princesssarisa - Tumblr blog

[princesssarisa]

Do you know about Ludwig Bechstein? Well you should.

But do not worry: if you never heard of his name until now, it is perfectly normal. In a similar way to madame d'Aulnoy in France, Ludwig Bechstein was one of the great names and influential sources of the fairytale in Germany, but fell into complete obscurity due to being overshadowed in modern days by a contemporary (Charles Perrault for madame d'Aulnoy, the brothers Grimm for Bechstein).

Ludwig Bechstein was, just like the brothers Grimm, a German collector of fairytales (Märchen in German), and just like them he published an anthology of them. However, whereas the brothers Grimm started publishing their work in the early 1810s with re-editions later on, Bechstein published the first volume of his collection in 1845, and the second volume in 1856.

And here's the thing: Bechstein was MUCH, MUCH more well-known in Germany than the brothers Grimm, for the rest of the 19th century. While yes the brothers Grimm were a big success and a huge best-seller, Bechstein's fairytales were even more so. In fact his fairytales were THE de facto German fairytales of the 19th century - until the brothers Grimm's international celebrity (because their fairytales had crossed the Germanic frontiers into English and French-speaking countries, while Bechstein's had not) came back and made their own fairytales overshadow, and then completely eclipse/bury Bechstein's own fairytales.

Why is this important? Because Bechstein had in his collection several fairytales that overlapped with those of the Grimm: for example, as I will show above, both collections had an "Hansel and Gretel", and " Little Red Riding Hood". But while we know today the Grimm's version better, it was the Bechstein's version that the 19th century children knew about. And there is one big difference between the two sets of tales: while the brothers Grimm were obsessed with an "accuracy" of the stories (or what they believed was an "accuracy"), stitching stories together or writing them so as to create what felt like a traditional oral story as it would be told to you by a random German person, Bechstein allowed himself a more "literary approach". He never reached the level of an Andersen or a d'Aulnoy that would entirely rewrite a folk-tale into a long poetic epic... But he allowed himself to correct inaccuracies in the stories he collected, and to add personal details to make the story fit his tastes better, and to develop the dialogues into more than just nonsensical little rhymes, so while he kept short and simple stories like the Grimms, they definitively were more literary stories.

To give you two good examples of the differences, here are Bechstein's changes to the two stories I described above.

The main change within Little Red Riding Hood is Bechstein making the girl more intelligent and well-meaning than in the Grimms version, and the Wolf's deception even more devious. When the wolf tells the girl she could go pick up flowers and play outside of the path, like in the Grimm's tale, Bechstein's Riding Hood stops and asks roughly (not a quote I recap here): "Hey, mister Wolf, since you know so much about herbs and plants within this forest - do you know about any medicinal plant around, because if there is an herb that could heal my sick grandma, it would be super cool!". And the wolf jumps on the occassion, pretending he is a doctor - and he lists to her a whole set of flowers and herbs and berries she can pick up that would heal her grandmother... except all the plants he describes to her are poison, and the Wolf just mocks his intended victim. The joke also relies on the fact that all the plants he lists are named after wolves, with the beast convincing the girl it is because wolves are good and great things. (There's the wolf's-foot, the wolf's milk, the wolf's berries, the wolfswort - names which do correspond to real-like plants such as the spurge laurel or the aconit).

The ending is also slightly modified. The hunter is attracted to the grandma's house by hearing the unusually loud snoring of the wolf - he thinks something is wrong with the grand-mother, maybe she is dying, only to find the wolf in her place. He immediately grabs his rifle to kill it but then pause wondering "Hey, the little grandma is nowhere to be seen... and she was a scrawny woman... Better check if he did not eat her". And so he opens the wolf's belly (and the wolf is still asleep during all that, he really is a deep sleeper). When the humans decide to put stones in the wolf's belly, they explicitely reference in-universe the "Wolf and the seven goats" story, which gives them the idea. (Quite a fun and accurate detail since we know that the brothers Grimm attached the episode of the stone to the Little Red Riding Hood story by taking it from the "Wolf and the seven goats" one)

As for Hansel and Gretel, the witch is described differently from the Grimms (she is still a very, very old woman who has something wrong with her eyes, but she isn't red-eyed like the Grimm, rather she has "grass-green" rheumy eyes, and she has no cane or crutches, Bechstein rather insisting on her being a hunchback and havin a very, very large nose.) But the main difference occurs in the climax, which is very different from the Grimm.

The witch still tries to push Gretel in the oven, but she doesn't ask the girl to check if it is "hot enough". Rather she put bread in it to go with her Hansel-roast, and she asks the girl to check if the bread is brown yet. And Gretel is about to obey... when the snow-white bird that led them to the house reappears and warns her of an upcoming danger with human words. The girl immediately guesses the trick, and pushes the witch in the oven. Second big change: the "treasures" the children obtain are not the witch's, nor do they find it on their own. As they exit the house, the treasure literaly rains on them - because all the birds of the forest arrived and dropped the precious items on them while singing "For the crumbs of bread / Pearls an gems instead". As the children understand, the birds were grateful for what they believe was food offered to them (the bread crumbs) and reward the children with the treasure.

Oh yes and the mother (no stepmother here) doesn't die. Rather she and her husband are miserable in their house because they regret leaving their kids, so they are very happy when they return, and with the treasure they all are certain to never go hungry again. Happy end. (Because here the mother isn't a bad person like in the Grimm - she just really, REALLY was a desperate woman who didn't want to see her own children die before her eyes)

[princesssarisa]

[princesssarisa]

Here's a big list I've made (because of course I had to) of opera birthdays, for anyone who wants to remember and celebrate them.

(Les Contes d'Hoffmann shares my birthday!)

January

2: Der Fliegende Holländer

3: Don Pasquale

14: Tosca

15: Vanessa

19: Il Trovatore, Manon

21: Jenufa

22: Lady Macbeth of Mtsensk

23: Eugene Onegin

24: I Puritani

25: La Cenerentola, Elektra

26: Cosí Fan Tutte, Der Rosenkavalier, Dialogues des Carmélites

27: Boris Godunov

29: Idomeneo

February

1: La Bohéme, Manon Lescaut

2: Louise

3: Semiramide

5: Otello

6: La Voix Humaine

7: Orphée aux Enfers, Four Saints in Three Acts, Il Matrimonio Segreto,

9: Falstaff, Khovanschina

10: Les Contes d’Hoffmann

11: La Fille du Régiment

16: Werther

17: Madama Butterfly, Un Ballo in Maschera

19: Don Quichotte

20: Il Barbiere di Siviglia, Giulio Cesare, La Wally

23: La Juive

24: Rinaldo

29: La Forza del Destino

March

3: Carmen

6: La Traviata, La Sonnambula

9: Nabucco, Ernani, Die Lustige Weiber von Windsor

11: Rigoletto, Don Carlos, I Capuleti e I Montecchi

12: Simon Boccanegra

13: Médée (Cherubini)

14: Macbeth

16: Thaïs

17: Attila

18: Faust

21: L’Enfant et les Sortileges

27: La Rondine

28: Andréa Chenier

31: Rusalka

April

5: Die Fledermaus

8: La Gioconda

10: L’Amore dei Tre Re

14: Lakmé

15: Serse

16: Alcina, Le Prophéte

25: Turandot

27: Roméo et Juliette

28: L’Africaine

30: Pelléas et Melisande

May

1: Le Nozze di Figaro

5: Mefistofele

12: L’Elisir d’Amore

17: Cavalleria Rusticana

18: Iphigénie en Tauride

19: L’Heure Espagnole

21: Pagliacci, Doktor Faust

22: L’Italiana in Algeri

24: Duke Bluebeard’s Castle, Cendrillon

30: The Bartered Bride

June

6: Moses und Aron

7: Peter Grimes

10: Tristan und Isolde

11: A Midsummer Night’s Dream (Britten)

12: War and Peace

13: Les Vêpres Siciliennes/I Vespri Siciliani

18: Der Freischütz

20: Albert Herring, La Navarraise

21: Die Meistersinger von Nürnberg

26: Die Wälkure

July

1: Arabella

16: Die Entführung aus dem Serail

26: Parsifal

August

3: Guillaume Tell

9: Béatrice et Bénédict

14: Il Turco in Italia

16: Siegfried

17: Götterdämmerung

28: Lohengrin

September

5: La Serva Padrona, Satyagraha

6: La Clemenza di Tito

11: The Rake’s Progress

14: The Turn of the Screw

22: Das Rheingold

24: La Donna del Lago

26: Lucia di Lammermoor

30: Die Zauberflöte, Les Pêcheurs de Perles, Porgy and Bess

October

5: Orfeo ed Euridice

7: The Golden Cockerel

10: Die Frau ohne Schatten

19: Tannhäuser

22: Nixon in China

25: Ariadne auf Naxos

28: Roberto Devereux, Cappriccio

29: Don Giovanni

31: L’Amico Fritz

November

4: Les Troyens, Prince Igor, Intermezzo

6: Adriana Lecouvreur, The Cunning Little Vixen

10: La Forza del Destino

16: Stiffelio

17: Fedora

20: Fidelio

23: Kát’a Kabanová

25: Martha

27: L’Arlesiana, Ruslan and Lyudmila, The Bohemian Girl

December

1: Billy Budd

2: Samson et Dalila, La Favourite

4: Die Tote Stadt

6: La Damnation de Faust

8: Luisa Miller

9: Salome

10: La Fanciulla del West

14: Il Trittico (Il Tabarro, Suor Angelica, Gianni Schicchi), Wozzeck

18: Iolanta

19: Pique Dame, The Ghosts of Versailles

23: Hänsel und Gretel

24: Aida, Amahl and the Night Visitors

26: Norma, Alceste, Anna Bolena

30: The Merry Widow, Maria Stuarda, The Love for Three Oranges

i do think it’s a really fun feature that operas have birthdays. i know that everything can have a birthday if you know how to look at things but i love that every march 6 i see people saying happy birthday la traviata!! and every october 29 i see jokes about how of course don giovanni the opera is a scorpio (although i think don giovanni the character should have been born in may). there’s something so kind about it

[princesssarisa]

What is Scheherazade like?

Well… I mean her hair (👩), her eyes (👀), her body (🚶‍♀️) and some colors of her skin

Well, I tend to imagine her as beautiful, though of course it's not important that she be beautiful, her intelligence and knowledge of stories are what matters.

I picture her of medium height and slender, with light brown skin, deep brown eyes, and long, luxuriant black hair.

[princesssarisa]

Guess what? I'm doing a rewatch of Faerie Tale Theatre. Every day or so I've been watching a new episode.

Some of them I haven't seen since I was in elementary school, and I've been enjoying them very much. So far I've gone from The Frog Prince through The Princess and the Pea and the next episode I'll be watching is Pinocchio.

I have two comments about aspects of certain episodes that are bugging me, though.

Is it just me, or is Little Red Riding Hood slightly unclear about its message in the end? Of course it has the standard message in which Mary (Red Riding Hood) learns to be less naïve and not to talk to strangers or stray from the path anymore. So in other words, she should have listened to her parents, right? Then why is her father portrayed as such an overprotective jerk? At the beginning of the episode, she has no friends, never goes out except to visit her granny, and is treated like a child at home instead of the young woman she is. (The fact that Mary Steenburgen was 30 makes it all seem even more ridiculous, though I assume the character is supposed to be about 15 or 16.) Then he blocks her budding romance with Christopher because he thinks Christopher isn't good enough for her. You'd expect this to lead to an ending where her father admits he's been overprotective, that by keeping her so sheltered and lonely he caused her to fall for the Wolf's sweet talk, and that it's time to let her grow up. Maybe all these realizations are supposed to be implicit, since he does reconcile with Christopher after the latter rescues Mary and Granny (albeit in a non-apology, "pretending there was never any conflict" sort of way, for comic effect) and lets Mary be with him after all. But the narrator only talks about Mary learning to be wiser and more cautious in the end, as if she realizes her father was right all along. Is it just me, or should there have been more of a compromise between Mary and her father, where they both admitted they were wrong and he agreed to let her be more free while she agreed to be more cautious? Again, maybe this is implicit for most viewers, but too subtle on the father's side for my autistic brain. Does anyone else think this episode's ending could have been better written?

In The Princess and the Pea, is it just me, or does it feel like a scene is missing from Prince Richard and Princess Alecia's romance arc? In their second scene together, they have a big argument when Alecia accuses Richard of only looking for shallow qualities in his bride-search. But then in the next scene they share, Alecia is playfully directing Richard and the Fool in a fencing duel, and all three of them are chatting like friends, as if the argument never happened. Was there a scene cut for time where she and Richard made up? The review of this episode from the Up On The Shelf blog praises it as an excellent romantic comedy, and especially praises the romance arc for feeling so "real." I would agree, except I don't understand why they go from fighting to friendship with no transition. Again, maybe this is my autism brain again – I expect people to follow certain "rules" of conflict resolution, and it baffles me when they either forgive each other too easily or not easily enough. But I have to fill in the blank with a missing scene to fully appreciate this love story.

I know I'm overthinking an '80s fairy tale TV series that never takes itself too seriously. Still, I wanted to express it.

[princesssarisa]

Describing Foods - A Masterlist

                As a broke university student, I love reading about food. It’s almost like eating a real meal myself <3.

I get a little angry when characters are eating a meal and I barely get to experience it with them. In that, I mean I don’t just want to know what it is, but what it’s like to eat that food—how it tastes, smells, sounds, and feels. Is a perfect croissant still a perfect croissant without the crack of the exterior, the airiness of the pastry inside, the smell of yeast?

                Probably not. When writing about a dish, the smell, texture, technique, taste, and how it looks are all important to painting the experience, so here’s some words to use when describing a meal:

Taste:

Acidic: Sharp tasting. Often used to describe tart or sour foods as well.

Aftertaste: A different taste that remains in the mouth after eating something

Bitter: Tart, sharp, and sometimes harsh flavour.

Bittersweet: Less harsh than bitterness. Tartness + sweetness.

Bland: Has no significant flavor or texture

Briny: Just means salty. Often describes pickled foods.

Citrusy: Bright flavour like… well citrus fruits—oranges, lemons, limes, etc.

Cooling: Mimics that cooling feel—like mint.

Earthy: Reminiscent of soil. Can be used to describe wines, root vegetables, and mushrooms.

Fiery: Another word for spicy.

Fresh: Light and crisp—describes produce or herbs.

Fruity: Sweet and reminiscent of fruit.

Full-bodied: Rich and ‘feels heavy’ in your mouth. Can describe wines or soups.

Herbal: Bright, fresh, sometimes earthy from the presence of herbs

Honeyed: Sweet or candied taste like honey.

Nutty: Taste similar to the flavors of nuts. Often used to describe certain cheeses.

Rich: Full, heavy flavour. Often dishes that contain cream taste rich.

Robust: Rich + Earthy. Used for lots of wines or aged liquor.

Savory: Describes meaty, earthy dishes and soups.

Sharp: Harsh, bitter, or tart taste. Used to describe acidic foods.

Smoky: Reminiscent of the smell of smoke.

Sour: Biting, tangy, tart flavor.

Spicy: Burning taste.

Sweet: Sugary.

Tangy: Tart, biting taste—feels tingly

Tart: Sharp, bitter, or sour flavour. Used to describe acidic foods.

Woody: Earthy, sometimes nutty taste. Describes some coffees or cheeses.

Yeasty: Earthy taste reminiscent of yeast. Describes beer and bread.

Zesty: Fresh, vivid, or invigorating flavour.

Sound/Texture:

Sound has a lot to do with texture, so I've combined them for this section!

Airy: Light, pillowy texture (think inside of croissant)

Brittle: Hard but easy to break

Bubbly: Usually during heating, when bubbles rise to the surface—low sound.

Buttery: Smooth, creamy texture (think certain pasta sauces)

Chewy: Food that needs to be chewed thoroughly. Can be light and bouncy (chewy bread) or heavy (steak) and sticky (candy)

Creamy: A smooth and rich texture, comes from dairy.

Crispy: Light texture with slight crunch.

Crumbly: Food with loose structure that falls apart into crumbs.

Crunchy: Firm, crisp texture with a sharp, loud noise.

Crusty (behave): Food with a hard outer layer and soft interior (many loaves and breads)

Delicate: Light and fine, feels like it can come apart easily.

Doughy: Soft and heavy, usually pale colouring.

Fizzy: Usually liquids—a hissing sound, feels like ‘static’

Flaky: Light, characterized by layers that come apart during eating.

Fluffy: light and airy.

Frothy/Foamy: Airy bubbles, usually in a drink like a latte.

Gamey: Usually refers to meats when they’re very “meaty”

Gooey: Viscous, sometimes sticky texture from moisture in a dense/solid food.

Hearty: Firm, robust texture.

Juicy: Tender and succulent texture from liquid in a solid food (steak)

Molten: Hot, gooey

Oily: Slick, heavy, lingers on the tongue.

Silky: Fine, smooth texture that feels sleek.

Smooth: Texture free of grit, lumps, or edges.

Snap: A quick, sharp, crackling sound when broken.

Squelch: A soft sucking sound when pressure is applied. Somewhat gross.

Sticky: Gluiness in the mouth.

Succulent: Tender and juicy

Tender: Soft and easy to break down

Velvety: Smooth and rich

Smell:

Acrid: Strong, bitter, unpleasant

Comforting: pleasant, probably calls back to a nice memory

Damp: Wet smelling—probably a bit earthy

Delicate: subtle, faint, not overpowering

Earthy: reminiscent of soil

Fetid: Caused by decay—unpleasant

Fishy: reminiscent of fish

Floral/flowery: Reminiscent of flowers

Fragrant: Sweet or pleasing

Fresh: Cool, crisp, refreshing—produce, probably not cooked

Funky: Something’s gone off

Heady: Strong smell, pungent, rich

Musty: Not fresh

Perfumed: Pleasant, reminiscent of something (can be perfumed with citrus, say)

Piquant: stinging, pungent—tickles the nose

Powerful: strong

Rancid: Definitely gone off, decomposing

Ripe: Strong, usually unpleasant smell

Savory: spicy, salty, no elements of sweetness

Sour: has gone off

Spicy: Sharp, tingles the nose

Tangy: Strong and bitter but in a good way

Tart: Sharp

Woody: earthy smell, reminiscent of wood

Sight:

Usually texture gives us a really good picture of what a food looks like, so here’s some non-texture sight additions:

Blistered: Bumpy exterior.

Caramelized: Usually golden brown

Cloudy: Splotched. Almost see through if not for a slight white or grey mist.

Colourful: Bright and vibrant

Glassy: Resembling glass

Glossy: Smooth, shiny

Marbled: Two colours intertwined

Opaque: Not transparent. Can’t see through.

Ripe: Colourful (can be to a fault). Nearing the end of its edible state.

Scaly: Covered in scales, fish.

Shiny: Appears wet or glossy

Sparkling: Glimmers under the light

Stuffed: An ingredient placed inside a larger part with no additional space.

Translucent: Allows light through

Vibrant: Striking, bright

Food Prep:

How the food is prepared gives it these other attributes. If your character is familiar with cooking (or is the cook themselves!) they may describe food this way.

Baked: Cooked in an oven. Results in browned or crispy outer layer.

Blackened: When food is dipped in butter and coated with spices then cooked in a hot pan—spices darken, making it appear ‘blackened’

Blanched: Food scalded in boiling water and moved to cold water so it stops cooking. Texture comes out soft.

Braised: Food that is briefly fried in fat and then stewed in a pot. Results in seared, crispy exterior with a tender interior.

Breaded: Coated with breadcrumbs/batter then baked or fried so it turns crispy

Broiled: Food cooked with intense radiant heat in an oven or on the grill. Results in a darkened appearance and crispy texture.

Caramelized: Food slow-cooked until it’s browned, nutty, and has a bit of sweetness.

Charred: Grilled, roasted, or broiled and gains a blackened exterior and smoky flavor.

Fermented: Food that’s sat with bacteria, yeast, or another microorganism and has produced acids, alcohols, or gases. Results in a biting, pungent flavor. (Kimchi is fermented)

Fried: Food cooked by submerging in hot oil. Creates crispy, crunchy texture and golden colour.

Glazed: Food with a coating brushed onto its surface. Appears glossy with a thin, flavorful, and crisp outer layer.

Infused: Food steeped in liquid with another ingredient so it carries the essence of that ingredient. Used with herbs usually.

Marinated: Usually meat soaked in liquid containing flavourful herbs, spices, vinegar, or oil.

Poached: Food cooked in near boiling water. Results in tender, moist texture.

Roasted: Food cooked with dry heat in an oven or over the fire. Results in browned exterior and crisp coating.

Sautéed: Food cooked quickly in small amount of fat.

Seared: Food cooked in small amount of fat until caramelized. Finished by roasting or grilling. Results in crisp exterior and tender interior.

Smoked: Food exposed to smoke from smoldering wood for a long time. Results in that distinctive smoky flavor.

Whipped: Food beaten to incorporate air. Light and fluffy.

What did I miss?

[princesssarisa]

I alternate between all of these, just like the book does. Or sometimes I distinguish them by their maiden names, "Catherine Earnshaw" and "Catherine Linton."

@faintingheroine

[princesssarisa]

I see that Kel is getting the most votes by far.

I almost voted for her. In some ways I do think she's the most interesting and the most admirable. But in the end I had to vote for Alanna: even though Pierce was still a bit of a "raw beginner" when she wrote Song of the Lioness, and even though I'll admit that Alanna has some faintly Mary Sueish traits compared to the later heroines, my attachment to her still stands.

I struggle slightly with Kel, for partly the same reason I struggle with the grown-up Amy March in Part II of Little Women. (A character who has nothing in common with Kel apart from immaculate self-control – but that's the very issue.) She's so different from me, I'm bad at everything she's good at, I fail when I try to be more like her, and the books seem to hold her up as a role model for being unlike me.

no "other/see results" we die like men

note that I'm not talking about the best SERIES just your favorite CHARACTER

[princesssarisa]

Yesterday, for the first time since 2019, I finally attended a community Seder at my local synagogue.

It was wonderful.

In the car on the way, my mom exclaimed “We forgot to light the menorah!” Married to a Jewish man for 40 years and she still gets Passover and Hanukkah mixed up! 😆💗

[princesssarisa]

🌹☀️

[princesssarisa]

What is Nancy (Oliver Twist) like?

Well… I mean her hair (👩), her eyes (👀), her body (🚶‍♀️) and some colors of her skin

I don't remember if there's much description in the book of what she looks like. All I know is that when introducing her, Dickens writes that she and her friend Bet were "not exactly pretty, perhaps, but they had a good deal of colour in their faces, and looked quite stout and hearty."

I don't remember if Dickens ever mentioned her hair color or not, but since several different adaptations have cast her with red hair, I tend to imagine her with red hair too.

One of these days I'll reread the book and be able to give better answers about her.

[princesssarisa]

🔥 Little Women for the unpopular opinion ask?

(I'm sending another one because I think I accidentally hijacked it last time. Sorry about that.)

I like Amy better in Part I than in Part II.

It seems more common to think she's an obnoxious brat in Part I but becomes likable in Part II. But I like her better as a flawed, funny little showoff than as an almost perfect lady who gets rewarded for being everything that people like Jo and myself fail to be.

Maybe part of the problem is her fans, who sometimes react to the hate she gets by going too far in the opposite direction. They can't ignore her flaws in Part I, but in Part II they paint her as having grown into the ultimate role model who never does anything wrong. Ignoring that she arguably does start to forget her family's values in favor of social advancement, only to get her bearings in the end.

I don't dislike grown-up Amy, but I do prefer child Amy.

[princesssarisa]

I've never seen pink currants before and now I want some.

Red currants, pink currants, white currants

[princesssarisa]

How To (Realistically) Make A Habit Of Writing

To clarify: Works with my autism. WORKS WITH MY AUTISM!!! I’ve been meeting my goals since I made them my New Year’s resolution! Anyway I’m so sick of all those ‘how to’ guides that don’t actually tell you what the process is they’re just like ‘just do it, but don’t burn yourself out, do what’s best for you!’ because you’re not telling me what I’m not supposed to be burning myself out over but okay, so I made my own. Hope this helps

1. Choose your fighter metric. What works better for you as a measurement of your progress; time spent writing or your word count? Personally I get very motivated and encouraged by seeing my word count go up and making a note of where it should be when I’m done, so I measure by that. At the same time, a lot of people are also very discouraged by their word count and it can negatively impact their motivation to write, and in that case you may be better off working from how much time you spend writing rather than where the word count is

2. Choose your starter Pokémon time frame. How often can you write before it starts to feel like a chore or a burden rather than something fun you look forward to? Many people believe that they have to write daily, but for some people this can do more harm than good. Maybe every two or three days? Weekly? Figure out what fits your schedule and go with it

3. Choose your funny third joke goal. Now that you’ve got your chosen time frame to complete your goal in, what’s a reasonable goal to aim to complete within that time frame based on the metric you chose? If your metric is your word count, how much can you reasonably and consistently write within your chosen time frame? If your metric is time spent writing, how much time can you reasonably and consistently spend writing within that time? Maybe 1000 words per week works, or maybe 10 minutes per day? The goal here is to find something that works for you and your own schedule without burning you out

4. Trial and error. Experiment with your new target and adapt it accordingly. Most people can’t consistently write 1667 words per day like you do in NaNoWriMo, so we want to avoid that and aim somewhere more reasonable. If you feel like it’s too much to do in such a short time frame, either give yourself less to do or more time to do it in. If you find yourself begrudgingly writing so often that it constantly feels more like a chore than something fun, maybe consider adapting things. And if you think that you gave yourself too much wiggle room and you could do more than this consistently, give yourself more of a challenge. Everything needs to suit you and your pace and needs

5. Run your own race. Don’t feel like you’re not accomplishing enough in comparison to others or not working fast enough to satisfy some arbitrary feeling of doubt. Everybody works at their own pace and slower work doesn’t mean worse work. You could be on one word per day and you’ll still see consistent results, which is still one word per day more than you could originally count on. All progress is progress, regardless of its speed

[princesssarisa]

It's not really a movie, but I vote for The Rugrats Passover Special.

okay jumblr. besides Prince of Egypt or The Ten Commandments (because everyone always says one of those two), what's the best passover movie?

[princesssarisa]

I like this poll. I'm sure most of us are a blend of more than one.

[princesssarisa]

(🔥 for the unpopular opinion ask)

Wuthering Heights:

I find Heathcliff's treatment of Linton more appalling than his treatment of Isabella. Other readers often seem to view his abuse of Isabella as his darkest hour and not care as much about Linton because they don't like Linton. But to me, while of course what Isabella goes through is horrible, there's something more uniquely horrible about Heathcliff abusing his own mortally ill teenage son. It doesn't matter that Linton is an unpleasant person: he's still a dying teenager and he's still Heathcliff's own child. This more than anything else is why Heathcliff "stands unredeemed" to me.