty orange sofas and one of the underlying major parts of who Henry is, he is enduring like the orange (and his royal status make him an attention grabber without needing to try) but there is that underlying sense of loneliness - yes he might’ve had a crush on Alex since the climate conference, but as soon as the air had been cleared between them during the PR trip Henry reached out and pursued Alex because he was lonely and wanted a friend - not knowing if it could ever be more than a friendship.

Then, finally we have the spaces Henry and Alex occupy - spaces which are just theirs to occupy - spaces when they are themselves - these are predominately yellow and blue spaces, with some deep colours such as the teal we see on the walls of Alex’s room and the red room.

I’ll go into more detail about all the yellow and blue in this film a bit later on in this meta, but to provide a comment on the red room - red is a colour of passion and love, but this shade of red they’ve chosen maintains that orange undertone we see in the rest of the American spaces.

I wrote a post on the choice of red calla lilies and how they are both a symbol of love and commitment, as well as a phallic symbol of sexuality, and I know Alexander Hamilton was on the wall in the book, but he is there not only because he was very likely bi, but also because he was the subject of what is known as the first political sex scandal - something our boys are essentially also themselves going to end up becoming!

Once Alex does return stateside we start to see colour begin to fill his world. This is a really interesting thematic choice - think how the wizard of Oz (a film very much associated with gay culture - ‘a friend of Dorothy’ was a slang code used by gay men to identify one another and there is obviously the rainbow connotation) begins in black and white and then transitions to colour as soon as Dorothy wakes up in Oz. This film is playing on that same trope/ concept - this is a story essentially told from Alex’s perspective, so Henry and his world is already in colour - its only when Alex enters that world and becomes entwined with it that colour starts to seep into his life - its done in a much more subtle way, but it is there - even during the text bantering they have going one while he is watching a film with Nora - it is a black and white film (‘Some Like it Hot’ - its self a film that helped open conversations about queer identity and the queer community at a time when the Hays code was still in operation and when Sodomy laws still existed in the US, but that is a whole other conversation and lots has been written about it before, its one of my favourite films and if you want to know more then head to your search engine of choice or hit up my inbox! It’s also a film our director Matthew Lopez adapted for the stage which is possibly partly why it was chosen for this scene- as a nod to his other work!)and they are both wearing grey while Henry is in colour (cream and blue - playing into the queer coded yellow blue theming) and sits on the bright orange sofa.

I cannot tell you how much I am in love with the Koi carp on Alex’s dressing room wall because the symbolism - the symbolism!!!!! Koi are seen as a symbol of strength, patience, perseverance, love and bravery they symbolise success through courage. Koi are known to swim against the current and overcome great obstacles - there is a Japanese proverb ‘Koi no Takinobori’ which translates as 'koi swim up waterfalls' and as the word Koi in Japanese also translates to mean love the proverb therefore means that love can go against the current and overcome great obstacles and if that isn’t the perfect metaphor for Alex and Henry’s relationship then I don’t know what is!!

I am obsessed and I adore the set designer for including that wallpaper in general, but especially in their text banter flirty developing relationship - the writing is essentially on the wall for where their relationship is going and how its going to unfold - they are literally Koi swimming agains the current and overcoming great obstacles to be together!!

Back to the costuming!

As I said previously - when Alex returns from the PR trip we start to see increasing amounts of colour and it starts with blue - Oscar is wearing a blue shirt - a colour we only see him in for that scene and then again at the end of the film - during election night. Its an important choice - Henry's colour is blue - its the colour we nearly always see him in some form of blue so for this to essentially be the first colour that appears in the clothing in Alex's world is telling in its own way - it is the beginning of the slow saturation of Henry in the world of Alex. Oscar is always in tan colour-ways apart from those two scenes and generally speaking we see him wearing Mexican tribal and geometric prints/patterns and cowboy boots - playing into his Mexican heritage, but also establishing him as Texan.

Miguel is clearly set out as the baddie to us all - head to toe in black all the time expect at the PM dinner - when he has to wear a white shirt because its etiquette - but they do make sure to give him black buttons on that shirt - which separates him from everyone else in dinner dress very clearly and keeps the undertone of untrustworthiness going.

The other thing to note is the grey fuzzy jacket he wears when being interviewed on the news. I’ve spoken before in my 911 meta’s about how the use of the grey fuzzy patterning is symbolic of confusion or obfuscation and that holds true here - Miguel is called out as being the one who hacked and leaked the emails by the presenter and he tries to bluff his way out - to obfuscate the truth.

We see the idea of green and jealousy play out a couple of times in the film - the flirty girl that tries to commandeer Alex and kisses him at the NYE party is wearing a very blatantly iridescent green dress which sets her apart from the rest of the crowd and then when the crowd drops low we also get the green lights on the DJ desk - while the scene is a play on the I saw you across a crowded room idea, there is also that undercurrent of jealousy - Henry is Jealous of Alex’s ease and that he cannot have him loudly and in the way he wants - highlighting that jealousy helps to build into Henrys later actions when he throws caution to the wind and kisses him under the tree.

Ellen Claremont has a narrow colour palette as well - we only see her in black in that first scene and in the ‘new Texas strategy’ arguement with Alex, after that her dominant colour is cream and we also see plenty of red which is a power choice - she wears it in scenes when she needs to convey power and status such as at the PM dinner or when she is shutting down his Texas strategy. The cream is the base colour for her - its a colour of elegance, sophistication, it is also a neutral colour - playing into her position as POTUS, but also when she wears it in one on one scenes with Alex, it is a sign of her being a mother rather than the POTUS.

Zahra tends to wear blacks with one blue/grey cashmere jumper and when we do get colour on her they are jewel tones - purple and teal. We also get some more grey fuzzy patterning - again playing into my previous statements - here it is very much about confusion rather than obfuscation - she only wears the fuzzy grey when she finds out about Alex and Henry and has her mind blown by the knowledge. Its a perfect costuming choice for this scene as it conveys so much about where her brain is - that her mind has been blown by this huge thing she as just become privy to and it helps make her facial expressions even louder!

Nora wears a full spectrum of colours, the stand ones are obviously the red bodice and trousers she wears for new years and the pink shirt she wears in the office when Alex is having a mini bi panic and figuring himself and his attraction to Henry out. Generally speaking a characters costumes are meant to be about them and their own character, however with a film like this, everything is a driving point for the two main characters and so, other characters costumes will, at key points be less about the character wearing them and more about driving the story of the mains forward - this is very much the case with Nora’s red outfit (and we have already talked about the green of the flirty girl at new years representing jealousy).The red is very very red, it is meant to stand out and is a nod to romance - for both herself with Pez and for Alex and Henry, but Red is also a colour associated with passion and sexuality as well as fire and heat - essentially it is a marker that things are about to kick into action on the romance scale - we are heading from friends to lovers.

The pink shirt plays into the same theme - its a continuation, but a cooling down - less about the heat and passion of a sexual encounter, and more about the concept of romance and relationships - because that is what the conversation is ultimately about in this scene. We have the bi flag background helping to visually tell us what the conversation is about, but we also need to have that subtle reminder that this is not about fire and passion it is about the potential for romance - for love - because if Alex is going to hook up with Henry, it isn’t going to be a hook up, it going to be real. We do of course see things heat back up in the red room (as they should), but ultimately that is the last of the fiery heat we see - from then on anything connected with Alex and Henrys relationship is much more steadfast - the blues and yellows I will talk about in a minute!

Lets talk signet rings!! We see them worn on the male members of the royal family - so King James, Phillip and Henry - as well as Alex when Henry gives him his ring. their use is telling and significant. James and Phillip both wear their signet ring on the little finger of the right hand, while Henry (and Alex) wears his on the little finger of the left hand. in a general sense one would usually wear a signet ring on the little ringer of the non dominant hand - so if you’re a lefty you wear it on the right hand and vice versa if your right handed. This is not what is being portrayed here - all three of them are naturally right handed (yes I did spend far too much time on google to find this out!!) which would in theory mean all of them should have their rings on the left little finger and yet only Henry does.

There is however another explanation - a ring worn on the right hand is symbolic of tradition conformity and rigidity and royalty (traditionally the monarch would wear a ring on the right hand and this was offered to subjects to kiss), wearing it on the dominant hand as a sign of power/ dominance. Henry and then Alex wear Henry’s ring on the left hand - the traditional hand that wedding bands are worn - because of the concept of the main artery running from the heart down the left arm and into the left hand, it is a symbol of love and life and connection to another person and is where the concept of the red string of fate comes from (which ties in nicely with Alex referring to the rope in his chest pulling him towards Henry). This all gains greater significance when Henry gives his ring to Alex and that he choses to also wear it on the left hand, its essentially a symbol of engagement and eternity - it is a sort of pre engagement I guess - and is a low key statement from Henry he is giving Henry Fox to someone for eternity - to Alex.

Right, shall we talk about the yellow and blue theming that I keep mentioning. This specific theming, tends to be seen more in sets and lighting than costumes - although we do see it used in costuming too (looking at you Bea!!). For those not aware, there is a tendency to use yellow and blue colour-ways for queer story arcs - if you look at Heartstopper (esp s1) they have been using it to great effect , and it can be seen in other shows and films with queer character arcs to such as 911 (and Lonestar), as well as plenty of other mainstream media if you’re looking for it. I don’t know when or how it became a colour way associated with queer relationships - especially mlm relationships - I’ve not had the time to deep dive into that particular research spiral - but suffice to say we see it put to very very great effect here in Red White and Royal Blue - we only ever see it used as a colour way when it is regarding Alex and Henry and their romantic relationshipI’ve included some of the blue and yellow we see (couldn’t fit it all in - 30 pictures is apparently not enough!!!) surrounding Alex and Henry and there is plenty of it. The first time we see this yellow/blue theming come into play is at the turning point - when Henry opens up the lines of communication with his text message. Alex is in his room - the first time we’re seeing into his room - a room painted dark blue and full of yellow accents - the lamp on his desk and the unit to the side of the sofa, as well as the very yellow and blue painting we see above his bed (which was commissioned for the film and so the colour choice was very much deliberate). Just to show how prolific the yellow/blue colour way is here is a list of most of the occurrences - I've tried to include as many of them in the pictures as I can as well.

The copy of People is yellow and blue, the Jacket Alex wears for new year has gold and blue embroidery. The PM’s dinner has blue lighting with gold curtains and there are a lot of blue and yellow dresses being worn in the crowd when Alex is watching Henry. The cushion on the sofa behind Alex is yellow and blue. Then we get to the French hotel room and the Eiffel Tower - it is literally all yellow and blue - everything - even down to the blue (extra safe) condom packets. the New York hotel room is dark blue and gold another is a blue bottle of lube on the side (the condoms and lube are very much a deliberate colour choice - there are a million different colours you can buy both in so if the colour wasn’t important they could’ve chosen any, esp as fuchsia and red is the most common colour for both in the durex brand in the UK).

In England - Henry mostly occupies green spaces - in keeping with the royal theme I wrote about earlier - however the room he is most himself and most comfortable in is the music room/ library which is yellow and any time we see him in that space, he is wearing blue. It is telling that when the emails between Henry and Alex are hacked, his sanctuary is full of ‘old white men in suits’ and Henry cannot go in there - symbolic that who he is - his true self - has been violated and he is being forced into ‘royal coded’ spaces - back into his box as it were!

Back to costumes and he two blue hoodies. I’m gonna get a bit of hate for this, but the blue hoodie is actually two different hoodies! - they are slightly different shades of pale blue - Alex’s is much more dusty blue, while Henry’s is much more baby blue, they are also different cuts - Alex’s a traditional sleeve cut while Henry’s has a raglan sleeve cut (think baseball tee). There is the idea with these two hoodies that they are at different points in their journeys, but still connected and i love that we see them in them at really key points of crisis - they are a comfort blanket in a way - Alex wears his during is bi crisis and again when he's watching Miguel on the news and figures out who the hack was, while Henry wears his when he lets Alex in - when he opens up and unspokenly confesses his love for Alex, when he agreed to take the step and be brave - both are wearing these hoodies in moments when they need/want comfort the fact that they are wearing such similar hoodies speaks to the fact that in it is the other they want that comfort from (even if Alex doesn't actually realise it during his min bi crisis).

And now to our two mains - lets start with Henry.

Henry

The bulk of Henry’s wardrobe is double breasted suits - a key theme for the members of the royal family - not one else where’s them - its a fun costuming choice, cease generally speaking the double breasted suit isn’t in fashion at the moment - the film fit single breasted suits we see on the rest of the characters is. It's a very clear choice to create a them and us concept in a visual and telling way. the other thing to note about these db suits is that only Henry wears plain fabric - the ones we see on Phillip and James are pinstripe or woven stripe. I want to quickly mention the tie King James is wearing because of its very obvious pattern. it is the only loudly patterned tie in the entire film - all others are either, plain , striped or spotted. In the book Henry says that patterned ties are considered too political (i'm paraphrasing and can't find the actual quote!!) and here we have a king playing with politics wearing a patterned tie - I love tiny nods like this to the original source material that only those of us who love the book will pick up on - its just a tie to the ga!

Henry himself wears pinstripes - when he is at his most royal - so for example when he is taking part in the PR exercise post cakegate. His ties also fit into this theming - he almost exclusively wears striped ties excepting at a couple of key moments - when he’s undertaking skulduggery and the yellow one he wears for the election. at all other times he has stripes on his tie. the stripes get wider or skinnier depending on the situation - the wide ones tend to be for royal events while the skinnier stripes tend to be connected to Alex.

Another thing to note with Henry is the lack of black he wears - the only time is at the most royal of occasions - the wedding - all the rest of his suits are varying shades of blue or grey (and cream) even the tux he wears to the PM dinner is a dark navy with black lapel rather than black - it differentiates him from everyone else in the room (esp Miguel) and shows him as the object of Alex’s gaze. I also want to mention the royal blue theme we see on him - something I love Keith Madden for doing - Henry nearly always has something blue on him and a lot of the time (especially connected to times when he is doing something connected to his status as a royal) we see him wearing something royal blue - its why his riband at the wedding is royal blue rather than the lighter blue of the order of the garter - but we also see it in the royal blue socks we see him in several times, the royal blue pyjamas when the hack/leak comes to light and the blue shorts in Texas when he’s lying on the bed before he leaves to return to England. We also see him in a lot of blue shirts keeping that blue theme connected to him.

Then there is my most beloved check theory - (its a theory connected to 911 for those who don’t know my costume metas already) Check is connected to foreshadowing of trouble - Henry wears a check/plaid pattern at a couple of very very key moments - at the bar in Texas - when we see Alex realise his love is the forever kind, when he is back in England having broken his own heart in a misguided attempt to save Alex (gingham shirts in pink and blue) and then the suit he wears when he choses himself over the crown and steps out onto the balcony with Alex to greet the crowds has a subtle check pattern (not sure if you can see it its the pictures but if you watch the scene you should be able to) all of these are moments which foreshadow the upcoming or current trouble in his life.

Yellow roses - symbol of Texas being flipped - from Mexican to independent (and eventually becoming part of US) - symbol of the fact Texas is about to flip blue from red. Yellow roses are also a symbol of good luck more generally and the yellow tie is a great choice to suggest neutrality in the election scenes (at this point in time Henry still has royal status). We see Henry in a grey suit with this yellow tie - this only further highlights his escape from royal life - when he is un the US we do not see him wearing the navy blue suits we see him in in England - the only exception is the dark navy dinner jacket he wears to the PM dinner . In the US he wears either a grey suit or the cream/light blue suit we see him in when he visits the lake house and the light blue linen jacket we see him on his light back to the UK is the only single breasted jacket we ever see him in - I would have loved to have seen the grey suit at the end also have been single breasted, but I'm guessing budget constraints prevented that from happening, as it really would've highlighted the difference between Henry George Edward James Hanover-Stuart Fox and Henry Fox!

At the lake house we get a piece of costuming that I love - the slightly differing short lengths we see on Henry and Alex - it Alex’s shorts are always shorter than Henry’s - it maintains that sense of Henry be more closeted and buttoned up - the overhead shot of them on the pontoon shows it really clearly - the two of them have similar leg lengths which serves me well here to show this point - the shorts Henry is wearing are at least 3 inches longer (possibly more) than Alex's - it isn't just that one pair of shorts - all 3 pairs of Henry's shorts are longer - its a costuming choice thats s perfectly in keeping with their respective characters.

The final thing to talk bout is Henry’s rainbow turtle swim shorts - a cute nod to his being gay - especially as Alex is is his purple bi swim shorts. But there is also the fact that they are turtles. Turtles are a symbol of steadfastness, longevity, perseverance and transformation. they can also be seen as a symbol of everlasting love. there is also the concept of carrying the weight of the world - which is seen in its most explicit way in Terry Pratchett’s Discworld novels - where a giant turtle carries the world on its back. All of these metaphors and symbols perfectly fit Henry and his relationship with Alex - it is a symbol of the enduring nature of their love for each other, the perseverance we will see for them to overcome the obstacles thrown at them, the steadfastness of their love, as well the transformation we are seeing Henry go through - from closeted gay thinking he has to conform to the very rigid and dated ideals of his family - to the freer Henry we see in the US - the real Henry and the version of himself he so desperately wants to be but thinks he can’t - he has the weight of the world on his shoulders at that moment a la the disc world turtle.

Alex

Alex, obviously has the largest number of costumes, as well as the largest colour palette, but even that is pretty limited. In the same way we see Henry’s wardrobe go through a subtle transformation, we also see the same for Alex, almost in the opposite direction - while Henry’s wardrobe becomes freer, Alex’s becomes more grown up - more mature and conveys his growth as a person - becoming more certain in who he is. I’ve already written a fair amount throughs this meta about Alex’s costumes, so this section is a little shorter than Henry’s for that reason!

We get rebellious Alex to begin with - the leather jacket easily conveys this to us, its almost a universal symbol or rebellion in costuming speak at this point and one of the reasons I like its use here is that it very quickly sets him apart from everyone else in the film - yes its early on, but he is the most casually dressed character by a long way - and this jacket it the antithesis of the buttoned up penguin suit from the wedding - it emphasises how uncomfortable Alex was in that environment and as a result gives the heavy drinking we saw before the cake went flying purpose and visually sets him up as the lead and as a rule/ convention breaker. The same is true of the greyscale with leopard print Hawaiian shirt which is meant to contrast him dramatically with Henry, who is still stuck in that stuffy double breasted suit prison of convention and expectation to behave a certain way - the costuming does a big chunk of the work in giving us rebel v prince in those opening scenes. I actually like that they brought the leather jacket back for the drive to the lake house - it sets up Alex’s falling in love arc nicely - in that it allows the idea of rebellion to continue flowing through the story - Alex wanting to be outing proud in Austin and not grasping that that isn’t an option Henry at this moment in time and is a nod to his not really understanding the different places he and Henry are in when it comes to what being out means for them respectively.

I’ve already written about the black and white colour way we see him in until his PR stint when we start see colour appearing in his wardrobe. I’ve put the pictures roughly in chronological order because it helps to show his progression, but it also shows the increasing amount of blue in his wardrobe, especially in moments connected with Henry.

To pick out some of my favourites - the Mexican pattern shirt with the red cardigan is wonderful - we have the shirt hinting at Alex’s heritage - in blue with the chunky knit red cardigan - I’ve written above about the use offered as a colour of passion and how that passion ebbs and flows - this cardigan also plays into that idea - it is the first time their texting becomes flirty - even the text message is in a red bubble on screen. This idea carries on with the orange red tee he is wearing during the turkey conversation - I made a post about that outfit being the same colour way as the turkey in question and how to talk turkey means to talk honestly and openly with someone - the very thing we see in that scene.

I adore the subtle yellow and blue jacquard embroidered New years jacket - the moment our boys connect and we move further into the lovers part of the enemies-friends-lovers trope and it keeps the yellow/blue theming an active part of the storyline. - the contrast with Henry’s orange tie is a choice - while there is a lot of colour at the NYE party Alex blends into the background while Henry is quite literally tied into the orange theme we’ve already seen in the furniture and sets - orange stands out and now we the audience are being drawn into unconsciously making the same connection that Alex is making - Henry is lonely, but he is an enduring and attention grabbing part of Alex’s life - it only further reenforces the direction of Alex’s gaze - green wearing flirty girl who??

We have a fair amount of Alex and the bi colour ways and we subtly see it coming into play from more or less the moment they start messaging - the light purple tee and purple message boxes, flowing through to the women sufferage wall and the fact he is wearing blue and purple in that scene with Nora in pink to round out the there colours. then we have the blue and purple colour ways he wears at the lake house - bolder and brighter - contrasting with the more muted shades from before - showing that he has recognised and accepted that part of who he is - he’ now out and proud and his parent know about him. I’ve used the old subtle a lot, but this is yet another example of transformation and growth for a character done subtly through colour. We also see him bathed in bi lighting at the bar when he has his 'OH I feel forever about him' moment at the Texas bar - he is the only one in that whole scene lit in that way - Henry is blue lit, while there is a more general lighting scheme that is blue/red dominant for the bar as a whole.

On to Alex’s suits and ties - he seems to have 5 suits and a jacket (not including the formal wear - tux and tails) a black one, 2 navy blue ones (one with a woven pinstripe that he wears in Paris) a bright bluish grey one and a grey one along with the black and blue waffle jacket we see him wear both on the PR trip and at the Polo match. I am obsessed with the fact that when he is in England he wears the navy suits and jackets whereas in the US he wears the other colour s suits - in the same way we see Henry less buttoned up and wearing grey and lighter blues in the US, here we see Alex fitting into Henry’s world and the navy blue suit uniform of the Royal family - its a wonderful piece of costuming that tells so much of how each of them are fitting into the others worlds, especially wen the black and navy waffle one is only worn early on - it is the cross over garment!

The ties have a similar story to tell - we see him wearing 4 ties - a yellow one we see in the beginning in the news reel and never see him in again and then we get the lighter blue striped one at the polo match - the one most similar to the striped ones we see Henry wear - suggesting he is trying to fit into this new world - Henry’s world - that he’s been invited into - its somewhat jarring for his character and plays on the idea of trying too hard - its therefore telling we don’t see it happen again - we only see hi in a striped tie again at he end during election night and accompanied by the black suit we saw him in a couple of times on the campaign trail in Texas. the blue tie is the only other tie we see him wear and it nicely connects all the key moments he has while in his suit - key political moments - his speech at the DNC followed by his speech to the press after the email hack and when he is at Buckingham Palace facing up to the King.

The final ting to talk about is the khaki green shirt jacket - I cannot tell you how happy I was with this costuming choice (and not because it was screaming Eddie Diaz from 911 vibes) khaki is so associated with military - with the army - anti is the most perfect choice for this scene - army are about war - they go somewhere to fight - to storm the palace etc so to have Alex - who has never worn anything remotely like this before rock up to KP to fight for his relationship - for his love - is the perfect choice, its a subtle yet clever way of emphasising the Alex has chosen to fight for what he wants - for his relationship with Henry and what makes it more telling is that we only see him change out of it once Henry has explicitly stated that he will try to be brave and that he wants history to include his love for Alex. It is why we see Alex in the yellow and blue Mexican patterned jacket - he no longer needs fight for his love because he has won - this yellow/blue jacket is a piece of costume tied into pivotal moments - we see the jacket twice - when he wins his bid to get the Claremont campaign to focus on Texas and Ellen tells him he’s going to Texas, and again when he has won the day with Henry and they are back together - in some ways that makes this his victory jacket - victory in his own personal battles - battles that are central to who he is and his development and I think that’s petty neat!

Hopefully you've enjoyed this deep dive into the sets and costumes of the film - I've loved writing it and I can only hope its coherent! Feel free to hit me up with any questions or comments and likes and reblogs are love ❤️🤍💙 thank you for reading and until next time...

#this really is a monster post!!!#rwrb meta #red white and royal blue #alex claremont diaz #henry fox mountchristen windsor #rwrb movie #first prince #costume meta #set meta #meta #long post #kym costume meta #costume theory #colour theory #colour theory meta #kym writes meta

174 notes · View notes

matan4il · 6 months

Text

Daily update post:

So far, over 1,400 people in Israel have been confirmed dead, over 4,200 wounded, over 200 were kidnapped and are held in Gaza, and 6,930 rockets have been fired at Israel since the beginning of the war as of yesterday (October 17). Just a reminder, this is what the first round of rockets fired into Israel looked like, every red dot represents a siren triggered by one rocket or more:

Since it's been a hot topic, I made a post with all the current evidence that the hospital in Gaza was struck by a rocket by Palestinian terrorists (PIJ), originally fired at Israel, but ultimately due to some malfunction, falling within Gaza and hitting the hospital.

US president Biden has landed in Israel. I've heard very contradictory assessments on what his goal is with this visit, so I guess we'll just wait and see.

In various places around the world, people have been spotted taking down posters with the faces of the Israeli hostages. These are two of the more recent incidents.

A Jewish school in Rome had to be evacuated due to a bomb threat. In Germany, a synagogue was attacked with firebombs. This is directly related to the spread of anti-Israel hate.

A British journalist asked a colleague from Gaza what would be a 'proportionate' and acceptable response from Israel to the massacre of over 1,400 people by Hamas:

I think the lack of response from this Palestinian journalist (to whatever degree you can say that about a place where there is no free press) shows that to her, there is no response from Israel, no matter how minimal, which is acceptable. In other words, in her mind, Israelis are supposed to just... be killed and do nothing about it. Your interpretation may vary, but that's what it feels like to me.

For most of the world, it feels like the slaughter of people in Israel is over, but for us, it is still very much happening right now, as bodies are still being identified (to whatever degree they can be), as the names and faces of the murdered are being published, and as we hear the personal stories of the people that we lost. And all of this is happening while the knowledge that we will lose even more people, once the ground action starts, looms over our heads.

This is Aner Shapira. He was a soldier, but on Oct 7, he was off duty. He was at the party that Hamas attacked as a civilian, and together with others, he hid in a bomb shelter. When Hamas terrorists started throwing grenades inside, he caught them one by one, and threw them back at the terrorists. He kept doing this, until one of the grenades exploded in his hand, killing him. But he saved the others hiding in that bomb shelter.

This is Guy Simchi. He was a soldier, but was also present at the party with his friends off duty. When the terrorists attacked, Guy and his friend Adar managed to make it to a kibbutz (small agricultural community in Israel) with the intention of hiding in one of their bomb shelters. While there, he and Adar gathered 30 of the kibbutz members and led them into a bomb shelter while staying outside it to fight the terrorists. Adar happened to have his personal weapon on him. Guy didn't, but he told his friend he wouldn't leave him to face the terrorists alone. When the terrorists attacked, Guy came at them with his bare hands. Together, they managed to kill two terrorists, run off the others, but Guy himself was killed.

May their memories be a blessing.

(for all of my updates and ask replies regarding Israel, click here)

#israel #israeli #israel news #israel under attack #israel under fire #israelunderattack #terrorism #anti terrorism #antisemitism #hamas #antisemitic #antisemites #jews #jew #judaism #jumblr #frumblr #jewish

64 notes · View notes

coochiequeens · 2 years

Text

A woman dared to say that there are two sides to the story of women’s rights v trans rights and a man started arguing with her over social media. Then to show how much of a good boy he is to the TRA cause he got her, a disabled mother of young children, barred from an event where she could have sold plastic packaging free soap at an event for small environmentally friendly business event

A British woman who found herself expelled from a community event after an organizer deemed her “transphobic” is planning on taking legal action for having been discriminated against on the basis of her gender critical views.

On July 26th, Fiona Ryan took to Twitter to share her shocking exchange with a Committee Member for People in the Park, an annual community event at Salisbury’s Queen Elizabeth Gardens that features local small businesses selling environmentally-friendly products.

Ryan uploaded screenshots of an exchange she had with a People in the Park committee member, who advised her that comments she had made on local social media platform NextDoor “showed strong views against the LGBT community which we don’t feel fits the community theme of our event.”

Speaking to Reduxx, Ryan explains the conversation on NextDoor occurred long before she had applied to pitch a stall at the event. She had been engaging in a debate with a man named Andy, who had become offended after she voiced her opposition to Penny Mordaunt, a contender for the UK Conservative Party’s leadership.

“I felt she was uncomfortably okay with the deconstruction of women’s rights in favor of gender ideology,” Ryan says, “This guy appears and calls me homophobic and transphobic.”

Ryan says she tried to keep the conversation cordial, but that Andy was extremely offended at her perspective on women’s sex-based rights.

“I’ve given up arguing that the sky is blue with these people… So I don’t have the argument anymore. I just say: Look, you have that mindset, and I disagree. I hope you can see how telling people they can change sex, or treating people like they can change sex is harmful. It’s not that I am trying to harm anyone, but I am entirely focused on the rights of women and girls.”

Ryan explains that she tried showing Andy examples of violent males in women’s prisons, but the man doubled-down and continued to call her bigoted.

“I then told him: I will concede that you are not saying these things from a place of harm, and I am simply asking for the same respect.”

But shortly after the conversation ended, Ryan says she found she had been suspended from NextDoor after her account had been reported. At the time, she didn’t think much of it.

After losing her job earlier this year, Ryan launched a soap-making company called Salisbury Soaps, which has an emphasis on making plastic-free, handmade soap products. Speaking to Reduxx, Ryan says she heard about People in the Park about one month ago, and felt her products were a good fit for the event’s theme of sustainability. Ryan says she had no idea the same man she had engaged in a debate with on NextDoor was affiliated with the organization for the event.

Ryan paid a £40 reservation fee, and began to collect supplies in preparation for opening her booth. She paid approximately £250 for moulds and a pre-licensed vegan recipe she thought would be a hit with the customer base.

“I am a disabled mother-of-three… this was quite a lot of money for me,” she explains, but says that she was excited to have the chance to show her plastic-free products to members of her community.

The next day, Ryan received an email from Andy, who was representing the People in the Park committee, formally disallowing her from attending the event as a merchant.

After citing a guideline on “equality,” Andy stated that Ryan’s NextDoor posts showed “strong views against the LGBT community,” and that her pitch was being withdrawn.

Confused and shocked, Ryan sent Andy a reply.

“I have been offered, accepted and paid for a stall at this event. My focus on the rights of women, girls and children is not at odds with my opinions on the environment, it is very much in line,” Ryan wrote, “… the only thing I have said on NextDoor, or any other application, is that there are two sides to any debate and that people who insist biological markers define things like sport, law (including prison placements) and society (including girls changing facilities and washrooms) are doing so from a position of care and consideration for women and girls, not out of cruelty.”

Her email went unanswered. Hurt and upset, she took to Twitter and published the exchange, not expecting a tremendous response considering the small size of her Twitter account. But once the post began circulating in the online gender critical community, it began wracking up thousands of ‘likes’ and outraged comments.

Ryan says she was heartened when she saw a flood of placing through orders on her site to show their support for her small business.

“I’d say I lost out on probably £1,000 in sales at People in the Park. But it was the community connections that were more important to me, and those have been taken away,” she says, “I am part of this community, and because I will not concede that men become women, I was excluded.”

Ryan tells Reduxx she is now planning legal action against People in the Park on the basis of violating the 2010 Equality Act and discriminating against her because of her gender critical beliefs, which are a protected characteristic in the United Kingdom. Ryan points to the recent legal victories of Allison Bailey and Maya Forstateras having “paved the way” for women to be able to better advocate for their rights in court.

“I am a disabled woman and I am gender critical. I have had to put up with so much of this stuff for years. I have been treated like a leper simply because I refuse to say that men become women when they say so,” she says, continuing: “I am going to stick my head above the precipice here because I feel like I should for all the women who can’t.”

Moving forward, Ryan jokes that she has a bright future in selling suffragette-colored dinosaur soap to the gender critical feminist community.

“I’ve bought all the moulds, pretty dinosaur moulds. It is going to be a little surprise for the women,” she says, noting that a portion of the proceeds from the sale of the suffragette soaps will go to a local women’s refuge, which she is also planning on donating care packages to.

“Freedom of speech is essential for democracy. You cannot stop people from speaking their mind, even if you don’t like it,” Ryan says, “If we stopped looking at people as whether they are deserving of the right to have an opinion and open the line of communication between people who disagree, I feel like everyone would be more lovely to each other.”

By Jennifer Seiland Jennifer is a founding member of the Reduxx team, writing with a focus on crimes against women and sex-based rights rights advocacy. She is located in the American south where she is a passionate animal welfare advocate and avid coffee drinker.

370 notes · View notes

acti-veg · 6 months

Note

what’s your opinion on buying a poppy? Does it fund further arms?

The money raised by The Royal British Legion goes towards charities that support the armed forces community, rather than funding arms. Much of it goes towards support for veterans and their families.

The problem with the poppy for me isn’t where the money goes, it’s what the poppy has come to represent. It’s hard to stomach the idea of the poppy as a symbol of remembrance while politicians are pinning three of them on their designer blazers then sending people off to war. It’s hard to not feel uneasy about how it is used as propaganda now, and it quite clearly does glorify war and sacrifice in many contexts.

This phenomenon is particularly apparent right now. Both party leaders are pulling out their poppies, and simultaneously refuse to support a ceasefire or put any real pressure on Israel to stop committing genocide. The right wing press stokes fear, prejudice and division, then absolutely mauls any public figure who dares to not wear a poppy. It is laughable.

I recognise the profound symbolism of the poppy, and agree with the sentiment behind ‘never again’ and ‘lest we forget.’ But ‘never again’ is happening right now, and our own leaders and armed forces are supporting it. We have clearly already forgotten, as we had in Afghanistan, in Iraq, in Libya, and now in Palestine. The poppy as a symbol has unfortunately become a hollow farce at best, and at worst, it is a tool for propaganda and an exercise in conformity.

If you want to support veterans and their families then there are a great many charities you can support, and you can also donate directly to the Royal British Legion without wearing the poppy. It’s a personal choice in the end, but if you’re going to wear one I’d just say make sure that you’re doing it for the right reasons.

#ask #poppy #poppies #rememberance day

30 notes · View notes

rachelkruglyak · 6 months

Text

Queen Charlotte: A Bridgerton Story (History Redesigned Panel Presentation)

What is the koinos kosmos (common world) and mutually assumed knowledge the series shares with viewers?

Queen Charlotte and the Man in the High Castle both invite viewers to consider an alternative historical reality that results from a slightly different course of history. Both shows challenge the viewer to consider the different paths that history can take and to suspend some disbelief to imagine alternative worlds. In both shows, the viewers can be expected to know what is historically accurate. The true Queen Charlotte was a German princess selected to marry the future George III. In The Man in the High Castle, the viewer can be assumed to know that the allies, not the axis powers, won World War II. But both shows provide the viewer with a chance to wonder “What If?” What if a mixed woman from Germany was selected to become Queen? What if the axis countries had won the war. In describing Philip Dick’s The Man in the High Castle, James Thrall writes, of “Dick’s overarching project of inviting his readers to consider history itself as fluid by presenting our assumed past set slightly askew.” Indeed both shows present altered versions of the agreed-upon past. The Man in the High Castle presents a fictitious New York City ruled by the Nazi party and a San Francisco administered by the Japanese. Queen Charlotte: A Bridgerton Story presents a fictitious Britain in the late 18th century in which the German young woman Charlotte of Mecklenburg-Strelitz has risen to prominence and power. In the show, Charlotte was brought from Germany to be the wife of King George III, an event that mirrors agreed-upon history. However, unlike the woman who was actually selected, Charlotte in the TV show is of mixed race, raising questions about the openness of the royal court and the British people to a ruler with a mixed race identity.

youtube

How does the series depict cultural hybridity through the altered history’s role in reflecting and reshaping cultural assumptions?

Queen Charlotte: A Bridgerton Story depicts cultural hybridity by imagining that the Queen of Britain and Ireland played by a mixed girl. The show plays out one possible version of how history might have looked with a mixed girl marrying the future king. Much of the show focuses on how different parts of British society react to a mixed race Queen, which would have been the first in British history. The Man in the High Castle also involves culture clash as the Germans are imagined to control the Eastern Coast of the United States while the Japanese control the West Coast. James Thrall writes, “His characters muse regularly about differences between types of people as indicated by, for example, distinguishing characteristics of Germans and Japanese. The rippling image of fused flags that concludes the credits encapsulates Dick’s presentation of these two countries as linked but uneasy and culturally distinct allies.” The interactions between the German and Japanese occupiers represents an important plotline in the show.

In Queen Charlotte: A Bridgerton Story, the presence of a mixed race Queen leads to some shifts toward a more inclusive society that receives a mixed response. After hearing from Lord Bute that there will be talk about Charlotte’s race and being told that it might be best to cancel the wedding, the King’s mother, the Dowager Princess, who thinks it’s too late to cancel, says it’s only a problem if the palace makes it a problem. She then says that people from Charlotte’s “court” are invited to the royal wedding. Later in the episode, at the wedding, the Dowager Princess continues this shift to a more inclusive nobility. She refers to Mr. Danbury, a Black British citizen, as “Lord Danbury,” which surprises him. The Dowager Princess says that he “shall be receiving the official proclamation from the King. You are honored to be Lord and Lady Danbury now. All the members of the ton must be titled.” She then goes on to say that it is time they were united as a society.

In episode 2, Lady Danbury tells the Dowager Princess that she needs her husband not to be denied entry to White’s, for him to be invited on hunts, for her to be able to cross the street to the best modiste, to take the finest seats at the opera. When the Dowager Princess says that this is unreasonable, Lady Danbury reminds her that she needs to know what is going on at Buckingham House and says that they need to be equal members of the ton.

The Danbury Ball in episode 3 is another example of cultural hybridity and reshaping cultural assumptions. After Lady Danbury expresses to the Dowager Princess that she would like to host the first ball of the season, the Dowager Princess is appalled and says it will not be accepted, to which Lady Danbury says that it would be difficult for the Dowager Princess to hear about the Queen being with child long after the fact. The Dowager Princess says she will take it up with Lord Bute, but later that day, before the Dowager Princess can come to a decision, Lady Danbury decides that she will just have to send out invitations first. The White members of the ton are reluctant to come until they receive a personal message from the King that he will be attending. During Charlotte and George’s dance at the ball, Lord Ledger, who is White, asks Lady Danbury to dance, which prompts more mixed pairings to be made. Later that night, George tells Charlotte that “with one evening, one party, we have created more change, stepped forward more than Britain has in the last century.”

youtube

How does the series depict the power of understanding world-creation?

Queen Charlotte: A Bridgerton Story exists in the world of lavish, opulent wealth of the British royal family. Queen Charlotte lives in a huge mansion with intricate furnishings. She has an entourage that dresses her in the morning, feeds her, and watches her as she eats. She has elaborate, high-style clothing and shoes. She wears expensive jewelry and her hair is fashioned in elaborate hairdos. In addition to the opulence and privilege, her movements are carefully prescribed and often criticized. There are members of the court who gossip about her and are seemingly in control her life. And, to her dismay, her new husband seems completely uninterested in spending time with her. Through scenery, costumes and styling, Queen Charlotte: A Bridgerton Story transports the viewer to the world of British royalty. This ability to create a compelling and unfamiliar world is powerful as it invites the viewer to escape their daily life and become part of a world that is intriguing and beautiful even with its flaws.

In what ways do formulations of the past, present, and future engage with prospective realities of what might have been and what might be in the series’ altered history?

Both Queen Charlotte: A Bridgerton Story and The Man in the High Tower start with a different possible reality. They consider what might have been, but wasn’t, and the story unfolds from there. As James Thrall writes, Margaret Atwood, author of The Handmaid's Tale stated, ‘[p]rophecies are really about now. In science fiction it’s always about now. What else could it be about? There is no future. There are many possibilities, but we do not know which one we are going to have’. Queen Charlotte tackles the fallout from one possible choice, one possible reality.

There are two timelines present in Queen Charlotte. One takes place in the present of Bridgerton, beginning in 1817 with the death of the royal heir Princess Charlotte, which causes the Queen to pressure her children into producing another royal heir. The other timeline begins in 1761 with Charlotte meeting and marrying King George III. This timeline explores the King and Queen’s marriage and the King’s mental illness.

In episode 3, after being told by the Dowager Princess to cancel her ball, Lady Danbury goes to talk to Charlotte about it. She asks if Charlotte could encourage the other ladies-in-waiting to attend. Charlotte doesn’t understand what the issue is. Lady Danbury says that the Dowager Princess asked her to cancel the ball. Charlotte wants to know how it applies to her. Lady Danbury says that Charlotte is the Queen and has that power. If she were not the Queen, her life in London would be completely different. She is the first of her kind. She opened the door and the titles given to Lady Danbury and the other colored folk of the ton are brand new. She tells Charlotte that she should focus on the fate of the country as she hold its fate in her hands. She accuses Charlotte of being unaware of what’s happening outside the palace walls. This scene shows that there is a decision point surrounding whether the ball will be held, and with time it is clear that the ball had a major impact on creating change in the ton.

In episode 5, colored members of the ton meet with Lady Danbury and ask her what will happen now that the Lord Danbury has passed on. Lord Danbury is the first member of their side to pass on and the rules for inheritance have not been established. They want to know if Lady Danbury’s 4-year-old son will inherit the title, if the laws of succession from “their side” will apply to “our side.” Lady Danbury says she never realized, that they could lose it all in a generation. This too is a critically important inflection point because if the title ends with Lord Danbury, the transition to a more inclusive society would essentially end.

How do multiple realities or contemplations of multiple realities merge with questions of authenticity?

There are two different questions of authenticity in Queen Charlotte that exist at different levels but ultimately merge and inform the other. At one level, there is the question of alternative reality being depicted. The TV show tells a story that did not actually occur as there was a real George III, who was married to Queen Charlotte, but she was not mixed race. On one level, the writers are attempting to convince the audience that this alternative reality is plausible, that 18th century English royalty, in hunting for a mate for the king, might select a woman like Queen Charlotte, and that a similar narrative could transpire. From this perspective, the writers seek to establish some level of authenticity in their attempt to convince the audience that this narrative represents a story that could have taken place.

At another level, within the story, the royal court is attempting to convince the rest of England that the woman they have selected to be Queen is in fact a legitimate Queen of England. In “The Great Experiment” they seek to convince any doubters of Charlotte’s suitability for the throne. This level of authenticity within the show also hinges on the same issue of whether Charlotte can convince the English nobility and population at large that she is an authentic Queen. In episode 2, Charlotte’s authenticity as Queen is said to hinge on whether she and George III consummate the marriage, something that everyone, including George’s mother, is concerned about. Indeed, in the present timeline, their concerns are warranted as George leaves the palace and spends all of his time at the observatory after his honeymoon, leaving Charlotte completely alone. However, through the flash forwards, the audience learns that George and Charlotte will have 15 children in the future.

#oxyspeculativetv #@theuncannyprofessoro #Youtube

20 notes · View notes

tiaramania · 1 year

Note

For the coronation usually monarchs don't attend, but what about countries like Spain? They don't really have a heir of age that can attend and sending a former king and queen isn't a really good look...Or like Japan, Naruhito is an emperor and he outranks a king, but there are rumours that he at least will attend, so do you think that everyone will throw the "rule" out of the window and attend such a big party? hahaha

Yeah, I think the rule isn't as strict as people make it out to be and I'm not as sure as I was about who will be attending the coronation.

First there's the countries that are part of the Commonwealth and monarchies in their own right (Brunei, Eswatini, Lesotho, Malaysia, and Tonga) most of which sent the monarch not the heir in 1953. I would not be surprised if they did the same this time around. There are also more countries following the Dutch example of the monarch abdicating as a form of retirement so former reigning monarchs are in the mix in a way they weren't before.

Then you've got the young heirs. For Spain I think it will either be Queen Sofia or Queen Letizia. My dream would be for Queen Letizia to accompany Infanta Leonor since she's underage but both of them go. I wouldn't expect her to wear a tiara or anything and I know it's not going to happen but I can dream. There's also the heirs that are technically of age but still pretty young like Princess Catharina Amalia of the Netherlands, Princess Elisabeth of Belgium, and Prince Moulay Hassan of Morocco. I can't imagine being 19 and attending an event like this on my own. Are they going to send someone else with them or send someone else entirely?

Now we seem to have other sovereigns saying that they are planning on going. I was surprised when Prince Albert told People that him and Princess Charlene would attend because at the last British coronation Prince Rainier III sent his father, Prince Pierre, as Monaco's representative. I was expecting Princess Caroline to go but I'm hoping this means Princess Charlene will finally wear a tiara at a royal event.

A couple of weeks ago there was an article in Aftonbladet where Margareta Thorgren, the head of the Swedish Royal Court's press department, seemed to say that King Carl XVI Gustaf and Queen Silvia are planning to attend the coronation. I assumed that something got lost in translation but now I'm not so sure. They use kungaparet which means the king couple not kronprinsessparet which means the crown princess couple.

I Sverige kröns inte längre kungar, det började med att Gustav V avstod från ceremonin. I Storbritannien kröns däremot prins Charles den 6 maj i Westminster Abbey. Att kröningen kommer att bli lika spektakulär som när hans mamma, drottning Elizabeth, kröntes 1953 är inte troligt. Men det svenska kungaparet kommer att finnas på plats. Det är planen, säger Margareta Thorgren.

In Sweden, kings are no longer crowned, it started when Gustav V refrained from the ceremony. In Great Britain, on the other hand, Prince Charles is crowned on May 6 in Westminster Abbey. That the coronation will be as spectacular as when his mother, Queen Elizabeth, was crowned in 1953 is not likely. But the Swedish royal couple will be there. That is the plan, says Margareta Thorgren.

I didn't see the rumors of Emperor Naruhito attending but now that I read back how Prisma translated this article it does kind of sound like that's a possibility.

So I'm just really not sure about who we're going to see at the coronation.

#Tiara Talk #British Coronation #royal hair

83 notes · View notes

moregraceful · 1 year

Note

KAS, I AM ON MY KNEES.

You can't just write about Siegenthischier royalty AU in your tags without continuing!!!

Okay so I did three of the things on my very lengthy to-do list and drank a cup of coffee and a litre of black tea so let’s do this

FIRST of all, fuck monarchies, there is no divine right of kings, second of all this is MY sexy imagine and EYE want to see Jonas in a crown.

So Jonas is a crown prince of a country in the style of Luxembourg with a constitutional monarch and representative democracy and the military of Switzerland. This is as much thought as I am willing to put into the politics of this post, thank you 🙏 He’s expected to take over as monarch after his grandpa dies — he’s one of only a few grandchildren but he’s the oldest and his parents died tragically, so it’s basically always been him. He bears it gracefully, always stays the course, never does anything to bring disgrace upon himself or his family, unlike his cousins. Basically perfect and everyone loves him and feels confident that their country will be fine with him, especially as his grandpa gets older and his health starts to fail.

Jonas does his required 2 year military service and then goes to Kings College London for his university education. He’s studying international relations and modern languages (I don’t know how bachelor’s degrees work in Europe so let’s just go with the idea that he is Smart and Studious) but takes philosophy classes when he can because he wants to. Everyone expects him to spend all his time partying with British royalty in London and like he’s supposed to be spending time in the UK to find a wife in one of the many royal branches, but he mostly keeps his head and sticks to hanging out with his classmates. He’s not big on partying or wild nights out at clubs, prefers a normal night out at a pub with classmates or going to football games with his friends. Again he is VERY aware of the pressure on him when he takes the throne in a couple years and he’s not interested in rocking the boat. Better him than any of his dipshit cousins, basically. He loves his country and he won’t fail his people.

ANYWAY, he goes out to a pub one time with some guys from one of his philosophy classes and they’re all complaining about the grades they got on their papers and arguing with Jonas because he got the highest marks despite not even being in the program, that’s so unfair!! And he agrees to buy them a round of drinks “to make up for being smarter than all of you” which no one takes gracefully, but they’re all laughing and it’s a good night out.

Goes up to the bar, it’s crowded. You see where this is going. Guy gets shoved into him, spills beer all over his shirt. It’s Nico. “Oh god,” says Nico. “I am so fucking sorry.”

Jonas isn’t even that bothered because he knows an opportunity to meet someone when he sees it and he’s, well. He’s not stupid. Nico’s cute and flustered and his eyes are very dark. He spends the next fifteen minutes chatting up Nico, who he leans very quickly is an absolute delight and VERY funny, until his classmates start hollering at him across the bar to hurry up with their drinks. Jonas buys the entire bar a round of shots and goes home with Nico.

AND THEN OF COURSE THEIR GREAT ROMANCE BEGINS. Nico is an international student at LSE getting a BSc in Politics and Economics so he can go home to Switzerland and work in the UN or in some related think tank – he did an internship over the summer with Economic and Social Council working on sustainable development in small rural communities in central Europe and he’s VERY excited about the future he’s creating for himself – working hard to help people, being involved in international politics, doing his best to help the world develop into its best self. Jonas finds out very quickly that Nico has SUCH a big heart – for his family and friends, but also his country, and for the world. Nico wants to help people! Jonas is unclear why he chose the UN if he wants to make an immediate difference int he world – Jonas’s country has had to work with UN and he knows how slowly the wheels of change turn. But he won’t crush Nico’s spirit for anything.

They fall in love so fast that it’s actively embarrassing for both of them but man, when you know, you know, right? They meet each other’s friends, they spend so much time together for the next three years. Nico knows who Jonas is bc a) politics nerd, b) hard to miss the bodyguard trailing them home that first night. Nico spends approximately five minutes being starstruck over it that first time and he gets over it because it’s Jonas.

They don’t spend summers together and they keep it pretty tightly wrapped because if they do get engaged and married, it’s going to be HUGE news for the monarchy when Jonas and Nico aren’t able to have children of their own. No one even knows Jonas is gay except his brother – and Nico. There are always rumors of course, but most people who pay attention to such things just think Jonas is probably secretly dating a Belgian princess. Jonas misses Nico so much during the summer though, beause Nico sends him updates all the time on what’s he’s doing, and meanwhile Jonas is doing royal stuff. Watching anxiously as his grandfather’s health declines. Meets heads of states who slyly introduce their daughters. Is forced to go to a dance class, which kills him, bc Nico is literally doing micro-economics stuff in Romania and having a blast and Jonas just wants to be with him so bad, anywhere in the world. He just wants to be at Nico’s side, always.

Their education is wrapping up, it’s a couple nights before graduation, and Jonas and Nico are MUST MAKE A DECISION. Do they stay together? Do they break up? They can’t keep it under wraps as easily once they graduate. It’ll be harder. Jonas will start taking a more active role in his country’s politics; Nico has multiple job offers lined up already. Jonas confesses to Nico how lonely he’s been growing up, how isolated he’s always felt being told he’ll be king, how empty the thought of being king is, how devoid of meaning his life feels as it rolls out in front of him, decades of isolation and loneliness like he felt growing up. He loves his country and his people and he knows they love him but – it’s a terrible thought to do it alone. He would like to be able to see Nico sometimes. He can’t face the rest of his life with nothing. It doesn’t have to be permanent, it doesn’t have to be big, but he doesn’t want to NOT be with Nico.

Nico’s like, okay! Let’s get married. Jonas is like, well that is not REALLY what I meant, but Nico’s already kissing him so okay, they’re getting married. Jonas calls his brother and is like, hey, I need dad’s ring. his brother, who knows all about Nico bc Jonas got extremely drunk last summer when they were at the lakehouse hiding from their cousins and told his brother all about Nico, just laughs. Sends an overnight courier with both their parents’ rings. Jonas gives his dad’s ring to Nico the next afternoon, who looks so happy he’ll burst.

They go out to a pub that night to spend some time with friends and maybe they’re a little too cosy because, hello, they just got engaged?? And the British tabloids, who always have a couple people trailing Jonas these days as he graduates, because they’ve figured out there is definitely SOMEONE in Jonas’s life, just have not figured out who, catch Jonas and Nico in a very quietly intimate moment through a window. Dig up as much info on Nico as they can. Publish it. The story explodes.

Jonas basically has to go IMMEDIATELY home, skip his graduation, and have a series of the worst conversations in the world with various royal advisors, various politicians, and, most awful of al, his grandfather, who is shattered that a) Jonas is gay (no heir) and b) Jonas didn’t TELL HIM he was gay so he couldn’t support him (he loves Jonas), and c) Jonas got engaged without even talking to him first (THEY ARE A ROYAL FAMILY.)

Meanwhile Nico graduates without Jonas in the crowd :( weh

Things are a liiiiiittle rocky for a couple weeks until Nico can make it to Made Up Not!Luxembourg for a press conference. Jonas is so glad to see him that he could collapse and they have the LONGEST hug in the airport that unfortunately so many airport employees take pictures of. But like it’s Jonas! The whole country loves Jonas! And all they know about Nico is what press offices have been able to dig up on him! And Nico seems like a nice guy, they think? He’s smart and he’s engaged in the world? Someone found a photo of him volunteering at a youth hockey camp in Switzerland and he looked like he was kind?

The press conference is extremely well attended not just by local press but by foreign press and Jonas is so glad he speaks so many languages and he considers it a blessing that Nico is Swiss and speaks three languages. It’s a mess. So many questions all at once. The media coordinator is hollering at them all to shut up. The whole thing is being livestreamed on local TV AND the internet. Who is Nico? Since when is Jonas gay? Why is he marrying someone who isn’t royal and isn’t from their country? Is his grandfather ashamed of his decision or his sexuality? What are Nico’s intentions for the crown? Do they think Nico is equipped to rule alongside Jonas.

“Nico will be a good leader for our people,” says Jonas, when the press relations people threaten to shut the entire conference down if people don’t give Jonas a chance to speak. “He has a degree in politics and economics from London School of Economics and has done extensive work with the United Nations.”

He takes Nico’s hand. The ring on Nico’s hand is very visible in the light of the cameras. Jonas is wearing a ring too – it’s much plainer than Nico’s, but it belonged to Nico’s grandfather. Nico gave it to him last night after they got back to the palace, when they got a quiet moment to themselves in between the chaos.

“And I love him very much,” Jonas says simply.

Nico smiles so brilliantly at him in that moment that no camera in the world can miss how much he loves Jonas. When Jonas looks back, the whole world sees the same.

FIN!!

I love them….

#writing 1.8k of siegenthischier not!fic was not what i intended to do with my afternoon HOWEVER. prince jonas is so important to me!!!!!!!#grammarly almost blew up my apartment while i was writing this and i chose to ignore all of it so i apologize #the way i just went back 17 pages in my njd tag CONVINCED i had a siegenthischier tag...but i did not....#i mean it is a siegenthischier world and we're all just living it #acrossbrazenskies #cage replies #aria 👑#unfortunate birdcage fanfictions

25 notes · View notes

warsofasoiaf · 5 months

Note

Are there any political parties that you like? Is there a model from outside the U.S. we should adopt?

I can't think of any I like. Political parties have one basic problem: their goal is primarily the perpetuation and expansion of the party's power, which incentivizes fundraising over effective legislation. I'd abolish them if I had a better system to replace it with, but alas, I do not.

Now, not all things are the fault of political parties. In any first-past-the-post voting system like the one that exists in the United States, it is mathematically advantageous to have a two-party system. That means even if the political parties were 100% incorruptible, they would steal be a barely-functional coalition of wildly divergent interests where centrist and heterodox thoughts find themselves on the outs. A parliamentary system with multiple parties does not necessarily ideal either - the collapse of political coalitions can lead to rapid government collapse and a real lack of staying power to get long-term legislation done. Alas, there simply is no long-term fix.

One of the things I've been thinking about recently is the obligation that political leadership has toward public opinion even if the policy idea itself is fairly shit. This isn't anything actually dealing with modern political thought, it actually came up in a discussion with a friend regarding Nevalle Chamberlain and the appeasement debate. Long-time readers will know that I am adamant in the idea that appeasement was a garbage policy idea (then and now - fuck dictatorial scum), but it's worth noting *how* popular it was with the British public. A fairly large cross-section of the British public supported appeasement largely out of trauma coming out of the Great War. So in what way are elected officials responsible for giving in to bad ideas because they're popular? Most of me says "not at all, the entire point of a representative democracy is that the public entrusts legislative officials because the average person has no understanding of how legislation works," but at the same time, there's a part of me that says "legislators that don't listen to their constituents is a big problem, especially in an era rife with misinformation."

Thanks for the question, Cle-Guy.

SomethingLikeALawyer, Hand of the King

#modern politics

9 notes · View notes

ukrfeminism · 2 months

Text

Three female MPs have been given taxpayer-funded bodyguards and cars as concerns over politicians’ safety are escalating.

The women – who have not been named but include representatives of the Conservative and Labour parties – have had their security upgraded as MPs are said to be “petrified” at the abuse they are facing.

In an overhaul of safety measures in place for MPs, Security Minister Tom Tugendhat has been working with the Home Office, the police and the parliamentary authorities, as well as the royal and VIP executive committee (Ravec), a secretive organisation responsible for the security of senior politicians and the royal family.

The new process, launched following a referral by police or parliamentary authorities, comes as the threat level faced by British politicians has shot up in recent weeks.

A senior security source told The Sunday Times: “Many MPs are petrified by the abuse they are facing.”

The newspaper understands the three female MPs have been given close protection from private companies, as well as chauffeur-driven cars, which are usually only limited to senior members of the cabinet and the leader of the opposition.

“We’ve taken a front-footed approach to co-ordinating action against the people or suspects that intelligence suggests most threaten MPs,” said a senior Whitehall source.

Other MPs’ security is also under review if they are deemed at risk, while, for those not needing the highest level of protection, thousands of security measures have been put in place in London and at hundreds of constituency offices and homes.

Private security operatives have been used at thousands of members’ surgeries and hundreds of events, alongside a police presence if required. MPs also have access to security advice, including via advisers based throughout the UK.

Ravec’s membership and decisions are mostly opaque, although insiders do say it has a budget of hundreds of millions of pounds.

It comes after the Palestine Solidarity Campaign defended the right to lobby MPs “in large numbers”, amid reports the group wanted so many protesters to turn up that Parliament would “have to lock the doors”.

The group said the issue of MPs’ security was “serious” but should not be used to “shield MPs from democratic accountability”.

The organisation’s director Ben Jamal said thousands of people were “shamefully” denied entry into Parliament on Wednesday as they attempted to lobby MPs to vote in favour of a ceasefire in Gaza in what he described was one of the largest physical lobbies of parliament in history.

The Times reported that Mr Jamal told a crowd of demonstrators in the build-up to the protest on Wednesday: “We want so many of you to come that they will have to lock the doors of Parliament itself.”

Sir Lindsay Hoyle, the Commons Speaker who has faced calls to resign after going against convention during the SNP’s Opposition Day debate on a ceasefire, said his motivation for widening Wednesday’s discussion was fuelled by concern about MPs’ security because of intimidation suffered by some parliamentarians.

Mr Jamal said the group “does not call” for protests outside MPs’ homes and believed parliamentarians have a right “to have their privacy respected”.

The government’s political violence tsar has said police should have the powers to “disperse” protests around Parliament, MPs’ offices and council chambers that they deem to be threatening.

Baron Walney, the Government’s adviser on political violence and disruption, said on Friday that the “aggressive intimidation of MPs” by “mobs” was being mistaken for an “expression of democracy”.

The crossbench peer, who in December submitted a Government-commissioned review into how actions by political groups can “cross into criminality and disruption to people’s lives”, told BBC Radio 4’s Today programme he was calling for police forces to act “uniformly in stopping” protest outside MPs’ homes.

#Articles #Law

5 notes · View notes

samwisethewitch · 2 years

Text

The Green Knight as a Fairy Journey

"In this domain more marvels have by men been seen

than in any other that I know of since that olden time."

- Sir Gawain and the Green Knight, translated by J. R. R. Tolkien

In my previous post, we talked about how Arthurian legend combines pagan and Christian elements to create a syncretic mythology. The Holy Grail, for example, is explicitly connected to Christian myths around the death of Jesus, but it may also be related to Irish and Welsh myths about divine cauldrons with healing properties. A lot of Arthuriana is like that -- a patchwork quilt of pagan and Christian elements.

One of the most unapologetically pagan Arthurian legends is Sir Gawain and the Green Knight. This tale has it all -- sex, violence, magic items, and a Green Man figure whose appearances are tied to the winter solstice. While Christian elements are still present (like Gawain's shield which bears an image of the Virgin Mary), they take a backseat to a pretty straightforward fairy story.

Sir Gawain and the Green Knight is a fairy story both in the sense that it features at least one of the Good People (the titular green dude) and in that it follows the protagonist on a journey into the realm of the Good People which is, confusingly, also called Fairy. In studying fairy lore for an upcoming project, I realized how similar this story is to other Fairy Journey narratives from the British Isles, and I think reading it through that lens can help explain a lot of the elements that don't always make sense to modern audiences.

The story opens with a Christmas celebration at the court of King Arthur. Ye olde partying is interrupted by the arrival of a mysterious knight, who is both bigger than a normal man and entirely green, from his skin to his hair to his clothes and even his horse. The visitor says he has heard tales of Arthur's knights and wants to test their bravery. He proposes a game: he will allow any man in the room the chance to swing at him with his (probably enchanted) axe as long as they will allow him to return the favor in a year and a day. Arthur's nephew, Gawain, accepts this challenge. Gawain beheads the Green Knight with his own axe, but instead of dying the Knight picks up his decapitated head, gets back on his horse, and reminds Gawain of his promise before leaving.

The fact that the stranger who visits Arthur's court has Otherwordly origins is explicitly stated in the text: "in his face and form that showed; / as a fay-man fell he passed, / and green all over glowed." [Emphasis added, quote from Tolkien's translation.]

In other words: "His face and body looked like a terrible fairy man and glowed green all over."

In their book Fairies, A Guide to the Celtic Fair Folk, Morgan Daimler says that green is probably the most well-known color associated with the Good People, and that they are often described as wearing green. Daimler also points out that the Good People often appear wearing a combination of green and red -- usually green with red accents. It's worth noting here that the Green Knight is described as having red eyes.

When he enters Arthur's hall, the Green Knight is described as holding an ax in one hand and a holly bough in the other. Some authors have argued that this connects him to the Holly King, a figure who represents winter in British folklore. Author John T. Kruse says in his book Faery: A Guide to the Lore, Magic, & World of the Good Folk that holly was used to protect the home from the Other Crowd, but at the same time they were said to shelter under it in the winter. This connects the Green Knight once again to Fairy, and to midwinter.

There are a few details in the encounter in Arthur's court that seem to indicate fae mischief. First, the Green Knight proposes that he accept a blow from one of Arthur's knights and be allowed to return it in a year and a day -- this time frame is common in fairy stories. Second, he asks to know Gawain's name before they begin. Names have power in Fairy, and Gawain freely giving his name to the Green Knight may be what allows the Knight to trick him later in the story.

The following year, Gawain sets out after All Soul's Day (Samhain) to search for the Green Knight. He cannot find any sign of the Green Knight or of the Knight's home, the Green Chapel in England or Wales, and we are told he wanders into "countries unknown." The poem skims over this part of Gawain's journey, but we're told he fights with worms (possibly referring to dragons), wood-trolls, and ogres. It seems pretty clear that at this point Gawain is in the Otherworld.

Gawain eventually arrives at a beautiful estate which belongs to a man named Bertilak. Bertilak's court is consistent with descriptions of Fairy courts -- wealthy and opulent, but very similar to contemporary human society.

The way the poet describes Bertilak's wife may also hint that this is a Fairy court. Lady Bertilak is described as supernaturally beautiful, and Gawain feels immediately drawn to her. This is similar to descriptions of Fairy Queens throughout the Ireland, Wales, and the British Isles.

When Bertilak learns that Gawain is looking for the Green Chapel, he tells him that it is very close by and suggests that Gawain stay with them to regain his strength before going on. Gawain agrees, and Bertilak proposes a game: Bertilak will go hunting, and each day he will give Gawain whatever he gets on his hunt. In exchange, Gawain will give Bertilak whatever he gets in Bertilak's house.

On the first morning, after Bertilak leaves to hunt, Lady Bertilak sneaks into Gawain's bed and offers him sex. ("To my body will you welcome be / of delight to take your fill; / for need constraineth me / to serve you, and I will.") This exploits a paradox in the knight's code Gawain lives by: a knight is required to do anything a noble woman asks, but sleeping with a married woman is a serious sin. Gawain compromises by kssing Lady Bertilak, but not going any further.

That night, Bertilak returns and gives Gawain deer he has killed. Gawain responds by giving Bertilak a kiss ("His fair neck he enfolded then fast in his arms, / and kissed him with all the kindness that his courtesy knew"), but refuses to tell him who he "won" it from.

The next day, Bertilak hunts a boar with his men. Lady Bertilak visits Gawain again, and this time she kisses him twice. When Bertilak returns, he gives Gawain the boar. Gawain gives him the two kisses but refuses to tell him what happened.

On the third day, while Bertilak is hunting a fox, Lady Bertilak visits Gawain and insists on giving him a gift. She offers him her girdle. (Which, for those not familiar, is an undergarment -- it's like the medieval equivalent of offering a man your bra.) Gawain refuses this very inappropriate gift, but Lady Bertilak tells him that the girdle is enchanted and will protect him from physical harm. Gawain takes it, thinking it might save him when he faces the Green Knight. When Bertilak returns and gives Gawain the fox, Gawain keeps the girdle for himself.

Let's unpack this part of the story. First, it's unusual for hunting to be this good in midwinter -- Gawain even comments on how strange it is that Bertilak found such good venison at Christmastime. This is another hint that Bertilak's lands are not bound to the same cycle of the seasons as ours. Daimler notes that Fairy often appears green and bountiful, even when it is winter in the human world.

Second, Lady Bertilak's seduction of Gawain falls into a larger pattern of Fairy Queens taking mortal lovers. The Queen often offers her lovers some kind of magical gift or supernatural power in exchange for their affection, but this often comes at a price. In Gawain's case, his fairy lover grants him protection from harm at the cost of compromising his vows as a knight and lying to her husband.

Third, this fits into the "seduction test" story type. For example: in the first branch of the Welsh Mabinogion, the hero Pwyll trades places with Arawn, lord of the Otherworld, for an entire year but refuses to sleep with Arawn's wife. After this, the two are lifelong friends, and Arawn continues to be friendly to Pwyll's descendents after Pwyll dies.

Gawain finally leaves Bertilak and his wife, wearing Lady Bertilak's girdle for protection. He reaches the Green Chapel, where the Green Knight is waiting for him. The Green Knight fakes him out twice, then gives him a very small cut on the neck. He then reveals that he is Bertilak, and that the cut was a punishment for hiding the girdle Gawain took from his wife. He adds that he doesn't blame Gawain, because he knows he only took the girdle to save his own life. Aside from a little blood and a lot of embarrassment, Gawain is fine.

Bertilak's appearance was changed by Morgan le Fay, who he also calls Morgan the Goddess. (Morgan le Fay LITERALLY means Morgan the Fairy.) He invites Gawain to return to his house to meet Morgan and to celebrate, but Gawain refuses and returns to Camelot instead.

Sir Gawain and the Green Knight makes much more sense as a straightforward tale of a journey into Fairy than it does as a Christian morality tale. The Green Knight is clearly an Otherworldly figure, and both Lady Bertilak and Morgan le Fay fit the role of the Fairy Queen. The test of virtue is consistent with older stories of Otherworld journeys, and Bertilak's home being in Fairy explains how there is such good hunting in the middle of winter.

196 notes · View notes