orlxndom-blog

[orlxndom-blog]

Divine Right to be a Dick

King James VI and I was a good ruler. His son, Henry was set up to be one but died before he had the chance. As for Charles, James's second son, he was a straight up snob. The Basilikon Doron was created by James with the intent to guide Henry on how to be a king. Due to Henry's death at a young age, the book never made it to him, but rather Charles. According to the Basilikon Doron, a king should obey God but fear him, know  their divine right as king, and know how to live the life of a monarch. Charles was blinded by his power and paid no attention to the other key components mentioned in the book. This shows how dangerous power can be when placed in the wrong hands. What is a king with no followers? Charles's rude behaviour has pushed people away and left a strain on outside support. To me, this is someone I would not want to be ruled by. Charles could have been much more successful in his reign if he had followed the guidelines his dad had set. Bringing attention to faith and proper etiquette are important for anyone, especially a king. The dangerous profession of being power hungry is never a good tactic. This only unsettles fear into those around you and leads to distrust and vulnerability. Instead of building himself up, Charles is just creating more barriers between himself and the throne, blocking him from being a true king. All of his efforts of focusing on the divine rights of kings just looks like a slap to the face at James. Putting time and effort in grooming a child a to follow your footsteps, and build them to the best of their ability, all for it to just be tossed down the drain. I feel sorry for James in how his succession has taken a turn with the rule of King Charles. He took his dad's work, and interpreted it in how he felt would bring the most benefits.

[orlxndom-blog]

Historical Fan-Fiction

The Wallace was written by Blind Harry (was actually blind) during the 15th-century. It’s a poetic biography in an imaginative account of the Scottish hero, William Wallace’s role in the Scottish wars of independence. The Wallace was one of the first book printed in Scotland, becoming the most popular book at the time after the Bible. The purpose was to be commemorative and eulogistic - celebrating a heroic ancestor, but this poem can be seen as evidence of a bromance. Blind Harry exaggerates the accomplishments of Wallace, and sometimes to the point of writing about events that weren't all that true. There are mentions of Robert Bruce, but it is clear that Blind Harry favours Wallace over him, stating that he ‘was a greater hero,’ ‘more brave and patriotic,’ ‘and rescued Scotland from the english,’:

“All worthi men that has gud witt to waille,

Bewar that yhe with mys deyme nocht my taille.     

Perchance yhe say that Bruce he was none sik.

He was als gud quhat deid was to assaill

As of his handis and bauldar in battaill,

Bot Bruce was knawin weyll ayr of this kynrik;

For he had rycht we call no man him lik.

Bot Wallace thris this kynrik conquest haile,

In Ingland fer socht battaill on that rik” (2.351-59).

He even takes it a step further by taking some of Bruce’s military accomplishments and slapping Wallace’s name on them (why some events are not true). Harry writes Wallace in a way of wanting him to be a great historical figure, such as Hector, Alexander the Great, and Julius Caesar, all who were popular illustrations in the Middle Ages. To match these great men of history, Harry sheds a strong light onto Wallace, over glorifying him in a way and proving his greatness to the extremes. Wallace was Harry’s hero and had such an influence that led him to write a novel-size poem dedicated to Wallace. In the end, Blind Harry just wants the best for William Wallace, keeping his ancestors alive through his written word, and bringing attention to one of the greatest Scottish warriors.

[orlxndom-blog]

Jamie is the hidden star here.

Dragonfly in Amber was written by Diana Gabaldon, and is the second novel in the Outlander series. The story is about a time traveler named Clair Randall, who travels from 20th-century America to 18th-century Scotland. There she marries Jamie Fraser, a Scottish warrior, to survive her time in the past. One may think that Claire is the main focus of the story, but through some not-so-hidden details, it’s clear to see that we are really here for Jamie.

Being written by a female, in a female perspective, and a feminine style cover, it is a good guess to say that this book’s directed audience is the female population. And what grabs a female reader’s attention more than a strong (literally) male character. This is where Jamie comes into play. In chapters 16 and 17, there are a number of details describing Jamie’s body, putting a sort of sexual tension in this historical fiction.

In chapter 16, Jamie is playing chess and a lady makes a comment about ‘making the red-haired lad squeal and giggle a bit’, and nothing about the other guy, showing how he’s quite the looker to other female characters. Later on, a pregnant Claire is going through some pain supposedly due to being poisoned from some wine she drank earlier in the night (side note: I know it’s the time period and all, but girl is pregnant and consuming alcohol…#bigoof). During this time a frantic Jamie rushes to get a maid ‘nearly forgetting to put on his kilt’ and coming back ‘half-naked’. While Claire is curled up in a ball, dying from pain, Jamie is getting low-key checked out by another maid who is ‘starring at the scars on his back’. It’s interesting as to why the author wrote these kinds of details of Jamie, when the focus should be on Claire, who at this point might be having a miscarriage, but no the piece of man candy waiting at the door is in need of some attention.

In chapter 17, Jamie has been spending a lot of time with his friends, and Clair is getting annoyed with this. One night though, Jamie doesn’t come home till the morning. We later find out that he was out all night at a brothel through peer pressure from his buddies. Even though he did not take part in the events of a brothel, and just watched, Claire discovers scratches and bite marks on his general crotch area. She calls for a bath to be ready for and acknowledges him as ‘the hulk on the bed’. The rest of the chapter goes into a detailed bath time, including a scene of a maid getting a glimpse at Jamie’s manhood and commenting “Enorme!”.

Being a novel targeted towards women, it’s understood as to why Jamie’s appearance would be described in many different ways. What confuses me is when they are mentioned. For example, when I’m trying to sympathize Claire’s situation, I get hit with some random facts about Jamie’s body. It may just be me, but I don’t think back scars are beneficial in aiding a poisoned pregnant lady.

[orlxndom-blog]

Red Wedding

Before this episode was assigned, I have only seen the very first episode of Game of Thrones. With little background knowledge on the series and books, Game of Thrones seems to be a show of morals, alliances, and vengeance. The Rains of Castamere and The Storm of Swords show similar yet different versions of the Red Wedding.

The Red Wedding was brought upon inspiration from an incident that happened in Scotland, with the Black Douglas clan and the young King of Scotland, dubbed the Black Dinner. Martin stated in an interview, “At the end of the feast, [the King’s men] started pounding on a single drum. They brought out a covered plate and put it in front of the Earl [of Douglas] and revealed it was the head of a black boar — the symbol of death.” Though in the show it is depicted as a black bull and not a boar. 

Comparing the TV show to the novel, Catelyn’s attitude differs during the ‘Red Wedding’. In the novel, she is very frantic and expressive of her grief and misery over her son. While in the TV show, she seemed more calm and collective. Instead, she stands still and with a lifeless look to her. 

I think that by portraying Catelyn’s attitude like it was in the novel, has a greater impact. Showing the emotion and being able to read her inner thoughts (something that does not happen in the TV show) allows the reader to sympathize with her more, especially as it is written in a mother’s perspective.

[orlxndom-blog]

Different from the Rest

During Shakespeare’s time, women were not given the same equality as they are today. To see Lady Macbeth as she is in the play, Macbeth, is interesting to say the least. Compared to other Shakespeare characters such as Juliet, who is a meek and mild follower, Lady Macbeth goes by her own rules and ambitions, making her stand out from the rest.

When Macbeth’s letter about his new title as Thane of Cawdor and the witches prophecy, Lady Macbeth immediately takes things into her own hands. Designing a plan of murder and her pleas to be “unsexed” shows that she is not one to be waiting on the sidelines. It is clear that she wears the pants in this relationship. Questioning her husband's masculinity and confidence, are strange for the set time period. While this is something that we, as modern day people, become drawn too and almost root for. Back then ambition was frowned upon whereas today it is praised.

Lady Macbeth plays a bigger role in the play than some give her credit for. She is the one who grounds Macbeth, bringing him to reality and stripping a world of metaphors away from him (when he tries to make a big deal over an owl noise and she tells him its just an owl, nothing more, nothing less).

Headstrong until a downfall that leads to her demise, Lady Macbeth is a one of a kind character. Her influence on Macbeth is powerful and is what helps lead him to their main goal, power. If Lady Macbeth was not the great mastermind that she was, the play would most definitely not be the same.