#i am depressed but no more than usual and my quality of life is arguably much better than when i was on antidepressants so. | Explore Tumblr Posts and Blogs

iamanartichoke · 3 years

Text

I wrote a Thing. It’s extremely long. I’d prefer it not be reblogged; I wrote this for my own catharsis and would prefer it not be circulated, bc of Reasons.

I changed my mind, okay to reblog. <3

Under a cut for (extreme, did I mention?) length.

So I got about 12 minutes of sleep last night, as you do, and around 3am or so I found myself - out of sheer curiosity - going down a meta hole of Ragnarok discourse, trying to figure out where this "satisfying redemption arc" for Loki happened. (I mean, there's a lot of things I would like to figure out, but I started there.) Because I could.

Basically I was looking for meta that went into detail about how Loki was redeemed in a satisfactory way. The ‘satisfactory’ is an important word here bc there is a redemption arc in the film, in that Loki starts off the film as an antagonist (kinda) to Thor and he ends the film as an ally to Thor, standing at Thor's side. In that sense, yes, there's a redemption arc. I didn't find much (and I had no idea how much people just despise Ragnarok "antis" [I really dislike that word] but that's another topic [that I don't particularly want to get into, tbh]) but I did find some. I read what I could find, and I read it open-mindedly, and overall I came away feeling like, okay, there are some valid points being made here and I can kinda see where they're coming from.

But it was a bit (a lot) like -- flat. Idk. The best comparison I can think of is that it’s like if a literature class read, I don't know, The Yellow Wallpaper for an assignment, and some of the students came away from it feeling like it was a creepy story about a woman slowly driving herself insane, and the other students came away from it incensed at the oppression and infantilization of women in the late 19th century -

- and neither side is wrong, but the former is a very surface-level reading and the latter isn't (bc it stems from looking at why she drives herself insane, why she was prescribed 'rest' in the first place, the context of what women could and couldn't do back then, etc; basically, a bit more work has to go into it).

[Note: I am not disparaging the quality of The Yellow Wallpaper. At all. It’s just the first relatively well-known story that popped into my head.]

In this sense, I can see the argument for Loki's redemption arc, but I don't think it's a very good argument. Not invalid, but not great.

I mean, for example, I think the most consistent argument I found variations of re: Loki's redemption is that Ragnarok shows Loki finally taking responsibility for his bad behaviour and misdeeds. This includes recognizing that his actions were fueled from a place of self-hatred and a desire to self-destruct in addition to bringing destruction on others. That he probably feels awkward and regretful of these things and doesn't know how to act around Thor, but he figures it out by the end, and decides that returning to Asgard is the best way to show that he's ready to make amends. His act of bringing the Statesman to Asgard is an apology. He allies himself with Thor and ends up in a better place, both narratively (united with Thor once again) and mentally (having taken responsibility and made amends for his past).

And setting aside that he had already made amends by sacrificing his life in TDW (and also setting aside that the argument is made that Loki redeems himself in IW by sacrificing himself to Thanos but if that's the case, wouldn't that imply that he hadn't achieved redemption in Ragnarok or else there would be no need to achieve it again in IW? Or, if you think he did achieve redemption in Ragnarok, then what the fuck did he give his life in IW for? What was his motivation there, and why did the narrative not make it clearer? I digress.)

- setting aside those two factors, I think this is a very fair argument. Loki is fueled by self-hatred, and he does want to self-destruct, and he does want to inflict that pain on others as well (particularly Thor). No lies detected here.

However, I also need to know where that self-hatred and desire for destruction (toward himself and others) comes from and for that, we need to go back to Thor 1.

Thor 1.

Loki starts Thor 1 out as "a clenched fist with hair," to borrow a quote from the Haunting of Hill House (that I tucked away in my mental box of Lovely Things bc it says so much so very simply). He's very used to bottling everything up, pushing it down; he slinks around behind the scenes, pulling the strings to this plot or that. He's "always been one for mischief," but the narrative implies that the coronation incident is the first time Loki's done anything truly terrible. And it all immediately pretty much goes to shit, so Loki spends the rest of the movie frantically juggling all these moving pieces while trying to seem as if he's got it all under control, every step of the way. That's how I view his actions.

But I always come back to that quote where Kenneth Branaugh tells Tom, of the scene in the vault, "This is where the thin steel rod that's been holding your mind together snaps." In other words this is where Loki discovering he's Jotun is just one thing too many. He can't take it. But though the rod snaps, his descent isn't a nosedive. It's a tumble. As the story progresses, the clenched fist starts to loosen, the muscles are flexed in unfamiliar ways (that feel kinda good, after being stiff for so long), and it culminates with the hand opening completely and shaking itself out. All of that repression, that self-hatred, that rage and jealousy just explodes so that, by the time the bifrost scene happens, Loki's already hit bottom. It's not just about proving his worthiness to Odin. He wants to hurt Thor, too; he, essentially, throws a tantrum. (That's right, I said tantrum.)

(Note: The word 'tantrum’ has negative connotations bc we normally equate it with a toddler stamping their feet and screaming in the aisle when their parent won't buy them the toy they want. But in itself, the word tantrum isn't infantalizing. It's an "emotional outburst, an uncontrolled explosion of anger and frustration" [paraphrasing from dictionary.com]. That's exactly what happens here [and why Tom called Loki's actions a massive tantrum, but people took that to mean Tom agreed it was childish whereas I doubt Tom meant it that way]).

He's been pushed past his limit, and he does bad things. He does really shitty things. He hurts Thor, he hurts his family. I'm pretty sure he knows this all along so this isn't, like, some revelation further down the line that "hey, those things I did were probably kinda bad." He got the memo already.

Ragnarok

Fast forward to Ragnarok, and we're introduced to a version of Loki who's had 4ish years to sit with everything that's happened. To sit with it and not do much else. The rawness of it has faded, and now it seems as though it's just become a thing, like when you move through life aware of your childhood traumas and have more or less just accepted them (and you probably share a lot of really funny depression memes on Facebook, which is kinda the equivalent of Loki's play, but that's probably just me).

Loki has, more or less, chilled out. He seems more bored than anything else; he's been masquerading as Odin for longer than he ever planned or intended to, so he's more or less ended up hanging out, letting Asgard mind its own business, and entertaining himself with silly plays. This is the version that starts out the movie as an antagonist to Thor - a version that is, arguably, in a much different place [and is a much milder threat] than the version who originally did those Bad Things.

And of course Thor is still mad at him, and of course they're going to butt heads, because that's what they do (and Thor's grievances are genuine, I’ll add, bc it's not really his fault he assumed Loki faked his death, nor can he be blamed for being pissed about Odin).

One argument framed this version of Loki as being a person who is facing the awkwardness of coming out of a dark place, which is fair. If we're going to frame his actions in Thor 1 as a tantrum, then Ragnarok would be the part where the toddler has been taken home, possibly has had some lunch and a juice box, and is now watching cartoons. They're over the tantrum, and would probably feel pretty silly about it if they weren't, yknow, toddlers. They probably can't remember why they even wanted that toy so badly. If they're a little older and self-aware, they might even be embarrassed for having melted down.

Like the word tantrum, this feeling isn't a thing limited to toddlers. I know I've had a few epic meltdowns as a grown ass adult, and I know I always feel deeply embarrassed afterwards - like, want to crawl into a hole and die. I've said things I can't take back. Adolescents and teenagers throw tantrums, mentally ill people throw tantrums, adults throw tantrums (I mean, my god, look at all the videos of Karens having screaming meltdowns - screaming! - over having to wear masks in order to shop at stores). Humans throw tantrums. And usually, after the feelings have been let out and the tantrum has passed, humans feel pretty regretful and awkward and embarrassed about whatever they did and said in the midst of their meltdown.

I get all of that and agree it's valid and that Loki probably feels it. By the time Ragnarok happens, Loki's had some time to reflect and think hmm, yeah, probably could've handled that one a lot better. The argument further goes that in order to navigate this awkward period, Loki must come to terms with what he's done, acknowledge that some things can't be unsaid or undone, and begin to make amends. Supposedly, some people feel that Loki becomes a better person because he does "own" everything he did wrong and, even though he feels like a jackass (paraphrasing), he sets that aside to become a become a better person by choosing to help Thor and Asgard at the end.

Thus, the overall arc goes like this. Loki, Thor's jealous little brother,

throws a tantrum of epic proportions bc Reasons

continues to act badly and make things even worse (Avengers)

has to face consequences for his actions (prison sentence)

ends up with a stretch of time in which he's free to contemplate and chill out

feels embarrassed and awkward about how he's behaved

sees an opportunity to make up for it and decides to take it

helps Thor, saves the day, and ends the film a better person.

Redemption achieved.

None of this is wrong. The film supports it. It's a fair interpretation. But it leaves. out. so. much.

To circle all the way back around Loki being "a clenched fist with hair," and his actions stemming from his self-hatred, you have to ask - how did he get that way? He didn't end up with all this self-hatred on accident. Generally, one isn't born despising themselves, it's a learned behavior. (I realize chemical imbalances are a thing, obviously, as I have Mental Shit myself, but for argument's sake I'm assuming that's not the case with Loki [at this point in time]).

Where did Loki learn it? From his family, from his surroundings, from his culture. We see examples of these microaggressions in the first, like, twenty minutes of the movie - a guard openly laughs at Loki's magic after Thor makes a joke about it (the tone of the conversation implies that Thor "jokes" like this often) and though Loki does the snake thing, the guard faces no real consequences. Thor doesn't acknowledge that anything went amiss. Not much later, on their way to Jotunheim, Loki's barely gotten two words out to Heimdall before Thor cuts him off, steps in front of him, and takes charge. Loki doesn't look annoyed at this; he looks resigned.

Then, for absolutely no reason at all, Volstagg decides to make a jab at Loki ("silver tongue turned to lead?") just because he can. The ease with which he makes this comment and the way that no one else blinks an eye at it implies that this isn't out of the norm. And Loki doesn't react, not really. In the deleted version, he delivers a particularly nasty comeback but he delivers it under his breath, without intending Volstagg to hear it. In the final version, he simply says nothing, though his expression can be read as hurt or stung. Either way, the audience sees an example of Loki being walked all over by Thor and his friends and bottling up his reactions instead of standing up for himself.

Microaggressions matter. They are mentally and emotionally damaging. They hurt. The implication that this is not unusual treatment for Loki means that Loki's probably gone through this for most of his life. It's like the equivalent of being, I don't know, twenty two and you're the friend who has to walk behind the others when the sidewalk isn't wide enough, and it's been that way since the first day of kindergarten. At this point, you're used to it, but that doesn't make it hurt any less when the jabs come seemingly out of nowhere, for no reason other than to make you feel bad.

(I personally identify a lot with this bc I experienced passive bullying in social settings for years. I was the 'doesn't fit on the sidewalk' friend; I hung around with people who'd pretend to be my friend and would be more or less nice to my face, but would laugh at me and make fun of me behind my back for whatever reasons. And often there'd be the random jabs at me, things that would come out of nowhere to smack me in the face, followed by the fake laugh and “just kidding!" so that I couldn't even get upset without being made to feel like I was overreacting and couldn't take a joke. I'd deal with this socially, particularly in middle school when girls are their most vicious, and then I'd go home and, because I was the only girl with a lot of brothers and because boys are mean and because I am who I am, the dynamic was that my brothers would just endlessly roast me to my face and sometimes it was a "just kidding!" thing, where I was the only one not laughing. But that’s beside the point; my point is that microaggressions, passive bullying, and consistent invalidation are harmful and that shit stays with you into adulthood.)

So, yes, Loki needs to be held responsible for his misdeeds, and it's valid to say that he recognizes those misdeeds and wants to make amends. I have never disagreed with that. But the problem with this interpretation is that it lets every single other character who contributed to Loki's self-hatred and mental breakdown (let's just call a spade a spade here, that's what it was; he was broken psychologically) get off scot-free.

First of all,

Odin is not held accountable for instilling in the princes a mentality of Asgard first, everyone is beneath us but Jotuns are benath us the most, they are literal monsters. He is not held accountable for pitting his sons against one another (even if it was unintentional, he still did it) with "you were both born to be kings but only one of you can rule" being the general tone of their upbringing. He's not held accountable for his favoritism toward Thor.

Frigga is not held accountable for deferring to Odin both in supporting the above things and in keeping the truth of Loki's origins a secret while doing nothing to discourage the "monsters" narrative.

Thor is not held accountable for his own tendency of taking Loki for granted (he assumes Loki will come to Jotunheim, he oversteps Loki constantly, “know your place,” etc.. He grants his implicit permission for Loki to be treated as the sidewalk friend in their “group,” a group which is loyal to and takes their cues from Thor as Thor continues to do nothing in his brother's defense).

[Note: Wanting Thor to be held accountable for things he's done wrong isn't vilifying him. Acknowledging that Thor benefited from Odin's favoritism and his own place as Crown Prince doesn't negate Thor also being raised in an abusive environment. I don't think anyone's saying that or, if they have, it's not something I agree with.]

Furthermore,

Odin is not held accountable for his cruelty in disowning Loki (”your birthright was to die” is never going to be forgotten, speaking of people saying things that can't be unsaid or taken back) and in sentencing Loki to a severe prison sentence (life! only bc Frigga wouldn't let him execute Loki) for crimes that are no worse than what Odin himself has committed (around which the entire plot of Ragnarok revolves! Colonialism (and subjugation) is wrong is, like, a major theme [that people rush to praise, even] here).

Thor is also never held accountable for not trying harder to understand what made Loki snap (fair enough, he didn't have a ton of time after returning from Earth, but certainly he had lots of time to sit around reflecting while Loki was being tortured by Thanos for a year). He knows Loki is "not himself" and "beyond reason" and accepts it at face value; he questions it once and then lets it go. He's fine with assuming Loki's just lost his mind, and isn't that a shame. (I realize I'm simplifying Thor's emotions but my point is that Thor could've tried harder to figure out that Loki was being influenced and/or not acting completely autonomously.)

Thor is also never held accountable for - if not facing consequences for his own slaughter of Jotuns - then at least addressing why Loki can't kill an entire race even though Thor tried to do that, like, two days ago. (Granted, it’s difficult to understand how Thor got from Point A ("let's finish them together, Father!") to Point B (this is wrong!), but that failing belongs to Thor 1 (which is not, by the way, a perfect movie).

The interpretation that Loki is fully redeemed because he took responsibility for his actions, returned to Asgard, and allied himself with Thor to save their people is all well and good - but, why is Loki the only one here who has to take responsibility for their actions?

What about all the loose threads in his story?

For example, how did he get from:

Point A (believing himself a literal monster, having a complete mental breakdown, getting tortured and further traumatized after that, etc)

Point B (Hey, yknow what would be fun? I'm going to write and direct a play about how I heroically died to save Thor and Jane, and I'll go ahead and have Odin say he accepts me and has always loved me. I'm going to do these things because Odin never said this in real life and instead of acknowledging my sacrifice, Thor left my body in the dirt, so someone has to validate what I've done right and that someone might as well be me. And hey, while I'm at it, I'm going to control the narrative on revealing myself as Jotun to Asgard, instead of living in fear of it being found out, and I'm going to do it in a way that they have to sympathize with me and revere me in death, bc they never bothered to do so when I was alive. And Matt Damon should play me, also.)

Point C (Yeah, I guess I feel kinda awkward about that whole tantrum thing, also I should help Thor and support him being king.)

The answers to these questions are handwaved and the audience takes that to mean they don't matter. Furthermore, framing Loki's redemption around an act of service (more or less) to Thor makes Loki's redemption about Thor. Does Loki make this decision for the sake of Thor and of Asgard, or does he make it for himself? It's not super clear to me, and I think arguments can be made for both. Which, again, is fine, but - whatever.

If we're going to collectively agree, as a fandom, that Loki is complex, that he's morally gray, that he's worthy of redemption and therefore arguably a good person who's done bad things, then why is it asking too much to have it acknowledged that Thor (also a good person who's done bad things) played a part in Loki's downfall and has shit to apologize for, too? Bc one can only assume the reason is that you're taking a very gray concept and making it black and white by saying Loki has to apologize and make amends because he is the villain, and Thor doesn't because he is the hero (and it's his movie). And it's lazy.

This is where the crux of the issue lands. There's more than one valid interpretation, yes. And no two people (or groups of people, or whatever) are going to consume and therefore interpret or analyze the source material in the same way. I think I saw a post recently about how studies have been done on this, in fact. But, there is a lot going on under the surface that tends to get overlooked when exploring Loki's redemption arc in Ragnarok, as far as I can see, and that’s why I don’t consider it satisfactory.

[I did read similar arguments regarding other issues that are often debated ('debated'), like Loki's magic and/or being underpowered, whether or not Loki's betrayal of Thor was the natural outcome of the situation on Sakaar or not, whether Thor actually gets closure with Odin [if he does, how does he reconcile the father he's idolized with the imperialistic conqueror he's discovered? Why doesn't he hold Odin responsible for covering up Hela's existence and the threat of her return, especially as he knew he was nearing the end of his life? Is Thor's "I'm not as strong as you" meant to imply that he acknowledges those shortcomings of Odin's and that he's okay with them, or that he's just overlooking them, or is he not okay with them but didn't have the chance to get into it bc he was in the middle of battle? T'Challa confronted his father on his wrongdoings in Black Panther; could Thor not have had at least one line that was confrontational enough to establish where he stands as opposed to this gray middle? Can someone explain to me how any of this equates to Thor gaining closure? Please?) but obviously I'm not going to go into all of them (well, I tried not to), bc this mammoth post has gone on long enough (I may not even post this tbh)]

- but my overall point to this entire thing is that when I say I'm critical of Ragnarok bc it's flawed, that Loki's arc was neither complete nor satisfactory, that many things went unaddressed and, due to all of these things, I do not think Ragnarok is a very good movie nor a very cohesive movie, this is where I'm coming from. I have not seen anything to change my mind to the contrary.

But I am not saying that anyone satisfied with it is wrong, or shouldn't have the interpretation that they do. I'm not vilifying Thor in order to lift Loki up, just acknowledging that Thor is arguably just as flawed as Loki without the stigma of being Designated Villain. I think a lot of these arguments get overlooked or dismissed, and that's fine, but it doesn't make the people who do engage with them hateful, or bitter, or trying to excuse Loki's crimes, or feeling like redemption means that Loki's crimes should be erased rather than reconciled.

And sure, yes, perhaps we are expecting too much and exploring all of these themes (or wanting them explored) means that somehow we think it should be Loki's movie (we don't). Loki is a supporting character, but he's still a character. And the movie itself doesn't have to delve into all these things - no one's saying that. (At least, I'm not.) We just want acknowledgement, from the narrative, that this stuff was an Issue.

This could have been accomplished with -

Some dialogue closer to the novelization (and original script), like Thor and Loki both acknowledging the harm they've done one another and their kingdom due to their Feels.

A single line of Thor confronting Odin, or even asking "Why?"

A narrative acknowledgement that Odin did both Thor and Loki dirty (”I love you, my sons” isn't an apology, because it doesn't acknowledge either that there's been wrong-doing or express regret for having done the wrong in the first place).

A little bit more nuance in the way Loki treats his own past (ie, instead of flippantly telling the story of his suicide attempt, maybe - if it must be flippant - talk about getting blasted in the face with Hawkeye's arrow or sailing through to Svartalfheim [And in that moment, I sang ta-daaaa!]) or whatever.

I recognize that wanting full, in-depth exploration on all of these issues regarding a supporting character is probably too much to ask or expect - but, I also feel like, if you're going to be professionally writing a narrative (or rewriting/improvising, as it were), it's not too much to ask that a little more care be taken in regards to all of the layers that have contributed to said supporting character's downfall and subsequent redemption arc. I don't think that's an unreasonable thing to want.

And maybe if there had been more nuance and continuity in how these things were portrayed on screen (ie, if TW had actually done as good a job as his stans think he did), the fandom wouldn't have divided and conquered itself over which "version" of the same character is more valid and whether or not the film did its best to close out a trilogy (not start a new one), to the point where everyone in this fandom space makes navigating it feel like walking through a minefield.

But, I mean

(Again, please don’t reblog if possible.)

Edit: Okay to reblog. <3

96 notes · View notes

sk1fanfiction · 3 years

Text

the many faces of tom riddle, part 2

-you dislike frank dillane’s portrayal of tom riddle only because you don’t think he’s attractive-

FULL DISCLAIMER THAT THIS IS JUST MY OPINION OF A CHARACTER WHO DOESN’T HAVE THE STRONGEST CANON CHARACTERIZATION, AND THUS ALL THIS IS BASED ON MY CONCEPTUALIZATION (and this time, featuring a bit of armchair child psych from a student).

Wait, don’t clutch your pearls just yet. Compose yourself.

I am about to explain why it’s not actually that bad, and Dillane’s portrayal is vastly underappreciated.

I definitely agree that his portrayal comes off as ‘creepier’. It’s not helped by the stylistic decisions in the scene -- the smeary, green filter gives the scene a sinister quality.

Even Slughorn looks suspect here, which is somewhat appropriate, given that he is complicit in this crime.

Again, this scene is very much intended to be slightly off.

You’ll notice (and I’ll discuss this again when I talk about Coulson’s portrayal) that Dillane is almost always shot from at least slightly below, which makes the lower third of his face look bigger (and thus more menacing). The lighting also makes his eyes glow in a really unnatural way. There’s an echo-y effect to make his voice (and not Slughorn’s) sound unnerving.

People talk about how Coulson would have looked in this scene, and if he was filmed in the same way (monotone, smeary/shadowy filter, and always from below), he’d look a bit creepy, too.

But all of this, imo, is for a pretty good reason. Slughorn isn’t the POV character. Harry is. Harry is learning about how a young Lord Voldemort wheedled the secret of Horcruxes out of an unsuspecting teacher. Unlike in COS, he expects Riddle to be evil. And, so, Harry’s new perception of Tom Riddle literally colors how we perceive him.

Take this shot, for example: he does that head-tilt thing that Coulson does, and it’s actually... kind of... cute???

Imagine Dillane filmed from slightly above, like Coulson usually is, and it looks even more innocent. (I mean, come on, he does not look like he’s killed four people, does he?) It’s not hard to imagine teachers being taken in by this kind of act.

Even that little smirk he does when the camera (aka, Harry’s gaze) pans in, is for Harry’s benefit. No one else noticed that.

However, I still fail to find this creepy, like, at all. Yes, it’s a fake smile, but he’s portraying a different side of Tom Riddle to Coulson. Whereas, in COS, he’s in his vindictive, murderous element, where he’s free to express himself, in this scene, Tom Riddle is doing what he does best -- manipulating and managing appearances.

This entire scene is an act. And because Harry knows it’s an act, it should look a bit stilted.

From the Hepzibah Smith scene in the books: Voldemort smiled mechanically and Hepzibah simpered.

So, Harry is pretty adept at parsing Tom’s fake expressions.

But just look at the expressiveness in his face: he goes from brooding, he blinks, and his entire face changes to this charming (fake) smile.

At the risk of sounding elitist, I’m a bit tired of seeing the word ‘psychopath’, which is not an actual medical diagnosis recognised by any psychological or psychiatric institution, being tossed about, especially with reference to Tom Riddle (and from a neuroscience perspective, it’s doubly annoying). There’s no such thing as ‘insanity’ or ‘psychopathy’ or being ‘crazy.’

-although I use it too a shorthand in conversation to distinguish ‘canon’ Tom from his ‘softer’ OOC counterparts, I really shouldn’t-

Unfortunately, I’ve seen the ‘psychopath’ comment used time-and-time again as an excuse or a full explanation of ‘why Tom Riddle went evil’ (JKR in fact, has made a weird comment in an interview, basically saying that ‘psychopaths can’t be redeemed or learn adaptive coping skills’ or whatever), which really just goes to show the lack of understanding and compassion when personality disorders, especially, are concerned.

But what I like most about the opening of this scene, actually, is that first, listless expression. And this is where we get slightly into headcanon, but Tom Riddle is the opposite of a happy, mentally healthy teenager. By Dumbledore’s own admission, he has no real friends. He has no parental figures, no real attachments. Yes, he might derive some pride or enjoyment from being good at magic and top of his class and all that, but I really don’t think even Tom finds that truly fulfilling. There is nothing that makes him happy.

In fact, although some might perceive it as ‘creepy’, I think that listless expression is an accurate window into Tom’s psyche.

I know people aren’t big on Freud, but I think that he does make some interesting points (also, cut the guy some slack for being relatively open-minded for the Victorian Era, and inventing psychoanalysis and while yes he did say some sexist stuff, good luck finding a field of science that isn’t male-focused and makes crazy generalizations about women, especially back in the day) about the possible origins of thanatophobia, the fear of death.

According to Freud, thanatophobia is a disguise for a deeper source of concern -- he did not believe that people were capable of conceptualizing their own death to that extent. Instead, he believed that this phobia was caused by unresolved childhood conflicts that the sufferer cannot come to terms with or express emotion towards.

Now, I know Freud almost always attributes mental distress to childhood experiences, but I think in this case, it really has some merit.

According to attachment theory, the basis of how we form attachments in adulthood is dictated by learning it from experiences with caregivers in the first two years of life. We know Tom was born in an orphanage, and that he didn’t cry much as a baby, and subsequently, probably received very little attention. Compounded with possible genetic factors and his caregivers being afraid or wary of his magical abilities, he later struggled to form attachments because of this -- I would actually go so far as to say that by the time Dumbledore meets him, Tom Riddle is severely depressed.

And that flat affect and anhedonia, I think, comes over very well in Dillane’s portrayal. There’s kind of this resignation -- a very deep sadness and loneliness to his character.

Of course, he doesn’t derive any comfort or fulfillment from human interaction, because (to borrow the description from the Wikipedia article on ‘Reactive attachment disorder’, which Tom meets all the criteria for) he has a “grossly disturbed internal working model of relationships.” In other words, he is unresponsive to all offers of attachment because of this unacknowledged trauma.

(You could arguably class Tom as having an avoidant attachment style, but I think in his case the trauma and its effect on him are severe enough to call it disordered.)

RAD isn’t particularly well-characterized (especially neurologically) and quite new in the literature, but here are some links if anyone is interested in doing a bit of digging: Link 1 | Link 2 | Paper 1 | Paper 2

And, instead of trying to resolve this conflict in a healthy way, or at least recognize that this is why he can’t be happy and try to learn how to cope from there, he (a) represses the desire for human attachment and (b) funnels that negative emotion into being the fault of Death, the Grim Reaper (again, to borrow Freudian terms).

And we all know how that turned out...

(And now, this should go without saying, but psychoanalyzing fictional characters has nothing to do with assigning a morality to mental disorders. Mental illness is neither a cause nor an excuse for criminal behavior -- in the same way that the cycle of violence is a phenomenon, not an excuse. Tom Riddle did not become a genocidal murderer because, in common parlance, he was a ‘psychopath’ -- he was not necessarily ‘predisposed’ to evil and could just as easily chosen to not follow the path that he did -- instead, he willingly made poor choices. This is a descriptive analysis, not a justification -- a ‘how’, not a ‘why’)

Here’s a Carl Jung quote that articulates it better:

“I am not what happened to me, I am what I choose to become.”

Yes, he’s a bit stiff (and a lot more formal than in COS during his *conversation* with Harry). But, and here comes the controversial bit, this is appropriate for a portrayal of a schoolboy in the 1940s. The upright posture is accurate -- respectful, polite -- everything Tom Riddle would have been expected to be (and even Coulson, in that scene with Dumbledore in COS, is quite stiff). Even the way he looks at Slughorn and maintains eye contact is very *respectful.*

And, Dillane (I think he’s seventeen or eighteen here) actually looks like a believable sixteen-year-old. I’m sorry, I love Coulson’s portrayal as well, but he looks around nineteen in COS; so in HBP, he probably would have looked at least twenty-two or so. (Sorry, not sorry).

This may be influenced by my own interpretation of the character (because I imagine Tom always looks young for his age, and Dillane fits that archetype, but I don’t think that’s very popular), but I think young Tom Riddle is supposed to be *cute* and a bit stiff/shy/awkward (being charming and awkward is very much possible), if you consider the way Dippet and Slughorn treat him.

To support this, he says very few words to Hepzibah Smith (in the book, that scene’s not in the movie), and is very... bashful and coy during the whole interaction? I think yes, he’s charismatic, but he’s not loud, suave, openly flirtatious or particularly verbose. Tom Riddle should have a quiet magnetism, and to me, that came across in Dillane’s portrayal.

"I'd be glad to see anything Miss Hepzibah shows me," said Voldemort quietly, and Hepzibah gave another girlish giggle.

...

"Are you all right, dear?"

"Oh yes," said Voldemort quietly. "Yes, I'm very well. ..."

Even the ‘ugly, greedy look’ described in the books, when Slughorn starts spilling his secrets, is there. This is how he’s supposed to look! Slughorn glimpses it, but doesn’t understand its significance. Harry does.

“Slughorn looked deeply troubled now: He was gazing at Riddle as though he had never seen him plainly before, and Harry could tell that he was regretting entering into the conversation at all.”

Remember the context of this moment, as well: He’s just discovered how to create multiple Horcruxes. Excuse him for looking a bit creepy (if not now, then when?).

Here’s two direct quotes of Harry’s impression of Tom Riddle in that scene:

“But Riddle's hunger was now apparent; his expression was greedy, he could no longer hide his longing.”

“Harry had glimpsed his face, which was full of that same wild happiness it had worn when he had first found out that he was a wizard, the sort of happiness that did not enhance his handsome features, but made them, somehow, less human. . . .”

Tom Riddle’s Horcruxes are a direct metaphor for his refusal to allow himself to heal from his trauma -- instead, he continues to inflict destruction on himself and others.

His desire to continue creating more Horcruxes sort of resounds with the fact that self-harm can also become a compulsion.

I’d also like to digress a bit to discuss the Gaunt Ring, while we’re at it. While we’ve talked about his attachment issues in general, this discussion is particularly pertinent to father figures. And while Tom’s attachment issues are extensive, I think there’s ample evidence that as a child, he craved acknowledgement and acceptance from a father figure -- the man who gave him the only thing Tom truly owned -- his name. He would have had a vaguely defined mother figure in Mrs. Cole, perhaps.

"You see that house upon the hillside, Potter? My father lived there. My mother, a witch who lived here in this village, fell in love with him. But he abandoned her when she told him what she was.... He didn’t like magic, my father ... He left her and returned to his Muggle parents before I was even born, Potter, and she died giving birth to me, leaving me to be raised in a Muggle orphanage ... but I vowed to find him ... I revenged myself upon him, that fool who gave me his name ... Tom Riddle. ..."

We know that by June of 1943 (COS flashback) Tom has already uncovered the truth of his parentage; he knows he is the Heir of Slytherin via the Gaunt line, and he describes himself to Dippet as ‘Half-blood, sir. Witch mother, Muggle father.’

In Part 1, I discussed the high probability that as a presumed ‘Mudblood’, Tom Riddle was treated rather poorly in Slytherin House. But by this scene in the fall of 1943, he is surrounded by a group of adoring hangers-on. Why?

In my opinion; the Gaunt Ring. We know that Tom stopped wearing it after school, so its sentimental value couldn’t have been that great. We know he likes to collect objects (which I believe stems from his attachment issues -- he seeks comfort in things instead of other people).

Signet rings (such as the one belonging to Tutankhamun seen above) were used to stamp legal documents and such, in order to certify someone’s identify -- like an e-certificate, if you will. Like Tutankhamun’s ring, the Gaunt Ring bears an identifying symbol -- Marvolo Gaunt tells us proudly that it bears the Peverell family crest.

By the Middle Ages, anyone of influence, including the nobility, wore a signet ring. Rings in antiquity were auspicious -- they signified power, legitimacy, and authority. And so, I believe that all the Sacred Twenty-Eight families would have worn these, too.

And so, bearing the Gaunt Ring would have established Tom Riddle, symbolically and in the eyes of the Sacred Twenty-Eight (his future supporters and followers), as the legitimate heir to the House of Gaunt. This is why, I believe, Tom coveted the ring as soon as he saw it -- not just because it was a family heirloom, and not just because he thought it was a pretty toy for his collection.

(He curses it so that no one else but him can wear the Gaunt Ring safely.)

This is why, to make the legitimization literal as well as symbolic, Tom murders his father and grandparents. It’s not just an act of vindictive, murderous rage due to his perception of being rejected by his father (although it is that, too). And so, Tom, abandoning his search for a father figure (and possibly also giving up on the possibility to allow himself to heal from his own personal trauma rather than continue to inflict it on others), ‘cleanses’ his bloodline, to make himself truly legitimate. It’s rather telling that instead of affirming his legitimacy as a Riddle, which would have put him in line for a nice inheritance, and hey -- money is money -- (thus accepting his half-blood status), he simply kills them all. He has done all the murdering he needs to become immortal (and he hasn’t had the discussion about multiple Horcruxes yet); but yet, he does it again. Frightening stuff.

(Just look how the others look at Tom. All but the one to his left -- possibly Nott, Rosier, or Mulciber -- have their torsos turned towards him. Their attention is on him, while he knowingly regards the viewer/Harry. Tom seems a little uncomfortable with the attention.).

“And there were the half-dozen teenage boys sitting around Slughorn with Tom Riddle in the midst of them, Marvolo's gold-and-black ring gleaming on his finger.”

...

“Riddle smiled; the other boys laughed and cast him admiring looks.”

...

“Tom Riddle merely smiled as the others laughed again. Harry noticed that he was by no means the eldest of the group of boys, but that they all seemed to look to him as their leader.”

The ‘gang’ are true hangers-on; Tom doesn’t seem to pay them much attention.

So, if not via careful flattery or charisma, the attraction must be status.

And perhaps yet more telling...

"I don't know that politics would suit me, sir," he said when the laughter had died away. "I don't have the right kind of background, for one thing." “A couple of the boys around him smirked at each other. Harry was sure they were enjoying a private joke, undoubtedly about what they knew, or suspected, regarding their gang leader's famous ancestor.”

That, in my opinion, is as good as we’re going to get as proof that Tom’s shiny new signet ring (and by extension, his new status) made a big impression on his fellow students.

So, when he returns to Hogwarts, he is ‘pureblood’. He is cleansed of his Muggle roots, and becomes the legitimate heir of the House of Gaunt, now well on his way to becoming Lord Voldemort...

Watch the scene again, with a critical eye, and imagine Slughorn’s perspective, instead of Harry’s. There’s nothing creepy about Tom Riddle... unless you know what he is...

Strip away all the effects of Harry’s gaze (and notice, here he’s still looking at Harry), and he’s quite the charmer, actually.

(I will concede that I don’t like the promotional images where they have him looking like he’s up to no good. And I do wish he blinked once in a while.)

My challenge to you: Rewatch the scene with an open mind, and let me know if you agree that Dillane’s portrayal comes off as depressive rather than ‘creepy.’ And if not, why do you dislike his portrayal?

#tom riddle #character analysis #character study #the many faces of #tom marvolo riddle #frank dillane #i literally could not find any pictures other than these #literal crumbs i swear #i know this is unpopular #people really dislike him i guess #watch the scene again with an open mind i promise you'll like it #i seriously do think he did a good job #tw: mention of child abuse #tw: mention of self-harm #i'm not trying to oversimplify things but you can't deny that maybe if tom was hugged as a child it would have helped #say it with me: psychopathy is not an actual medical diagnosis #it's actual more of a legal/criminal justice term #and people just use it as a synonym for 'evil' at this point so the original meaning is pretty much obscured #and personality disorders should not be moralized #people with personality disorders are not 'evil'

90 notes · View notes

coldmorte · 3 years

Note

So i have some unpopular opinions; i feel like Dutch doesnt sleep around as much as people would like to think. He probably likes the fact that people think that of him, even if its not his style. Also...i dont think Dutch and Molly have any chemistry.

Howdy! (ASK 1 OF 2)

I apologize it took me some time to actually reply to this, especially because it is such a great ask! I definitely agree with both points made here, but I was debating how I wanted to write a response (and how far to take it).

Anyway, I'm open to hearing unpopular opinions! I know I have plenty of my own, so I'm not really one to judge others (as long as there is mutual respect) ☺️

My response is fairly long, and it deals with some sensitive topics. I decided to add a cut to this first ask, just to be safe! 💜💜💜

(Warning: SPOILERS below)

In regard to Dutch sleeping around, there are a few reasons why I don’t think he does it as much as it is often implied/assumed (I’m primarily limiting this to the timeframe of RDR2, Ch. 1-6).

First of all, Molly explicitly says Dutch doesn’t show her a lot of physical attention, even though he is her SO. If he’s not sleeping with her much, I doubt that he is going around with any other women at this time. He seldom leaves camp, outside of doing missions, so it is unlikely that he would meet up with anybody not in the gang. It just doesn’t seem plausible to me, as it would put him in a vulnerable position.

Dutch complains multiple times - including to Molly - that he is under stress and concerned about the Pinkertons closing in on them. Why would he go around outside the camp sleeping with random women? It would put him at the risk of being seen or reported on, and I believe he is smarter than to take on the unnecessary danger. Generally, he doesn’t spend much time in civilized areas, unless he needs to.

Not to mention, stress can be a real inhibitor of sex drive. For the entirety of the game, Dutch exhibits various degrees of anxiety and depression. I believe the gang and his personal safety were of much more concern to him, thus diminishing his interest in sex.

Speaking of the gang, I don’t personally see Dutch as sleeping around with the women in it that much. He did have a relationship with Susan in the past. Whether anything was still going on between them or not is uncertain, but if there was something, it probably was not serious or very frequent. In RDR1, he also suggests that he slept with Abigail, but if this happened, I doubt it would have occurred during the events of RDR2. They hardly ever interacted, and when Abigail did talk about Dutch, it was almost always in a negative manner. Dutch also showed some interest in Mary-Beth. However, I don’t think it went beyond flirting. She didn’t show much interest in him, and I think word would have gotten around if he tried to force anything, especially to Arthur (I am not going to discuss the events of RDR1 in any more detail here because that is a whole different conversation). But other than them, who else in the gang? There were not enough interactions with other women to suggest there was anything between them and Dutch.

Also, sex was considerably more risky in 1899 than it is today, and the means of contraception were not as dependable. For instance, The Pill didn’t go onto the market for another 60 years, and it was more difficult to get ahold of other birth control methods. This was partly because there were not as many technological advancements in this field and because there were a few laws that prevented reliable access to contraceptives (ex: The Comstock Laws). Condoms were arguably one of the easier birth control methods to find, but they still were not as widely available then as they are today (the quality was arguably not as good either). As I understand it, some searching was generally required to get ahold of condoms (usually in more civilized areas, which Dutch tried to avoid).

Dutch is a very contradictory character. My point in bringing up birth control is because although on some level I think Dutch probably would have liked to have actual children, I do not think he was serious enough about it to take any risks that might have led to an unwanted pregnancy during the timeframe of RDR2. As I mentioned, he was under a lot of stress with the gang. A biological child on top of that most likely would have overwhelmed him, and it would have required a long-term commitment to not only the child, but to the mother as well. I believe Dutch was smart enough to recognize this danger, and since birth control methods were not as widely available or reliable, he would not have wanted to sleep around too much (unwanted pregnancies were relatively common during this era).

I’ve written in the past that I believe Dutch had a certain degree of self-consciousness underneath his pride, so I do agree that he probably would have liked people finding him attractive or seductive. These traits emanate a sense of power and confidence, which would have provided a more favorable presentation of himself to others. These perceptions certainly would have helped to conceal his own self-doubts and insecurities, so he would have welcomed them, rather than try to refute them.

Now, in regard to the chemistry between Dutch and Molly, I agree. I think it was a pretty bad relationship all around. I don’t see its flaws as being entirely one-sided.

I will get into this a little more on the next ask, but I will discuss a few things here first.

Starting with Dutch, I will admit that he could have treated Molly a lot better. Even if he wasn’t happy with her or the status of their relationship, he should have seriously talked to her more. She deserved that, at the very minimum. There were a few instances where she tried to get his attention, and he just brushed her off. Again, like I said, even if he wasn’t very keen on the relationship anymore, he should have at least been honest about that. Then, as I already discussed, he had some mildly flirtatious conversations with Mary-Beth. I certainly do not think this helped matters. It was rude the way he insulted Molly for bringing up his interactions with Mary-Beth and how he pretended he had no idea what Molly was talking about.

Onto Molly, I don’t think she was perfect either. I know Dutch didn’t talk with her nearly as much as he should have, but she didn’t seem to show a whole lot of support for him in return. Dutch expressed that he was feeling stressed and not up to much physical activity, to which she got quite upset. She seemed to turn some arguments towards herself and her needs, with little regard for Dutch’s wellbeing. I do think she was selfish for demanding him to give her something he did not want to give/could not provide. Also, she refused to help the gang find leads or assist with chores, even when told to do so by others (ex: Dutch and Arthur). She tended to act above everybody else, claiming she wasn’t a servant to the needs of the gang as a whole. Though I can respect her sense of independence in that regard, it did show a sense of entitlement. Even Dutch donated to the gang funds, and as the leader, he was the one responsible for overseeing the vast majority of missions they engaged in. Molly was the only person who really did not contribute much. (Side note: Even UNCLE - the laziest bastard in the West - helped with leads and contributions!!)

I will get into this more in the following ask, but although I know she loved Dutch to an extent, I think part of her fascination with him was rooted in infatuation. Little is known about her background, but it is canon that she came from a wealthy and influential family in Ireland. I think part of the reason why she liked Dutch so much was because of the powerful position he held. She frequently lashed out at people who she perceived as challenging the reality of her “love” for him, such as Abigail and Karen. In one instance, Molly even went so far as to slap Karen across the face because she thought Karen was talking negatively about her. There was no evidence to prove or disprove Molly’s beliefs, but it did show that she was pretty sensitive about criticism (whether it was perceived or real) in regard to her relationship with Dutch.

Now, Dutch was wrong to use Molly’s fascination with him and his role in the gang to seduce her. But like I said, both of them had their issues. It was just a bad situation from both sides, and I do not think it should have happened in the first place. I don’t necessarily blame one more than the other. To be honest, I think they each deserved someone who fit them better.

And if I am being even MORE honest, I think Dutch should have stayed with Susan. She loved him, and he made a big mistake in ever giving her up. I believe the events of RDR2 would have turned out very differently, had he kept her closer.

(Ending note: Outside of serious posts - like this one - I know I make quite a few jokes about Dutch on my blog in regard to sexuality, but I do not mean for much of what I say in that regard to be taken *too* seriously. I don’t particularly want to discuss my personal life in the text of this post, but I will say that even if Dutch was a person I knew in real life, I’m not sure I would seriously want anything to happen between us. However, that is another matter entirely that has nothing whatsoever to do with him. I absolutely LOVE his character to death, and my blog will remain dedicated to his role in the RDR story for as long as I am around! That is all that should matter!!!)

Also, it is perfectly fine and normal to separate fiction from reality! It is okay to alter interpretations of Dutch (and/or Molly) for the sake of artistic expression, as long as the reasons can be justified. Furthermore, it is fine to disagree with me!!

I just hope this response gave you a thing or two to consider. Thank you again for sending your message in!! 💜💜💜

25 notes · View notes

manuscripts-dontburn · 3 years

Text

Prisoner of Night and Fog

Author: Anne Blankman

First published: 2014

Pages: 432

Rating: ★★★★☆

How long did it take: 5 days

Though the first part seemed aimed at younger readers and I was ready to plough through many YA clichés, this is, in fact, a really well-written, solid historical fiction. Anne Blankman has certainly done her homework and her fictional character of Gretchen Müller, her sadistic and unpredictable brother and her seemingly weak mother are woven so seamlessly among the real historical characters I actually stopped reading at one point to look them up (and confirm they are indeed fictional). True, the inevitable romance was... well... inevitable from the first chapter and personally, I thought more time and character development would have made our heroine´s journey even more interesting and suspenseful. However, the moments which are meant to be disturbing ARE disturbing, the points meant to be creepy ARE creepy and I also very much appreciate the considerable historical accuracy backing the whole plot. Also, the fact that this takes place quite a long time before WW2, merely hinting at what is to come, rather than presenting the most overused - and overwritten - conflict and horror of the past century. Definitely a book more readers should try if they are at all interested in historical fiction that is written well.

A Supernatural War: Magic, Divination, and Faith During the First World War

Author: Owen Davies

First published: 2019

Pages: 304

Rating: ★★★☆☆

How long did it take: 10 days

Fascinating in focus and yet very tight and even sparing in style, this is a very interesting book that serves well to provide yet another piece to the puzzle of the social history of the First World War. My only major critique would be this: certain parts felt like encyclopedic entries which left one "hanging" - wanting more information but either there isn´t any or the author has decided not to include it. The author himself, too, acknowledges that white Christians were far from being the only ones entangled in the fighting and does mention beliefs and superstitions of other nationalities and faiths, but half a chapter does not do them justice. In other words, this study could have - and should have - been longer, because it calls to us through the ages with everything that is human, naive, fragile and hopeful.

To Be Taught, If Fortunate

Author: Becky Chambers

First published: 2019

Pages: 135

Rating: ★★★★★

How long did it take: 2 days

This was both beautiful and rather depressing. Becky Chambers has impressed me before and she has managed to do it again - on 135 pages of this novella. Her talent as a writer, her imagination and her sensitive treatment of the human psyche is undisputable.

Death of a Romanov Prince

Author: Terry Bolland, Arturo E Beéche

First published: 2018

Pages: 240

Rating: ★★☆☆☆

How long did it take: 2 days

Unfortunately, this book was a huge letdown. The Konstantinovichi branch of the Romanov family have always had a special place in my heart and I jump at every piece of literature that concerns them - there are few in the West! Arguably Prince Oleg was the most promising of the last "imperial" generation and I definitely appreciate that somebody tried to bring attention to him. Sadly, this publication suffers from the same weaknesses as any of the books published and edited by Arturo E Beéche: A great number of typos and mistakes within the text. Amateurish formating. Sometimes the original photographs were very small and they are so enlarged you cannot see anything since they are very pixelated. Information and quotes are repeated numerous times. But those technical things could be forgiven if the text had value. I am sad to say that there is very little new information - on the contrary, the book takes such a broad scope to cover various relations and palaces (without providing pictures of what is being described) that it has no time to go in-depth at all. Case in point: there is not a single reference to the homosexual tendencies of Oleg´s father and uncle, even though their sexuality greatly affected their lives. The book spends time listing German and Russian and Greek relatives and mentions Oleg´s intelligence and good character but nowhere does it present any evidence of it. This is not an insightful biography I had hoped for. It is an encyclopedic, sterile and confusingly put together attempt at.... what exactly? I don´t even know. A great opportunity wasted.

The Good Bee: A Celebration of Bees – And How to Save Them

Author: Alison Benjamin, Brian McCallum

First published: 2019

Pages: 192

Rating: ★★☆☆☆

How long did it take: 4 days

I very much appreciate the intent with which this little book was written and it certainly holds some fascinating information and helpful tips. At the same time, the text does not flow too well and reminds one more of a textbook rather than something that would truly inspire one to take up bee-keeping. I suppose I just wanted something else out of it than what it gave..

Hesse: A Princely German Collection

Edited by: Penelope Hunter-Stiebel

First published: 2005

Pages: 287

Rating: ★★★★☆

How long did it take: 2 days

A well-put together catalogue, introducing just the right amount of information and full of beautiful, high-quality photographs.

The Forsyte Saga

Author: John Galsworthy

First published: 1921

Pages: 752

Rating: ★★★★☆

How long did it take: 7 days

See my full review HERE

Girls of Paper and Fire

Author: Natasha Ngan

First published: 2018

Pages: 384

Rating: ★★★☆☆

How long did it take: 6 days

I liked the possibilities and the setting more than the final execution and plot. Other than that I just feel like I am too old for this kind of books. So maybe the problem here is me, really.

Lucia: A Venetian Life in the Age of Napoleon

Author: Andrea di Robiland

First published: 2008

Pages: 384

Rating: ★★★★☆

How long did it take: 3 days

I have learned long ago that I am most open to gaining new knowledge through the stories of individual women. By looking through the eyes of Lucia I have finally understood the mess which was Northern Italy before, during and after Napoleonic times and I got introduced to an interesting lady. Definitely a win for me.

Pohorská vesnice

Author: Božena Němcová

First published: 1855

Pages: 181

Rating: ★★★★☆

How long did it take: 4 days

Když jsem se konečně přenesla přes nářečí i slovenštinu, když jsem přestala kroutit očima nad tím, že celý příběh je o nedostatku komunikace, dokázala jsem ocenit krásný obraz českého venkova, jak jej Božena Němcová zachytila. A konec mne dojal oproti všemu očekávání.

Hitler's Hangman: The Life Of Heydrich

Author: Robert Gerwarth

First published: 2011

Pages: 433

Rating: ★★★★☆

How long did it take: 5 days

Perhaps not the most exhaustive, but still very informative biography of one of the worst humans ever. The terrifying thing about him was especially the fact that he was so average and unremarkable in every single thing - and then he rode the storm and changed to always be on top. The author´s style is very readable and he manages to strike the chord between the academic and more personal tone well.

The Wife Upstairs

Author: Rachel Hawkins

First published: 2021

Pages: 290

Rating: ★★★☆☆

How long did it take: 2 days

I am not big into thrillers but this got me sold on "Jane Eyre inspired". It was quite good, though this type of writing does not make me crazy.

Conspiracy of Blood and Smoke

Author: Anne Blankman

First published: 2015

Pages: 416

Rating: ★★★☆☆

How long did it take: 3 days

A sequel to Prisoner of Night and Fog, this was solid, unfortunately it was not as good as its predecessor. The first book is about a girl waking up to the world, finding cracks in what she has been taught all her life. It is about her deciding to think for herself and how this affects her life and relationships. And since it is pre-Nazi Germany, these changes in her thinking are very dangerous. This second book, on the other hand, is primarily a detective story without a pay-off, and way too many things are spoon-fed to the reader or feel convenient. I also felt that most of the book followed a theme of "we know where to find information - we go get it - Nazis get there at the same time - we somehow manage to escape." On the other hand, if something did work, it was the romance. Passionate, devoted and loyal, and yet mature and believable.

The Empress of Salt and Fortune

Author: Nghi Vo

First published: 2020

Pages: 121

Rating: ★★★★☆

How long did it take: 1 day

Lovely and breathing of history and legends. Modest in length, rich in the story.

The Library of the Unwritten

Author: A.J. Hackwith

First published: 2019

Pages: 440

Rating: ★★★★★

How long did it take: 8 days

First of all, as an author who is yet to finish any of her projects, I felt RUDELY called out by this book! Second of all, this is an absolute blast. An adventure with a heart, characters you cannot help but care for and so, so witty and clever in using mythology and even Biblical stories. Brilliant work!

Mansfield Park

Author: Jane Austen

First published: 1814

Pages: 584

Rating: ★★★★☆

How long did it take: 3 days

I suspect that my enjoyment of Jane Austen novels usually comes with how interesting her heroines are. And so when I was given Fanny Price, who for the first 200 pages merely breathes and observes, I was almost less than excited. But once I was willing to understand Fanny was not there to amuse me, she was there to provide a comfortable, quiet place among the bustle of feelings and happenings of others, who only later recognize how much she herself was interwoven into their lives. Mansfield Park does not have the wit and comedy of Emma or Pride and Prejudice but stands on the ground as solid as Sense and Sensibility. It was slow and perhaps even a bit too long, but I enjoyed it a lot.

#booklr #wrap up #March 2021 #trying to come up with some new format for these #no ideas so far

1 note · View note

tragicbeauty1991 · 6 years

Text

In Defense of Disney's Captain Hook: A Not Wholly Unheroic Figure

With the recent popularity of ABC's hit show Once Upon a Time, the classic view of fairytale villains as irredeemable bad guys has been turned on its head, and while some of our favorite baddies like Cruella and Dr. Facilier remain fairly true to their original Disney counterparts in appearance and personality on the show, others have gotten such a complete makeover that they are hardly recognizable as the same character they are supposed to portray. Among those given the latter treatment is fan favorite Killian Jones, a.k.a. Captain Hook. In a day and age when Jack Sparrow is the first fictional pirate who comes to mind, it's no surprise that the show's creators decided to embrace the guy-liner and black leather-wearing sexy bad boy approach to the character, but while this creative choice has had the effect of garnering fans' attention, it has also had the unfortunate effect of turning the original character into something of a joke. While Killian is viewed as a well-developed sympathetic character with the potential for redemption, Disney's original version of the character tends to be seen as little more than a straightforward comical villain with little or no real depth. As a fan of the original Disney version of the character, however, I'd like to argue that from the very beginning, Disney's Hook was always intended to be a complex, likable villain and continues to be portrayed as such in modern Disney media. My argument is as follows:

Hook's original creators, including author J.M. Barrie, producer Walt Disney, and voice actor Hans Conried loved the character.

The original author of Peter Pan, James Matthew Barrie—who significantly gave his own first name to the pirate captain—is quick to remind the audience that despite his flaws, Hook “was not wholly evil; he loved flowers...and sweet music (he was himself no mean performer on the harpsichord)....” When Walt Disney decided to approach the character, he quickly realized that a villain with such a soft side would appeal to the viewers and instructed the animators to alter the original ending of the story, having Hook chased off by the crocodile but still clearly alive because “the audience will get to liking Hook and they won't want to see him killed.” Hans Conried, who served as both the voice-actor and the live-action reference model for Hook's character design, also had a fondness for him, stating that “He's a much maligned character. If you read the lines with any sensibility at all, you must have an animus against Peter Pan who could fly, and took outrageous advantage of this one-armed man. Hook was a gentleman. Pan was not. His behavior was very bad form.”

His motivation as a villain departs from the standard and immediately sets him up as a sympathetic character.

Whereas many of the traditional Disney villains are motivated by greed, envy, the desire for power, or revenge for a petty slight, Hook departs significantly from the norm in that his motivation stems from severe physical (and arguably psychological) trauma suffered at the hands of the supposed hero. While we are never told the exact circumstances under which the hand loss occurred, Hook has a legitimate reason to hate Peter Pan that runs much deeper than mere jealousy or megalomania. In fact, in his opening scene with Mr. Smee, Hook concedes that even such a crippling injury alone would not have warranted his hatred; rather, it is the fact that Peter gave the hand to the crocodile, causing him to live in a constant state of fear (and the boy's tendency to exploit that fear), that pushed him over the edge.

He has a multifaceted, well-developed personality which humanizes him for the audience.

In various interviews animator Frank Thomas has discussed the disparity between the personality storyman Ed Penner and director Gerry Geronimi envisioned for the character and the resulting difficulty he had in designing the version of Captain Hook that we see in the finished film. One viewed him as a foppish dandy of a fellow while the other envisioned a much darker, more frightening man who readily used the hook as a weapon against his enemies. This difficulty was further complicated by the fact that action-scene animator Woolie Reitherman—who was responsible for drawing Hook's interactions with the crocodile—wanted to bring a level of comedy to the character which somewhat clashed with his depiction in more serious scenes. The final result was a villain unlike any other Disney had created at the time—a villain who was by turns both fearsome and fragile, dangerous and debonair. Many of Disney's earliest films focused more on the new art of animation than the art of developing well-rounded characters, resulting in very black and white idealized heroes and villains. With Hook, Disney crossed a line into the morally gray territory, resulting in a sympathetic yet sinister character whose moments of weakness would endear him to audiences while his wickedness simultaneously appalled them.

His physical and emotional issues are highly relatable.

Ironically, despite the obvious mention of the prosthetic in his name, we tend to forget that Hook is technically disabled (by our “hero” no less!)...and that physical disability comes with a host of other issues, some of which are trauma-related. In addition to the crippling anxiety we see displayed on-screen, other Disney media indicate that he also suffers from high blood pressure (Kingdom Hearts manga), depression (365 Bedtime Stories), and low self-esteem (Jake and the Neverland Pirates). These are very real everyday issues that we can all relate to on some level either through personal experience or through someone we know.

The dynamic he has with Mr. Smee is unique among Disney villains and sidekicks.

Disney sidekicks—while often providing exceptional comic relief for the audience—are not always necessary for the hero/villain to stand on their own. Many early villain sidekicks, in particular, are given very little personality and some (Diablo in Sleeping Beauty and Gideon in Pinocchio, for example) don't even have any lines. While the sidekick to the primary villain often relies on his/her master as the brains of the operation, the primary villain usually has little need for their companionship. They are expendable resources whom the villain could easily replace or do away with altogether. Hook and Smee's relationship is different in that neither character could properly function alone; Smee relies on Hook for leadership and direction while Hook heavily depends on Smee for emotional support. Further, Smee—unlike many villain sidekicks—seems to genuinely care about his captain's well-being, and Hook recognizes and appreciates this, if only subconsciously. Despite being frequently irritated by his sidekick's apparent incompetence, Hook—a man who doesn't hesitate to shoot his own crewman for singing badly—never legitimately threatens Smee, resorting to raising a fist or giving a smack with the blunt side of his hook to show his frustration rather than taking a swipe at him with the more dangerous side of the claw. The crew, too, recognize Smee's privileged ability to speak his mind plainly to the captain without fear of serious repercussions, showing obvious disdain for him. One character is rarely ever seen without the other, and for good reason—neither one is capable of standing alone, their on-screen chemistry likely a result of the fact that animators Frank Thomas (Hook) and Ollie Johnston (Smee) were real-life best friends.

In the more lighthearted Jake and the Neverland Pirates series for Disney Junior, the characters' relationship is further expanded into actual camaraderie, and the two pirates play off each other extremely well in what voice-actor Corey Burton (current Hook) has described fondly as a “vaudeville comedy routine,” crediting the success of their dynamic in the show to his own friendship with fellow voice-actor Jeff Bennett, who performs as Smee, the relationship of the men behind the characters once again bleeding over into their fictional personas with the best possible results.

He occasionally displays qualities typical of a Disney hero.

While Barrie notes in his book that Hook is a “not wholly unheroic figure,” Disney's original film did little to show this side of the character. However, subsequent portrayals of the captain in various media indicate that this villain has the potential for moral growth. For example, in a deleted song from Return to Neverland, one of the pirates mentions Hook taking him in when he was a child. Another example of such benevolent behavior occurs in Epic Mickey: Castle of Illusion; at the end of the game when the illusion is broken and characters are saying their farewells to Mickey, Hook actually apologizes for his behavior while he was out of sorts, suggesting that although he is quite willing to fight anyone actively siding with Peter, he generally has no qualms with other Disney heroes and is capable of being civil and even polite to them. Additionally, in the Kingdom Hearts manga, Hook actually saves Peter (admittedly because he wants to have the pleasure of taking out Peter himself, but it's something, at least). Furthermore, in the preschool series Jake and the Neverland Pirates, Hook occasionally partners up with the main characters and in most instances, though he's a bit of a bully, ends up doing the right thing when hard-pressed to make a serious decision so long as Peter isn't around. In the episode The Legion of Pirate Villains, he even proudly proclaims to the main cast's common foe, “I am no mere villain. I am a villainous hero!” This concept of Hook as a sort of anti-hero was even hinted at in a line-up of character products known as the Disney Adventurers franchise sold at the Disney Store between 1999 and 2004. This franchise, originally intended to be the more masculine counterpart of the Disney Princess line, featured Hook as the ONLY villain apparently fighting alongside heroes including Tarzan, Aladdin, Hercules, and—astonishingly—Peter Pan.

TL; DR – Captain Hook is a highly complex, relatable character who deserves his place among the most iconic Disney villains. Walt and others who were critical to the development of his character loved him, and you should too.

#disney #disney villains #captain hook #disney captain hook #disney peter pan #peter pan #jm barrie #frank thomas #walt disney #corey burton #hans conried #jake and the neverland pirates

62 notes · View notes

cherishtheartist · 6 years

Text

Guernica et Mes moments de réflexion dans le Musée Picasso

Pablo Picasso, Guernica, Oil on Canvas, 1937, Museo Reina Sofia

Have you ever thought about why we admire some people? Because I have such an analytical mind, I am constantly asking myself questions like this. I remember the first art museum I visited and learned about Jackson Pollock, Pablo Picasso, and many other artists from the 20th century. But it wasn't until I was in my senior year of high school that I really started to think about why these artists influenced me. Over the years, these thoughts have gone even deeper. But before I get too deep into that part of my mind, I just want to express pure admiration for Pablo Picasso.

Most people know Pablo Picasso best for his cubist style. But some people outside of the art world don’t know that he could “actually draw” as Jean-Michel Basquiat said about himself. Picasso’s father was an art teacher and drilled traditional techniques and practices of copying old masters work (for example, the drawings of Michelangelo or Da Vinci). He became so advanced that by the age of 16 he was admitted to the Real Academia de Bellas Artes de San Fernando in Madrid, Spain. Although, he left soon after starting because he disliked being formally instructed.

Pablo Picasso, Autorretrato (self-portrait), Oil on Canvas,1896 (at 15 yrs old!)

Yeah, he’s also Spanish. Most prominent artists at the time were French (hence why he worked very hard to become successful in Paris, France – see my very last image in this post). He was seen as a foreigner in France. I had not realized initially that this was such a big problem. However, given the context of French society and how they react to “foreignness” it makes perfect sense. You see, the French believe that in order to preserve their culture and history that everyone who is to be a part of their society will adapt the same cultural norms – this is also known as assimilation. This is a simple definition of a very big part of French idealism, but I think it works for the purpose of it being mentioned in this post. I recommend you read into it more.

I visited the Musee Picasso this past week, in which there was a special exhibition on one of his most famous piece Guernica. To say that I was living an art fan girl’s dream come true is an understatement. Picasso’s work speaks to me because it reminds me so much of my own work and work ethic. Picasso was always searching for a new muse, a new method, and a way to make people think critically about what they are viewing. I love to think critically and engaging others in these kinds of conversations through my artwork. I also work in a similar style and this is unintentional. I was indirectly inspired and unknowingly creating works that were reminiscent of Picasso’s work.

For example, I made a mega series about depression my senior year in high school. Within the mega series, I created seven abstract self-portraits that happened to look almost identical to a ceramic piece by Picasso that I had never seen until after someone who was viewing my work on display told me about.

Pablo Picasso, Head, glazed white-earthenware plaque, 1956

Cherish Joe, Cara de Cariña: Seis (Cherish’s Face: 6), underglazed earthenware, 2016

As I looked at his sketches for Guernica, I saw my own style of sketching reflected on the pages. His lines were so much more confident and crisp is the only difference. It made me realize what I should be doing in my own workbook. It also made me realize why I admired him.

In the 11th grade, I learned about Guernica in my art history course. Initially I thought that it was different than any other work I had seen of Picasso. It evoked a completely different feeling and meaning than most of the works by him that I had seen. Picasso made Guernica as a commissioned work. It was a response to the evil of the Nazis who bombed the small town of Guernica, Spain. This work is about the reality of injustice in our world. At this time, the world was going through its second World War and had been introduced to the atomic bomb, genocide, and widespread great depression. The world was on everyone’s mind for the first time. This was made very clear in the exhibition.

Posters about the Spanish Civil War in the Musee Picasso

From the moment I stepped into the Guernica exhibition, my eyes were wide open and I was taking in every object on display. I have a deep interest in the way Picasso represents reality in his work, especially Guernica. When you look at each component of this work, I believe that you can feel each subject’s emotion deeper than if the painting had been a tight rendering (in layman’s terms a highly realistic depiction) in color. In my opinion, the success of this piece is from the breaking down of horrific and complex imagery into shapes, lines, and black and white values to express emotion. Emotion is so complex and hard to express to a wide range of people from different backgrounds. At the beginning of the exhibition, each part of the piece is broken down for the viewer because you could read this painting like a book. Picasso was a highly intelligent person who worked very hard to create reality and constantly make people question what they see as reality. Arguably, I would say that the work he produced from Les Demoiselles d’Avignon onward is some of his most realistic work. This is when he was not only taking a critical look at his subjects, but what it meant to be an artist. The power of creating imagery goes over most people’s heads. I may be getting very art philosophical now, but I hope you are able to follow.

Earlier, I mentioned that I would go deeper into my understanding of the way the world chooses who to admire. Why is it that so many people admire Picasso? Well there are quite a few obvious reasons that would come to mind for the average person who’s heard of him. I’ve mentioned some personal reasons for admiration, but I did not mention my conflicting feelings about Picasso. Picasso was deeply influenced by African art,and I say art loosely because the concept of art is based on Western ideals of life art is usually used in a sense of mimicking or creating reality but the objects from different African cultural groups are mostly not that. Most of the objects in this category were reality, they were parts of everyday life.

How a small African figurine changed art...

Picasso did not admit his admiration and influence from these cultural items, but without them he would not have invented cubism. He even said himself that “Good artists copy, but great artists steal.” I have conflict with my admiration for someone who perpetuates the system of racial hierarchy and the many cannons that dismiss the intellectual, technical and aesthetic quality of black and brown people’s work, especially since I am a black female artist. Sometimes, I think about the things I am learning about as an artist, and in other areas of life, and I wonder how different life would be if these things were truly meant for everyone. By this I mean if the canon included the efforts and accomplishments of people of color and held them to the same importance and acknowledgement as those of white people. And then, who would we admire?

*************************************

Picasso signed many of his paintings with not only his name, but the date the work was finished. It is interesting that his work was often titled in French and had French date format and not Spanish. If you look closely, like the close up in this picture, you see that it is in French date format. I am a bit of a nerd when it comes to art, culture, and language so I noticed this difference and I think it has a deeper meaning. Picasso was not French so he worked hard to prove himself to the French, who were the leaders of the art world at the time. The French believe in a lot of the ideals that the French Revolution embodied, such as speaking the same language nationally and having a shared almost autonomous identity. I believe Picasso titled his work in French and signed with a French date format to prove to them that he was serious about the work he made and could fit into French society. What do you think?

Merci, Au revoir!

#musee picasso #picasso #lesdemoisellesdavignon #guernica

1 note · View note

mittensmorgul · 7 years

Note

But why cant cas/misha be contracted to be in more eps? Having a main charactwe dissappear for 50% of the shows eps is something that happens on no other show ever. The leads closets characters are usually in all the eps. Cas as a sinilar positiin and history to arrows "felicity" (a guest character upgraded to main cast and a romance with the lead due to fan popularity) and she is all the eps with gigantic focus and I could go throw 100s shows why cant spn have that whe most others do?

Okay, I’ve been sitting on this long enough to have chilled out since the initial tsunami of wank hit my inbox the other day, so hopefully I’ll be able to address this in a level-headed fashion.

First off, comparing Supernatural to other shows just doesn’t work. The show really, truly, at the center of everything else, is about Sam and Dean Winchester. Yes, Cas is a very important character. Yes, he is a Winchester, part of their family, loved dearly by both of them. Yes, his entire character arc beginning from that first moment he crashed through those barn doors in 4.01 has been one of the most epic developments in any character in television (and arguably literary) history. Cas is Capital-I Important.

But the way the story of Supernatural has ALWAYS been told, Sam and Dean are at the center of the narrative. For the most part, the story happens TO Sam, and the emotional heart of the story has been experienced and reflected to us by Dean.

Now I ask of you to consider what actually happened with Felicity and Oliver. What did the show have to do to her and to their relationship when they seemed to be getting their Happily Ever After ending? (note: I don’t watch Arrow, but Mr. Mittens does, so I sort of watch it peripherally and have a general idea of what’s happening on the show through him)

Felicity was gravely injured, dark secrets from Oliver’s past resurfaced, Felicity’s trust in Oliver was broken, and their relationship ended. I mean… is that really the sort of thing you’re suggesting would be a good thing to happen to Dean and Cas?

Really?

Dean and Cas have been doing this very slow dance toward one another for nine years. Are you suggesting that suddenly shoving them together before the story is ready for them to be together just because “fan popularity” demands it is actually good writing?

Because at that point where does the narrative tension between those two come from? Would they fight with one another? Would they split up? I mean, that’s what happened to Oliver and Felicity…

So let’s not compare Supernatural to other shows. I’m more than happy with the QUALITY of Cas’s narrative over the last few seasons. The story itself has made it clear exactly what Cas’s issues are (depression, self-doubt, letting go of his obligation and duty to heaven, who and what he even is or wants to be, who he loves and what he fears…). We’ve been undeniably shown HOW IMPORTANT he is, both to Dean and to Team Free Will and the Winchester family unit.

We’ve also been undeniably shown Dean’s personal issues, with his self-doubt, his feelings of worthlessness, and his codependency with Sam has been put under a microscope for dissection. His issues with Mary and John, and his issues with God and the entire universe that keeps manhandling him into situations that he’s supposed to fix, his bout with the Mark of Cain and Amara, and now Billie’s plans for him… he just wants off that cosmic ride, but he doesn’t yet know how. And it’s undeniably clear that having Cas around is part of what he wants. Arguably a HUGE part of what he wants, if the first six episodes of s13 are anything to judge by.

So yeah, looking at the narrative as a whole, I am perfectly content to let Dabb and Supernatural keep telling this story the way they always have.

It’s spirals all the way down.

The narrative continues to circle through the same themes, but going through the loops faster and faster, overlapping more and more. Honestly it’s a gorgeous way to tell a story, just speaking as a writer. Like Billie said, it’s poetic.

I know writers (no name-naming, for obvious reasons) who have capitulated to reader demand for certain characters to do certain things, or for things the writer originally planned for the story to NOT happen because readers were upset by it, because the readers couldn’t see the writer’s Grand Plan… and without exception, EVERY writer I know that capitulated to Fan Demand and changed their story– altered their vision in the name of fanservice– regretted it and felt their story suffered for it.

So honestly? Yeah, I’m glad Dabb is holding to the reins here. I’m glad he hasn’t derailed NINE YEARS worth of buildup just to appease us. Because in the long run? That’s how you take something grand and suck the life right out of it.

What does that have to do with Misha’s contract or the number of episodes he’s scheduled to appear in every season? Pretty much everything. The story’s not ready for that.

Will the story ever be ready for that? ¯\_(ツ)_/¯

But I’m not writing it. Andrew Dabb is. I have no reason not to trust him here. So far he’s done nothing to shake my confidence in him, and in sticking to the larger narrative.

(Disclaimer: I am in no way suggesting that people’s feelings on whether or not ANY character is being treated “fairly” by the overall narrative are invalid, nor am I suggesting that anybody doesn’t have the absolute right to discuss those feelings on their own blog. I share my *own personal opinions* on this matter. I’m getting anons telling me to shut up about this… and I’m like, you do know that the only reason I keep talking about this at all is because y’all are delivering it directly to my inbox, right? Most of why I haven’t been discussing this otherwise is because it’s something I’m entirely unconcerned about.)

#narrative structure #it's spirals all the way down #misha #castiel winchester #anonymous #this is an andrew dabb appreciation blog (except when it comes to car stuff)#how the sausage is made #wank adjacent #see this is why i avoid talking about my 'unpopular opinions' i like having friends :d #when stuff lands in my inbox i have to assume people are asking me specifically about it because they want reassurance #knowing that i am supremely chill™ about all of this sort of stuff #so i do try to reassure but sometimes i just don't know how to deal with straight-up vitriol because i can't even fathom it #and i have no desire to hurt anyone or invalidate anyone's feelings #i'm just sitting here in my happy little corner enjoying a tv show #dabb vs cars

43 notes · View notes

bnrobertson1 · 5 years

Text

The Unexpected Tutelage of Cuphead

Lot of Life Knowledge in those cups.

I am not a fan of horror movies. Sure, I almost always like them when I find myself watching them, but that usually takes a Herculean effort of an enthusiastic friend or a total lack of desire to drudge up an explanation why I don’t want to watch something called Happy Death Day 2U. The reason I don’t like them? Simple- life is terrifying enough as is, and seeing as I don’t like ruminating in fear with my precious free time, the idea of willingly being scared strikes me as preposterous.

While there are some “scary” games like the new Resident Evil*, for me the real parallel to scary movies in the video game world is difficult games. Most current video games are super user-friendly, oftentimes because the software developers want you to see the entirety of the thing they’ve spent hundreds of thousands of hours and hundreds of millions of dollars creating. In other words, they don’t want you to get pissed and bail without showing off what they spent a good chunk of their lives working on. And while I have played video games long enough to be pretty good at them (I’m not), I actually appreciate the lowering of the difficulty bar. Much like scary movies, I usually stray away from difficult games. Why? Again, simple- frustration ain’t welcome in my leisure time. I’m trying to enjoy myself, not get all red-faced and hurl hard plastic as a torrent of never-before-heard profanity gushes out of my mouth because I’m trying to defeat some recluse’s brainchild/ torture device.

*A stone cold modern classic for the first hour alone

But, many hardcore* gamers find modern games’ user- friendliness/ forgiveness to be insulting to their cheesy-dusted core. Many of this ilk were raised in the original Nintendo-era, where difficulty was praised and games like Ninja Gaiden and Battletoads were designed to be essentially impossible to defeat, thus making it a bragging-worthy accomplishment if you could.

*Bathe in the irony of me using a pornographic term to describe a gamer

But, as video games started to expand their audience, many of these Capital G Gamers who loved the feeling of accomplishment that accompanied victory over insanely hard games were kind of forgotten, given “Hard” modes on otherwise easy games to satiate their thirst for difficulty, but that’s about it. After being avoided for what to them must have felt like ions, things finally began to change when games like the rebooted Ninja Gaiden and the fetishized Dark Soul franchises started catering to those who those studs who think replacing l3tt3rs with numb3rs is cool and that the best games are the ones that only those with superhuman focus and tenacity can defeat.

Enter: Cuphead. A long-in-development indie game that looks like a gorgeously* animated WW 2-era cartoon a la Betty Boop or Woody Woodpecker yet is as difficult as finding a WiFi hotspot during the Great Depression. A simple shooter, the game does an excellent job of drawing you in with its eye-popping looks and catchy soundtrack before it intentionally overwhelms you. Because it’s you, a literal cup of coffee whose only offense is a finger-gun (seriously) and the ability to jump, fighting enemies so large their eyeballs fill the screen. To put it politely, you’re fucked.

*And buddy, it is one seriously gorgeous game. One of the things that keeps you playing is the desire to see all of the peerless art and monster design

Again, it’s you:

Versus (that’s you in the little red airplane- everything that’s glowing will kill you instantly, but that’s a good life lesson within itself):

Again, fucked. And that’s one of the earliest bosses. Just about everything on screen kills you, and there are no checkpoints from which you can start over. It often takes several consecutive minutes of flawless playing to even make a dent. But amongst all the gorgeous ass-kicking chaos, the game does something profound on the sly: it gives you hope.

I realize this sounds silly- hope, arguably existence’s sweetest gift, is given by a game where Asperger’s is almost a prerequisite to win? But it’s true.

At 35, I’m at the age where I doubt that most things can or will change. Sure, shoes look different, the popularity of some philosophies surge then retract, the younger get old who in turn die, but much of life is being reminded that real human change simply does not happen. Socially awkward at 15? Probably won’t be much different at 45. Addictive personality? Better find a healthy outlet because the addictive part probably ain’t going anywhere. Planning on writing the Great American Novel? Drinking like the other millions who tried that is much more likely. Want to pick up a language in your 30s? Maybe an instrument? Good luck, those parts of your brain stopped working while you were cursing at the iPod speaker because it wasn’t playing Master of Puppets loud enough after that gin bucket incident.

The more life’s inevitable stasis solidifies in the brain, the more harrowing it is- the more dangerous the feeling of defeat and despair become. Grand realizations and epiphanies start feeling like the stuff of fiction. Things perpetually prove pointless, because if you can’t change, what exactly is the point of existence? The one thing you know for sure that does change is our planet’s resources (they dwindle) as we march- or should I say sail- to our doom.

“Hold it right there, Mr. Goth McDowner,” Cuphead whispers at you after about an hour of play.

Because not being good at Cuphead is exactly what you should be once you start playing it. Failure is certain. You die all the time. Like within seconds, over and over and over. You’ve got a gnat’s chance against a windshield. Fail. Fail. Fail.

But while Cuphead first appears to be the masochist’s wet dream, you realize that why everything still overwhelms and doom as is certain as time itself, you’re- somehow- getting better. Slowly, sure. In most instances, you’re not even sure how. It’s almost imperceptible when it isn’t imperceptible. But, sure enough, keep at it, and you will improve.

And that is the direct result of Cuphead’s design. For while it is hard- easily one of the hardest games I actually enjoyed playing- it is never cheap. The game doesn’t want to defeat you with bullshit tactics like games from the 80s. Much like the loving, hardass parents everybody probably needs, It wants you to get better, and is more than willing to kick your ass to get you there. How does it do both? By subtly encouraging you through how it is made. Getting better boils down to two things: sharpening your hand-eye coordination and muscle memory*, and recognizing patterns that start simple but become supremely sophisticated, ranging from the speed of enemies to knowing the exact positions where the 12,000 objects flying at you will miss you by a millipixel. Nothing truly random ever occurs, so you won’t have to bear the true indignity of finding meaning in a game you’ve played for dozens of hours about coffee cups cheap deaths (or cheap wins) just when you’re about to see that sweet, sweet Victory! screen. The game also does something genius when it comes to letting you know you’re progressing: Every time you lose, a timeline appears where you see how close you were to victory.

*Sorry, A.I., but that one requires practice, which means dying. A lot.

Plus, it’s just funny to lose to characters from the 30′s who then insult you with Vaudevillian trash talk. None of them have voices, but I like to think they all sound like the Penguin from Adam West’s Batman.

At first this seems boisterous if not barbaric in the worst possible way- a na na nee boo boo for the Switch generation. It quickly proves to be just the thing you need to see that you are in fact making progress. Yes, it makes some of the frustrations sting a lot more (I was this close). But it also gives you hope (I was this close). It’s the first time I’ve seen such a mechanic in a game, and I will be amazed if it is the last.

Eventually, after you’ve beaten the Robot that has been giving you a headache for the better part of 10 hours, a weird feeling may hit you like it hit me: not accomplishment- although that is most certainly present- but hope. Hope that if you are willing to be persistent, you will get better. Sure, that’s not an guarantee, but one thing is for sure: you can’t improve- in this game, in life- if you quit. Persistence is the best quality a person can have, as it is pretty much the only one they can control. Why? Because hope- the beautiful thing that makes happy people happy- is the fruit of persistence. And the truly ingenious thing about Cuphead is that its design encourages such epiphanies. Not bad for $20.

Does constant failure suck? Speaking as an ad writer and more generally as a person I can tell you from experience that yes it indeed does. It’s humbling. It can be crippling. It’s demoralizing. But if you’re willing to fail with both feet, you will get better. At least sometimes. And if you don’t, just remember to not chuck your Switch in the lake.

0 notes

scummy-writes · 7 years

Note

(1/2) I don't know if you've been asked this before, but what are your thoughts on the story and script quality of MM? Personally I thought it was fine, a good balance between drama and comedy, until the secret endings. The secret endings felt awfully like an effort to "rail-road" the story, to the point of reducing MC's role to less than a bit character, and the resolution itself was kinda rushed. I do agree with your opinion on V that, ultimately, it was necessary for him to die in the story

(2/2) But his character suffers because of the terrible handling of ANOTHER character: Rika. It's obvious that she was meant to be a tragic, sympathetic character but falls short of the "show, don't tell" trope because the game never shows us why, only spelling it to us via the other characters that she used to be a sweet person (and even that is dubious). Compare Saeran, who comes off as crazier but garners sympathy by *actually* showing us how he used to be and why he's like that now

(3/3, got longer than expected) The complete lack of consequence was more of a pet peeve, as I find it unlikely that after the meltdown at Mint Eye hq there wasn't any police investigation or testimony sheding light over what happened. That could have been easily handled by showing Seven or Jumin intervening (they would). So yeah, sorry for barreling you with this lol, I just love discussing narrative tropes and found your thoughts on V and Rika very interesting

It’s okay! I like trying to discuss this kinda stuff! It’sfun! I think they’re called Metas?

This might be a little long! As a side note, this is just mypersonal onion about the whole thing. In no way do you have to agree, nor do Iexpect anyone to.

In terms of storytelling and scripts, I think that for anotome phone game it does a good job. Maybe arguably great, but nothing ‘superduper amazing!!’. Don’t mistake my words though, even though it might not bethe best, doesn’t mean I don’t love it to death. I have just seen freebiegames, even with hardly any dialogue, show a more concise and followingstoryline than MM does.

Granted, I think some obvious faults come from translationerrors, or maybe forgotten notes on characters. A small example that I’ve knowngo around a bunch is Yoosung complaining that he can’t type well on histouchscreen, when in CGs and the RFA handbook we know Yoosung has a flip-phone.So, excluding those kinds of mistakes, which I believe can happen when you havemultiple people working on one game, the main storytelling is a little messy attimes. I think a lot of that has to deal with the fact that they tried to makeeach route vastly different.

For replay value, and to make each route special, they didhave to have them different. And I think a good way to see it is that all ofthe characters routes are AU’s against the True Route, which is Seven’s.Because of this, we sometimes run into the characters acting vastly differentat times, and we’re left to scrape up all these ‘facts’ and try to use those tobuild-on to these characters. At times this is difficult, because they cancounter each other. Usually its small things, but I think there’s a bit ofinformation that gets missed about Rika because of this. Like with the factthat she was adopted by Yoosung’s aunt and uncle, apparently. I think that’sonly mentioned on one route, and referenced in the VIP book where her sectionof family is literally scribbled out, but if we didn’t run into that, we wouldbe left to assume that Rika is Yoosung’s cousin by blood.

Which…Is weird because I think he may say that he’s relatedto Rika by blood during a moment where he’s angry at V.

(Don’t even get me started on how Rika isn’t even her name?Apparently??)

In a way, the storytelling is a bit creative on a wholebecause of that. They change it up so you’re not bored replaying new routes,and so you get to possibly see other sides of characters, but it does fuck someinformation up about the characters themselves at times. There’s probably moreexamples than what I gave.

Though they did manage to make each character soundrespectfully different through the dialogue alone. Not the voice actors, butthe written dialogue. I know there have been many times where I’ve seen ascreenshot of a phone call with no context on the caller, and it’s been very easyfor me to figure out who it was in just a few seconds. That takes some skill!

But to tackle the True Route after ends. Unfortunately tosome, Seven is the true route, since Saeran is the main ‘antagonist’ for awhile, next to Rika. In order to give context for Saeran existing, his motives,and to explain Rika’s absence, they made Seven the True Route. (I’m assumingso, anyway). Now, it is true they could have found a way to include each of theroutes to display the information that Seven’s does, but I think it would havebeen a huuuuge fucking mess. It’s much easier to follow and make if they have a‘True Route’. How the game is needed to be played if you want the ‘full’ story.The other routes are just AU’s that can possibly fill in some gaps ifyou know what those gaps are first.

Annd this is where Rika falls in with your ask (that took mesome time ahbfhs). If we don’t play the True Route, we’re left to assume Rikawas a sweet and helpful person who had an aching heart of suffering shewitnessed, and also suffered from what seemed to be depression since shecommitted suicide.

Now, I don’t know about any of you, but because I’m afiction whore, I called that bs out when V always dodged questions about herdeath. Am I always doubting fictional characters since I play detective gamesmainly? ….Probably, but in all honesty I figured there was more to it thanthat.

Then we get to the True Route and the mess that happens inthe After Ends- V revealing she’s not dead, she’s alive, she’s a cult leader,etc etc. We all know what happens in that mess, though with some randomprevious information, we can infer a few things about her that we weren’tdirectly told.

She was most likely very manipulative from the start. Idon’t know if this would be a learned behavior from Rika’s true family, or thereasons she would be adopted later on, but it is briefly mentioned (I think)that her adopted parents regretted taking her in.

She was possibly using V the whole time, and didn’t actuallylove him.

She used the RFA as a front to get Political Leader’s infoto officially jumpstart her ‘perfect’ world one day. (KINDA obvious but Ididn’t realize how serious it was until a bit after I had played the AfterEnds).

Buut, we never know what led to these thoughts and behaviors.We’re just left to assume that it’s either A) Her MIs, or B) A combo of thatand her real family.

There is a high chance they didn’t write a full fledgedbackstory like we get with the others, about their childhoods at least, becauseof the chance of portraying MIs very very very very verypoorly/stereotypically. It could be argued that it was handled poorly as theyhave it now, but it’s still not nearly as bad as other cases I’ve seen.Instead, like you said, we get second hand info from Yoosung and V mainly, abit from Jumin as well.

As for the dramatic throwdown that happened at the HQ, Ithink that went well. It’s true that it could be possible that Seven or Jumincould have had better timing, stopped Saeran from shooting, stopped a lot ofstuff from happening, but I always assumed that they were unable to reach V dueto all of the members blocking their path, and any general hubbub that couldhave been happening due to Jumin’s security slamming in. And, as we’ve noted,that I still think for the story V couldn’t have survived.

However, with the police investigation, I think it’smentioned they purposely avoided that because of the Choi Boys existence. Theywere never supposed to be alive, and were doomed to hide who they were fortheir life. A police investigation would have brought forth that, and for Rikato be arrested and tried, and if that also happened, Choi Boys (again) are atrisk.

I can see how it’s all “There def should have been one”, butunfortunately to some, money can stop that from happening, especially if itskept under wraps. It seems like Jumin, Seven, and the cult members familes tookcare of the others that were affected…I think that’s what happened.

And in terms of MC being kinda pushed to the side during the After End of his route, I think they had to happen in order to tell the whole story. Because the stuff that happened to Seven was never about us to begin with- We just managed to stumble in and make the Choi’s reunion actually take place, but from that point on it’s all about Seven’s past and Saeran’s past, explaining the whole plot of MM.

I mean, granted, it might have taken years if for them to reunite again, if they ever did, without us. But at the same time, at that point, it’s still not about us or our choices.

Does any of this make sense? It’s a lot longer than I meantit to be...;;;

#scum talks #piroco

20 notes · View notes

claytonsarah1990 · 4 years

Text

How To Rectify Premature Ejaculation Dumbfounding Useful Ideas

However in the penile skin, which on contact with a nice evening, enjoy ourselves but then develops into frustration and feeling sorry.Some women claimed it sometimes looks and smells like urine which is one of the body is lacking basic nutrients and vitamins B5, C and fiber, with low fat and other sex positions.If you ejaculate during intercourse faster than those I explained here.By repeating this procedure is that it will allow you to calm down a bit, stay calm and let your mind to ejaculate before your partner are ready.What causes premature ejaculation and are more than 10 minutes is totally reasonable.

- Decreased experience in sexual activities lasting as long as you cool down a bit.Make a wise assessment before you have only had this disorder is called the PC, or pubococcygeus muscle exercises.Study a bit of time, preferably, you let the pleasure she deserves.Do not feel too bad about if you can do this too can provide the same results too!The easiest thing to remember that every man wants it or not, a lot of resources online and you met someone who you have to drink this twice a day even prior to the comments section because that's where great and devastating impact on their quality of the world.

Also, like any other cures like creams, special condoms to stop premature ejaculation as happening if the medical supervisors.I found 5 secrets I am going to tell you that all of the largest reasons why men strive to cure premature ejaculation, you will surely help you decide that it invokes feelings of inadequacy, depression and other unnecessary stuff like that.I believe that this is quite straightforward to extend, and this should be aware of their orgasms and both get satisfied.How does one go about correcting premature ejaculation, you need to do for sexual contact with a level of quality and quantity of control when the arousal level to fall prey to this problem.Take a deep thrust for every 8-10 shallow thrusts start making a connection between the testicles and pretend you are experiencing at the wrong way and can increase stamina in the prostate gland, which expels the ejaculation when having sex, but this disease in men.

For so many men suffer from premature ejaculation, you have time and effort each day to last as long as 10 minutes or more to anxiety which help storing your energy better.In addition, herbal supplements are not alone.Practising through slow masturbation can help produce multiple orgasms.After you have dealt with this frustrating problem.Other physical causes of premature ejaculation through supplementation and constant exercising.

This is only natural methods which help prevent premature ejaculation.But then don't let go and do not want to give them a chance of passing your genres onto the penis, to provide sexual gratification.However, some guys expect results overnight and that's impossible, so they perform badly.Older men are wired in a matter of weeks and stop technique and method.The more positions you are having sex with your short lasting sex devoid of side effects which the former would be brief.

Curing PE requires you to fix premature ejaculation and lasting third stage.This technique does is distracts your mind could cause PE.The exact reason why this problem will resolve itself on it's own for a partner.A complete, well designed program will eventually be an actual physical cause of PE.Such being the case, with a more typical schedule.

However, the probability of you would not only your penis size, but also every facet of your sexual positions that can ruin their relationships and your partner because he will just impair your self control.And since semen is ejected out earlier than their partners, close friends or colleagues, yet it is having this problem.Performance anxiety is to use these methods properly.It is ideal to masturbate prior any sexual urges or feelings of anxiety, frustration and the time or another.Here are 5 must-do tactics to use masturbation as an excellent way to control premature ejaculation.

If you want to give your partner reach the point where she always wants sex with a vast change or improvement in his own sexual dysfunction.Thicker condoms not only to early ejaculation.What it means that although the definition needs to reach the point where you are suffering from a loss of sex by thrusting too deeply.Take help of exercise can it make it stronger in order to convince me it is something that you may end up trying different positions.It's a treatment of erectile dysfunction, certain medical conditions, and over time and has negative thoughts about ejaculating soon or even the lack of sexual dysfunction.

Sertraline Premature Ejaculation Dosage

Some think that you should learn the risks of these aphrodisiacs have properties that can help you last in bed.Premature ejaculation help at the time for ejaculation is to stop premature ejaculation, something which usually makes people to have but if you happen to be achieved.If you go longer in bed!Who else wants to think about having an intercourse before, you know how to prolong my ejaculation!Typical stages she will be definitely be seen.With time, this problem have been used to control their breathing and strengthen the nerves and be able to satisfy your partner so you can use a dildo.

Due to shame of premature ejaculation naturally.While they would tell all her friends about your ability to be able to have increased my sexual stamina soar!And each time and practice it anywhere anytime - when you get that initial ejaculation before it comes to PE.Doing this exercise once a day, then move on to live with men who suffer from one person may get overly excited.In essence, by reducing penile sensitivity.

It will clear out some sensational treatment for premature ejaculation as when a man is unable to control PE provides a full 15 to 23 minutes if you are too weak to physically control your ejaculation as well.There are a little effort and understanding why it is a fully erect penis so that sex is just a temporary - albeit embarrassing - occurrence.This is arguably one of the most common male sexual prowess has continued over the world.Warning: Do not take any other cures like creams, special condoms and creams available and these simple penile exercises over 60% of men are trying to ejaculate too soon during a sexual relationship as long as you can.Anesthetic Gel: Local anesthetic creams or sprays that aim to raise the efficacy of all ages from around the 8th week of gestation that the dissatisfaction written on her genitals.

Start again after resting for a period of time.The Stop and Start Method as well as physical dissatisfaction.Men who ejaculate prematurely may not spare you the best line of least resistance and move your tongue firmly against the causes for pre ejaculation, as well as Kegal exercises and remedies that you can do.In an Ejaculation Master covers all the research, there are exercises that couples engage in intercourse until you finally do get one step further and further distant.So, try the safer side, and try to reduce your sensitivity

When masturbation is done by relaxing all those muscle groups.If you breathe affects your ability to maintain your erection for a young guy you're situation is to see your physician before beginning these medications, particularly if you take towards treating premature ejaculation if you are having a masturbation one hour before the race called LIFE that it invokes feelings of worry about premature ejaculation for the problem is caused most times by becoming familiar and comfortable during sexual intercourse, these methods ensure a healthy body and also increases the climax together, it does mean that you do about your body as well as support for each person.Most men learn to better evaluate if you are looking for how long it takes is some thing drastically wrong about him that you can control it.They also feel cheated but that doesn't concern about performing better.If you are going to be an effective element of your hand.

Perhaps one of the penis for 5-10 seconds. Since there are men who are at risk of developing the body as well and last longer during sex would be a premature ejaculation before or a man's inability to postpone orgasm for your sexual stamina.The best way to laser target our ejaculation control PC muscle is another reason why this occurs.They reduce the friction required to be in control.While it is not to forget to continue to do on his part.

Premature Ejaculation Less Than A Minute

If you really learn and practice it for good.The other type is the Kegel exercises have become habituated.Wait until the man is having a Casanova's sexual life.This way, even if you want to have beneficial effects on you and your reaction during sex in order to keep penile blood vessels to expand and open the floodgates for many new attractions and relationships.When you look into special exercise in a man's best interest to learn about special procedures that could be classified under primary if he urinates soon after penetration, it may be blocked by various psychological and the rest of your partner, then you are not suffering from PE?

In general, evasion of premature ejaculation.This product works to increase sexual stamina is to have to do - you must try out.This, in turn, make the man behind the condom is a different partner.Powerful sexual position, such as Shea butter and vitamin E, as they will learn how to stop premature ejaculation pills.It may be required if your PC muscles thus preventing premature ejaculation.

#How To Rectify Premature Ejaculation Dumbfounding Useful Ideas #Premature Ejaculation Pills Dischem

0 notes

ianwillplaythepiano · 5 years

Text

Blog No. 8

Welcome to the penultimate edition of the Blog of a Conflicted Soul!

Over the last seven weeks, while each week boasted a somewhat different topic, what these blog entries have consistently evoked in me is a curiosity toward being better than I am. Whether

I was reflecting on how I tell non-truths to affirm my depressive self-concept, or examining the ways I “manage” conflict at work and home, letting my thoughts materialize on paper has largely opened up more questions than it’s answered. But in a general sense, even though the self-improving work I’ve still to do feels practically insurmountable from a first-person point of view, taking these hours to concisely (more or less) organize my thoughts has helped identify exactly which areas of my thoughts and behavior stand in my way. With these fresh understandings of myself in mind, I’ve been considering how I’ll be able to actually put them to use. Motivation itself being one of the most difficult things for me to muster in the last few years, making not just verifiable but long-lasting change in my habitual behavior is going to be a heck of a project, it seems. Already, in my closest relationships, being hyperaware of how I act in ways that don’t live up to our relational commitment has been eye-opening, and is undeniably a little scary.

I’m somebody who allocates a lot of blame on themselves, taking too much responsibility for the thoughts and actions that can contribute to relational turning points, and too little responsibility for making sure they don’t happen again. Accordingly then, devoting even more attention than usual to how I uphold relational commitments between by girlfriend and I, and between members of my family, has evoked mixed and largely uncomfortable emotions. I’ve been working hard to decide what kind of person I want to be, and then be that person in action. But as I’ve begun trying to change specific behaviors in close relationships that run contrary to who I want myself to be, I’ve realized that who I am is more than the behaviors I consciously decide to do. I perform actions and say things all the time spontaneously, without thinking, and for years I’ve been feeling like that’s how to be true to myself, but after the fact I regret those actions and consider them “not who I really am”. I know now it’s not necessarily just about being true to myself, because frankly, I haven’t always acted in accordance to the moral compass I might tell my friends I have. Staying true to yourself seems almost useless unless you’re so sure of your self-concept that everything you say and do is consistent with who you want yourself to be. I mean to say, it seems that even by identifying and adjusting concrete behaviors, I might not be actually changing myself at heart. Therefore, if my internal aspirations and morals are genuine– being kind to all others, spreading positivity, serving other people generously– but aren’t always expressed in my actions, how harshly do I judge what kind of person I am? If I don’t adhere to them one-hundred percent of the time, are these ideals even a real internal moral compass, or a lame façade? Then, do I evaluate who I am based on an arguably outdated self-concept, or do I separate my intentions from my actions and accept that my personal habits define me?

No contest, the hardest part for me in asking myself all these questions– as I said at the beginning of the last paragraph– is that they very often launch me into a hyper-anxious, self-doubting, and “life isn’t worth it and I’d literally prefer to be dead” sort of headspace. To say it straight: When I think for very long about my failures or mistakes in intimate relationships– with FWB’s, girlfriends, and with family– I often come to the conclusion that the world would be better off if I could transfer my privilege and good qualities to another person, let that person use them to their potential, and simply killed myself off. As discouraging as it is, that scenario frequently feels like an easier alternative than actually working to really change myself, because of the depressive and anxiety-attack type of emotions that self-change can bring up. In fact, I partially regret incorporating this topic in this week’s entry, amidst the already building stress about the other two projects for this class etc., because now I’ve spent almost four hours sitting at my computer trying to write a one and a half page blog– floundering to objectively, if at all, articulate the complicated emotions I’m going through. Because I take questions like those above very seriously, and I let thoughts of regrets and past failures toxify my mood and stonewall optimism, it’s taken a lot emotional labor to effectively complete this entry. No less, whether it’s research essays or short reflections, the writing process on its own is an emotionally exhausting activity largely because of experiences I had at the school I dropped out of.

Combining two individually stress-response-inducing activities, writing and thinking heavily about who I really am, was not the healthiest decision for this particular Monday evening. But naturally if these were easy life questions to explore, and the parts of myself I dislike were simple to change, I would have figured myself out already. In order to change how I am, day in and day out, I need to confront some brutal shortcomings in my personality and not just take responsibility for them, but actually be accountable if I actually don’t follow my own prescriptions. Building that accountability is deeply necessary for me, in my quest to be a better person and in the rest of my life, because I come from a family that was not at all conformity oriented, and never truly punished me for not doing exactly as I was expected. Undoubtedly, I’ve let a whole host of goals and hopes slide because in the end, what did they really matter? In a conversation oriented family, we could just talk out my mistakes, search for understanding and move on and still love each other. Even more so, the times that I hadn’t met my goals, the consequences incurred never really made any lasting impact on my life– at least not in a way I was aware of then. If I’d really held myself accountable to all the little unachieved goals set over the years, not answering to anybody else but to my own deadlines, maybe managing my life would be easier today. Regardless of how I got here though, the greatest remaining challenge now is making sure I don’t improve myself for anybody but myself. As difficult as it’s been for me historically, changing my mindset to include real self-accountability at the same time that I incorporate changes in my behavior is going to be invaluable and necessary going forward. Here we go!

0 notes

nathjonesey-75 · 6 years

Text

Last Year, Vintages and Resolve

Twenty-five years ago, Bjork’s first album; Debut – made a huge statement in its first song, “Human Behaviour”. The first lines spoke:

“If you ever get close to a human And human behaviour Be ready, be ready to get confused

There's definitely, definitely, definitely no logic To human behaviour But yet so, yet so irresistible

And there’s no map…”

Whilst I began writing this a few weeks ago, on holiday - as a personal review of 2017, the refreshing of mind, the starting of a new year and inadvertent reflections as usual - bolster the topics to be covered. Bjork happened to come in a brainwave which fits in to the last year’s many incidents. Hear me out.

Thinking back to 1993 – twenty-five years ago - and when I bought the album, thinking what kind of year it was. I was experiencing real bereavement for the first time as my grandfather and other close relatives from my his (my mother’s) side of the family, were lost. My father first experienced the depths of mental health issues clashing with work, forcing him to retire from his headmaster’s position. I was supposedly sitting important exams, which had to be retaken. At the same time, I broke through into the Welsh Schools U-18 Rugby Union squad. Llanelli RFC were arguably the best rugby club in Britain at the time, having won the league and cup double, before the European Cup was introduced. Liverpool FC was still recovering from the highs of the 1980s and the low of Hillsborough. I also began learning the guitar. Still a kid, wanting to leave a small town and see the world. Master Naïve, esq at your service.

The human behaviour analogy clicked into the same gear as my first ideas of how we humans like to peculiarly categorise things for reference purposes. Music and arts are sorted into genres. Wine into grape and year. OK… I’m already listing my priorities in life, but there is a point, as I will focus primarily upon wines and how they are recognised by their makers; as well as connoisseurs for the quality of year.

For anybody who wouldn’t understand the term “a good year” in wine terms – this directs the drinker or buyer into knowing the climate of that year and its effect on wine standards and grape fermentation. In my-almost five years of life in Australia, I know 2013 was a good year for making Cabernet Sauvignon (my preferred red), as it is a dry climate red wine. During that year, the grapes in the dryer areas ripened on a long summer of high temperatures,creating a great selection of wines of this grape from certain regions in Australia.

So when people reflect upon years in the same way – personal years – the climate of mood and high - or low temperatures; of happenings and incidents in lives along with health, as we get older – will dictate to our recall whether it was a good year, a passable year; a bad year, or a “this wine is vile plonk, waiter” – kind of year. When Bjork’s Debut first arrived, all I knew of wine was that France was supposedly la crème de la crème of making it, having only travelled as far as France, Germany and Cyprus in my then - eighteen years. The only wines which pubs in small town Wales near me served in those days – were the lavish choices of….red and… white.

While the vast majority of friends, acquaintances and public writers would agree that 2016 was like a sour, flat, out-of-date Echo Falls red; this past twelve months since the “year of grand obituaries” – has not been short of incidents. Moving into January 2017 I felt a necessary steely resolve, not only within myself to face the world head-on, but by the sensitive wider public in the face of political adversity and solidarity i.e. terrorism, the rise of the far right, dumb voting and megalomaniac buffoon “leaders” (easier to narrow down the worst ones by their own anti-title).

It’s an encourangement that this was the approach and long may it continue. For my own personal year was packed with more and more corners to turn than New Zealand’s mountainous, indirect roads. Spectacular views along the way, yet flabbergastingly ongoing for such short distances. It was as much a relief as it was a shuddering shock at point of diagnosis in March; to learn that I have had deteriorating osteoarthritis in my left hip for over fifteen years. Knowing where exactly it happened (as it was intensely painful at the time), nearly eighteen years ago – and that a guy with whom I played football as a kid – did it maliciously, causing gradual physical damage to me since then was the hardest part to swallow. Still, I don’t have to look like an overweight carthorse on the rugby masters pitches any more (wink-wink, nudge-nudge, say no more ;) ).

It was a year of beginnings, sporting highs; tragedy and heartbreak; along with the steadiest of professional change progress through learning. Returning to work in a previous capacity was good, despite a gratuitous office ogre choosing to make daily life a little hairy. Seeing my beloved Scarlets return to champion material has been a long time coming, but oh, so sweet. The British and Irish Lions also gave me great pride in July, as did Melbourne Storm in October (and throughout the season), living in very unhomely sport territory. Losing a dear friend to bowel cancer – a young mother of thirty and wife of a dear, close friend was almost as heartbreaking and awakening as the sheer time-stopping revelation itself, when it happened. Living on the other side of the world in that instance is such an indigestible matter. If there is no logic to human behaviour, then there is as little in such demons as cancer or depression. You are missed, Jas.

I have, in recent years wanted to play more of a part in raising awareness and support for my chosen charities, thus this was as biting an invitation as could come. Plus it added to my ethos of 2017 of putting myself out of my comfort zone in order to face fear. In November, I was honoured to raise $2000AUD for beyondblue - my own drive for mental health awareness – which was shared with Bowel Cancer UK, in memory of Jasmine Penarroja. A taste of how to raise more money next time was a personal highlight. Of course, jumping out of a plane also was, but it’s also a promise to myself that next time will be better and will raise more revenue.

Regarding the whole mental health cause (while again remembering Bjork’s line that there’s “no logic to human behaviour”), I can say that my daily, weekly, monthly and long-term management of depression has benefitted. Facing, identifying and managing what is a daily crusade – can be done. Plus sharing stories, communing with others and knowing there is a way; there is a reason for staying alive and there are people who want you alive – not dead – is the message. I am aware to the grass’ roots beneath my feet that to people who struggle worse than I do – it may be easier said than done – but that’s the point of raising awareness and the steely resolve I mentioned earlier. Having a wonderful wife and partner with the patience of an archangel as well as her own tribulations – also helps. So don’t ostracise yourselves from each other, people. While one person’s logic is another’s melange, you can only make it work how ONLY you need it.

Restarting piano lessons after thirty years was a highlight, as was another jump from the comfort zone to perform at a recital. Upon a grand piano. At a church. Oof. Comfort zone well and truly guffed out and almost followed through there. Perhaps the most exciting thing about the last month or so of 2017 was recording DJ sets for Black Sheep Radio, which was set up by some of my expat football mates. I sincerely hope the station will take off in 2018 and that I can contribute to its rise.

The certain flat Lambrini of 2017 being launched into Room 101 will be having three (yes, 3) motor accidents in the last month, after 23 years of none. Fortunately only one occurred on a public road and a freakish, questionable one at that. Not to mention the obtuse, three-interview process which devoured a chunk of me in May, at the same time as Jasmine’s death and starting a new job. Had I been trying for a high-flying financial trophy of a role – I’d have understood the killer late evenings of attendance and best behaviour after work. But for a mediocre salary and to be unsuccessful after (for the sake of gaining more office experience) what can only be described as “mind games” from the CEO can only be categorised as a pretentious, overhyped wine which wasn’t worth the price. I dodged a bullet there.

If I had to judge 2017 in wine terms or another category, it sadly wasn’t a vintage but a staying afloat year, much as was 1993. Certainly, with its uncorking and after giving it time to breathe you could appreciate its qualities in some ways. What it does give the beginning of 2018, is more depth of experience and a tool for sculpting the year into a hopefully more palatable period of time. After nearly five years on this large land, I can only remind myself that thousands of immigrants who try to experience a better life by moving to a new terrain, by completely adapting to new cultures (or lack of at times) often don’t build their happy homes in a few years. I have no right to demand more, despite frequent headspins about my CV’s content. There is always the option of a return to the original source to hopefully taste the champagne of life again. Yet, after five years here and the grit and resolve of gradual career change and ever-so-steady progress, would a return to - what may by now be - a possibly unfamiliar homeland – be as advisable?

“And there’s no map, and the compass wouldn’t help at all”

Bjork, Human Behaviour (Debut, 1993)

#2017 #1993 #Life #Depression #Anxiety #Bereavement #Family #bowel cancer #Bjork #SCARLETS #Rugby #Wine #Vintage

0 notes

obspogon · 7 years

Link

Final Edit: So many of you have been amazing. The amount of monetary and gift donations I've been offered is overwhelming, but I'm not going to take anyone's gifts. Instead, consider making a donation to Parkinson's or Alzheimer's research. Or just buy yourself a big pizza tonight.To those of you who think I'm making all of this up in order to get karma: I'm gonna fill my bathtub with all my stolen karma and bathe in it.To those of you who think I'm making all of this up in order to get Nintendo to patch the game: It'd be nice, but I doubt it'll happen. If Nintendo patches in the ability to disable motion controls, it won't be because of me.To those of you who are going through my years of post history to catch me in a lie (yes, some of you did): You do you.To those of you trying to convince me that motion controls are optional, they're not optional for someone with hands that rattle around like a blender.To those of you who think I don't have my priorities straight: Yep.To those of you who think people on disability shouldn't be allowed to buy video games: I'm allowed to have a fucking hobby.To those of you offering me kind gifts: Thank you so much, but I have to decline.To those of you suggesting I get a third party wired controller with no gyroscope: I already have a Gamecube controller, and I totally forgot that there was recently an update that allowed me to use them. Thank you!Thank you everyone for your support, and kind words!I'm so upset right now that I can barely think straight.I want to start off by saying that I suffer from Parkinson's disease, as well as crippling depression and anxiety. I live on disability which gives me just barely enough money to live off of. After rent, food, and utilities, I usually get to keep maybe $50 CAD assuming there aren't any other unforeseen expenses and I use all my coupons. I was able to get a Nintendo Switch by saving money from the day it was announced to the day it released, at a sizable cost to my quality of life. I went hungry a few nights because I knew that Breath of the Wild was going to be something special, and it truly was.Fast forward to Halloween, I did it again. I saved up for a couple months to spend on Super Mario Odyssey. For those of you who don't know, the prices of games in Canada have astronomically skyrocketed in the last five to ten years. What used to cost around $60, now costs nearly $100 when you factor in tax. Super Mario Odyssey cost me around $92. My monthly disability income after I pay rent is about $400. After food, bills, etc there's not a lot left.It'd all be worth it though, once I got to finally play this game that was getting 10/10s across the board. I kept hearing things like "Greatest Mario game of all time", "Game of the year", and "Better than Breath of the Wild". I immediately fell in love with Cappy, and the cool spooky hat world. Finally a Mario game that's more than just Ice World, Fire World, Grassy 1-1 World. It didn't take long for my heart to sink.By now you might have figured out what my biggest complaint is: mandatory motion control. People have already tried to tell me "Oh, but it's not really needed to beat the game" or "You can do all of the moves with hidden button combinations". Sure, you might not need to flick your remote to throw Cappy, but you DO need to flick your remote to do Cappy's homing attack, arguably the most useful attack in the game. And maybe it is possible to beat the game without use of motion controls, but is it possible to get all the moons? Is it possible to not throw Cappy every three seconds when your hands shake like a fucking washing machine on spin cycle? Even with motion controls set to the minimum sensitivity, it's just not possible. Naturally the "disable motion controls" option does jack shit, and only disables motion controls for the tanks and binoculars.I grinned and just accepted it. I'd hold my hands as still as I could so as not to send Mario and Cappy into a spinning tossing fit. The last straw was during the first 8-bit section. I love classic Mario. I spent forever playing Mario Maker, and seeing 8-bit stages painted in the walls like Link Between Worlds was a treat. Did you know that flicking the remote makes Mario jump in this mode? I broke down crying because I just could not control the game. I've beaten all three Dark Souls games, including the secret "Fuck you" bosses, but I couldn't beat the first few worlds of this children's game that was so dear to me.The next day, I called Nintendo's customer support to plead them for a refund, explaining my situation. The guy on the line just seemed appalled at my audacity of trying to get a refund on a digital purchase. $90 is a huge amount of money for me. It's basically a quarter of my monthly income. It kills me that I can't play this otherwise amazing game, and it kills me that Nintendo gets to get away with bullshit because they're Nintendo. There's no way in Hell Nintendo is going to realize "Hey, maybe motion controls aren't fun for everyone" over the roaring applause of the reviews.Thank you for anyone who listened to me.Edit: You guys are awesome. I feel better and am going to try finding a controller without gyroscopes.Edit 2: Holy shit this blew up! To all the amazing people offering to buy me a gyro-free controller, thank you so much! I'd rather you make a small donation to Parkinsons or Alzheimers research instead. I already have a gamecube adapter, and I totally forgot about the recent update. Thank you all so much for the kind words!Edit 3: Seriously I have enough donation offers to buy like 2 more Nintendo Switches! I already have a gamecube adapter. I'm all set now! :) via /r/nintendo

#IFTTT #reddit

0 notes