#they are seeing aromanticism and asexuality as the root of the problem. | Explore Tumblr Posts and Blogs

lavenderandlaurel · 3 years

Text

finished my reread of a little life this afternoon. it remains an objectively depressing angstfest, but I still find it hopeful, ultimately, and comforting in spite of the bleak ending. (CW: discussion of suicide under the cut)

lots of people reviewing the book have already talked about the found family thread, and it certainly is one of my top relationship models in fiction. not just the adoption and the core friend group (although those hit so good), but the mundane, everyday details of the relationship jude and willem build over 800 pages. my roommate and I describe ourselves as "significant roommates," and that's what this is: the person you live together with both physically and in terms of planning for the future, who knows you best, who you share the logistical details of life with, and may or may not be physically intimate with. some of my favorite moments between willem and jude are the conversations they have about things that matter but are unrelated to the plot: food, art, work, whatever the third thing is. as a touch-averse person straddling the lines of aromanticism, asexuality, and other queer relationships, this fictional example means a lot to me, especially in its scenes of normalcy.

even more important to me, though, is the recurring theme - from the title to a dozen quotes I could pull - that life matters, that your individual life matters, including a disabled, suicidal life. even a little life (little as in short, as in constrained, as in a life with limits) is a life. jude's life is meaningful and his presence valued even when he is actively suicidal; his eventual suicide does not negate any part of his life's worth. jude's death is not a failure on his part or anyone else's. it's a success, though a deeply tragic one, that despite everything, he lived, and lived, and felt joy, and brought joy to others. this book is maybe the only thing that has ever convinced me of that: every moment alive is a victory, no matter what the ending is.

that's the other thing about this book: the comfort is earned. the romance, the found family, the success, the small pleasures - they don't try to paper over jude's past, and they don't undo it either. the reason a little life is so satisfying (and the reason why good hurt/comfort in fanfiction does so much for me) is because it offers relief, not solutions. because jude is fictional and his traumas are so exaggerated,* I, the reader, don't want his problems to be resolved with a quick fix. that would invalidate my own hurts and fears, which similar to jude's despite having less dramatic roots.

lastly. the recurring motif of autonomy, especially as it is distinct from independence. a little life reinforces over and over that no one is independent. jude is especially reliant on others as a disabled person. his autonomy, though, is not contradictory to that. jude's body, his apartment, his career, and his life are very much his, and when those are violated the narrative takes it seriously. there are limits to this autonomy (as with his first suicide attempt), but overall it's clear that jude's agency and digtnity are incredibly important to him, and the people who care about him are marked by their respect of that. the descriptions of greene street make me cry. it's such a powerful symbol of adulthood and the freedoms that come with it (whether or not you suffered abuse), the pride in building a life for yourself, the security of having a space of your own. there's a moment where jude recognizes malcolm's model buildings as exercises in exerting control, and that need is fundamental to people, I think - having some corner of the universe where your impact is tangible and meaningful.

as melodramatic as it is, a little life is sheer affirmation for me. life matters, even when you're depressed and exhausted and in pain. do what you need to do. build the places and the relationships you need to support you. the pain you're in is real, but there will be relief. and when there's no relief, you're not alone. you impact the world even when you don't see it.

willem says all he needs is, "work I enjoy, and a place to live, and someone who loves me." maybe maslow was on to something, but I really think there's something to this. when things are bad, I try to find those three things: 1. my effect on the world, no matter how small, 2. the place I'm secure in every sense, and 3. the people I'm connected to. really, that's become core to me. I need these things, and everyone else deserves them too.

*not that real people don't experience the things that jude does. but I think yanagihara's intent here is to offer a particular intensity of suffering that the reader can map their own personal tragedies onto. jude's past is horrific in specific ways, but his fears are horrors that many queer, mentally ill, traumatized, and/or disabled people face, whether or not their experiences are comparable to jude's.

#this is only the tip of the iceberg lmao #insert jenny slate meme #bookposting

4 notes · View notes

theaceandaroadvocacyproject · 3 years

Text

TAAAP’s Response to an Open Letter

We welcome productive conversations between TAAAP and the communities we serve. We value honest critiques and will always strive to correct mistakes we make, and commit to doing good work. However, we do not engage in dishonest dialogue with those who refuse to address our actual stated and acted values, in favor of propping up a false and directly contradictory representation of our positions. We have written this response to address claims that concerns around our December Pride Chats topic were ignored, dismissed, or misunderstood. This will be our final response to Coyote on this matter.

Our first email responding to Coyote’s concerns was sent on November 30, and our last correspondence was sent on December 18. We made it clear that it was our last correspondence with:

“The topic has been decided and it will not be edited further. Like everyone, you will be free to share your thoughts during the December Pride Chats, as long as you follow the guidelines. Since we do not plan on changing the topic from what it is now, we will not be continuing this conversation through email. We have also expressed the core tenets of our stance through previous emails and see no need in reiterating those points, as that would simply be tiresome for all parties involved. We suggest rereading our previous emails for answers already given to your questions on this matter.” - 5th and final email

As the claims in Coyote’s Open Letter make it clear that our emails were either ignored or disregarded, we have chosen to take the route of responding to specific points in Coyote’s Open Letter with quotes from our emails, and adding clarification and emphasis when needed. We also only include quotes from emails sent by us, as we are not interested in publicizing Coyote’s emails without its consent. The block quotes from Coyote are from Coyote’s Open Letter, which was publicly posted on its blog.

Quotations from Coyote are labelled with an alphabet letter & indented with “blockquote” formatting. Quotations from our previous emails to Coyote, as well as the topic announcement from our website, are only italicized.

A) Because that’s the context from which the term “SAM” itself emerged. That itself is the birthplace of the phrase. You do not “use” “the SAM” any more than a bullseye “uses” an arrow.

In the first sentence, Coyote links to a post claiming this as the origin of the SAM (content warning for aphobia). The post speaks of the Split Attraction Model as a pre-existing concept and does not attempt to coin “SAM” in any way. Due to the difficulty of finding historical posts on Tumblr and forums, no one in the community has offered an earlier post that actually coins the term. Therefore, it cannot be determined what context the SAM actually emerged from. As of that post that is referenced, it was a pre-existing concept. It is a stretch to definitively claim this post as the “source” of the SAM.

We addressed that here:

“Several of us at TAAAP read through and adjusted the wording of this announcement prior to sharing it on the Discord server with the knowledge that while it is possible that the SAM may have been created by exclusionists, its exact origin is unknown and so it has been reclaimed and popularized by the ace and aro communities.” - 1st email

We also addressed this in the blog post of our Official Topic Announcement on our website, which was posted on December 19th before the Open Letter was posted:

“If a term may violate our guidelines, due to being rooted in exclusionist or other harmful ideology, do not assume that everyone is aware of its harmful origins or that they espouse those ideas. Many terms have been reclaimed, used without bad intention, or simply used without knowledge of other people using them in harmful ways.” - Official Topic Announcement on TAAAP Website, emphasis added

B) But you already know that, or so you say. You are comfortable with treating those issues as over and done with, and having personally acclimated yourself to the language, you believe no other issues with the phrase itself remain.

In nearly every email we sent, we described those issues as ongoing.

“While it may not always have a coherent or consistent meaning in these communities, it is still something that is widely referenced and that many people have at least a vague conceptualization of.” - 4th email, emphasis added

“Also, due to the prevalence and often-presumed universality of the SAM, we believe it is important to name it so as to specifically encourage conversation about it. We believe it will be worthwhile for discussion to include it, so that both positive and negative viewpoints of it can be shared, and alternatives can be offered. Many people are on distinctly one side of discussion about the SAM, and some do not even know of the existence of the other side, so engaging in discussion with people who hold different views can be useful in how individuals move forward with their own identities and participation in their communities. “ - 4th email

“The full sentence is ‘We also will require that all participants in the conversation respect others' personal choices and feelings surrounding any particular attraction and orientation model or lack thereof, including people who object to there being a binary of SAM and non-SAM.’ (Emphasis added) While some people do treat SAM and non-SAM as a binary, this is not a view we are interested in spreading.” - 4th email, quotes our prompt, emphasis was present in this email

Regarding the accusation of TAAAP members being personally acclimated to the language, we refer to this:

“These kinds of criticisms are necessary for communities to address issues within themselves, especially when those issues are so common. One motivation behind choosing this topic is to address the far too common issues with the SAM, and offer room to discuss diverse and inclusive perspectives, as many people, including members of TAAAP, have been harmed by those who use the SAM to identity police. Not discussing these topics at all, as we have previously stated, can leave people of the dominant perspective ignorant of other perspectives, allowing divisions to grow without any chances to understand and correct the issue. That being said, and as is written in the month’s topic, we also require respect for how people self identify, including seeing one’s own aromanticism as a subset of their asexuality, and using the SAM. “ -5th and last email, emphasis added

C) You have expressed an investment in opposing identity essentialism, which means the only part that’s missing for you is how one person’s own personal use of a term could be unfair to anybody else.

I will illustrate this with an example.

Hypothetically, say someone in the aro community decided to give a name to a completely legitimate type of aro identity or experience — nothing wrong with that. Hypothetically, say in order to express that identity, they start calling themselves a “pure aro.” Say the identity becomes a popular one, and say there’s also some aros who speak up with objections. Now imagine those aros get told, “That’s okay, you don’t have to use the purity model.”

That would be messed up.

This hypothetical is something I’m assuming we’re on the same page about. If you can recognize that this “pure aro” construct would be a problem, regardless of what “pure aro” was chosen to represent, then you can understand how the language we choose for ourselves — even to represent completely legitimate things — can in fact be unfair to other people. In the same way that it would be wrong to refer to certain aros as “pure aros” or “impure aros,” it is wrong to refer to completely legitimate things as “SAM” or “non-SAM.”

We agree that the language of “pure aro” is inherently bad, in part because it implies an “impure aro” and in part because it assigns a morality to a specific identity, which can also be true with “split” and “non-split”, although to a lesser extent. “Pure” invokes religious oppression and purity culture, with the opposite of “pure” generally being “sinful”. This degree of connotation does not exist for “split”. We say this not to dismiss the real harm people experience in relation to the SAM, but to highlight the false equivalence in the hypothetical.

In fact, we did at one point address someone in the Pride Chats who used the term “complete aro” by pointing out the potential harm that does to other aro-spectrum people who are just as completely aro as someone who experiences no romantic attraction at all.

We do agree that another issue with the SAM is its perceived universality, which forces labels onto people without their consent. We stated our view of this issue here:

“[S]ome people do understand themselves through use of the SAM - [it does] not work for all, and when that isn’t understood is when identity policing, exclusion, and invalidation can occur. We are open to discussions of the harm done by universalizing identity models in the Pride Chats.” - 5th and final email, some words removed to account for privacy concerns and to avoid quoting Coyote.

Many terms used by LGBTQIA+ individuals were originally coined and used by their oppressors or were slurs. Some terms are sometimes used in harmful and exclusionary ways, and have different meanings for the different individuals that use them. Writing off a term or idea as completely bad and assigning moral value to it is harmful to those who are not aware of its history, have reclaimed it, or find positive aspects of the term with which to identify. We believe it is possible to recognize the harm that occurs from certain community practices while also not attacking people who do not intend to perpetuate that harm. Rather, we should focus on the harmful actions. We do not condone broad condemnation of all who identify with a term, simply because others weaponize or have weaponized that terminology to cause harm. People who have adopted widespread terminology to describe phenomena or identities should not be judged because others weaponize or weaponized that terminology, or for forgiving a potentially negative interpretation/aspect/connotation of said terminology for the comfort they find in using the positive aspects of it to describe themselves.

D) [...] it is wrong to refer to completely legitimate things as “SAM” or “non-SAM.”

This states that people are wrong to use the terms SAM and non-SAM. As shown by our message above, in multiple other messages, and in our Pride Chat guidelines, this is identity policing; it is not allowed in the chats and will not be espoused by TAAAP’s members. It’s not simply the experiences that are legitimate, but also identifying with the SAM or as non-SAM. This is not an acceptance of the SAM, or of a supposed binary of SAM and non-SAM, as a universal model that everyone must or should identify with, but rather an acceptance of some people’s personal identification with the term SAM or non-SAM. We conveyed this idea through email here:

“Also, we do not want to imply that we think using the SAM is not legitimate, as it is a model that many people use and relate to, and do so using that specific term.” - 4th email

E) 1) It’s not split. The word “split,” like the word pure, inherently sets up a contrast. It’s framing these things as only partial, splintered fragments of what they’re normally supposed to be. Categorizing my experiences of attraction as “split” attraction is like referring to me as a “split person” just because I’m not a conjoined twin. I wasn’t split off from anyone. I’m just like this. This is my own whole and natural way of being. “Split” language talks down to me as a lesser fragment of something else. Why should that be recognized as anything less than condescending?

If someone were to talk down to anyone in this way, that would go against our Discord guidelines and they would be warned, “timed out” if they continued, and banned if they continued after the time out, per our rules. Dictating how people can identify, whether by imposing labels on others or by demonizing others for identifying with certain labels, is identity policing. Different identities and conceptualizations of identities resonate for different people, and there is nothing wrong with this. This is also related to the issue of universalization, which we addressed above with the block quote C from Coyote. To be absolutely clear, people with the same or similar experiences are allowed to use different labels and models, likewise, people with differing experiences may resonate with the same labels and models. Additionally, people are never required to identify in opposition to or in relation to any label or model.

This was addressed here:

“Everyone uses different methods, models, and terminology to understand their own orientations. Some of these may not be ones that you personally agree with or would use, but you must respect others’ right to use the model or method they want. Similarly, you can discuss what you don’t like about any given model, method, or term, but be careful to only apply it to yourself or use “I feel” statements so as not to say what methods others should or should not use. Focus on critiquing the models and not how people make use of them or identify with them. The only models, methods, or terms we do not support are those that are culturally appropriative or violate our guidelines in some other way.

F) It’s not “attraction,” either. Too often I’ve seen people deploying “SAM” or “using the SAM” to misrepresent multi-orientation labeling, which is conflating “attraction” with “orientation.”

Some people do identify with an orientation based on their attraction. The legitimacy of people who do base their orientation on attraction as well as the various other ways people do not, is recognized in our official topic announcement, the final version of which was sent to Coyote before posting it to our website.

“The topic will be models of attraction and orientation, including the SAM (Split-Attraction Model), as well as understandings and models of orientation that do not center attraction, and any other potential ways of understanding attraction and orientation. We at TAAAP support any person using any kind of model, or no model at all, to identify their attraction or orientation. We also will require that all participants in the conversation respect others' personal choices and feelings surrounding any particular attraction and orientation model or lack thereof, including people who object to there being a binary of SAM and non-SAM. This discussion will explore why people use the SAM, use something else entirely, or use none.” - 3rd email, emphasis added

There are also people who use the SAM to only identify their attractions, and do not use it for their orientation(s). More broadly, we do not agree that it is essentialist or harmful for someone to identify with their own orientation(s) based on their own attraction(s). The harms that are related to self-identifying have been covered above under Quote C.

G) Frankly? It’s not even a model. It doesn’t model anything. It’s just an extra sticker over multiple preexisting models and concepts, chained together by conflation and essentialism.

The SAM does refer to multiple ideas. Many orientation models and identity terms have a level of ambiguity to them, and this is not unique to the SAM. We addressed the ambiguous nature of the term here:

“We do not strictly define the terms given in the topic, as the ambiguity can allow for segments of discussion that we cannot predict. The terminology 'the SAM' is popularly used enough that many people have their own varied personal understandings of it, and we recognize that this lack of continuity in what it means can open extra avenues of discussion. We know that many people identify with it or refer to it when speaking of their identities, and that others do not identify with it nor wish to use it as a reference point, and we want to leave room for people of all perspectives to talk about it (whatever they believe 'it' is) without correcting them for talking about the ‘wrong' thing.” - 3rd email, emphasis added

H) All this is why I recently had to gently shepherd an aro out of your “opting out of romantic orientation” channel.

This is elaborated upon later:

I) The TSAMM encourages a conflation between “romantic orientation” and “distinguishing romantic from sexual,” and the popularity of that conflation has so thoroughly undermined conceptual space for folks like me that you can outright name a channel “opting out of romantic orientation” and you’ll get people in there talking about how much they definitely do identify with a romantic orientation. Even in space deliberately set aside for me, the TSAMM renders the distinction incoherent.

As mods, we should have noticed this when it happened and addressed it then. After reading through the exchange, it was clear that this person was questioning and trying to find what term(s) they felt comfortable identifying their orientation with. The channels for different identities are open to people who are questioning, as well as those of other identities who are willing to ask questions and listen respectfully. While in our Pride Chats, it is expected that questioning people are respected and given space to question without being “shepherded” away.

J) I deserve better than this. Everyone deserves better than this. We deserve to get to have these conversations without the TSAMM getting in the way.

“TAAAP specifically does not feel comfortable avoiding discussing the term Split-Attraction Model, as it is common community terminology and many identify with it in a positive sense. We feel that it would be a greater disservice to beat around the bush than to allow people to discuss it, although we do understand that our wording can better reflect how we encourage discussion about various other orientation models/terminology, and to reflect the fact that participants will be welcome to share criticisms of the term 'SAM' as well.” -1st email, emphasis added

In this first email, we clarified the wording of the December topic to make it clear that the SAM was only one part of the topic, and to encourage discussion of more models and terminology.

“The terminology 'the SAM' is popularly used enough that many people have their own varied personal understandings of it, and we recognize that this lack of continuity in what it means can open extra avenues of discussion. We know that many people identify with it or refer to it when speaking of their identities, and that others do not identify with it nor wish to use it as a reference point, and we want to leave room for people of all perspectives to talk about it (whatever they believe 'it' is) without correcting them for talking about the 'wrong' thing.” - 3rd email, emphasis added

“We chose to name the SAM because of its wide use as an orientation model in the ace and aro communities, and regardless of personal use or opinion, the term contextualizes our topic for those generally unfamiliar with orientation models and theories.” - 4th email , emphasis added

“Not discussing these topics at all, as we have previously stated, can leave people of the dominant perspective ignorant of other perspectives, allowing divisions to grow without any chances to understand and correct the issue. That being said, and as is written in the month’s topic, we also require respect for how people self identify, [including] using the SAM.” - 5th and final email, some words removed to account for privacy concerns and to avoid quoting Coyote.

We would like to refer everyone to our guidelines for the Pride Chats. These will be updated with expectations around identity policing using parts of our Official Topic Announcement.

Also, we feel it worthwhile to address the overall complications inherent in pushing certain terminology and attempting to erase other terminology. Demanding such specific, unambiguous language makes the conversation inaccessible to some neurodivergent people, some people who speak English as a secondary language, and some people with a more casual or limited understanding of this terminology and the nuances of this intra-community conversation. Ace and aro people already struggle to access knowledge about these identities, and this policing of nuanced terminology provides another barrier to aro and ace people who want to understand and express themselves.

When someone identifies with a term, or wants to discuss a term, in TAAAP’s Discord server or on TAAAP’s Dreamwidth page, a safe space, we require that no one identity polices, attacks, nor harasses this person under the assumption that they should “know better”. Discussion and critiques of terms can be brought forward without assigning a certain morality to the people who use them. Discussion and critique can happen without condemning a person.

To suggest an alternative term or to write the SAM out of discussions does not change that many people are exposed to that terminology, and it has impacted their personal identities. The comments on Coyote’s Open Letter are all part of the discussion we always intended to have, and still will have in our Pride Chats Discord and Dreamwidth. As a reminder, our December 2020 Pride Chats will take place on the 26th and 27th and the topic is “models of attraction and orientation, including the SAM (Split-Attraction Model), as well as understandings and models of orientation that do not center attraction, and any other potential ways of understanding attraction and orientation”.

#long post

6 notes · View notes

kcrabb88 · 5 years

Text

In a Mirror Dimly

Summary: Enjolras and Valjean bond at the barricade, discussing love and something they share in common. Written for Ace Mis Week 2019.

Note: Aromanticism and asexuality definitely overlap here! That’s my personal experience/orientation, so that comes naturally for me when writing about ace things. Also, the title is a reference to a verse from 1 Corinthians. Thanks to @aflamethatneverdies and @librarianladyx for beta’ing!

Valjean knows he shouldn’t get attached to these boys.

Because these boys will probably be dead soon.

Young men, he corrects himself, because they’re not children. But he has a habit of making any youth a child in his head.

He can’t help but feel fatherly toward them.

Perhaps he can convince them to run? Then again, maybe not. And how could he lead them through the dark of Paris unnoticed, even if he got them out?

Surrender? He flinches, digging his fingernails into his palms. That might mean prison. He swallows, unwilling to imagine these vibrant young men under that weight.

He looks over, seeing the one called Enjolras whisper something in Combeferre’s ear, a soft smile sliding onto the chief’s face.

He remembers seeing the tear running down the lad’s cheek after he shot the artillery sergeant. He remembers watching him step away for a moment and take a deep breath, because there isn’t time for grief.

Not here.

Enjolras brushes a stray strand of astonishing fair hair out of his eyes, not yet noticing Valjean studying him. Paris feels dark in this space before true daylight comes, clouds sweeping across the sky as a slice of blue edges into the black night, just a hint of red lingering on the horizon. There’s no light from the usual window lanterns, the few they have near the barricade emitting a dull yellow haze. The scent of gun smoke lingers in the air, never allowing Valjean to forget where he is.

He’d sensed the revolt in the air for weeks, months, before he heard news of the barricades today, but France has been roiled so many times since his birth that he can never tell when a spark will turn into something or when it won’t. The revolution was in progress when he was shipped to Toulon, and he remembers hearing news of the changes inside France: the revolution ending, Napoleon’s coup, and years later, his disastrous defeat in Russia. Then, Waterloo.

Nothing changed inside the bagne.

Valjean’s surprised when he glances up and sees Enjolras looking at him.

Then walking toward him.

“I was grateful for your help with the mattress to block the grapeshot, citizen,” Enjolras says as he approaches. “And for your bravery in giving your uniform to send another man away. My friends and I are thankful.”

Always citizen, rather than monsieur. Valjean’s intrigued again, even if he doesn’t quite know what to say. He can’t really say why exactly he’s here, though he’d heard Marius say I know him, so what might the other men here suspect? Perhaps nothing. Perhaps that Marius has only seen him in the street.

He realizes how much he’s used to keeping secrets. Always secrets, because he carries Toulon with him everywhere. The secrets grew heavier when he tore up his yellow passport and became someone else, when he took the bishop’s silver and started a new life. But with his secrets he also gained a sort of freedom. The freedom to be someone other than Jean Valjean and the damage that name carries with it. He’s only Jean Valjean at night, when he’s alone with his scars. Wearing another name gives him the chance to help others. It gives him the chance to love his daughter.

Valjean folds his hands together, praying he can get Cosette’s young man out of here even as the National Guard gets closer and daylight breaks into the night, the first hints of dawn reaching the barricade. He recalls Enjolras’ words from the speech he gave not long ago, the words cutting into Valjean’s heart because he doesn’t want these young men to die.

We are entering a tomb all flooded with the dawn.

Enjolras sits down on the paving stones, the first strains of morning light creeping toward his feet through the shadows as if drawn to him. The glow casts his youth into relief and washes the gravity from his face, the knowledge that this lad might perish—and soon—making Valjean’s chest ache. Smudges of gunpowder stain Enjolras’ hands black in places, but he’s bafflingly free of even a small injury.

“Do you have anyone worrying over you at home?” Valjean asks, because he doesn’t know what to say. He so often feels like he doesn’t know what to say, only what to do.

Enjolras pulls his gaze away from the sunrise. “My parents are at home in Marseilles, but hopefully they aren’t worrying yet because news won’t have reached them.”

“No wife or children like those men you sent home?”

Valjean wonders if there’s any way he might convince Enjolras to go home. He looks barely more than seventeen or so, even if he must be a good bit into his twenties. Valjean isn’t opposed to the politics, because he knows just how desperate so many people are, right now. How desperate they’ve been for years. He understands the inequalities and the cholera and the poverty. Those were the things he was trying to fix, in Montreuil, before it all went wrong. Those are the things he wants to help alleviate now, where he can, person by person.

But he doesn’t want these young men dying over this. He wants them to find another way, because there’s enough death in these streets already.

Enjolras smiles, possibly catching onto to Valjean’s motives. “No. I have never been very interested in romance or the…” red creeps into his cheeks, and Valjean suspects he doesn’t blush often. “…the other activities my friends occupy themselves with. So no mistress waiting, either.”

Valjean shifts the gun resting between his knees. “Too busy wanting to change the world?”

Enjolras runs a hand through his over-long fair hair, and the small movement makes Fantine appear in Valjean’s mind with a flash of vibrant, tangible memory, her golden hair cut short and ruined by the cruel edge of a knife. All these years later and he still aches over the fact that he couldn’t save her.

He probably can’t save all these boys either, only the one he’s come for, the one his daughter loves, and it hurts.

Truth be told he doesn’t even know if he can save Marius.

Even in the last excruciating moments, there had been hope in Fantine’s eyes, hope that she might see her daughter again. Even as she died, Valjean saw the life in her bursting at the seams with nowhere to go. He never had the chance to know Fantine, just as he won’t ever know Enjolras, but despite their differences in circumstance and age and gender, he recognizes the same radical, indestructible hope in both of them. In Fantine’s last days he sensed that she was never just surviving, but always looking for the tiniest fragment of joy in the dark, even if she was only holding on by her fingernails. He senses that same spirit in Enjolras, watching it shimmer in the air around them like a living thing.

If he could, he would give some of his years back to Fantine, so she could see her daughter again.

He would give some to these lads, too, and save them from the bullets awaiting them on the other side of the barricade.

But he can’t.

Enjolras’ voice draws him back toward the moment at hand, every second feeling precious, because death’s shadow creeps over the barricade even as the orange-red glow of the sunrise bursts over the Parisian skyline. “That is always time consuming, but my friends also find plenty of hours in the day for both their mistresses and their politics. I suppose I never felt the impulse.”

“I thought I heard one of your friends teasing and saying you were rather intrepid for a man who had no woman he loved,” Valjean says, finding himself talking more with Enjolras than he does with most people other than Cosette. “But I thought perhaps they just might not know that you did.”

Enjolras laughs softly, but there’s grief within the sound. “Oh, no. I keep no secrets from my friends. We are a family, after all. Bound together by love of the same cause, and years of friendship.” Enjolras’s voice cracks ever so slightly, his words growing heavy.

“You’ve lost good friends today.” Valjean almost clasps Enjolras on the shoulder, but he isn’t sure if the touch would be welcome, so he refrains, for now. “Not just compatriots.”

“Two of the best men I knew.” Enjolras glances over at Courfeyrac, Feuilly, Combeferre, Bossuet, and Joly, who stand nearby, a gleam of deep love in his eyes. “Bahorel and Prouvaire. Bahorel had a laugh you could never forget, and a formidable loyalty to those he chose as his own. Prouvaire had an absolutely astonishing soul, and poetry that could make any man cry, even if I don’t understand the finer points of the art form.” Enjolras touches his undone cravat, a bright-red against the more muted colors of the rest of his clothing. Perhaps a gift from the friends he mentioned. Then, his voice goes deeper, a dangerous anger puncturing the words. “Some of the national guardsmen executed Prouvaire point blank. It’s why I’m afraid the police inspector inside will meet his end here.”

Valjean tenses at that, Javert’s presence is a problem for him in a million ways even as he wishes to get him out of here unscathed. Javert is a thorn in his side. Javert could turn him in. Javert keeps turning up, and yet Valjean doesn’t want to see him killed. A strange sympathy for the police inspector wells up in Valjean’s chest, a sympathy of which he doesn’t entirely understand the root.

“I’m sure some people find it odd,” Enjolras continues, his words holding the ring of a confession. “My lack of a mistress or interest in marriage. But I have all I need with my friends.”

Valjean pauses, hesitant to share anything about himself with anyone, the instinct ingrained so deeply within him he doesn’t know how to undo it. He’s afraid to undo it.

“I understand.” Valjean speaks the words before he’s ready, but he does understand, and it’s almost a relief to hear Enjolras make his own admission. Their lives are very different, but that feeling is the same. “I have a daughter, you see. Not my blood, but…” Valjean trails off for a moment, an image of Fantine coughing until her whole body shook overtaking his memory. “…but my own nevertheless. The life I’ve led has never truly offered me the opportunity for marriage and the like, but then again I also haven’t found I desired any of that. So I don’t find it odd at all, if you want the opinion of an old man.”

Concern floods Enjolras’ face, his eyes widening in alarm. “You have a daughter and yet you gave yourself up for another man to leave? I didn’t know…I…” Enjolras is inarticulate now, and it’s a far cry from the beautiful ease of his earlier speech, the words he spoke to the crowd like a hymn caught in the wind. Valjean remembers how those words sunk into his old soul, watching as the flames of hope came alive in the eyes of the men surrounding him. Not hope for their own lives, necessarily, but hope for the future they all believe in.

Valjean does clasp Enjolras’ shoulder now. “Easy, lad. I know what I’m doing. I’ll be all right.”

Enjolras frowns, the earlier gravity returning. “I am far from certain that any of us are going to be all right, I’m afraid. I hate to see your daughter lose you. I’m sure she needs you.”

“I’ll be all right,” Valjean repeats.

He cannot say I faked my own death to escape a prison ship. He cannot say I once snuck into a convent by hiding in a coffin. He cannot say I have been through stranger things, and somehow survived. He’s honestly not sure if he will survive. But he has to try. He has to try to get Cosette’s young man back to her. Even if it means losing her, Valjean wants her happiness. She deserves her happiness. She deserves more than an old man like him.

Valjean’s eyes flick to Marius for the briefest of moments, and it doesn’t go unnoticed by Enjolras. Enjolras looks at Marius and back at Valjean again, some kind of recognition flashing in his face that he doesn’t voice.

“I don’t suppose there’s any way I can convince you and your friends to leave the barricade?”

Valjean speaks before Enjolras can, hardly knowing what he’s saying.

A sad smile graces Enjolras’ features as the sun comes up fully over the barricade, gold dripping from the ends of his hair when the light strikes him.

“We will not surrender. My friends and I will do this together as we have so many other things in our lives these past years. We will survive together, or we will not.”

There’s a finality in Enjolras’ words among the grief and the hope and the unshakeable love Valjean hears.

“That kind of family is a beautiful thing to possess,” Valjean says, his words turning tremulous, and he clears his throat against the wave of emotion crashing over him. “That kind of family, and something to believe in.”

Enjolras blinks, wiping away a stray tear falling from his eye. “Those two things are all I have ever needed. Perhaps some might say that my lack of a mistress means I do not love, but that is not the truth.” Enjolras glances over at his friends again, and then at the sun casting the barricade in a golden glow, the light of a new day dawning. The dawn of the sixth of June. “I love so much I feel it might burst out of me at any moment. And sometimes it does.”

“I understand.” Valjean stands up at the same time as Enjolras, putting out his hand for the lad to shake. “I truly do.”

Enjolras accepts the handshake, his hand warm with life and kindness. “I hope that you find your way back to your daughter, citizen. Her name is?”

“Cosette,” Valjean says, something powerful filling him up as he says his child’s name, even more determined to get the Pontmercy boy back to her. He has never felt the kind of romantic feelings for someone like she possesses for that young man, but he does know what it is to deeply love, because she taught him.

“Cosette,” Enjolras repeats, handling the name with care. “Thank you for sharing a piece of yourself with me. It’s always nice to share something in common with someone when you didn’t expect it.”

Valjean nods, letting go of Enjolras’ hand. “It is. Thank you for talking with an old man.”

Enjolras smiles again before going back over to Combeferre and Courfeyrac, who each put an arm around him.

There’s still the matter of Javert inside the Corinthe. There’s still the matter of getting Cosette’s young man out of here. There’s still the matter of surviving long enough to do that. But Valjean marvels at the life on this barricade that is so obviously destined to end in death.

He marvels at the love all around him.

More words from Enjolras’ speech echo in his head, louder than the footsteps of the soldiers and the cannon fire on the other side of this chaotic, mismatched pile of wood that is the only thing standing between them and eternity.

Whence shall arise the shout of love, if it be not from the summit of sacrifice?

#Ace Mis Week #My fic #Enjolras #Valjean #Canon era #Les Miserables #Les Mis #Ace things

155 notes · View notes