#(edit: i learned who malcolm is while making the next set)

[enbylesbianism]

ANY WAY THE WIND BLOWS: Simon Snow trilogy wrapped! (review)

Hi, there! It took me a while to finish this post, as I could talk about it for... a long time (not necessarily a good thing), but I got it! I like praise, so if anyone wants to tell me I did a good job... Also, I might edit this post later on. I don’t remember anything else I’d like to add, but I wouldn’t be surprised if I did after posting. My brain does not obey me. Anyways, off to it! By the way, I won’t give this book a real rating.

While this is a review on Any Way the Wind Blows, I intend on analysing some points of the overall series too. The book starts where Wayward Son left off, the end of the road trip, Simon and Baz having problems in their relationship, Penelope helping Shepard with his curse... and the whole situation of the NowNext vampires. Rainbow Rowell only seems to remember the first part. That leaves us with the second book of the series ignored almost completely, with the exception of Simon and Baz’s feelings as well as Shepard’s existence.

Don’t get me wrong, aspects of the book are mentioned, but never in a truly important way. Lamb, the Vampire King, is mentioned by Simon, but only focusing on his and Baz’s relationship, never about the fact that there are a bunch of vampires (supposedly ‘evil’) in the U.S. but I guess what happens in Vegas stays in Vegas, right? I could count on one hand the times the NowNext vampires were mentioned (like, literally, this isn’t an exaggeration, I looked up ‘NowNext’ on the e-book and only got five results), all of them either being one of them considering telling someone else about it, then not following through with it, or dismissing it as a concern for Lamb. Which makes the plot of Wayward Son completely useless for the trilogy. Now, that wouldn’t matter as much if everything else had been properly developed, but we definitely can’t say that.

We are introduced to a brand new, poorly developed villain, Smith-Smith Richards, whose character arc is as ridiculous as his name. He’s one of the fake Chosen Ones that started appearing after the events of Carry On (and the only one to be mentioned and/or defeated, for that matter). It becomes clear that presenting as Simon Snow-ish is part of his brand, especially when Baz describes him as looking like the Netflix adaptation version of Simon, and that he was raised and guided by his uncle, who’s just... there. I don’t think it would’ve been hard to make him manipulating Smith-Smith into believing he’s the prophetic savior of the Magickal World, which would not only make both of their characters more interesting, but it could also serve as a parallel of Simon’s relationship with the Mage. Richards also has some special powers such as increasing a mage’s magic for a limited amount of time, but taking it away afterwards, as well as making someone immune from spells. It’s worth saying those aren’t skills that are usual in the Magickal World, or else there wouldn’t be so much confusion and shock from people (specially Baz and Penny, who would definitely have heard of something like this before), but we get no explanation on why or how Richard has them.

Then, we have the Salisbury’s. We, as readers, already know Lucy and Davy are Simon’s parents, making Ruth his grandmother. It’s noticeable that Rowell builds up to that discovery, by making Simon get along with Ruth instantly, him thinking about Lucy a lot etc. It makes us excited to read the part where they actually figure it out, to know how Simon would deal with that, him dealing with the fact that he’s the Mage’s son and the fact that, technically, he killed his father. I suppose that’s the point, but actually getting to that part was incredibly underwhelming. The way they discovered about Simon—being able to lift a family sword—hadn’t been mentioned or hinted at before. One would’ve expected Simon, who’s particularly interested in swords as it’s mentioned many times throughout the series, to notice a freaking Excalibur at the Salisbury’s place before. 

And speaking of noticing things: when it’s finally revealed that Simon is Lucy’s son and the Mage’s heir, Baz pointed out the uncanny similarities between his boyfriend and the deceased Watford principal. “Those narrow eyes. That tilt of his head. I thought... I thought he’d learned it. Was imitating it.” + “Merlin, Simon, you even look like him.”  (Any Way the Wind Blows, chapter 86) Simon was the Mage’s protégé for years and I assume the Magickal authorities knew that he was the one to inherit all of his money and personal belongings, but no one, in the whole British Magickal community, thought about them being related? I refuse to believe there were no conspiracy theorist teachers at Watford or that Mitali or even the Pitch’s alongside everyone who was against the Mage didn’t at least check to know if there was something behind those characteristics. Baz literally said (chapter 88), “I think it’s undeniable. I’d cast ‘Flesh and blood’ on them, but it would bounce right off of Snow (...)”, so there is a spell for that. Plus, we didn’t even have one whole chapter of Simon dealing with this information! The chapters (no more than five, out of ninety-one) were divided between Simon, Baz and Lady Ruth’s POVs. He’s the main character, so one would think he’d get more development.

Another point that felt rushed was the romance. While Simon and Baz’s relationship wasn’t, as it’s been a topic Rowell has explored for three books (we’re not counting Fangirl here, as their ‘participation’ on it was minor and their personalities weren’t as consistent as in the trilogy. Not that it is that consistent there), the others just felt like she wanted everyone to finish the trilogy with a pair. I’ll start with Shepard and Penny. There were fans who liked them together before Any Way the Wind Blows, but it wasn’t hinted at—it was more like a fandom thing. I personally like them as a couple, but it could have had development and, maybe, foreshadowing in Wayward Son. I mean, they did fight monsters during a huge part of a road trip together.

The next one I’ll talk about is Agatha and Niamh. I love them, don’t get me wrong. Actually, it’s precisely because I love them that I wish they’d gotten a better treatment. Niamh wasn’t introduced before Any Way the Wind Blows. I get why she wasn’t introduced in Carry On—it was interesting to see a character who wasn’t caught up in Simon and Baz’s drama during the school years—but a hint of her existence could’ve been left in Wayward Son. Agatha is an important character on it, and a mention of her father training an aspiring veterinary could’ve fit somewhere, as a hint, maybe. (Also, Lucy, the dog, being absolutely forgotten during this book when a lot of Agatha’s time is spent in a veterinary clinic...) Besides, we could get the vibes from them, but after they kissed, there was barely any content. We didn’t get them calling each other ‘girlfriend’ (or if they even like that label at this point), or the aftermath of the kiss, or a POV from Niamh. Or Niamh appearing the epilogue? If Agatha was taking care of the goats, I’m sure Niamh would have a part in that too. Still on Agatha’s character, but not on Niamh’s, it felt like Rainbow Rowell was setting up for aromantic and asexual Agatha, specially because of this quote: “It was like she'd pulled the feeling right out of my heart. I could have kissed her. (I still wish sometimes that I wanted to.) (That would feel like an answer to... the question of me. Then I could say, 'Oh, thats who I am. That's why I've been so confused.')” (Wayward Son, chapter 4).

And I was leaving the best (I need to be sure everyone knows I mean this sarcastically) of the romance topic for the end: Fiona and Nicodemus. It’s just... so forced and undeveloped. Not even because, to me, they’re both gay as hell. There was just... such a lack of development! I don’t think we had any interaction between the both of them before Any Way the Wind Blows. There was no foreshadowing or why would Fiona, a vampire hunter from a family of vampire hunters, would marry... a vampire! I’d already find it weird to see fanfiction of them as a crackship, but it’s canon?! Like, canon as in they’re going to get married and use Fiona and Natasha’s mother’s ring? Seriously, nothing will take from me that this is a lavender marriage (as I’ve already discussed with my best friend, which inspired this post of theirs.)

I’d also like to speak about a topic that’d been hinted throughout the series, especially post-Carry On, which is the criticism towards the Magickal Community in the U.K.. That criticism is very much embodied in Shepard’s character. It’s explicitly said that the British mages have some kind of supremacy towards other supernatural beings, such as vampires for example, gatekeeping literal magic. Up until relatively recently, mages with weak links with magic couldn’t attend Watford (and that’s a major plot point in the final book) and there’s a denial towards any other kind of magic except the ones that are part of their craft. Even within the Magickal community itself, there are more important families that are more likely to succeed, like Natasha receiving criticism for marrying Malcolm, as a Pitch. It felt pointless not to tackle the issues you’ve set up yourself in your own universe. Penelope has very strict morals related to magickal law and beliefs, something that she could’ve deconstructed, especially considering Shepard, her love interest, symbolises that. Another point related to that is, the trilogy is very clearly heavily inspired by Harry Potter, where many of those points are very clear (e.g. wizard supremacy in relation to other species, such as werewolves and domestic elves and the status quo that makes some traditionally magical families more influential than others, like the Malfoy’s vs. the Weasley’s), so it’s not an easily forgettable concept.

The series also had a lot of inconsistencies. The one I’ve seen talked about more often is Simon and Agatha’s... intimacy status, let’s call it that. Simon’s whole thing in the first book was that he struggled controlling his magic when experiencing intense emotions, which makes it hard to believe that he managed to have sex withount an... accident. Besides that, though, there’s this quote, “She (...) presses a kiss into my temple. No one has ever kissed me there. No one has ever kissed me anywhere but on my mouth” (Carry On, Chapter 27), but in Any Way the Wind Blows, when Simon’s about to have his wings cut, Agatha says, “It’s a strange feeling to look at someone’s chest and know it’s nothing to do with you anymore, but still to remember kissing every inch.” (Chapter 14)

So, we have established that Rainbow Rowell’s work, both character and plot driven, is flawed. “But we got the characters interacting for the closure of the series, at least!” Well... we got interactions between the canon romantic relationships, yeah. But besides that, we didn’t get much. There were no interactions between Agatha and Penny, or Shepard with Simon and Baz. Or Penny and her mother figuring stuff out. Or literally anyone with a therapist. And not gonna lie, the interaction we got between Baz and Dev was underwhelming, to say the least. Niall is nowhere to be seen, too.

Rainbow Rowell’s writing is beautiful: she writes poetic lines that make the book seem perfect at first glance, if you don’t think about it for too long. Her words are very shiny, but once you get use to that light and see what’s behind them, what’s between one shiny quote and another, it has so many flaws and plot holes that it reads like a first draft. There are many concepts in there that are genuinely good: the rest of the trilogy focused on the protagonist dealing with the trauma of being a child soldier instead of being entirely an adventure, Simon being unlabelled, a fake Chosen One that gives mages fake hope... Those are all good ideas, but so poorly explored that, despite being an entire book/trilogy, it still feels like a writing pitch or something among those lines.

I felt iffy about other things during my reading of the series, but they aren’t exactly plot points, so I’ll just list them below:

Mitali, Penny’s mom, including ‘discovering your bisexuality’ as a mid-life crisis thing 

As I’ve seen people talking about biphobia/bi erasure in the books, I’ll be including this post that features both unlabelled and bisexual individuals talking about the topic (it isn’t my place, as a lesbian, to talk about this, that’s why I decided not to do so.)

Romanticising of Baz’s suicide (a.k.a. chapter 61) in the first book. If you’re not in a good place mentally, like I was when I first read Carry On, I hope you know that a kiss or romance doesn’t help any mental illness you or others might have. Don’t let anyone use your guilt to manipulate you. Paraphrasing Alice Oseman in their graphic novel Heartstopper, love can’t cure a mental illness.

Any Way the Wind Blows was... very horny. I can’t point out how this makes the book bad exactly, but it wasn’t something I enjoyed. One of Rainbow Rowell’s strongest skills is that her quotes, when loose, are good. They tend to be poetic and just beautiful, overall. But in the... explicit scenes, these skills were barely used, and I felt like I was reading NSFW tweets off of someone’s private account on Twitter. Besides, the first two books of the series weren’t written like that, so the change was very sudden.

The older people could’ve been more explored. Penelope and Mitali’s relationship and how similar the both of them are compared to each other, Daphne and Professor Bunce’s insecurities and why they believed in Smith-Smith, Fiona, Nico, and Ebb... Also, the Mage and Lucy. We could’ve had more on them, y’know. 

The pop culture references. They made the book read even more like Twitter’s feed. Honestly, if I wanted to read prompts and nice ship content alongside memes from Twitter with some horny thoughts sprinkled all around, I would’ve opened the Twitter app. Or Tumblr, Instagram, whatever.

The POV switching felt lazy to me at times. It’s nice to know how different characters are experiencing that situation, yes, but sometimes, like during the discovery that Simon is a Salisbury, it read as if Rowell wanted to create tension, but couldn’t think of any other way to do it except the switching around.

Narrative wise, I think Simon and Baz should’ve spent more time broken up. 

[underthewingsofthblackeagle]

Foto: Panorama Helsinki / Finland - Dom und Parlamentsplatz (by tap5a)

“We only do this for Fergus!” is a short Outlander Fan Fiction story and my contribution to the Outlander Prompt Exchange (Prompt 3: Fake Relationship AU: Jamie Fraser wants to formally adopt his foster son Fergus, but his application will probably not be approved... unless he is married and/or in a committed relationship. Enter one Claire Elizabeth Beauchamp (Randall?) to this story) @outlanderpromptexchange​

Chapter 1: Life offers you many surprises

Berlin, Französische Straße Friday, 25 July 2025, 8.50 a.m.

         Five minutes earlier, Claire Elisabeth Beauchamp had entered the large, light gray house, built in the neo-Renaissance style that dominated the whole Forum Fridericianum. In the lobby, which was dominated by marble and dark wood, Claire was greeted by a receptionist. She was asked to sit down for a moment in one of the dark leather armchairs, of which four were grouped around an elegant round table. As she waited, her eyes wandered up the high walls of the entrance hall. A few steps of a staircase led out of the hall through a large glass door that ended in a round arch at the top, reminiscent of a gate entrance. Above it was a large ornament of dark stones inlaid in the light marble. The ornament showed a circle, which, as it seemed, was formed from a belt. The words "Je suis prest" could be read in the curve of the circle and in the center of the ornament was the head of a stately stag, which looked directly at the observer.

“Französische Straße Berlin” by Jörg Zägel / CC BY-SA (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0)

         Claire knew that the French motto meant "I am ready!", but just as she was wondering what the sign meant, an older lady approached her. She introduced herself as Mrs. Fitz-Gibbons. This employee, whose blue costume gave the impression of a uniform, led Claire down various small staircases and long corridors to the room where she was now sitting. Wherever they had gone in this house, it had been extremely quiet. The heavy, dark red carpets that covered all the stairs and hallways, had swallowed every sound of their footsteps. Now she sat in a room whose furnishings were characterized by dark wood and light brass and whose dimensions were more like those of a hall. But it was the antechamber of the CEO’s office of "Fraser & Son International" and behind the large double-winged door that Claire was now looking at was the study of Dr. James Alexander Malcolm MacKenzie Fraser, one of the country's leading business owners.         Until two weeks ago, Claire did not know the man's name or that of his company. She didn't care about the gossip press, which also reported on the local "high society" in Berlin. But then Geillis Duncan, her best friend, came by one evening and showed her a job ad from the "Wirtschaftswoche" newspaper. At first Claire was completely surprised. How did Geillis, who loved to read the gossip press, come to show her an ad from Germany's leading weekly magazine for managers?

         "Dave left it on the kitchen table, and since I didn't have anything else at hand, I looked into it while having breakfast. But now take a look at this job ad!"

Geillis had emphatically pointed to an ad that featured the same ornament as the one she had seen in the lobby.          Claire had started reading. A pedagogically trained caregiver was needed for an almost seven-year-old child. The woman should speak fluent German, English and French. Further foreign language skills were welcome but not required. Furthermore, an extensive general education and an impeccable curriculum vitae (i.e. no entries in the Federal Central Crime Register) were expected. Special emphasis was placed on the knowledge and practice of the literature written by Adolph Freiherr Knigge. Three times the current monthly salary was offered, 30 days paid vacation, free board and lodging, private health insurance 1st class.

         "Just imagine Claire!" the girlfriend had exclaimed enthusiastically, "If you got this job and worked there for a few years, all your problems would be solved!”

         Geillis was right, well, almost. Surely not all her problems would be solved. But the financial problems she had to deal with could at least be significantly reduced by this job. She had to acknowledge that and so Claire, Geillis and her friend Dave met that very evening to write a letter of application. Dave, who worked for a large media company at Potsdamer Platz, immediately agreed to help her with his knowledge. The next day, Claire had sent off the application. Then she had bought an updated edition of "The Knigge" and started reading it. Shortly after, Geillis came and brought her a large pile of current newspaper clippings so Claire could learn all she needed to know about the person of James Alexander Malcolm MacKenzie Fraser and the family business he ran.

         She learned a lot about the company from various business magazines, but the person of James Fraser seemed almost like a phantom. It seemed to her that this man also didn't care about the so-called "high society" and obviously he didn't deliver any headlines to the gossip press. There was neither an article about him nor a photo of him on the company's homepage. Even a Wikipedia article with his name only gave the basic data (birthday, place of birth, family, studies) and otherwise dealt more with the globally active company. "Fraser & Son International" was one of the few family-owned companies that to this day had no shareholders and, having invested in a wide range of economic sectors, not only survived the financial crisis of 2008 well, but had even emerged from it stronger. In this Wikipedia article, however, there was a photo by James Fraser. It showed him with a group of business leaders at a national conference. However, this picture was over eight years old and also very pixelated. At some point everything turned in Claire's head and she hoped that she had not learned all this information for nothing. If she would at least be invited for a job interview.          Ten days later, she hadn't dared to hope that she would ever hear of Fraser & Son International, and to her surprise, her smartphone rang just before the lunch break began. A Dr. Ned Gowan called on behalf of the company, explained that he was the lawyer for "Fraser & Son International" and asked if she could come for an interview at the company's headquarters two days later at 9:00 am. She told him that she had to ask her department head to give her time off first and would call back. As the summer vacation period was over, it was no problem to get a day off and so she called Dr Gowan fifteen minutes later and agreed to meet him (and Dr. Fraser!) two days later. Claire had to be extremely restrained not to cheer out loud. This would have immediately drawn the attention of her colleagues in the department, and she definitely did not want to tell them about it. During lunch break, she left the clinic and sat down on a bench in a nearby park. From there she called Geillis and told her the good news. Right after the end of her shift, the friends met in the parking lot of the clinic to go into town together and pick out a suitable "outfit" for Claire's job interview. Geillis, who had worked as a freelance fashion consultant for many years before she met "the rich Dave", dragged her friend directly to the fashion department of the KaDeWe. There, after a while, they found a muted dark green business costume that emphasized Claire's figure but still looked respectable.

“Kaufhaus des Westens (KaDeWe) - Foto by Avi1111 dr. avishai teicher / CC BY-SA (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/4.0)

         "That's perfect," exclaimed Geillis as Claire stepped out of the dressing room.          "Yes, perfectly too expensive for me. Have you seen the price?"          "Don't worry about that," Geillis replied. Then she whispered:          "I'll pay for it. If the job doesn't work out, we'll just give it back afterwards. And if you get the job and want to keep it, you'll give me the money back when you get your first salary.”

         They bought the costume and also a matching blouse and shoes. Claire was not allowed to think about the amount of money they had spent within a few hours or she would get sick.          But that was all forgotten at that moment. Now it was time to concentrate and make a good impression.          Mrs. Fitz-Gibbons had led her into this room and instructed her to use one of the twelve large brown leather armchairs. With the words          "You will be called in when it is your turn,"          she had said goodbye.          Claire had taken a seat and scanned the room as inconspicuously as possible. Seven other women sat in leather armchairs of the same type, which were set up on three side walls of the room, each separated by a small table. On the tables were glasses and bottles of mineral water, but none of the other women had made use of them. Claire had not intended to drink anything either. She was far too excited to drink, and she was afraid that she might have to go to the bathroom in the middle of her upcoming job interview. Slowly, her gaze wandered across the light-colored carpet to that large, two-winged mahogany wooden door. On each of the wings was a coat of arms, divided into four sections. On the upper left and the lower right quarter were three white flowers on a blue background. The upper right and the lower left quarter each showed three red, pointed crowns on a white background. Behind this door, Claire assumed, must be the director's room. What would she expect there? She did not know. Why had she only gotten involved in this thing that Geilis Duncan had suggested to her? Out of desperation? She wasn't sure. Only one thing was sure: she had never thought that she would have to have another job interview at the age of almost 30. But that was her life. Much of what had happened in her life had not been planned, nor had she ever expected her life to be like that.          Claire Elisabeth Beauchamp, almost divorced Randall, had lost her parents in a car accident when she was five years old. For the next fifteen years she was raised in the loving care of her uncle 'Lamb'. Dr. Quentin Lambert Beauchamp, an archaeologist and Egyptologist whose research focus was on the Old Kingdom of Egypt and who was highly revered by his students, came to Berlin in 2015, where he taught at Humboldt University in the last years before his retirement. There Claire had also met her future husband, Dr. Frank Randall. He had been assigned to her uncle as a research assistant. Randall had courted her like no man before and they had already married in May 2016. The first four years of their marriage had gone in a way that Claire would still describe as happy today. Although, she was no longer quite so sure. What did happiness actually mean? Was there a definition for this term? And even if there was a definition for the term "happiness", was it really valid for all people? In any case, the first four years of her marriage had not been very negative. Together they had made regular trips to Paris, Madrid, Prague, Budapest, Dubrovnik, Palermo, Venice, Turin, Marseille, Amsterdam, Florence, Milan, Barcelona and Bruges.

“Palermo/Sizilien” by  nataliaaggiato 

         Claire enjoyed getting to know these cities and experiencing their cultural particularities. When Lambert Beauchamp died unexpectedly in February 2019 as a result of a stroke, Frank had been kind and, in her opinion, very sensitive to her needs. But in the spring of 2020, a strange development had set in with him. At first Claire had blamed it on the effects of the corona pandemic. After the start of the lockdown, Frank was mainly at home, giving lectures via Zoom and otherwise writing a new book on the history of the Scottish Jacobite uprising in 1745. Claire, on the other hand, was working as a nurse in the children's clinic of Berlin's Charité hospital, as she had been before the crisis. Frank had insisted that Claire should give up her job. The possibility that she could become infected with the virus seemed too high to him. But Claire could not bring it over her heart to leave her fellow nurses alone, especially in such a severe time, and thanks to the strictly observed precautions she got through this difficult time without any problems. While she could be happy about the successes in her profession, the problems in her marriage with Frank seemed to become bigger and bigger. At some point, she felt that Frank was becoming more and more monosyllabic and that they were drifting apart rapidly. But evem then she thought this was a temporary phase that would end after the pandemic at the latest. At least she hoped so. When a vaccine against the virus was finally found in July 2021 and became available in December 2021, Claire breathed a sigh of relief. She and Frank would get vaccinated and then they could travel again. This would change Frank's mind and make her marriage blossom again. But it all turned out differently. Once they were vaccinated, Frank suddenly didn't feel like traveling anymore. Again and again he put off his work. Regularly he worked until late at night at the university and sometimes he spent whole nights there. It was always about important analyses, which he published in specialist publications and for which there were tight deadlines. Even on evenings when Claire was off, he was rarely at home, and whenever she tried to initiate a little marital tenderness, he was too tired for that. In the spring of 2022, they had slept together for the last time. A few months later, Frank had stopped kissing her goodbye, as he usually did when he left the house.          What happened then had the potential to throw her completely off track. By the fall of 2022, a hunch that Claire had suppressed again and again had been confirmed. Frank had a mistress. When she returned from her work at the children's hospital one evening in October, she saw Frank saying goodbye to a slender blonde at the door of their shared house, kissing her intensely. She stood there frozen. Everything inside her urged her to turn around and run away. But then the anger that built up within her gained the upper hand. Like a burning ray that shot out of her stomach through her whole body, he took a breath. She ran to the front door, unlocked it and found Frank standing at the sink in the kitchen, where he was just rinsing out two wine glasses. He turned to her in surprise, but before he could say a word, Claire's purse hit him in the left half of his face with full force. Frank had lost his balance and had fallen over. His glasses had come off his head and had broken when he hit the kitchen floor. Claire no longer knew what insults she had used to call him. Frank had picked himself up and collected the parts of his glasses. He had not even set out to explain the situation or apologize.Claire would not have listened to him either. She had turned on her foot and had run into the shared bedroom. When she arrived there, she had taken Frank's bed linen, run back downstairs with it and threw it all into his study. Then she ran back into the bedroom again and locked herself inside. She did not know how long she had cried angrily. But before she had fallen asleep, she had made a plan. The next morning she went on the morning shift. During a break she called a lawyer and that same afternoon she went to see her to discuss the formalities of a divorce.

“Brille” by  jottbe

         Frank had had the injuries Claire had inflicted on him treated, but had not reported them to the police. It was only later that he let it show that he had orchestrated the whole situation. He had simply been too cowardly to have a conversation with her about a divorce, as two adults normally do. He probably wanted to make her feel guilty, too. Claire was convinced of that, at least. Frank had always been against her going back to work. When she accepted the job at the children's hospital a year after their wedding, he had expressed himself very negatively about it. What kind of impression would it leave on his colleagues if the wife of a prospective professor went to work? And in the last year of their marriage he had not missed any opportunity to tell her how much he felt neglected.            It took three months before Claire was able to move into a small room in one of the Charité nurses' homes. During these three months she did everything she could to avoid Frank as much as possible. Anything she couldn't take with her to the nurses' home, she stored in her friend Geillis Duncan's basement. Claire hoped that the divorce would be finalized in October 2023 after the obligatory year of separation and that she could finally start a new life. But this time, too, everything turned out differently than she had hoped.          It was a rainy autumn day in September 2023 and it was to be the last day in the life of Dr. Frank Randall. On a country road near Lübeck, where he had attended a conference for historians, Frank's car skidded for some unknown reason. The car broke through the barrier and then came to a halt in a field. There it was discovered the next morning by a farmer. When the police arrived at the scene of the accident, Dr. Frank Randall was strapped in the seat belt and sat in the driver's seat as if nothing had happened. He was uninjured and even still wearing his hat. But Frank Randall was dead. An autopsy performed later revealed that Frank had had a heart attack that caused him to lose control of the car, causing it to veer off the road. It was, as the police later said, very lucky that no other car had been hit. Claire was shaken.

“Lübeck”  by scholty1970 

         But an even greater shock struck her on the day of the reading of the will. On that day, the notary told her that she would not inherit any money, only debts from Frank. Her still-husband had bought a condominium for his mistress for 250,000 euros, which he had signed over to her. For this gift Frank had gone into debt and Claire, who was still married to him by law, inherited his debts. It was one big nightmare. Although Claire had also inherited the rights to Frank's books, these reference books sold only in very manageable numbers and brought in little money. With her salary as a pediatric nurse, it would take her decades to pay off Frank's debts. Meanwhile, Sandy Travers, this  bleached ...., was sitting in her apartment, probably enjoying herself with her next lover. Once again the anger about Frank rose in Claire's heart, but before she could think about him any further, a familiar voice tore her from these thoughts. 

[aion-rsa]

Marvel’s WandaVision Episode 8: MCU Easter Eggs and Reference Guide

https://ift.tt/eA8V8J

This article contains WandaVision episode 8 spoilers and potential spoilers for the wider MCU.

“You didn’t think you were the only magical girl in town, did you?” 

Agatha Harkness makes good on that line from last week’s episode in WandaVision episode 8, which functions as a trip through Wanda Maximoff’s entire MCU history. Not only does it reveal previously hidden (and crucially necessary) depths to her character and her relationship with Vision, but it successfully adds new elements to her established origin story. These new wrinkles pull from Wanda’s entire Marvel history, and have massive implications for magic users and even mutants in the MCU going forward.

Here’s what we found…

Sitcom Influences

Among the bootleg DVDs Wanda’s father is selling we can see Bewitched, Malcolm in the Middle, I Love Lucy, Who’s the Boss?, I Dream of Jeannie, and The Addams Family, all of which have been major touchstones for WandaVision throughout its run. But Wanda’s favorite? That would be The Dick Van Dyke Show.

The Dick Van Dyke Show episode that the Maximoffs watch is season 2 episode 21 “It May Look Like A Walnut”, or as Wanda’s dad calls it “the walnut episode!” This installment finds Rob Petrie (Van Dyke) staying up late to watch a spooky sci-fi movie on TV, while his wife Laura (Mary Tyler Moore) tries to ignore it because it freaks her out. In the movie, aliens from the planet Twilo come to Earth in disguise to slow down humanity’s development by feeding us walnuts that contain the chemical element “absorbitron.” The walnuts take away our creativity and our thumbs – the two things that get us into outer space to challenge their Twiloian supremacy. The next day, walnuts seem to be the only food that Rob can find. He comes to believe that Laura is either playing a trick on him, or that the Twiloites have really invaded.

Why would WandaVision go out of its way to mention this episode in particular? Well, Wanda can certainly empathize with a protagonist who comes to believe his world is fabricated. And Marvel Phase 4 does seem destined to spend quite a bit more time in space.

The scene of Malcolm in the Middle that Vision watches but doesn’t quite understand has Hal build a deck, only for it to collapse on him. In the third WandaVision episode intro, Vision builds a swingset, only for it to suddenly collapse in front of him.

Wanda’s father sold DVDs as a trade and even had a Malcolm in the Middle box set in there. That’s pretty damn impressive, since he was killed by that bomb in 1999 and the show didn’t start airing until early 2000. That’s some Spaceballs VHS technology right there!

While at the HYDRA facility, Wanda watches The Brady Bunch. The episode appears to be season 1’s “Kitty Karry-All Is Missing.” When Cindy Brady’s beloved Kitty Karry-All goes missing, she thinks her brother Bobby stole her. The Bradys have a trial and everything! But it turns out the Bradys’ dog Tiger actually took Kitty Karry-All. Perhaps that’s why Agatha needed Sparky out of the way – dogs are unpredictable.

Wanda’s assurance that “He’s not really injured. It’s not that kind of show” is as much a commentary on superhero storytelling in both comics and in movies as it is about sitcoms.

Agatha Harkness

Kicking things off with an Agatha Harkness origin story is an inspired move…

Placing Agatha’s origin in witch-trial era Salem in 1693 ends up being a little piece of misdirection. She’s not on trial for being a witch, but rather by her own coven for seeking too much power. 

We get a sense of Agatha’s family here, with Agatha’s mother leading the coven against her while Agatha is still just a young witch. This doesn’t match her comics origin, where she was already centuries old by the time the Salem Witch Trials rolled around – she is old enough to remember Atlantis being above water. In the comics, she was a leader of the Salem community when the trials began. 

Agatha’s mother’s name is Evanora Harkness. She doesn’t appear to have a counterpart in the comics.

The Latin chant that the witches are repeating appears to be “mors monstru naturale” which would translate to “natural death is a monster,” which…given Agatha’s seemingly immortal nature, tracks pretty well.

The magical “crown” of energy that appears on Agatha’s mother’s head very faintly resembles the headgear that Wanda wears in the comics as the Scarlet Witch. Granted, it’s blue here.

Agatha’s use of “purple energy” may be the most damning sign of her intentions yet. In comics, purple is often coded as the color of villains.

We also learn the origin of the brooch Agatha has been wearing all through this series, with Agatha having taken it off her mother’s corpse. 

In the final scene with Agatha and the twins, she floats above them and holds them at will like marionettes. This is probably a reference to Master Pandemonium, whose reveal made the children look like hand puppets…except they were his actual hands.

Because comics!

Let’s dig into some of the spells Agatha says…is one of them “crystallum possession”. I also definitely heard an Imperio something in there, which calls to mind the Imperius curse from TERF High Harry Potter. The Imperius curse allowed the witch or wizard to control the victim’s body like a puppet.

The Scarlet Witch

Hoo-boy, we get a LOT of Wanda’s comics lore introduced in this episode…

This episode makes it pretty clear that Wanda was born with her abilities and that Strucker’s experiments merely amplified them. Should we officially welcome mutants to the MCU? If her powers were latent, then perhaps so were Pietro’s. The fact that Strucker’s experiments killed all the subjects except for Wanda and Pietro could be seen as further evidence of their mutant heritage.

We get some very different explanations of Wanda’s magical powers than we’ve had in the past, all via Agatha, and all of them referencing various ways Wanda’s powers have been explained in the comics in the past.

Why didn’t that Stark Industries bomb explode and kill Wanda and Pietro? She may have unknowingly cast a “probability hex” on it. For many years Wanda’s “magical” powers were explained as a mutant ability to alter the probability of outcomes, no matter how unlikely.

Later, it was revealed that she was a master of “chaos magic,” another term introduced here. Furthermore, now it seems that being able to wield chaos magic gives Wanda a specific magical title, that of “Scarlet Witch.” We…do not have to tell you where that comes from.

The vision (sorry) that the Mind Stone gives Wanda would appear to be one of her future, fully Scarlet Witch-ified self. This particular costume, which evokes a long jacket and crown, is very similar to the one she’s worn in the most recent Marvel Comics.

When Agatha finally discovers that Wanda is the Scarlet Witch, she says that the Scarlet Witch was supposed to be “a myth.” Big Buffy the Vampire Slayer vibes in this exchange! Buffy often faced off against foes who once thought she was just a fairytale created to spook demons and nothing more.

Agatha’s “That accent really comes and goes, doesn’t it?” is a terrific joke at the MCU’s expense. As well as her “so many costumes and hairstyles” also feels like a nod to Wanda’s changing looks in the comics just as much as it is about the chameleon-like nature of the WandaVision universe.

Vision

The scene of Wanda coming across the disassembled remnants of Vision’s body in the SWORD lab is taken from West Coast Avengers #43 into #44. Instead of dying heroically, Vision was taken out of commission by the world’s governments for trying to take over all of the world’s computers. He was reduced to nothing but metal and circuitry in order for writer John Byrne to drive home Vision’s lack of human biology. 

That disturbing scene of Vision being “dissected” with his body stretched out across multiple tables is a direct nod to a panel from those comics.

It also reminds us a little of how Thanos had Nebula pulled apart in Avengers: Endgame. At least Vision is offline!

Vision was then resurrected in the white form that we see here in the mid-credits scene, and brought back without his emotions or any connection to his past life as Wanda’s husband or Billy and Tommy’s father. This was one of the catalysts for Byrne sending Wanda into her Dark Scarlet Witch phase that abruptly ended when Byrne stormed off of West Coast Avengers for the cardinal sin of “being edited.” For more on this, type “Why did John Byrne” into Google and let autocomplete take you on a fun ride.

We’ll have more on White Vision in just a moment.

The Stark Bomb

The toaster commercial from the first episode was always supposed to be a reference to the Stark Industries bomb that tore apart the Maximoff household. That commercial also had the blinking red light of the toaster show up despite everything else being in black and white. We now see that the bomb itself had a very similar blinking red light and sound.

The popular running theory was that the commercials tracked to the different stones, and while that may still be applicable, do they also/instead track to Wanda’s memories or key parts of her life? 

We saw the toaster match up with the blinking light on the bomb.

We know the watch had the Hydra face on it. Could this match if future Wanda floating in through the stone was actually a paradox and not just a vision?

The paper towel commercial mentioned Lagos too prominently to not pair with that moment of trauma.

Does the fruit snack commercial match up with her conversation with Vision in the Avengers compound?

The anti-depressant commercial does track fairly well with Wanda’s visit to SWORD.

It feels like the only one that doesn’t have an obvious pair is the tesseract bubble bath. Give us a shout in the comments if you can figure out what that matches to.

Westview

When Wanda drives through Westview for the first time, she passes by the normal versions of Herb (John Collins), Mrs. Hart (Sharon Davis), and Phil (Harold Proctor). Notably, Harold is putting up an ad for piano lessons when in the second episode, playing the piano was his talent. It’s also when Wanda magically turned his grandmother’s piano into an illusion.

As Wanda transforms Westview, we see a billboard for “Super” paper towels become “Lagos” brand paper towels (ala the commercial from earlier this season), which “makes cleanup a snap!”

When the Coronet theater marquee transforms, it’s showing two Walt Disney Productions films of the appropriate WandaVision episode 1 era, Kidnapped and Big Red. But before that it’s showing Tannhauser Gate. Roy Batty, call your agent, please.

Fake Pietro

It’s revealed that “Pietro Maximoff” was indeed a complete fake. A “Fietro” as Agatha calls him. He became her “eyes and ears” and she refers to his manifestation as “a crystalline possession.” We sense there will be more revealed about this in the finale, as Evan Peters has been M.I.A. since his appearance in last week’s post-credits scene.

The Post-Credits Scene and White Vision

In West Coast Avengers #45, Vision’s personality was wiped completely, so by the time he was reassembled, he appeared as “White Vision”. He completely lacked emotion and didn’t even understand why Wanda was hugging him upon entering the room. This became the status quo version of Vision for a while until his old personality, look, and feelings for Wanda were eventually brought back. But hey, this version got to be a playable character in the 1991 arcade hit Captain America and the Avengers!

cnx.cmd.push(function() { cnx({ playerId: "106e33c0-3911-473c-b599-b1426db57530", }).render("0270c398a82f44f49c23c16122516796"); });

What are the chances that White Vision will have James Spader’s voice?

We wrote more about that post-credits scene here.

Spot anything we missed? Let us know in the comments!

The post Marvel’s WandaVision Episode 8: MCU Easter Eggs and Reference Guide appeared first on Den of Geek.

from Den of Geek https://ift.tt/2Pb5kUp

[chaicoqui]

Favorite lyrics - thank u, next edition.

Ariana Grande latest album thank u, next released on February 8th, 2019.

imagine - 

Kiss me and take off your clothes

Imagine a world like that Imagine a world like that We go like up 'til I'm 'sleep on your chest Love how my face fits so good in your neck 

needy -

(the whole song tbh)

If you take too long to hit me back I can't promise you how I’ll react 

Lately I've been on a roller coaster Tryna get a hold of my emotions

And I'ma scream and shout for what I love Passionate but I don't give no fucks I admit that I'm a lil' messed up But I can hide it when I'm all dressed up I'm obsessive and I love too hard Good at overthinking with my heart How you even think it got this far? This far

And I can be needy, way too damn needy I can be needy, tell me how good it feels to be needed I can be needy, so hard to please me I know it feels so good to be needed

Sorry if I'm up and down a lot (Yeah) Sorry that I think I'm not enough And sorry if I say sorry way too much You can go ahead and call me selfish (Selfish) But after all this damage I can't help it (Help it)

I know it feels so good to be needed 

NASA -

I'd rather be alone tonight You can say "I love you" through the phone tonight

And when I miss you, it'll change the way I kiss you Baby, you know time apart is beneficial It's like I'm the universe and you'll be N-A-S-A

Give you the whole world, I'ma need space

Bottom line Usually I would love it if you stay the night I just think I'm on another page tonight It ain't nothing wrong with saying I need me time 

bloodline - 

Don't want you in my bloodline, yuh Just wanna have a good time, yuh

Not tryna make you all mine, yuh

fake smile -

Another night, another party, sayin' hi to everybody I’m sorry, it's time to leave, I gotta leave now 

I can't fake another smile I can't fake like I'm alright Ooh, ah (Ooh, ah) And I won't say I'm feeling fine After what I been through, I can’t lie Ooh, ah (Ooh, ah)

Fuck a fake smile, smile Fuck a fake smile, fake smile

If I'm hurt, I ain't gon' lie about it Arms crossed with the attitude, lips pouted If I'm mad, I ain't gon' lie about it Neck roll with the attitude, yeah

bad idea -

(I didn’t like this song much)

make up -

I like to fuck with you just to make up with you

'Cause the way you be screamin' my name

Make me wanna make love to you

At the end of the day, boy

You know that I'm 'bout to wake up with youI love it when we make up (Yeah eh eh)

Go 'head, ruin my make up (Yeah eh eh)

ghostin -

I know you hear me when I cry I try to hold it in the night While you're sleepin' next to me But it's your arms that I need this time (This time)

You been so understanding, you been so good And I'm puttin' you through more than one ever should And I'm hating myself 'cause you don't want to Admit that it hurts you 

I know that it breaks your heart when I cry again Over him, mmh I know that it breaks your heart when I cry again 'Stead of ghostin' him 

Though I wish he were here instead

Don't want that living in your head

He just comes to visit me

When I'm dreaming every now and then (And then)

in my head -

Painted a picture, I thought I knew you well I got a habit of seeing what isn't there Caught in the moment, tangled up in your sheets When you broke my heart, I said you only wanted half of me 

My imagination's too creative They see demon, I see angel (angel) angel Without a halo, wingless angel   

Falling, falling, but I never thought you'd leave me Falling, falling, needed something to believe in, oh I thought you were the one But it was all in my head It was all in my head (Skrrt, skrrt) 

Yeah, look at you, boy, I invented you 

Wanted you to grow, but, boy, you wasn’t budding Everything you are made you everything you aren't I saw your potential without seein' credentials (-entials) Maybe that's the issue (Yeah, yeah) Said maybe that’s the issue, ah Can't hold that shit against you, ah Guess I did it to myself, yeah Thought you were somebody else, you

7 rings -

Been through some bad shit, I should be a sad bitch Who woulda thought it'd turn me to a savage? Rather be tied up with calls and not strings Write my own checks like I write what I sing, yeah (Yeah) 

You like my hair? Gee, thanks, just bought it I see it, I like it, I want it, I got it (Yeah)

Wearing a ring, but ain't gon' be no "Mrs." Bought matching diamonds for six of my bitches I'd rather spoil all my friends with my riches Think retail therapy my new addiction

Whoever said money can't solve your problems Must not have had enough money to solve 'em They say, "Which one?" I say, "Nah, I want all of 'em" Happiness is the same price as red-bottoms 

Yeah, my receipts, be lookin' like phone numbers If it ain't money, then wrong number 

I don't mean to brag, but I be like, "Put it in the bag, " yeah When you see them racks, they stacked up like my ass, yeah 

Ain't got enough money to pay me respect

Ain't no budget when I'm on the set

If I like it, then that's what I get, yeah

thank u, next -

(the whole song’s bop lbfh)

Thought I'd end up with Sean But he wasn't a match Wrote some songs about Ricky Now I listen and laugh Even almost got married And for Pete, I'm so thankful Wish I could say, "Thank you" to Malcolm 'Cause he was an angel

One taught me love One taught me patience And one taught me pain Now, I'm so amazing I've loved and I've lost But that's not what I see So, look what I got Look what you taught me And for that, I say

Thank you, next (next) Thank you, next (next) Thank you, next I'm so fuckin' grateful for my ex

Spend more time with my friends I ain't worried 'bout nothin' Plus, I met someone else We havin' better discussions I know they say I move on too fast But this one gon' last 'Cause her name is Ari And I'm so good with that (so good with that)

She taught me love (love) She taught me patience (patience) How she handles pain (pain) That shit's amazing (yeah, she's amazing) I've loved and I've lost (yeah, yeah) But that's not what I see (yeah, yeah) 'Cause look what I've found (yeah, yeah) Ain't no need for searching

One day I'll walk down the aisle Holding hands with my mama I'll be thanking my dad 'Cause she grew from the drama Only wanna do it once, real bad Gon' make that shit last God forbid something happens Least this song is a smash 

I've got so much love (love) Got so much patience (patience) I've learned from the pain (pain) I turned out amazing (turned out amazing) I've loved and I've lost (yeah, yeah) But that's not what I see (yeah, yeah) 'Cause look what I've found (yeah, yeah) Ain't no need for searching And for that, I'll say

Thank you, next (thank you, next)

break up with your girlfriend, i’m bored -

You got me some type of way (Hmm) Ain't used to feelin' this way (Mmm-mmm) I do not know what to say (Yeah, yeah) But I know I shouldn't think about it Took one fuckin' look at your face (Hmm) Now I wanna know how you taste (Mmm-mmm) Usually don't give it away (Yeah, yeah) But you know I'm out here thinkin' 'bout it Then I realized she's right there And I'm at home like, "Damn, this ain't fair"Break up with your girlfriend Yeah, yeah, 'cause I'm bored You can hit it in the mornin' (Mornin') Yeah, yeah, like it's yours I know it ain't right But I don't care (Care)

You can say I'm hatin' if you want to But I only hate on her 'cause I want you Say I'm trippin' if you feel that But you without me ain't right (Ain't right) You can call me crazy 'cause I want you And I never even never fuckin' met you Say I'm trippin' and it ain't right But you without me ain't nice (Ain't nice, yeah)

[authorofdreams]

Notebook Finds: Reactions

My daily reading has three parts. There is the Bradbury Challenge reading of one essay, one poem, and one short story every day. I read the Holy Scripture in accordance with the Church calendar. I also read what I call my professional or secular scripture. I originally did it a decade ago, reading one section of The Pragmatic Programmer every day in my effort to get the job I have now. I dropped it within a year of getting my current position. With the release of The Pragmatic Programmer 20th Anniversary Edition, I restarted daily reading of it. I also took a James Scott Bell writing book, The Art of War for Writers, and began reading a section of it each day. The second section, "The writer must understand the essentials of success for a long-term writing career, and count the cost accordingly" ends with three quotes and space to react to those quotes. It also recommends you save those reactions and revisit them a year later. Today's post contains my reactions, copied from my journal, and cleaned up a bit. Next year we'll revisit them.

I decided that I would continue to write as long as I lived, even if I never sold one thing, because that was what I wanted out of my life.George Nernau I talk to myself. I imagine an audience when I do it, as though I'm holding court. The whole process is an affectation that became a habit. While in High School I read Isaac Newton would lecture to his walls during the plague years because he had not students. In a mix of ego and loneliness I began to imitate him. Forty years later I still do this, often in the car while driving. What is my writing, but that habit in ink as opposed to air? I have not quit lecturing and telling stories to the air. I will never quite writing either.

You must want it enough. Enough to take all the rejections, enough to pay the price of disappointment and discouragement while you are learning. Like any other artist, you must learn your craft then you can add all the genius you like.Phyllis Whitney What is enough? Isn't it a measure not just of desire relative to time? Stephen King, among others, has said your first million words are learning the craft of writing. If you take Malcolm Gladwell's 10,000 hours of practice, that number will be closer to 1.5 to 2 million. If I take twenty years to write those words, did I want it enough? What if I take ten years? My target date to "retire" to a final career as an indie author is five years and five days away. To do that, I need to have learned to write and have written enough to build a fan base that will sustain me. My rough numbers now require 20 to 30 short novel-length works out there and a base of reliable fans. The number of reliable fans and how many books I can put out a year are dependent, but I'm looking to have enough fans to replace my current income on six to seven books a year. However, one of those could be secondary works such as audiobooks, boxed sets, or relaunches of earlier books. Do I have enough desire to build that foundation of craft and business knowledge in five years? Well, that's the question, isn't it?

In Boot Camp, tough sergeants deliberately try to break the morale of the inducted men. Those who break they send back to civilian life, or to some more or less ignominious chore in army life. There are two or three hundred thousand 'writers' who 'write at' writing in this country. Ninety percent of them make next to nothing. The few who do get by are those who were not "broke" in the Boot Camp of their own wills or lack of same.Jack Woodford I was a boot once, long ago. To this day I'm not sure what, if anything they broke. I know they broke me down and rebuilt me. They did it so well that I cannot remember the parts that are gone from pre-Navy me. It is easy to say that was so long ago of course I can't remember it. That would be true if it were not the man I was when I left boot camp is still a vivid memory. What will the discipline of learning the craft and business of writing break down and rebuild? Will I remember that part after? Will I fail and instead of being broken down and rebuilt just break? Read the full article

[fadedtoblue]

Recap of the Defenders panel at SDCC, pt. 2 (aka just a beat by beat recap of episode 1...)

If you missed, it you can catch part 1 here. I’m sure you can find videos of the panel out now, but if you wanted my additional commentary, there you go, haha :).

I’ve been writing bits and pieces of this since Friday night, so needless to say, I’m starting to get a little fuzzy on the order of the scenes and specifics b/c I was in such a state of shock while watching (and I don’t get the benefit of rewatching it right away 10 times in a row, lol), but I’ll try to recollect as much as possible, as best I can. I’ll also share some of my opinions and theories at the very end.

Some brief, non-spoilery thoughts: This was definitely a set up episode for everything that is to come, so as much as I know everyone wants answers to certain questions, you’re just not going to get to them right away. The show doesn’t hesitate to pick up the threads left from each individual series though, so don’t expect it to be slow at all. They also did a lovely job making each Defenders’ scenes look and feel like their own shows, while still bringing them all together into a new kind of feel and style for The Defenders. I was impressed by that. Anyway, if you have any more general questions, feel free to send me an ask or note.

And now...I shouldn’t have to say this, but just in case...HUGE SPOILERS FOR THE FIRST EPISODE OF THE DEFENDERS UNDER THE CUT! (Apologies for any mistakes, I wrote too much and just want to get it posted rather than spending even more time editing!)

Opening scene:

Very first scene opens in Phnom Penh, Cambodia. An unnamed man is being chased by a woman in black wielding double katanas and shrouded in darkness down some sort of sewer-like corridor, exchanging blows, and the man is clearly getting overwhelmed in the fight. Before she can land the killing stroke, Danny appears out of the darkness and jumps into the fight to draw the woman away. Danny is holding his own, but the woman is clearly a superior fighter, and lands a nice slice across Danny’s tattoo; in his shock, the woman gets the opening she needs and stabs the mystery man to death. Danny tries to chase down the woman, who is running away, and manages to land one Iron fist-packed punch on her, which sends her flying, but she disappears as quickly as she appeared. When Danny returns to the man, Colleen is with him, and we see that he’s clearly dying. After a bit of back and forth, the man tells them that their fight is not there, it’s in New York. Very mysterious, and Danny is extremely frustrated. This has apparently been one of their biggest leads in their search for the Hand, and just like that, he’s gone. Also, it’s pretty obvious this woman is Elektra, and the most impressive thing was how much her fighting skills had supernaturally improved. A small hint at the power of the Black Sky! (Note: there’s really no hint as to who this guy could be, and I originally assumed maybe he was affiliated with the Hand, like Bakuto’s faction or something? But the end credits mention Shaft, who was announced as a character on the show, and plays a big role in the Chaste, so that’s an interesting tie in!)

Opening credit sequence:

New song and graphic styles, I really can’t recall now, but think the instrumental had a kind of synth-y vibe. The backgrounds are basically outlined, lit up, 3-D maps of New York, but they form each of the different characters in their main color palette. It’s super cool. The names on the credits also utilize an effect on certain letters to make it look like a subway line design (i.e. Charlie Cox’s name has a C in a circle). It’s a cute touch and really drives the whole “New York is the fifth Defender!” thing home.

Okay, this is where the order of these scenes gets a little iffy in my head, not to mention we do switch between the characters pretty often this episode...I think I’m fairly clear on the details themselves though! I’ll basically try to summarize everyone’s scenes in one go and then summarize the closing act on its own!

Jessica Jones:

Jessica is (surprise, surprise!) passed out drunk in an empty bar and gets rudely awakened by the bartender, who helpfully informs her that it’s morning and she should probably get out of his bar. Next, we see Trish is running across the street to keep her car from getting towed, but the cop is an ass and refuses to unhook it. Suddenly, we see the car get pulled off by an inexplainable force! Turns out it’s Jessica, who snarkily asks the cop if he has a problem, and Trish has trouble holding back a smile. Now we see Trish and Jessica walking down the street with coffee cups and fighting over Jessica’s life state post-Kilgrave, one that involves a lot of drinking and zero working, which greatly concerns Trish. Trish lets Jessica know that she’s been getting a lot of interest in her story and wants Jessica to take some interviews, if only to make some extra money while she’s not working. Trish says something to the affect of, only you (Jessica) could take a personal triumph and turn it into despair, or something like that. Jessica tries to tell her not to worry. Trish takes a sip of her coffee and nearly spits it out -- turns out Jesica had handed her coffee to Trish and Trish finds out the coffee has whiskey. This got a pretty good laugh during the screening :). Jessica is then shown walking down the hallway to her apartment -- the window is boarded up and clearly hasn’t been fixed since JJ S1. There are two people standing outside the door as she approaches, a woman who seems well-dressed and pulled together, and her teenage daughter, who is snarky and disdainful toward Jessica. The mom heard about what Jessica did and wants her to take a case -- her husband has been missing for a week -- and Jessica flat out says no. As the woman presses her case, Jessica goes into mocking mode, and suggests that everyone thinks THEIR partner would never do anything like this, but usually they’re always cheating. The daughter lobs a few snarky comments at Jessica and the mom, and finally the two of them leave. Jessica seems to have a moment of remorse as she’s opening the door, turns around, and calls out to them. The woman turns around hopefully but Jessica only says that she hopes they can find him soon. The inside of Jessica’s apartment is still absolutely trashed from all of the Luke / Kilgrave stuff from S1 -- part of the scenes are shot through the hole in the wall, which is hilarious. She gets a phone call, and someone using a voice scrambler warns her not to take the case. Dun dun dun! We know what that means!!

Later on, you see Jessica sitting at her desk with her laptop open, using her expert Googling skills to learn more about missing mystery man. At this point, Malcolm strolls in, which pisses Jessica off -- she’s already told him to stop coming into her apartment, he says she gave him a key, she counters that he made himself his own copy of the key, he helpfully clarifies because he was helping her get her locks changed, banter banter banter. I want to know that Malcolm has beefed up a lot for this show. It was noticeable lol. He immediately notices she’s on her computer and absolutely lights up, asking whether she’s taken on a case? She insists she hasn’t taken it...yet, and he’s basically celebrating that she’s totally taken the case and runs over to hover over her shoulder while she’s researching, which pisses her off. They talk briefly about the guy who’s missing, and Jessica mentions that the only reason why she’s even doing this is because she got a call from someone using a voice scrambler who doesn’t want her to look into it, but surely they covered their tracks and won’t want to be found. At which point Malcolm posits the possibility that the guy is actually an amateur, and what if she could track the call back? So Jessica pulls a Jessica and calls the operator, pretending that she received a call from her grandfather who is missing from dementia and gets the number. They find the address the number is connected to, which Malcolm immediately recognizes as a super shady neighborhood that people generally used to get off the grid to use drugs, etc.

Jessica shows up at the building Malcolm helped her identify. Inside, it looks and sounds sketchy as hell -- flickering lights, sounds of people fighting and/or having sex, a real ball. She heads up the stairs to the specific apartment she seems to have identified as the exact location of the call. She bangs on the door, telling him (I assume she thinks it’s James -- the husband -- hiding out in there) that the landlord / someone already told her he’s inside. After getting no response, she does her patented doorknob breaking move (the scene we saw in the first trailer) and goes in. There’s a TV on, but the place is otherwise dim and abandoned. She slowly walks through, peeking into the bedroom and rounding back out to the living area. She spots some boxes, opens one up and inside is either weapons or explosives (I’m leaning toward the latter) -- the camera paused on it for a quick few seconds and I didn’t absorb the writing as thoroughly as I’d like, but it’s obviously something really bad.

Luke Cage:

We start out with the scene of him walking down the jail corridor, while the inmates cheer him on. It’s not super clear in the beginning, but we soon discover that Luke had his charges cleared, thanks to the excellent lawyering provided by one MR. FOGGY NELSON, who is clean shaven and sporting a very short haircut (gotta look the part at those big firms I guess!). Luke asks for Claire, but Foggy tells him only lawyers are allowed. Luke decides it’s time to hop on a bus and get back to New York ASAP. Before he leaves, Foggy gives him his business card and lets him know he can always reach out if he ever needs help starting over. Luke assures him he doesn’t need to start over, just need to move forward. Foggy helpfully lets him know that most people call him Foggy, to which Luke quips: “And you let them?” which earns a great laugh from the room :).

Now you see Luke on his bus ride back to NYC, and this scene is basically just the same scene in the first trailer with him looking out the window and seeing things like Pop’s barbershop as he drives by. He gets off the bus (which is plastered with a New Harlem Renaissance ad, so you can assume Mariah is still going at it) somewhere in Harlem and as the camera pans out, you see Ms. Claire Temple looking like her damn fine self, leaning against the wall, waiting for his return. They end up back at her apartment and immediately rock that cup of coffee, like wow, it was...physical hahaha. Think overturning furniture, going at it all over the place, I’ll admit to being slightly concerned for Claire b/c damn Luke is a strong guy, but she seemed like she was having a good time lol. In the trailer I thought they were leaning against a headboard - nope, it’s a table turned over on its side on the floor, haha. They have a nice chat afterwards, mostly focusing on what Luke might do now that he’s back in New York. He calls Claire out a little bit, saying that he knows she kept some things from him in the letters they exchanged while he was away. She confesses a lot of things happened and are still going on in the city, and she’s concerned about Luke trying to be a hero (cue the dialogue from trailer #1). At this point, there’s a knock on the door, and it’s...Misty! She’s bemused to see Luke at Claire’s place so quickly after being let out, and asks if he can take a walk down the street with her.

They exchange some small talk, apparently Misty has been made head of some sort of city-wide initiative, which is probably how they’ll take her out of Harlem and into some of the other neighborhoods in the Netflix Marvel world. They end up at a burnt out car that’s decorated with flowers, and Misty explains: there’s been a rash of somewhat unexplained deaths that bear striking similarities -- all young men from Harlem, who were recently employed at some sort of mystery job, moved their moms out of Harlem and into nice houses in what I presume is a more gentrified neighborhood of New York, but end up dead under mysterious circumstances. It could be drug running or it could be something more nefarious -- Misty doesn’t know. Luke wants to help, which Misty reacts to with skepticism (she makes a “Really? I’m going to send the guy who just got out of lockup?” kind of joke) but she mentions that this particular memorial is actually for the brother of Candace Miller, who died in LC S1. Apparently she had two brothers, so Misty tasks Luke to track down the last brother, who she last heard wasn’t exactly on the right side of the law, and talk some sense into him before the mother of that family loses her last child.

Luke heads over to the apartment building of the third brother, another interior with flashing lights, except this time with loud music. Luke encounters a group of guys in front of an apartment and asks them where he can find “insert brother’s name here b/c I honestly can’t remember it out” -- they’re about to snap at him for interrupting them and realize it’s Luke Cage, at which points their jaws snap shut and they direct him one floor up. Luke lets himself into the apartment, sees the brother, and walks up to an expensive looking speaker set up to turn down / off the music. The brother angrily exclaims, thinking that his friends are messing with his equipment and is surprised to see it’s Luke. Luke says he’s here to pay his respects, and the two have a conversation in which the brother pretty much stubbornly refuses to listen or provide any information on his brother who just died. Luke notices that for a kid between jobs, he seems to have some pretty nice things (the music / speaker system, spacious apartment, really nice shoe collection) and asks if he might have taken on the same job his brother had before he died. The boy is silent, Luke says something wise, and then leaves.

Matt Murdock:

His scene opens in his apartment, focused on some sort of Braille printer? Matt is practicing an argument for an upcoming case as the pages print off. Suddenly, he catches on the sound of someone getting mugged and you see him going into Daredevil mode and hearing the situation unfold -- Matt is visibly tensing and literally willing his body not to rush off. As he’s listening, he also hears the police approaching and containing the situation. He untenses his body and resumes practicing his speech. At this point, we switch immediately to the courtroom, where Matt is grilling a man on the stand. I couldn’t exactly follow what the incident was and what product the man’s company made, but whatever it was, it was responsible for injuring a young boy, putting him in a wheelchair. Matt is really in his element and manages to pin the executive on the stand into a corner and goes in for the kill. Then we are suddenly outside the courtroom, actually in the same courthouse we were in for the Castle trial, and the news media is there -- Matt won the case and the family of the boy who was injured were awarded $11 mil. The parents of the boy walk ahead to talk to the reporters, while the boy, sitting in the wheelchair, hangs back. Matt has a really lovely scene here when he steps back to talk to the boy, who is clearly having a hard time adjusting to his new circumstances, and gives him a Matt Murdock pep talk about handling adversity and very specifically, coming to terms with a life changing injury (wish I could share more of what he says, but I just can’t remember it and don’t want to butcher it!! It was good though). It does seem to get through to the kid, who then goes back to join his family during their little hallway press conference.

Matt turns around, and we see Karen, who was in the courtroom covering the case for the Bulletin. Karen congratulates Matt on winning the case and is complimentary toward him and what he did in the room. I think Matt also mentions Karen’s work as a journalist and she does her aw shucks Karen thing. She mentions that she needs a quote from him for the story she’s writing, and suggests that maybe they do it over a drink or a bite to eat, which Matt seems surprised at, but agrees to. (This suggests to me that they really haven’t spoken much, since the end of S2 reveal, though they’ve likely crossed paths politely since then.)

Matt and Karen are sitting in a diner, and while the atmosphere is a little awkward, it’s still friendly. They exchange some small talk about their jobs -- Karen asks Matt about his lawyering and I think this is where Matt reveals he’s doing pro bono work, although it’s possible he mentions it at the courthouse, and Karen talks about how she really feels like this is what she’s meant to do. She lowers her voice a bit and asks Matt whether he’s missed being Daredevil. He basically lies and says no. That he doesn’t regret it, but he doesn’t miss it either. Karen seems to be satisfied with that response. She has a whole line about how she really feels like they needed some time to figure themselves out and it sounds like she believes that both her and Matt are in better places now than they were before. She mentions she’s been covering the police beat and she really thinks the police are doing a good job handling the crime, at which Matt cracks a bit of a cynical smile, so maybe he actually did it...he was the hero this city needed and now they don’t need him anymore. But she thinks that right now the city needs more of Matt Murdock, and btw, she still needs that quote, and that’s just about how the scene ends. Very friendly.

EDIT!!! Didn’t realize a huge chunk of Matt’s section was missing from this recap. Damn it Tumblr, you’ve eaten parts of this post like 5 times already. This re-recap will be a bit of a rush job, sorry! Anyway, after the meeting with Karen, Matt goes to find Father Lanthom for confession. He says it’s been three days since his last confession, which suggests to me that he’s been going consistently, and often. He initially brings up the meeting with Karen, and talks about feeling bad about lying to her about not missing being Daredevil. In order to remain transparent, I will say he did use language to refer to Karen as someone he loves, but the impression didn’t come off as romantic, but more out of friendship / deeply caring for her. I really do believe he is sincere in wanting to become friends again. And nothing about the diner meeting or the conversation here feels like it’s moving toward anything more than trust building, which Matt already kind of fails at since he lies to her face there. Anyway, this part of the conversation didn’t last for very long since Lanthom takes the temperature on the situation and immediately gets to the heart of what’s bothering Matt, which I won’t bother recapping b/c you can see it in the scene below:

Danny Rand:

Since Danny was such a big part of the opening scene, he doesn’t get a traditional intro scene like the rest of the defenders in the first act of the episode, so after we’ve touched base with all of the Defenders, we bounce back into his story and find him flying back to New York on his jet with Colleen. It starts with him, alone in the bathroom, and this is where we get that dramatic scene of him wiping the mirror from the trailer. There’s little bit of editing trickery here, as he notices some weird blood splatters on the wall behind him, and he goes from the mirror to tearing off a piece of the wall? Or pushing aside some sort of curtain? And we segue seamlessly into Danny walking into some sort of eerie, abandoned hallway, all torn and tattered. We quickly notice the hallway floor is covered in bloody bodies, bodies of the dead K’un Lun monks. He passes through another doorway and there’s a whole group of them, standing in formation, covered in blood and staring down at him accusingly. He is clearly overwhelmed and confused, and turns around, only to see himself, dressed in robes and looking serious. He says something to real Danny (again, sorry about being spotty on the actually lines), which prompts real Danny to basically breakdown screaming. At this point we hear Colleen in the background, shaking him awake from what’s obviously a nightmare. She tries to get him to talk about the screaming, which he tries to shrug off as turbulence terrors, but she’s not buying it. They talk about the man they hunted down in Cambodia and it’s clear that he’s feeling guilty about his death, and is still feeling guilty about the not being at K’un Lun to protect his city. Colleen insists that it’s not his fault, but Danny remains unconvinced. Danny and Colleen return to the city and are taking a helicopter ride over the city. They’re holding hands. She’s marveling at the view and they’re discussing home -- New York is basically Colleen’s home but for Danny, even though he grew up here, he still doesn’t know if this is his home.

Alexandra:

Our introduction to Sigourney’s antagonist Alexandra lacks any bombast or fanfare, but you definitely feel...unsettled in a lot of her scenes. We first see her in some sort of nondescript building, and she’s waiting for an appointment, looking classy af. A person comes up and leads her to a really bare, empty room, and asks Alexandra to change into a patient’s gown. The nurse brings her out of the room and to a larger room with a CAT scan machine. The doctor greets her warmly but has bad news for her, which she seems to be expecting -- her red? white? blood cell count is precipitously low and her body’s organs are starting to shut down. She asks what the doctor is going to do about it, and he says there isn’t anything they can really do, which is an answer that clearly doesn’t satisfy her (“That’s not what I asked.”). When she asks how long she has, he guesstimates around a few months.

Edit: Embedded the released preview clip that corresponds with the below scene :)

We see Alexandra again in what I assume is Central Park (sorry guys, I don’t know NY!), sitting on a bench and feeding the pigeons. Again, she looks amazing. Madame Gao (woohoo!) comes into frame and says she thought she’d find her here, it’s always been her favorite spot. Alexandra muses about how surprised she is this place hasn’t already been razed to the ground and replaced with high rise buildings, she remembers when it used to be forest. She starts into a mini history lesson about New York City and how the Dutch bought it for 24 dollars -- then she drops a burn -- it was 24 dollars too much. She delivers it with such classy disdain, I love it. There’s also a hint of “Hey I was here when this happened” which tracks nicely with the hints Gao has given about her longevity / immortality...clearly Alexandra has quite a history herself. Anyway, they move onto discussion of more important things, like nefarious evil plans? Madame Gao updates Alexandra about some part of this plan and says in a few months they should be ready to make their move. Alexandra quickly shuts this down, which seems to take Madame Gao by surprise. Instead, Alexandra wants to make her move now, which Gao tries to talk her out of -- she doesn’t think it’s a good idea, they still need more time, etc etc -- but knowing what we know about Alexandra’s updated life expectancy, she obviously can’t afford to wait to make her move. At the very end of this scene, Alexandra quite flippantly tosses her bag of bird seed at Gao and orders her to finish feeding the birds. So there’s a really obvious and interesting power dynamic here...whoever Alexandra is, she’s quite used to calling the shots!

The last scene we have with Alexandra takes place after all of the scenes from the other characters, and on some sort of fancy rooftop -- it’s the one from the trailer, and I think it might be the same one Gao met with Fisk in S1? I’m not 100%. Gao lets her know that things have begun, which seems to please Alexandra greatly. And at this point, we start to see what exactly that plan is.

Closing scene:

It starts out with a rumble, almost like mild earthquake tremors. Matt is back at home after his confession with Lanthom, and his apartment is bathed in red. When the shaking starts, he freezes almost seems like he’s not sure what to do. The shaking intensifies, dust and debris flying off, and he seems actually scared at this point, kind of crouching over and covering his head. Jessica, in the mystery apartment she’s tracked down, is also looking around in a mixture of confusion, fear, and WTF as everything shakes around her. In the streets, you see huge tremors and rows of cars being propelled upwards with some sort of strange force before slamming back into the ground. At the memorial for Candace’s mother, you see her standing outside of the car and looking around in shock as the city shakes around her. A streetlamp breaks and starts to fall, but Luke appears and immediately bears the weight of the falling lamp and pushes it back up and away from her. Danny and Colleen have just gotten off the helicopter, unaware of what’s going on on the ground, but in just a few moments as they walk off the landing pad, the ground cracks beneath them and between them.

As everything crumbles outside, Alexandra calmly turns from the edge of the rooftop and walks over to Elektra in the black cloak, and says that iconic line, “It’s just a city. You’ll get used to watching them fall.”

And basically while the city is falling apart and all of our heroes are like WTF, the episode ends. I know, we were really disappointed lol.

Interesting things of note:

There’s a little scene transition device they employed, at least for the first episode, as you go into a scene for a specific character -- it was sort of a quick-cut style with visual snippets and ambient sounds and slightly colorized for each Defender. I haven’t watched Jessica Jones since it first aired, but it reminded me of that show. Not too surprising because the director for the first 2 episodes of Defenders is the same director who did JJ!

I wrote the heading for this section 2 days ago so while I may have had interesting thoughts then, I certainly don’t now, sorry lol!

[cupofteajones]

Fall is just around the corner…and there are exciting highly anticipated new releases that will make you excited for the cooling weather! And this month is perfect to make use of your library card (or sign up for a new one) because of National Libray Card Sign-Up Month.  From highly sought out sequel to an upcoming romance from a popular author, September will be one busy month from book lovers:

The Testaments by Margaret Atwood

Expected Publication: September 10

And so I step up, into the darkness within; or else the light.

When the van door slammed on Offred’s future at the end of The Handmaid’s Tale, readers had no way of telling what lay ahead.

With The Testaments, the wait is over.

Margaret Atwood’s sequel picks up the story 15 years after Offred stepped into the unknown, with the explosive testaments of three female narrators from Gilead.

Home Girl by Alex Wheatle

This isn’t my home. Haven’t had a proper home since . . . This is just somewhere I’ll be resting my bones for a week and maybe a bit. This time next year you’ll forget who I am. I haven’t got a diddly where I’ll be by then. But I’m used to it.

New from the UK-based best-selling black British author and winner of the Guardian Children’s Book Award, Home Girl is the story of Naomi, a teenage girl growing up fast in the foster care system. It is a wholly modern story which sheds a much-needed light on what can be an unsettling life—and the consequences that follow when children are treated like pawns on a family chessboard.

Home Girl is fast-paced and funny, tender, tragic, and full of courage—just like Naomi. It is Alex Wheatle’s most moving and personal novel to date

I’m currently reading this right now and I find it both heartbreaking and entertaining and would be engaging to any reader who is a fan of realistic fiction.

  Bringing Down the Duke by Evie Dunmore

England, 1879. Annabelle Archer, the brilliant but destitute daughter of a country vicar, has earned herself a place among the first cohort of female students at the renowned University of Oxford. In return for her scholarship, she must support the rising women’s suffrage movement. Her charge: recruit men of influence to champion their cause. Her target: Sebastian Devereux, the cold and calculating Duke of Montgomery who steers Britain’s politics at the Queen’s command. Her challenge: not to give in to the powerful attraction she can’t deny for the man who opposes everything she stands for.

Sebastian is appalled to find a suffragist squad has infiltrated his ducal home, but the real threat is his impossible feelings for green-eyed beauty Annabelle. He is looking for a wife of equal standing to secure the legacy he has worked so hard to rebuild, not an outspoken commoner who could never be his duchess. But he wouldn’t be the greatest strategist of the Kingdom if he couldn’t claim this alluring bluestocking without the promise of a ring…or could he?

Locked in a battle with rising passion and a will matching her own, Annabelle will learn just what it takes to topple a duke….(Credit: Berkely) 

Girl by Edna O’Brien

Expected UK & Irish Publication: September 5

Expected US Publication: October 15

I was a girl once, but not any more.

So begins Girl, Edna O’Brien’s harrowing portrayal of the young women abducted by Boko Haram. Set in the deep countryside of northeast Nigeria, this is a brutal story of incarceration, horror, and hunger; a hair-raising escape into the manifold terrors of the forest; and a descent into the labyrinthine bureaucracy and hostility awaiting a victim who returns home with a child blighted by enemy blood. From one of the century’s greatest living authors, Girl is an unforgettable story of one victim’s astonishing survival, and her unflinching faith in the redemption of the human heart. (Credit: Faber Faber)

  Pet by Akwaeke Emezi

Expected Publication Date: September 10

Pet is here to hunt a monster. Are you brave enough to look?

There are no more monsters anymore, or so the children in the city of Lucille are taught. With doting parents and a best friend named Redemption, Jam has grown up with this lesson all her life. But when she meets Pet, a creature made of horns and colours and claws, who emerges from one of her mother’s paintings and a drop of Jam’s blood, she must reconsider what she’s been told. Pet has come to hunt a monster, and the shadow of something grim lurks in Redemption’s house. Jam must fight not only to protect her best friend, but also to uncover the truth, and the answer to the question-How do you save the world from monsters if no one will admit they exist?

In their riveting and timely young adult debut, acclaimed novelist Akwaeke Emezi asks difficult questions about what choices a young person can make when the adults around them are in denial. (Credit: Make Me A World)

The Institute by Stephen King

Expected Publication: September 10

As psychically terrifying as Firestarter, and with the spectacular kid power of It, The Institute is Stephen King’s gut-wrenchingly dramatic story of good vs. evil in a world where the good guys don’t always win. (Credit: Scribner)

Red At The Bone by Jacqueline Woodson

Expected Publication Date: September 17

An unexpected teenage pregnancy pulls together two families from different social classes, and exposes the private hopes, disappointments, and longings that can bind or divide us from each other, from the New York Times-bestselling and National Book Award-winning author of Another Brooklyn and Brown Girl Dreaming. (Credit: Riverhead Books)

Suggested Reading by David Connis

Expected Publication Date: September 17

Clara Evans is horrified when she discovers her principal’s “prohibited media” hit list. The iconic books on the list have been pulled from the library and aren’t allowed anywhere on the school’s premises. Students caught with the contraband will be sternly punished.

Many of these stories have changed Clara’s life, so she’s not going to sit back and watch while her draconian principal abuses his power. She’s going to strike back.

So Clara starts an underground library in her locker, doing a shady trade in titles like Speak and The Chocolate War. But when one of the books she loves most is connected to a tragedy she never saw coming, Clara’s forced to face her role in it.

Will she be able to make peace with her conflicting feelings, or is fighting for this noble cause too tough for her to bear? (Credit: Katherine Tegen Books)

  The Water Dance by Ta-Nehisi Coates

Expected Publication Date: September 24

In his boldly imagined first novel, Ta-Nehisi Coates, the National Book Award–winning author of Between the World and Me, brings home the most intimate evil of enslavement: the cleaving and separation of families. (Credit: OneWorld)

Wayward Son by Rainbow Rowell

Expected Publication: September 24

With Wayward Son, Rainbow Rowell has written a book for everyone who ever wondered what happened to the Chosen One after he saved the day. And a book for everyone who was ever more curious about the second kiss than the first. It’s another helping of sour cherry scones with an absolutely decadent amount of butter.

Come on, Simon Snow. Your hero’s journey might be over – but your life has just begun. (Credit: Pan Macmillan)

Slay by Brittney Morris

Expected Publication: September 24

By day, seventeen-year-old Kiera Johnson is an honors student, a math tutor, and one of the only Black kids at Jefferson Academy. But at home, she joins hundreds of thousands of Black gamers who duel worldwide as Nubian personas in the secret multiplayer online role-playing card game, SLAY. No one knows Kiera is the game developer, not her friends, her family, not even her boyfriend, Malcolm, who believes video games are partially responsible for the “downfall of the Black man.”

But when a teen in Kansas City is murdered over a dispute in the SLAY world, news of the game reaches mainstream media, and SLAY is labeled a racist, exclusionist, violent hub for thugs and criminals. Even worse, an anonymous troll infiltrates the game, threatening to sue Kiera for “anti-white discrimination.”

Driven to save the only world in which she can be herself, Kiera must preserve her secret identity and harness what it means to be unapologetically Black in a world intimidated by Blackness. But can she protect her game without losing herself in the process? (Credit: Simon Pulse)

No Judgements by Meg Cabot

Expected Publication: September 24

When a massive hurricane severs all power and cell service to Little Bridge Island—as well as its connection to the mainland—twenty-five-year-old Bree Beckham isn’t worried . . . at first. She’s already escaped one storm—her emotionally abusive ex—so a hurricane seems like it will be a piece of cake.

But animal-loving Bree does become alarmed when she realizes how many islanders have been cut off from their beloved pets. Now it’s up to her to save as many of Little Bridge’s cats and dogs as she can . . . but to do so, she’s going to need help—help she has no choice but to accept from her boss’s sexy nephew, Drew Hartwell, the Mermaid Café’s most notorious heartbreaker.

But when Bree starts falling for Drew, just as Little Bridge’s power is restored and her penitent ex shows up, she has to ask herself if her island fling was only a result of the stormy weather, or if it could last during clear skies too. (Credit: William Morrow Paperbacks)

            Books to Read This Month: September Edition Fall is just around the corner...and there are exciting highly anticipated new releases that will make you excited for the cooling weather!

[kalena-henden]

Deadline AwardsLine Timeless Screening + Panel | April 26, 2017

Here’s a little write-up of the screening and panel. This is from memory so forgive me for any errors.

They screened the fourth episode “Party at Castle Varlar” with James Bond writer/real life spy, Ian Fleming, Nazis and, the scientist who would eventually help us get to the moon, Wernher Von Braun. I really enjoyed seeing it on the big screen. This was the episode that where I went from like to love with this show. Adventure, mystery, danger, bonding and fun mixed perfectly. I’ve seen this episode several times but it was surprising how much more detail I was able to pick up on not just visually but with the music queues as well. The audience laughed alot!

For the Q&A they started off with a few questions for the producers. Many of their answers were things they’ve said before like they are never going to do a Titanic episode and they did the Hindenburg first because they were never going to get to spend that much on one episode again. Malcolm did joke that, if they did the Titanic episode, it would only focus on one member of the band (the bass player, I think).

A few interesting things: Shawn Ryan was the one who insisted Amy Preston disappear at the end of the pilot. Through the writing processes they discovered that having the emotional impact on the characters would be more compelling than say world changing events like Fidel Castro disappearing. Also, *SPOILER ALERT* they said they are planning to do alot more of this in Season 2 (if we get one) where things in the present will be drastically altered after missions. Another storyline that Shawn would like to do is the Orphan Railroad which happened from about 1870s to 1920s where street orphans in the east coast cities were shipped across the country to new homes. His own ancestors were apart of it as orphans. Some of the orphans went on to find a better life and others not so much, including getting separated from siblings.

Kripke was asked how they keep all the information and timelines straight. He joked about having writer’s rooms conversations that made him want to kill himself. Everyone laughed. Then Shawn and the host teased him about it. He joked he constantly has Blue Oyster Cult playing in his office. I can’t remember the answer if there was one, just alot of teasing and laughter.

Onto the cast! They were all asked how it was to play their character’s arc over the season. Matt started, he talked about Wyatt’s emotional journey of learning to let go of his past which he was really getting to him towards the end of the season. The three of them (Lucy, Rufus and Wyatt) really need each other not just for their different skills but as people. That Lucy in particular has helped Wyatt move past some of the hurt and hopefully he will have moved passed it so he can move onto other things in the next season. Then Abigail said, “And he LOVES Lucy!” lol Matt emphatically responded “Well, I wasn’t gonna say it!” with a grin because it’s totally true. The host mentioned something about Lucy going bad at the end of the season which didn’t quite make sense but Abigail laughed at it and Matt slyly jested “Wyatt likes bad girls”. I don’t think it implied anything other than what we’ve seen onscreen. They just appeared to be going along with the host in the spirit of the moment. But good or bad, Wyatt loves Lucy.

Abigail talked about how Lucy went from being very reluctant about participating in this adventure at all to the end of the season where she’s determined to Save the World. Malcolm talked about going from being an agoraphobic techie who didn’t really want to participate in the outside world or forge new relationships to someone who asks out the girl, gets out and does stuff, and has become good friends with his teammates.

Next they asked what things were easier or harder to film. Abigail talked about the fight scenes where like 8 main characters need close-ups and they have to shoot for hours and hours to get it all. The easiest scenes are just the trio getting to play off each other and goof off a bit which they all agreed on. Malcolm talked about the rain in the 1980s episode. He also talked about trying to get through the really serious scene in 1x16 when he’s holding Jiya and telling her how much she means to him. Claudia would tease him between each take to try to get him to crack. Malcolm attempted to imitate her “Is that a tear? Are you crying?” with a terrible British accent which Matt and Abigail protested didn’t sound like her because Claudia is originally from Australia. But Malcolm said that’s the only accent he add in his pocket, it was the closest thing he had. lol This was payback because he did it to Claudia ALL season long. Then Matt teased Abigail for mentioning the fights cause she just sits on the side of the scene in the fight while he’s the one doing all the fighting. The host joked that she stole Matt’s answer and she joked that she was just setting it up for Matt and trying to find the antique lamp to hold during the fights. BTW the cast was really friendly during the panel with many shared asides to each other that they didn’t say into the mics. You can tell they have excellent off-screen camaraderie.

Then they asked what was their favorite episode. Obviously, hard to choose. They all love the fourth episode which was screened and the director of that episode was in the house (they did a little shout-out to him). Abigail talked again about how much she loves the costumes which led to her picking Bonnie and Clyde as her favorite episode. One, she loves the clothes of the era but also because she loves that they humanized Bonnie and Clyde, getting to learn about them as people, and she and Matt had a ton of fun goofing around. Malcolm said they are constantly doing “Schtick” (theirs is physical comedy) in every episode and kept teasing them about it during the panel. In the Bonnie and Clyde episode in particular, Abigail said during the couch scene which is the first time that Lucy and Wyatt are physical for an extended period of time that she and Matt kept trying to top themselves doing sillier and more outrageous schtick every take. Hopefully that’s on the gag reel!

Matt’s favorite episode was the Alamo because the setting and feel was so different than any of the other episodes. He mentioned how crazy it was seeing the Alamo in a Vancouver parking lot (where they filmed). Kripke joked the Vancouver parking lot is where the real Alamo was located. Malcolm’s favorite episode was the Western (aka the Lone Ranger episode) because he LOVES Westerns and used to dress up like a cowboy as a kid with a cowboy hat and galoshes (which he imagined were his cowboy boots). He loved riding the horse and he wouldn’t take the costume off. Matt jumped in to say that 3 days into filming Malcolm was trying to talk him into going “halfsies” to buy a horse farm. Then Abigail jumped in to say she’s got 27 pictures of Malcolm in that costume.

Questions from the audience were next. I’m only going to write about the ones I thought were interesting. A woman asked if maybe many of the women we thought were gone or dead might actually be alive and in Rittenhouse’s clutches: Amy Preston (Lucy’s sister), Lorena and Iris Flynn (Garcia’s wife and kid) and Jessica Logan (Wyatt’s wife), and asked if Jessica was part of Rittenhouse. First, there was major confusion with the cast and writers on who were Lorena and Iris. Kripke literally said, “Who’s Lorena?” lol And Shawn Ryan was just as confounded. The woman had to explain to them she was Flynn’s wife, that’s when they realized they had put their names on the tombstones. Kripke said that even in the script for 1x16 the character was named FLYNN’S WIFE. Until this question had been asked, they considered all those women dead but now he joked who knows if they’ll stay dead.

A kid had been raising his hand for awhile. It turned out to be Abigail’s son, Roman, who hilariously asked the producers a question (instead of his mom) about how they choose which stories to tell. Shawn Ryan answered that they always try to decide what the characters are dealing with first and then build the story and time periods around their issues.

The last question was someone asked Malcolm how they got representation so right every episode. He joked how he “nailed it” everytime before segueing into a more serious and detailed answer about inclusion. The producers added the more they brought in these sidelined historical figures the more they felt they found the heart of the show. They plan on continuing to find and tell these untold stories.

Whew. It took me longer to write this up (and edit it multiple times) than the entire screening and panel took to experience. lol Hope you enjoyed it!

tagging @onlymorelove @wedlakeserenities i don’t know if this works when it’s under the cut, so let me know.

[smartsheffield]

Notes from the Meetup #5: Networks on Networks...

On Monday the 3rd July, we once again gathered at Arup’s cafe and presentation area at the top of 3 St Paul’s Place, to meet, chat and hear about developments in the local smart city ‘scene’. Thanks everyone for coming, once again it was a sell out and the event keeps getting bigger and better thanks to you. The next event will likely be on Monday the 11th September - sign up to the mailing list and/or watch social media to find out when it’s confirmed.

Below are are the highlights and videos from our excellent speakers. And as always, the videos, presentations and other supporting documents are available in Trello, where you can also comment in detail on the topics.

Andy Curtis: Knowledge Transfer Network

Andy Curtis is Knowledge Transfer Manager for the Digital Economy at the government’s Knowledge Transfer Network. The KTN is the government agency responsible for helping to connect people together in order to create new projects, products, services and businesses. Andy’s talk covered the many ways in which funding support could available for smart city-related projects. Note that some of them are grant funding (i.e. 100%) which others are competition funding (so usually provide between 40% and 70% of the necessary funding, leaving the applicant or consortium to find the rest). Also note that it is not the case that UK projects are ineligible for European funding, or will be looked on unfavourably - UK applications are being treated as ‘business as usual’ despite Brexit.

Here are the potential funding sources Andy mentioned in his talk:

Science and Technology Facility Council - looking especially for ideas that could disrupt industry.

Engineering and Physical Science Research Council 

Grant Finder  - The KTN has a license for this, contact Andy if you’d like access!

European Horizon2020 - Generally competition funding for large-scale pan-european projects.

Innovate UK - run regular rounds of sector-specific funding, but also periodically have ‘open’ rounds for a broader range of ideas. The current open call is at this short link: http://bit.ly/OpenInno3

Major calls for potential smart city projects that are coming up from Innovate UK are:

Emerging and Enabling Technologies Round 3 (October 2017)

Energy Catalyst Round 5 (December 2017)

Infrastructure Systems Round 3 (January 2018)

Open Programme Competition (Spring 2018)

Also, keep an eye out for Innovate UK briefings - e.g. the Infrastructure Systems competition briefings are going on now. You can find webcast recordings on the Innovate website.

Andy also briefly covered International competitions as well, e.g. the UK-Malaysia Urban Innovation Challenge which closes on the 6th September.

There are also signposting services such as the European Enterprise Network and the KTN itself which also runs frequent events up and down the country where entrepreneurs and consortia can get advice and guidance.

Andy also hosts an open source list of incubators, accelerators and investors that are out there, which you can access here: http://bit.ly/ktnrefer

And finally, there’s the Future Cities Catapult, of course. The Catapults are the boundary between emerging thought and practice in industry, and they are tasked with earning their way, which means they actively bid for contracts and frequently bring in 3rd party companies to work with them to fulfil them. They are currently looking for 3rd party partners, particularly in the IoT space.

Looking ahead, there is also the UK’s Industrial Strategy, which is currently being consulted on, and as I mentioned back in February I think it was, there is a decent chance that one of the themes will be “Integrated and Sustainable Cities”, so we should keep an eye out for that.

Martin Mayfield: Urban Flows Observatory (UflO)

Martin presented the slides that we ran through without him at the last meetup, but this time we got to hear it from the horse’s mouth :)

Check out the video to understand exactly what the Project is about, who’s behind it and the technology they are using to implement it, but the important things to take away are the following:

At it’s core, the project aims to measure the energy metabolism of the city - energy flows in and out, material properties, radiation, etc.

It’s a three-year project with a capital budget only - i.e. it has money for equipment, but not for people or projects beyond the core mission. However, there are opportunities to use the infrastructure to do some other related things if partners can fund it.

They are going to install a research-grade sensor network in the city. These could act as a reference network to compare and evaluate other (cheaper) sensors - i.e. it can act as a test bed for comparative equipment studies.

On top of this they are looking to add a layer of high-quality weather stations, and would like to site these in local primary schools.

They also want to run annual open competitions over the life of the project, that will provide kit for sensor projects to the tune of £50k-£100k for good ideas and applications - things that use the observatory’s infrastructure to provide ‘multipliers’ to the project. These competitions will be run by a steering group.

There’s also a fixed camera element to the network, and energy monitoring which is probably the least worked out component at this stage.

They are looking at building sensor platforms into ground vehicles, drones and other aerial vehicles to map the built environment and material properties of the city (or the portion on the city under study at least).

And finally, there is of course a significant data storage and analytics platform which is buying built out as well, with industry partners.

The big things for the smart city community in Sheffield are the competitions, and getting involved in figuring out how the infrastructure could become sustainable beyond the lifetime of the observatory project, otherwise it will become a teaching tool for the University of Sheffield, and cease delivering value back to the city at large.

There will likely be workshops and engagements on both of these things, and no doubt updates at future SmartSheffield meetups - we’ll keep everyone posted on these.

Pennie Raven: The Heart of Sharrow Development

Pennie, along with her business partner Jonny Douglas, presented on their mission to convert the old Victorian mansion house and grounds at Mount Pleasant, which is sandwiched between one of the most affluent parts of the city, and one of the most deprived.

They are proposing to convert the property into an an integrated complex for living, learning, innovating and producing, and holding it all under a community trust with a remit to ensure the complex delivers its foundational values to the local community for a minimum of 250 years.

It’s a radical, imaginative, future-oriented and extremely smart piece of urban design, and could really be a globally significant and pioneering project right in the city of Sheffield. Pennie and Jonny are looking for technically savvy and connected people to join their board and provide advice and guidance, should they manage to gain approval to proceed later this month, and then raise the £17m necessary for the first phase of development.

Several SmartSheffield regulars have said they would be happy to join the effort, and if you are also interested, please let me know and I’ll put you in touch with them.

Meanwhile, do watch Pennie’s presentation, it’s really extremely exciting!

Malcolm Snook: Adding audio to any flat surface

Malcolm is sales manager at Intelect, who develop technology that converts flat panels (or pretty much all kinds of materials) into high-performance speakers. These systems are most often built into ceilings, but as they can essentially convert any flat surface into a speaker, there are lots of unexplored applications, and surely some in the smart city domain.

For example, one bespoke system Intelect developed was for a Formula One team that wanted its mechanics to be able to listen to music while they set up and dismantled their garages on race weekends, but didn't want the additional clutter of a portable stereo in a busy and often cramped environment. Intelect built actuators into one of the large powered flight cases the team used to transport their equipment, along with a bluetooth receiver, thus converting the case itself a giant hi fi system that required no additional logistical effort to transport and use.

The challenge that Malcolm poses is how could this technology be used to make our cities communicate with us better?

Chris Dymond: SmartSheffield News

As is customary, we finished the talks with my regular update of recent smart-city related activity. In this edition, I briefly covered the following:

Sheffield Public Wifi This procurement is still ongoing and there’s no announcement yet.

Sheffield City Region Transport Prospectus The Sheffield City Region just published this document, it follows on from the region’s Integrated Infrastructure Plan which was released earlier in the year, and lays out how they intend to work with Transport for the North, Government, national delivery agencies and local partners to deliver the transport improvements necessary to enable the region’s economic and spatial ambitions. There is some stuff in it about smart mobility.

The Things Network Sheffield I reported on the group’s second meeting which was held just before the SmartSheffield meetup proper. Full notes of the meeting are published on the Network’s community page, but the main concerns currently are around whether to wait for TTN’s own gateways to be released, or whether we should build our own using 3rd party kit sooner, and what the precise implications are of trying to connect gateways via corporate networks and what the alternatives are. Also, there is going to be a northern Things Network gathering at the Wuthering Bytes festival at Hebden Bridge on Monday the 3rd September, as well as a sensor build workshop on the Sunday. Check these things out here!

Sheffield Meta-Meetup I also mentioned that Sheffield Digital and Google were collaborating to host the city’s first meta-meetup - a meetup for tech meetup organisers. This has now taken place and was very well attended. So far we’ve identified over 60 individual events and event series and we’ll be doing more to integrate and promote them all and the communities they represent. This provides a great way of accessing technical expertise, and there are definitely opportunities for some cross-fertilisation between events.

Sheffield Communicators Network I drew attention to another network in Sheffield, which is a regular monthly meeting of people who run the city’s major social media accounts, at which they support each others’ good practice, inform each other of upcoming campaigns and events, share assets and collaborate on promoting them. It’s been running for about 6 months (participants now refer to it as “Twitter Club”!) and the organisations involved report that they have seen a significant uplift in attendance and reach. It also means that the city is now able to speak with a much more coherent voice about things and make more noise - things that we should bear in mind as and when our projects need to avail themselves!

MoveMore June was MoveMore Month again, and it looks like initiative was a roaring success - I believe MoveMore is the largest city-wide project to get citizens to be more active and healthy and it’s something we should support. There should be a lot of data available from the thousands of movement app installs the project generated! SmartSheffielders interested in this should get in contact with the Advanced Wellbeing Research Centre - let me know and I’ll make an intro!

Advanced Wellbeing Research Centre ...and speaking of which, plans for the new AWRC building out at the Olympic Legacy Park have just been submitted. And as well as being an amazing facility for sports science and ‘active lifestyle’ research, they are also looking to create a comprehensive sensor network around the park and there are definitely opportunities for smart city projects around that. Again, let me know if you’re interested and I’ll put you in touch. Very usefully, Prof Steve Haake who heads the centre runs regular informal breakfast meetings to expand their network and meet people who could become partners.

City Standards Institute: PAS 184 Smart Cities – Developing project proposals for delivering smart city solutions Finally, just a heads up that the CSI have just published a briefing document detailing at length how to go about developing proposals for smart city projects. It is well worth a read, and I wonder if we shouldn’t run a dedicated workshop to explain it all in the near future..?

As always, please let me know if you spot anything we should cover in SmartSheffield News! I know there are more things going on in this city that are useful and relevant for us to know about!

Actually, two very quick extra things to mention:

Firstly, the annual Digital Leaders awards were held a few weeks ago, and the award for overall UK Digital Leader of the Year want to Helen Milner OBE of Sheffield-based  Good Things Foundation for her, and their, excellent work in digital inclusion; added to which the UK’s Digital Charity Leader of the Year went to Sheffield Flourish for their excellent city-wide mental health platform. Massive congrats to them both, and more evidence of the range and quality of city-oriented applications of digital tech and innovation in Sheffield.

Secondly, there have been serious talks recently about bringing much of the city’s digital activity into a more formal and joined up governance arrangement, led by Mark Gannon at Sheffield City Council. There’s a lot more on this to come, but it’s worth noting that very positive developments are now afoot.

Phew, that’s it for the write up! 

The July meetup was absolutely packed with ideas and inspiration, and it’s really tremendous to see so many people at the event contributing. And really great to see a lot of new faces as well!

The next event is likely to be on Monday the 11th September (the 1st Monday clashes with the Things Network gathering at Wuthering Bytes) - info about it will go out very soon and please let me know if you would like to present something!

[dougmeet]

Tyler Mahan Coe presents Cocaine & Rhinestones”  «Addicting Country Pōdcast & Coe» Season II | |||| |||| || |||| || |||| |||||| ( ||| i have worked on this project long and hard.  I only hope that its author and subject enjoy its fervency as I now celebrate its final end || ). | | ?| by Sarah Larson, The New Yorker Sarah Larson is a staff writer at The New Yorker. Her column, Pocasting Depo appears on newyorker.com. Addicting Cocaine, Country, & Rhinestones       On one episode of “Cocaine & Rhinestones,” we learn why Loretta Lynn’s song “The Pill” was banned  in 1975.           In 1975, Loretta Lynn, by then an established country singer-songwriter for more than a decade, released her single “The Pill.”           At that point, Lynn had won hearts and raised eyebrows with songs like “Don’t Come Home A-Drinkin’ (with Lovin’ on Your Mind),” whose themes are self-evident, and “Fist City,” warning a woman to stay away from her husband.               (“You’d better move your feet / if you don’t want to eat / a meal that’s called Fist City.”)           “I was the first one to write it like the women lived it,” she has said.           “The Pill,” which she didn’t write but performed with gusto, is a wife’s celebration of freedom:               “I’m tearin’ down your brooder house, ’cause now I’ve got the pill.”           The song—like several of Lynn’s singles—was banned.           In “Blow & Sparklers,” an opinionated, feverish, in-po-tain-cast about twentieth-century American country music, written and hosted by TyManCo, we learn why, from a progressive guy with an arsenal of doggedly presented research.           The Co. Man, thirty-three, grew-up country; his father is the outlaw David Allan Coe.           In childhood, T traveled with his Coe-dad’s outlaw band; in young adulthood, he played rhythm guitar and shredded a little.           He now lives in Nashvegas.           When asked how he turned out so centered after moving all the time AND his peripatetic, outlaw upbringing among musicians, he paused and said,               “Well, I’ve done a lot of acid.”           Also, books: as a kid on the road, he’d disappear into stuff like James Clavell’s “Shōgun;” he’s still  obsessive, often his books have never been digitized and may never be published.           “Cōgun & Rōgun” references a thorough bibliography.               For “The Pill,” this includes Lynn’s memoir, “Coal Miner’s Daughter,” and the collection “Feminists Who Changed America, 1963-1975.”               (Cōgun, who is currently working on the second season of the PC, was recently invited to use the private archives in the Country Music Hall of Fame, where he wrote a digitized, secret e-mail.               “THERE are at least 500 unwritten books in that data, and probably closer to 1,000 . . . Half-or-more of those books are not even written.”           The pōd has a distinct, essayist sound, narrated entirely by PōdCōe, delivered in a tone between that of a new anchor, or TMC's mentor-brōcaster-teacher, Malcolm Gladwell,  or a prosecutor WAITING FOR A JURY TO COME BACK.           I often laugh while listening.           In the “Pill” episode, PōCō begins by talking about the “Streisand effect,” in which an attempt to stop the public from being exposed to something makes it go viral, THEN goes on to discuss the Comstock laws, on obscenity; the history of contraception in the U.S.; a bit of Lynn’s biography, and the lyrics and authorship of the song—all to set up why “The Pill” was banned.               “I’m about to prove it wasn’t a knee-jerk reaction to a country song about birth control,” he says.           He forensically plays songs by men about birth control and abortion TO WOMEN.           “Pretty gross,” he says of callous Harry Chapin lyrics.           “But it was not banned.” None of the men’s songs were. There’s a double-standard in music, he explains:           “Men have to go way over the line.   All women have to do is get near it.” He plays FURTIVE samples of banned songs by women, including Jeannie C. Riley’s hit “Harper Valley P.T.A.,” about a mother telling off a bunch of small-town hypocrites. (Mindbogglingly, Cosign gives that song a three-episode deep-dive in season UNO.)           By the end of the episode, he’s proved his point, case closed:               “Female artists have their songs banned simply for standing up to society, or for fighting back.”           A primary thrill of listening to “Coke & Stones,” for me, a classic-country fan of modest insight—I love Hank Williams Sr., Johnny Cash, Loretta Lynn, and Pat Benatar; I’ve watched a few biopics; as a kid I was fascinated by “Hee-Haw”—is the education it provides about other less familiar artists, whose music is visceral. (if you can explain that sentence, i'll blow ya - ed.)           (Plenty of music lovers know all about the Louvin Brothers and Doug and Rusty Kershaw; I do not.)           Another provides cultural context; each story reflects larger themes about the artistry and business of country music. And MC CoCo’s writing—like a good country song—is provocative.           “Those bastards deregulated radio in the Telecommunications Act of 1996;” Buck Owens’s vocal delivery is “stabbed-in-the-back-sincere;” a racist song about school desegregation “ends with a chorus of, I assume, ghost-children, singing ‘My Country ’Tis of Thee.’ ” As the acid kicks in, we both laugh at the absurdities of life.  I question my own journalism and wish I could be more like Hunter T.           In one of my favorite episodes, about Bobbie Gentry’s eternally mysterious “Ode to Billie Joe,” from 1967, Coe develops a catarrh in one eye, an inward view of his "self;" eyes stare through distance, presciently decoding a past recording session on a dark night before his birth.                “You can tell it isn’t going to be a normal song right away, from those wheezing violins'  intro.”           The arranger “was working with an unusual crew of four violins and two cellos.” One of the cellists pizzicatied his unwell beast, “while the others weave in and out, like Steve McQueen in Bullit, responsive to drama.” The denouement is unknown to the A-team; cinematic, the strings rise up, up to the bridge “with the narrator up on Choctaw Ridge to pick flowers,” and down, “when the he throws the flowers down.” I get a chill. Suddenly Tyler the Oracle's chin hits his chest --his breathing shallow. He continues weakly, "We hear them, falling eerily, and they chill us. In the past I tried resolving my internecine preoccupation with “Ode to Billie Joe,” a childhood oldies station still plays in my head, trying to discover the protagonist, Billie Joe, and the package.  What were they throwing off the Tallahatchie Bridge; searching for Gentry; watching for inchoate clues, the horrible 1976 movie mocking the song’s success. No one was satisfying my quest, until listening to “Coke & Tone,” TMC both celebrated the song’s mystery and provided to me insight into its strange power.           I ask Podcone about his style; he doesn’t sound like many other P-ghosts.           “I would describe it as performative,” he mutters, "explicitly performative!" "You're [hereby] fired."                   "I now pronounce you man and wife."                   "I order you to go!" "Go—that's an order!"                   "Yes" – answering the question. "Do you promise to do the dishes?"                   "You are under arrest" – putting  me under arrest.                   "I christen you."                   "I accept your apology."                   "I sentence you to death."                   "I divorce you, I divorce you, I divorce you" (Islamic: see: Talaq-i-Bid'ah)!                   "I do – wedding."                   "I swear to do that." "I promise to be there."                   "I apologize."                   "I dedicate this..." (...book to my wife; ...next song to the striking Stella Doro workers, etc.).                   "This meeting is now adjourned." "The court is now in session."                   "This church is hereby de-sanctified."                   "War is declared."                   "I resign" – employment, or chess.                   "You're [hereby] fired."           He was influenced by “the Radio”—dramatic radio shows from his childhood—“specifically Paul Harvey, ‘The Rest of the Story’" —which, when I heard it in the eighties, felt like it had been beamed there from the forties—“and Art Bell, the guy who does ‘Coast to Coast AM,’ which has gotten super political and weird now, but when I was a kid it was on AM radio overnight, which meant clear airwaves; you could pick it up in most of the country.”           Bell had a “weird voice,” Coe said, and listeners would call in to talk to him about normal things like about ghosts, alien abductions, and telepathy.           “We had a driver who loved listening to it,” he said. “You’d be driving through the night to the next town, through the middle of nowhere, just headlights on the road  in bitumen-molasses-darkness, and all the adults are on the radio having conversations about stuff, and they sound dead serious.”           That mood made an impact.           On “Coe & Rye,” he wants to evoke of it.           He records his vocals overnight in a basement when it’s quiet outside. “Just me alone in the dark, talking to a microphone.  I'm nobody.  My father was a rusty nail!

“Cocaine & Rhinestones,” An Addictive, Sparkling Podcast About Country Music | The New Yorker  - guest-edited by mrjyn

[milady-milord-lj]

Community Re-Watch Season 1: Advanced Criminal Law and Social Psychology

Community Re-Watch:  Season 1 Hello everyone! Once again, watching in intended order. Which means this week we've got "Advanced Criminal Law" and "Social Psychology" (yes in that order). Advanced Criminal Law

Commentary by Dan Harmon, Joel McHale, Gillian Jacobs, and Andrew Guest (co-writer with Dan)

Dan says the script for this episode was pretty much written on-set. Andrew confirms that the script went through a lot of changes. There was originally a secondary story involving Professor Duncan. According to Dan, Duncan just had a paper published called “Born to Leave,” which was about why women always leave men. Andrew clarifies that the comedy about the paper was that it was clearly Duncan publicly grinding an axe.

Dan says that a lot of people didn’t get the exchange between Jeff and Duncan where they talk “in code” using sitcom titles. Joel is kind of shocked by that statement.

Dan admits that Abed is loosely based on a friend of his (side note:  original Abed did make an appearance as one of the custodians during S5 in “Analysis of Cork-based Networking). He said Original Abed (the guy’s name is actually Abed) is incredulous. That was the basis of the Abed-Troy storyline in this episode. Joel points out that Original Abed actually read for the part of Fictional Abed.

Starburns’s first line in the entire series is said in Spanish class. It’s, “My name is Alex, dude.” According to Dan, this exchange was originally longer and descended into a huge argument between Chan and Starburns. Unfortunately, NBC hated the argument and it got cut as a result.

Gillian said during the day they were shooting in the Spanish class, Ken Jeong was doing a lot of Andrew Dice Clay impressions.

Joel actually doesn’t remember which episode he’s commenting on. He sheepishly admits that during the break when no one is talking he was quickly looking up on his phone to see which episode it was.

Dan once again repeats that this is one of the episodes where Jeff gets his one-on-one with each character in the study group. This episode is meant to be Jeff’s one-on-one with Britta. This is the episode where we discover that Britta is a character who cuts and runs “because she’s a skank.” Gillian cheerfully agrees that Britta is a skank-y, cheating, ‘ho, “which is what the people want.” Dan assures Gillian that she is selling herself short, and that he is in negotiations about that stuff with “the people.”

Dan says there were multiple re-shot scenes between Pierce and Annie at the piano while Pierce is trying to write a school song for Greendale. He mentions that some of the scenes will be included in the DVD extras. The point was to say something about Pierce (not Annie, apparently). Dan repeats that Pierce is Dan’s avatar representing him as an artist. Namely, that he’ll shut himself up in a room and procrastinate, then go around and lie about what a genius he is.

Joel notes that Alison’s neck is bright red in the scene where Chang threatens to flunk the class unless the cheater comes forward. Gillian points out that it’s because Alison just screamed. Joel asks Gillian if the same thing happens to her, and Gillian confirms that it does. She adds that she bruises very easily.

Gillian says that during the scene where the class throws balled up paper at her, some of the extras in the scene whipped the balls at her pretty hard. Dan admits that he ended up debating the scene with Joe Russo during editing. Joe wanted a beat before people starting flinging paper at her, and Dan wanted it to happen right away. Dan won.

Joel calls the scene where Jeff approaches Britta in the Cafetorium as “the battle of the awesome coats.”

Dan asks if Joel was the one who ad-libbed the line that a dirty bum is higher on the totem pole than Britta. Joel and Gillian say that the line was actually in the script.

Dan says that Jeff is based on a combination of his friends. In addition, Jeff Winger is both the voice of “the dorky writer who created him” and Joel McHale. He credits McHale with really highlighting Jeff’s “pomposity, narcissism, and shallowness.” (Umm, compliment? I guess?)

Dan says the dirty bum line to Britta was the point at which he realized that they had managed to successfully create a very flawed character as their Jeff protagonist and they had to commit to it.

Andrew says that there are a couple of different versions of the Jeff-Britta conversation that were put into the script, but that writer Neil Goldman was the one who locked it down to its current form.

Andrew also says that writer Hillary Winston came up with Britta storyline, and that she came into the writers’ room with the plot almost fully formed before they even wrote the script. Dan confirmed the storyline was Hillary’s. Although he adds that he always had the idea in his head that he wanted to do a trial storyline where the trial takes place next to a swimming pool. He notes that if the idea had come from Joe Russo, it might get shot down as being too expensive. But because Dan wanted to do it, people were willing to make it happen.

The pool-side trial was apparently a long day of filming. Gillian points out that on that day, Alison was on-set for 16 hours, and only worked for a half-hour. Turns out, Alison had a scene as a witness at the trial, and she ended up being cut from the final version of the script/episode.

Dan says that part of it was that when he went down to the set, he thought the pool-side trial scenes weren’t working. So he and Andrew basically sat on the bleachers and re-wrote the trial scenes. Then they were printing out the re-written pages to give to the actors, while they were still shooting the original script. Andrew jokes, “It’s really not the way you want to work.”

Gillian points out the guy diving into the pool in the background at the end of the first pool-trial scene made that dive 30 times.

Dan says the scenes between Annie and Pierce were originally much darker in tone. All of the scenes had to be reshot because NBC because they felt the scenes were too dark. Dan admits that NBC may have had a valid point. However, he says that the whole point of the Annie-Pierce storyline was to “find the Pierce character” that both Dan and Chevy would be happy with.

Dan goes off on a tangent and says that Chevy basically wanted to be Fletch. Dan’s argument was that Pierce wasn’t Fletch, he was meant to be a buffoon and that Chevy had been warned that Pierce was the target of jokes. But Chevy insisted that he wanted to be “Fletch-y and sexy.” So the Pierce-Annie storyline was Dan’s attempt at finding a happy medium. Pierce was written to be an angry character because he’s not getting what he wants in life.

Dan says in the original scenes between Pierce and Annie, Pierce is very abusive towards Annie throughout their storyline. In the final piano room scene between the two of them, Annie snaps and dresses down Pierce. Actual Dan quote describing the original scene where Annie finally confronts Pierce:  “You know why you have seven wives? Because everyone who gets close to you, you shit on them. Now I’m one of one of those people, and I accidentally thought you were a decent guy. Now I’m out of here too, and that’s just the way it is.” As Dan put it, Annie was supposed to be Pierce’s first real friend. Dan admits that the storyline was inspired by Malcolm in the Middle.

Back at poolside again, Gillian says she got great joy out of the seeing posters of the Human Being in his swimming form. Andrew adds that the art department did an amazing job on the set. Both Joel and Gillian pipe up and say that the set was infested by very large cockroaches.

Gillian says that it was her idea to crawl up onto the platform to give Britta’s testimony. Joel says he thought it was kind of adorable.

Dan says that he had a real problem with Gillian’s boots. Gillian adds that he seemed upset that she was wearing heels. Dan counters that he has a problem with dishonesty, and it seems to him that if someone is short they should own it. He had a hard time wrapping his head around why someone like Britta would wear high-heeled boots, because Britta was supposed to be a character that represented practicality and honesty. So, why is Britta stumbling around on stilts? Gillian interrupts and says it’s because she’s not very good at walking in heels.

Andrew points out that this is the first episode where the writers actually address Britta’s character. Gillian agrees that this is the first episode where you see Britta is flawed (Ummm, did we forget Britta admitting to being a hypocrite in “Spanish 101?”).

Dan says that this episode is one of his favorite episodes, however, it’s also an episode that had a huge number of problems during production and post-production. There was “political” pressure on him, plus a lot of second-guessing and over-correction. For example, a lot of the act breaks got shuffled around in the edit bay to improve the flow of the episode, so as a result none of the act breaks we see are the original act breaks in the script, which seems to drive him crazy. In short, filming and putting this episode was, in Dan’s word, “a mess.” Plus he was in the middle of the learning curve of learning to work with his team and the network. There was not enough confidence on his part.

Gillian says that both she and Joel got to really enjoy watching Jim Rash, John Oliver, and Ken do improve during the poolside-trial scenes. She says that it was like being at a comedy show that never ended.

Joel says the shower scene between Chang and Duncan and Jeff and Britta was shot about 20 minutes before they were about to be thrown out of the pool. Gillian says that both scenes were shot very quickly, with only two takes for each scene.

Dan calls Gillian’s acting in the scene between her and Jeff “brilliant.”Dan thinks that looking back at the Jeff-Britta scene after 25 episodes of pounding on Britta by pointing out that she’s humorless and joyless, you realize in this scene that Britta is “a crazy person.” He says that Gillian’s performance informs that realization, because it’s “so real.” Britta is the character on Gilligan’s Island who sticks out because she’s different from “all these sitcom characters.”

Andrew says that the Jeff-Britta scene was shot at the end of a 16-hour day and Joe basically had to tell Gillian, “Okay, this is your big scene!” Gillian repeats that they had to do the scene in two takes.

Dan’s still complaining about act breaks.

First appearance of Leonard (By the fabulous Richard Erdman! I recommend you see him in one of his most famous roles in Stalag 17. Great movie! Somehow it served as the inspiration of Hogan’s Heroes. If you squint, you can kind of see it.).

Everyone talks about how Dan almost drowned Richard. Gillian says it was fascinating to see two people swim out with Richard to guide him to his mark and then he’d sink about five inches down the second they let him go. Dan says “the legend” is that Richard had to do 20 takes of his “Busted!” line, but the thing is, he nailed it on his first take while Dan was in the bathroom. And then when Dan came back, he kept asking for more takes. Eventually, the first assistant director took Dan aside and said, “He’s going to drown!” Dan admits that the ended up using his first take. Gillian starts laughing that Richard is basically “eating water” during his scene.

Dan starts singing Richard’s praises and urges people to look him up on IMDb to see what he’s acted in and what he’s directed. He’s basically a museum of early television and a living legend. Gillian says that Richard was Marlon Brando’s roommate at one point when they were both starting out in Hollywood. Dan says everyone on the set should salute Richard when he comes on set. Gillian says he’s always in a good mood, and is always happy to be there.

Gillian says that she loved watching Danny shoot his scene where he’s pretending to be an alien communicating with his home world. She says that for the “alien twin,” Danny insisted that make-up draw in his eyebrows really heavy so he’d have a more alien look.

Dan says the scene between where Troy confronts Abed about trying to fool him into thinking he is an alien was re-shot as well. Originally Troy bought it, but Dan thought it was too implausible that Troy would think Abed was an alien. Andrew jokes that now the writers know Troy well enough that they’d probably go for the original storyline.

Dan says that in the first season of any freshman show, everyone involved has the correct feeling that it’s their job to save the show. This sometimes leads to the equivalent of a car crash at a four-waystop. But the thing is, everyone is right because it is everyone’s job to save the show. So everyone has to learn to work together. Eventually people learn over time. But early on “you think you’re writing the Constitution and everyone if Thomas Jefferson.”

Gillian says that Chevy loves playing the piano. Joel adds that he’s actually very good at it.

Dan clearly isn’t feeling the scenes between Annie and Pierce and calls them “watered-down.” However, he adds that writer Liz Cackowski did a good job re-writing the scenes between the two characters. Turns out that Annie’s final speech to Pierce about being a cheerleader is actually taken from a combination of Hillary’s and Liz’s real lives.

Dan says he actually loves Annie’s cheerleader story because it’s so specific of a backstory and it allowed them to learn stuff.

Andrew says adapting the Bruce Hornsby song “The Way It Is,” came about because someone in the writers’ room thought the name of the song was “That’s the Way It Goes.” And they got to talking about what if Pierce thought that was the name of the song.

Dan says they tried to get Bruce Hornsby and The Range to play the closing song of the episode, but was turned down. Dan adds that he hopes to get Bruce on the show at some point.

Gillian says that Luis Guzman posed for the Luis Guzman statue.

Dan thanks Luis. He adds that he originally asked Mark Hamill to pose for it. Although Mark said no, Dan still got an awesome letter in response to his request. Dan said it actually made him love Mark, because he he’s one of the few people who can say “no” without coming off like a dick. He said Mark came across as fairly reasonable in his rejection.

Social Psychology

Commentary by Dan Harmon, Joel McHale, Yvette Nicole Brown, and Anthony Russo. Danny Pudi watched them do commentary from outside the recording booth.

Anthony states that the episode was aired out of order. It was moved up, which resulted in a rushed post-production.

Dan says that Liz Cackowski wrote the draft. It was apparently a big milestone for Dan. He felt that this was the first script that was just “ready to go” and he felt from the start that they could actually do this story.

First appearance of Vaughn (Erik Christian Olsen). Yvette notes that he’s (as of when they were recording the commentaries) a full-time cast member of one of the NCIS shows. Yvette says he was a great guy.

Anthony says that commentaries were recorded out of order from when the episodes aired. Apparently they had just finished commenting on later episodes and this was a return to the earlier episodes for them. Antony says that part of the fun of the early episodes is that you’re getting to know the characters, and in this case, exploring the relationship between Jeff and Shirley. He adds that another part of the fun is finding characters outside your core cast. Some of those characters wound up having “lives” in the first season, despite the fact they were originally cast as a one-shot guest.

Everyone loved the character of Vaughn, and they’re kind of sorry they didn’t get to explore him more. Dan mentions about making Vaughn a musical rival to Pierce (which only sort of happened).

Yvette says the nice thing about this episode is that she got to spend time with Joel. She says that just as Shirley and Jeff were getting to know each other, she and Joel were getting to know each other at the same time.

Dan credits Liz for coming up with the idea that the basis of the friendship between Jeff and Shirley is their mutual love of gossip, specifically talking smack behind people's backs.

Dan repeats that this is part of the series where “in the first six episodes” (umm, it took longer than six episodes for Annie,just sayin’), where Jeff would interact with each member of the study group and become inextricably tangled in each character’s life. This was the Jeff-Shirley episode. The problem they were trying to overcome was how to make that happen with Jeff and Shirley. That’s why they leaned into the whole thing where Jeff says at the open of the episode that he hates walking with Shirley and making small talk with her. However, he likes the fact that Shirley is the first to really bond with Jeff.

Yvette points out that Jeff and Shirley are really toxic together, so does that mean that they shouldn’t be together in future episodes? Dan disagrees, since the whole point is for “the family” to grow together so much that, if they want, Shirley moves up from being Jeff’s “least favorite family member” to someone he likes more.

Joel points out that the name of the coffee shop is Hot and Brown. Dan says it was tough coming up with a new coffee shop name after going through 15 names of coffee shops used on other sitcoms. Yvette jokes that she thought it was in homage to her. Dan points out that it’s racist. Yvette asks how it’s racist. Dan says, “It’s not racist if you say it.”

Yvette says that John Oliver has the cutest dimples ever. Joel adds that comedy just flows out of John and Jim Rash like a broken Roman fountain. Dan says that both John and Jim are amazing in different ways. He calls Jim “a machine” who hits every mark in exactly the same way if you want him to, which makes it easy to edit his scenes. John does a different thing every time and it’s amazing every single time.

According to Dan, there were a lot of shots (that were cut) where Duncan was leering at Annie, and it just made him feel very uncomfortable. He is very protective of the idea that Annie was an innocent little girl.

Yvette says that during this episode, a writer from Entertainment Weekly was on the set.

During S1, the exterior shots were shot at LA Community College. They also did outdoor shots on the Paramount lot. The Paramount lot was dressed to mimic the exterior of LA Community College. In this episode, they were shooting on the Paramount lot.

Joel points out that during his and Yvette’s first walk-and-talk scene, they were walking across the street from the office of the President of Paramount.

First official onscreen appearance of Garrett (Erik Charles Nielsen) is in Duncan’s group of lab rats for the Duncan Principle! (Although, he does also appear in “Advanced Criminal Law,” but from an airing order perspective, this episode is his first appearance.) Dan admits that in this episode, Garrett didn’t have a name. He was just a background character in the scene. Dan says Erik is “a darling of the underground stand-up comedy scene in LA.”

Troy’s meltdown was completely improvised by Donald Glover, to the point that the script only said "Troy melts down." Everyone on the commentary track just bursts into laughter. Yvette says that Troy's meltdown just makes her happy.

Dan notes that this episode runs longer than all the other episodes in S1, because NBC let them “super-size” the episode. Anthony says that even with the super-sizing, this episode was eight minutes too long. NBC waived the length requirements on the episode because this episode got moved up in the airing order, which meant they had a very short post-production window. So NBC took pity on them. Anthony says the version on the DVD is the as-aired longer NBC version. However, on streaming sites, they use the chopped-down syndicated version that’s only 22 minutes.

Yvette is convinced that Jeff is in love with Britta.

Dan feels this episode has a weird effect. He notes that the critics had a weird reaction as well, because they commented that suddenly Jeff Winger is Jim Halpert from The Office, and it’s now a rom-com and Jeff is so devastated because some girl he likes is making out with another guy.

Dan feels that Jeff is very, very inexperienced when it comes to feeling anything genuine about women. He’s had a crass, collector mentality when it comes to women. That as soon as he gets what he wants from them (he calls it “validation”), they become disgusting to him and he moves on. However, Britta, for whatever reason is different. He’s got a big crush on Britta, he likes her, he’s attracted to her “dirtiness,” and the eclecticness of her. In short, (and this is Dan’s actual words) Jeff “believes Britta is the girl he’s supposed to be with.”

Joel asks Dan if he thinks Jeff leaning his forehead against the vending machine was over the top. Dan admits they cut it down, but that he likes the fact that privately, Jeff is bummed out that Britta is “the one that got away.”

Joel says that when he read the script he was heartbroken in a “how could she” kind of way.

Dan says that Britta reminds him of so many of his ex-girlfriends. That one of things he finds attractive is that Britta is that tough girl you can throw into a suitcase and bring with you around the world. Then she turns out to be a mattress full of bed bugs and gives you ringworm. (This is greeted by groans and admonishment from Yvette.)

Dan admits that Duncan’s breakdown is him doing a "take that" against doctors and therapists because he hates people in white coats.

Yvette said she was very nervous about making Shirley making fun of Vaughn because she’s not really a physical comedian and she had to physically make fun of him.

Erik (Vaughn) was wearing tiny fake nipples. Anthony said that they weren’t actually prosthetic nipples. It was actually a trick of the make-up because they couldn't really afford the prosthetics.

Dan really likes the scene of Jeff and Britta sitting on the couch together. Dan mentions that the focus groups had a really simplistic view of Britta and the Jeff-Britta relationship. Focus groups felt that Britta was “the normal one” in the ensemble. Also, they really weren’t on board with the will-the-won’t-they between Jeff and Britta, but they liked the sibling vibe when they hatched schemes together and hung out as friends.

(Dan is obviously unhappy with that feedback as he stumbles a little bit over his explanation over whether or not to pay attention to the feedback. On whether or not Dan really wanted to know what the focus groups said, and he admits that early on he did. He kind of closes the discussion with “to me, you could get good feedback form a fire hydrant.” Anthony adds that NBC never “misused” the focus group information. They only shared the feedback.)

In the scene where the study group reassembles in the study room and the shit hits the fan, Joel jokes about Alison’s costuming by saying that she walked onto the set directly from her audition for Dukes of Hazard II. Dan adds that it’s subtitled, The Prep-ening.

Dan says that the study room scene is the first time they had a “shit hit the fan” scenario, and he now considers it a Community staple. Dan and Yvette said they both felt bad during this scene. Dan points out that in this scene, Vaughn becomes the most likeable character. Dan says it was also part of his “beating up on Britta to make her more likeable” campaign so she'd become the group Charlie Brown. It’s also the point where you realize the Study Group is made up of bad people.

Yvette says the scene following the Britta-Vaughn break-up scene was hard to do with Joel. However, it was due to behind-the-scenes reasons. Joel was being a sarcastic ass, and Yvette thought he was being mean to her. (She stresses that at this point they didn’t know each other very well.) Joel admits that he makes jokes and is sarcastic with people he doesn’t know people all that well. Dan points out that Joel just admitted that his defense mechanism is to be an ass.

Dan comments that Joel and Yvette have good chemistry. Yvette jokes with Joel and asks when she’s going to be getting a kiss.

Dan says that the scene between Annie and Abed where she gives him the apology DVD set was longer. In the cut scene, Duncan comes back and tells Annie that she’s brilliant and wants her to come with him to help him continue his work. Annie turns him down because she decides that she’d rather watch the DVDs with Abed. Anthony says that the point of the scene was to show that Duncan realized his meltdown actually confirmed the Duncan Principle. By cutting it, the storyline didn’t get paid off. Plus, Anthony adds, it was one of the funniest scenes that John Oliver had ever done. Dan says that this was part of the learning curve of learning how long a script needed to be to essentially make a 20-minute movie. The tragedy was they had to “kill their children” early on, the children in this case being scenes and jokes.

Dan says that a lot of the cool songs in the show comes from Joe Russo’s Ipod.

The tag between Troy and Abed was shot at 4 a.m. Joel says he had to leave directly from the shoot to catch a flight to New York.

Anthony said the episode needed to be locked two days later on a Saturday at 9 p.m., so he was up for 36 hours straight in editing to make the deadline.

[allofbeercom]

‘Are You The One?’ Recap: Murder On The AYTO Express

HELLO AND WELCOME to without a doubt the most lit episode in history with the most fucking braindead bunch of degenerate fuckpoles you’ve ever seen. Seriously, the casting this season is A-1. And by A-1, I mean that half of these castmates will probably end up in jail one day.

As someone who thrives on the drama of others appreciates good reality TV, this episode brought me more joy than I could have hoped, and I actually learned a thing or two in the process. For instance, did you know that behind the creatures that live on Geles’ eyelashes, there is actually a genuinely fucking insane monster-woman?

Also, in exciting news and by request, my betchy Jewish mom has decided to return the world of and I’ll be featuring some of her commentary. This show is such a great bonding experience for us because I can consistently say “see mom, I at least I’m not throwing bananas at people on National TV” and honestly, I think that’s all a parent really wants to hear from their kid <3

AFTER THE MATCH UP CEREMONY

They got 4 beams and party like crazy, because nothing is more exciting than being drastically behind in life.

Keith celebrates by lifting weights in overalls, and watching him do so is as close as I’ll ever get to the Midwest. He’s talking to Alexis about how the best way to handle not being a perfect match is to have a threesome with whomever their perfect match actually is. Alexis is like “seems like a legit solution” and this kids, is why our country is in shambles. 

They both eventually promise not to hook up with their perfect match. Psh, sure, Jan.

Kareem and Alivia are considering pulling their heads out of their asses and accepting the fact that they are almost certainly a no-match. Alivia is like “Keith is literally what I asked for in this game” and it’s like, soooooooo, wanna tell us what you’re doing with poor man’s mobster over there?

THE CHALLENGE

Keyana apparently got way too lit while celebrating and sprained her foot. Because it’s Keyana and the only athletic thing she’s ever done in her life is run in whatever direction Michael is in, she is in crutches with a full fucking cast. *cough, cough* pussy *cough*

It’s officially the best challenge of the year: The exes are hereeeeee! And hey, there is Taylor from last season? Hun, if you wanted another 15 minutes of fame, shoot for the stars and audition for . 

Apparently she’s Joe’s ex and color me shocked. I honestly never pegged Taylor as Joe’s type (and vice-versa) but I think it’s so cute that they can cut costs and share hair products. Lord knows everyone from season five needs to save as much money as possible.

The game is speed dating like and the castmates have to hang out with their ex while other castmates come and interview them. One time my boyfriend and I saw my ex at a bagel shop and I legit hid behind a trashcan, so honestly I’m cringing forever.

Here’s a couple things about the exes (sorry, you’re not safe from this either):

UCHE’S EX: My mom and I both agree that either she met him at Church or she helped him when he had fallen and couldn’t get up. Seriously, how old is this dude?

SHAD’S EX: If Shad was as good of a boyfriend as she said he was, he should have kindly pointed her to the nearest hair salon.

CLINTON’S EX: Poor girl got the fucking FBI shakedown from Uche, but I don’t trust anyone who calls fooling around “sexual encounters.” Who let the narc on this show?

DD’S EX: Is from her junior year of high school. Damn, the desperation levels are strong with this one.

MICHAEL’S EX: Looks like she probably has the personality of cardboard. So very obviously still into Michael, which makes me think she probably has the brain cells to match her shining personality.

MALCOLM’S EX: “Well… she’s not what I expected.” – Mom. That’s putting it kindly.

MY FACE LOOKING AT MALCOLM’S EX:

ANYWAYS, Geles and Taylor seem to be hitting it off in the way only two fame-hungry, moderately hot girls can: fucking screaming at each other over a dude with a man bun and chipmunk teeth. It’s not a good look for Taylor, but as the professional drama expert here at Betches (please see my LinkedIn for more), I’m putting my money down that Geles probably came in more crooked than her left eyelash atm.

As they continue to insult each other, I realize this might be the fight I never knew I needed? TBH watching people sink to their low really has got me thriving. Either way, putting on my expert hat again, editing is a fickle bitch and I’m going to explore the ever-loving fuck out of Twitter (or employ the detectives on the AYTO subreddit) to find out EXACTLY what happened.

Oh also, I forgot to mention that Shad apparently lasts for like, three seconds in bed. Just a heads up!

Overall, Keith and Alexis win the challenge. Say what you will about these redneck trash bags, but those fuckers know how to win. Take notes, Democratic Party. Anyways, Keith picks Alivia. Alexis, in a form of petty that is honestly inspiring, picks Kareem.

MOM: Alexis and Kareem need to reroute their date to the nearest asylum. 

BACK AT THE HOUSE

Anthony decides DD might be his match and wants to get to know her better. Cute, stupid Anthony. Anyways, he sets up a drinking/20 questions game on the balcony of the boom boom room.

Malcolm, the perpetual cheater, gets super mad that they even looked in the direction of the boom boom room and is like “WE ALL KNOW WHAT HAPPENS IN THE BOOM BOOM ROOM!” Of course, in a move that MTV def made happen was exceptionally dramatic, he runs and tells Geles too.

Geles is like “DD is easy and I want to throw her down a flight of stairs.” Well that’s not cause for alarm. Maybe Kareem and Geles should give love a shot. Also, that’s pretty tough talk coming from a girl who is like 85% silicone. DD would beat some ass, so I’m pretty excited about this possibility.

What’s even worse is that this game Anthony and DD are playing is totally innocent. He even asks her if he can kiss her and she says that “she has too much respect for Malcolm to do that.”

Meanwhile, in probable-domestic-violence land, Alivia tells Keith that Kareem is like pushing her away by being the most controlling and shitty human ever. Huh, what a weird concept.

She tells Keith that she’s afraid of Kareem and Keith’s like “I’m not afraid of Kareem.” Okay, so suddenly the whole fanbase (me, the subreddit and six teenage girls in Brazil) want to fuck Keith. This episode has so many twists.

Keith and Alivia start kissing and Alivia immediately does what she ALWAYS does and runs her ass to Kareem to tell him. She’s like “I’m sorry, I wanted to be honest.” Whoever told you honesty is the best policy was seriously disturbed. Of course, Kareem feels so betrayed, which is crazy because I didn’t know psychopaths could feel any emotion.

When DD leaves the date with Anthony, Malcolm immediately calls her a “dick rider.” Which would be okay if you were starring in a superhero porno, but otherwise it’s like, the most insulting shit I have ever heard. DD rightfully flips out because that’s just like, the rules of feminism.

MOM: Well, this explains his ex. — That’s like, way harsh Tai. REAL PIC OF MY MOM AND I:

THE DATE

They go to a palm reading and tarot cards reading date. Really MTV, y’all take Kareem’s and Alexis’ crazy asses into a witch shop? This is the lamest episode of ever.

Alexis is like “I’m super into witchcraft” and I’m honestly afraid for Keith rn. She’s got little white bread voodoo dolls in her eyes.

Alivia and Keith have a pretty real chemistry so they start making out again, obviously. Nothing gets Keith’s dick harder than the fact it’s probably going to be chopped off by Alexis within the next few hours.

Kareem and Alexis, meanwhile, are bonding over their shared mental instability. Kareem decides to tell Alexis about Keith and Alivia’s kiss and they rile each other up faster than a Disney Channel movie basketball team hearing an inspiring speech in the locker room at halftime.

They are like “just because we fucked up and did the same thing doesn’t mean that anyone else can!” Republicans have the weirdest logic.

Alexis and Kareem do the mature thing and confront Keith and Alivia on their date. Alexis yells at Keith for not telling her and how they agreed not to hook up with their matches. Keith is stuck in the age-old predicament where he tries to decipher what “hooking up” means.

Alexis thinks it’s a kiss and Keith thinks it’s anal. Tale as old as time.

If you think Alexis is crazy, Kareem is like, hold my beer. He’s hitting shit and yelling at Alivia while Keith stares on, wondering how this dude escaped his padded cell. Of course, Kareem has to fucking throw a table at Alivia and now MTV brings in producers, because maybe, just they have a problem here.

BACK AT THE HOUSE

The only thing I have seen Geles do in this house is shit talk, apply makeup and pine over a very average-looking dude named Anthony. Geles is basically every sorority sister I have ever had.

Geles and Malcolm team up to belittle DD for doing nothing wrong, and DD is not having it. She and Audrey start yelling back at Malcolm/Geles and it’s a mess.

TYLER: I hate this place, but it’s great.


ME AND MY MOM: #tru

TRUTH BOOTH

DD and Anthony explain exactly what happened and Malcolm is like “everyone knows what happens in the boom boom room.” Everyone knows there is money in the banana stand.

Terrence J is like, “you know the boom boom room is like, the only room with a door, right? Maybe they just wanted to get away for a second.” Malcolm acts like someone just explained quantum physics to him.

This show should just be called “twentysomethings considering basic concepts.”

Nurys and DD, bonded over the fact that Malcolm ain’t shit, make up and become friends. There is no stronger friendship than one bonded through mutual hate. That’s like, the only friends I have.

Keith word vomits that he and Alivia kissed again and of course Alexis and Kareem flip the fuck out.

Alexis tells Keith “to go die” and is two seconds away from asking her murderer cousin for a repeat performance. Terrence J is like “damn that’s harsh”, which is a weird way of saying “YOU ARE A FUCKING CRAZY PERSON.”

Alivia calls out the hypocrisy of this whole thing and tells the house about Kareem throwing a table and everyone in the house is like “what, Kareem?! No way!”

Shad’s like “hey, if I was a girl I would not want him to be my perfect match.” As a girl I also want sex to last longer than two seconds, but sometimes dreams are meant for when we are sleeping.

Zoe is like “I thought Kareem was my match but he’s getting a little too domestic violence-y for me.” Oh, did you not tell the matchmakers you wanted that?

MY MOM: You know poor Alivia’s mother is somewhere praying on her rosary that Kareem is not her match.

Kareem stands up, starts yelling, and leaves the room. He swears that Keith and Alivia are not a match and now he hates Alivia and is going to start the smallest chapter of the He-Man-Woman-Haters Club in the boom boom room.

Of course, Keith and Alivia go to the Truth Booth. They like, want this to help them win the money, but more importantly they want this so they can tell Kareem to take his perfectly sculpted facial hair and fuck right off.

The episode is about to end, and if it ends on a cliffhanger I will throw my laptop across the room. Kareem is obviously affecting me.

Because there is no such thing as happiness on reality TV, they are a NO MATCH. Gotta say, this bummed me out.

Kareem and Alexis start laughing their asses off, while Alivia and Keith make their walk of shame towards two people who legit want to murder them.

MY MOM: Is this going to turn into a murder mystery show? I actually really like that angle. — Your move, MTV.

from All Of Beer http://allofbeer.com/are-you-the-one-recap-murder-on-the-ayto-express/

[thismountainhastigers]

Writing Assignment #3

Designer Jeans to Designer Genes

Jurassic Park (Spielberg 1993) is often lauded as one of the greatest films of the last fifty years. Culturally, it contributed to the widespread use of computer-generated special effects, spurring even more famous film series like the Star Wars prequels and, later on, Lord of the Rings. It also gifted us the succinct, no-nonsense line from Jeff Goldblum’s character, Dr. Ian Malcolm, regarding the dangers of introducing new technology without thinking about its possible consequences: “Your scientists were so preoccupied with whether they could, they didn't stop to think if they should.” Given the explosion of the field of biotechnology in the twenty years following Jurassic Park’s release, it is rather fitting that Dr. Malcolm was referring to the reckless use of genetic manipulation to create a world that, in the end, was beyond mankind’s control. However, no matter how tempting it may be to approach the topic of genetic engineering as only capable of producing real-life scenes from Jurassic Park, Brave New World, or Gattaca, technology of any kind can only help (or hurt) us as much as we let it. If we understand our limits (and set them if need be), we can determine how such genetic intervention will effect us as individuals and as a society as a whole and to what extent we should allow it.

Our main limit right now is our knowledge. We still have much to learn about all of the intricacies of our genetic code. Beyond all the happenings at the molecular level, the most important factors involved in gene editing may be linked genes, where the phenotype of one characteristic is tied to the phenotype of another. If we dive too quickly into changing genes that have unknown relationships with others, we would easily end up doing more harm than good. Even some genetic diseases (most famously sickle cell anemia and cystic fibrosis) are shown to create the phenomenon known as heterozygote advantage, where simply carrying one copy of the recessive gene for the genetic disease confers some benefits to the individual in resisting another bacterial or viral disease (in this case, malaria and possibly cholera, typhoid, and tuberculosis) (Gabriel et al. 1994). By fixing one problem at the genetic level, we could open ourselves up to unanticipated dangers.

Beyond our limits regarding our own biology, we still do not know everything about CRISPR-Cas9 (the technology that would allow us to edit specific sites in the genome), and what we do know points to the fact that it is not perfect; the process itself has its own limitations. Of the ways that a double-stranded break in the DNA can be repaired (the way that CRISPR-Cas9 removes a “faulty” sequence), the most common pathway utilized by CRISPR-Cas9 is non- homologous end-joining—which happens to be the most error-prone compared to other options, such as homology directed repair (Lieber 2008). While it can correct mutations, the process is unreliable at best when used to correct mutations in individuals compared to groups of test subjects (Le Page 2017). However, at the rate that research is currently progressing, let’s assume for a moment that we will reach the point of using CRISPR-Cas9 as a common medical technique by the end of the century, and that we will anticipate and fix all potential problems at the biological level. In essence, we will have removed all practical limits to the widespread use of genetic engineering and must turn our attention to ethical and moral self-imposed limits.

It is in medicine where we will reap the first benefits of being able to alter our genetic code, though calling CRISPR-Cas9 the “cure” for genetic diseases is slightly inaccurate, if we take the definition of “cure” to be a treatment that restores a patient to full health. Its use as something to stop the problem of a genetic disease before it truly becomes a problem more closely mirrors a vaccine—something done in advance to prevent the disease from manifesting itself in the body. And who among us would deny a child the polio or measles vaccine?* In the same way, if it was possible to prevent Huntington’s disease or some other genetic defect, how could we justify our lack of effort to alleviate suffering that, in light of new technology, is completely unnecessary?

Recently, the idea that a life characterized by suffering is not a life worth living has become more popular among debates surrounding euthanasia and abortion. In these cases, some would decide that life is no longer worth anything after being diagnosed with a terminal or otherwise painful illness (physical or, in some cases, mental) or learning that a fetus possesses some disability or disease that would make life too difficult either for the child or the family. While euthanasia and assisted suicide are less popular on a global scale, we already see women largely opting for abortion upon realizing their potential child would live with a life-altering illness. The most famous example is Iceland, where it was recently revealed that nearly 100% of women choose abortion after learning that their child has trisomy 21, which results in Down’s syndrome (Lajka 2017). Wanting to avoid suffering and struggle is not inherently a bad thing; if nothing else, wanting an easier way to do things has brought about much of technology as we know it today. People will almost always go for the option that does not add any more difficulty to their lives. If we had to choose between a society that performed selective abortion on those with less-than-ideal characteristics and one that could both genetically identify and fix the problem before it is too late, I would embrace the latter with little reservation. A technologically modified life is better than no life at all.

Currently, our society in general seems to hold to the idea that an ideal human is simply a healthy one—for now. Using CRISPR-Cas9 as a medical treatment in people seems like the obvious path to take if it could eliminate the risk of developing certain diseases from humanity’s gene pool, but what happens when our idea of the ideal human changes? How can we use it to our advantage then? When there are no more problems for medicine to fix, medicine becomes about elevating the human race beyond its current constructs. The immediate upgrades that come to mind are all physical: being stronger or faster, having better immune systems or higher pain tolerance, even something as superficial as making people more attractive. However, as our knowledge of neurobiology grows, could we theoretically design a person right down to their personality? We have some evidence that the physical brain structure influences a person’s personality (DeYoung et al. 2011), so if we found a gene that encodes a particular region of the brain that results in people who are rash and quick to anger, are we not bound to remove from society a population that could threaten social stability? Here I believe we are getting dangerously close to impeding on the rights of an individual, as we spell out their life before they take their first breath. (Likely before they move past a unicellular stage.) If we set no limits on what we can edit in a person, we may end up sacrificing free will for the sake of implementing peaceful society.

If we take CRISPR-Cas9 to its full potential, we will have eliminated all genetic diseases by removing them from the gene pool or fixing mutations when they occur. Perhaps we will even eliminate susceptibility to cancer or other age-related diseases. We might not conquer death in the sense of bringing people back to life, but we will certainly be able to put it off for a considerably longer period of time (Blagosklonny 2012). A group of such “ideal” people, not only in body but also in mind, would theoretically form a perfect society if we can remove the selfish and the rash by simply not allowing them to exist in the first place. We would be eliminating metaphorical “diseases” like violence and political corruption. However, amidst all the optimistic ideas about what we can do, we have to consider what we actually will do. Technology is not cheap, it is always first introduced among the wealthy before becoming more common in the lower levels of society (Harari 2016). That is not to say that if it cannot immediately be available to all then it should not be available to any—we do not keep people from a life-saving heart surgery if there is someone with the same problem that cannot afford it. However, if we do not take the necessary steps to prevent abuses of this technology, we could end up with society governed by a physically perfect elite, capable of designing their own lower, subservient classes (if such classes are allowed access to the technology at all). In what would be the worst abuse of power, they could, with enough time, simply generate a lower class that is content in their subjugation. In essence, the “haves” could reduce the “have-nots” to organic robots.

Beyond the potential loss of free will (I will admit that it is a bit of stretch even for a dystopian society), my biggest fear within the realm of genetic engineering applies to how we as a society view life. Does life just become something to be bought, sold, and processed when too many people get involved in the business of creating it? When we think of things being “designed,” the first thing to come to mind is often clothing: something with a particular label on it that we buy (occasionally to showcase our own wealth or status) and eventually throw out in favor of the “next big thing.” Life, more specifically that of a human individual, should not be something we ever come to see as able to be replaced at the earliest convenience or is only worth anything so long as it serves a purpose. This brings us back to the potential new direction of the field of medicine: treating the natural development of life as a problem to be fixed (such as baldness, wrinkles, and other symptoms of aging) and not something we should count ourselves as fortunate to possess as a sign that we have made it this far.

I do believe in life after death, therefore I see no reason to live forever if forever exists on the other side. At the same time, I believe life (in this life) is rare, and therefore has value in that rarity. Going by the current evidence, we are the only ones with it in the universe. Regardless of whether or not we share it with others, the sheer length of time that it took us to get this far (from organic compounds to rational thought) is awe-inspiring at the very least. What’s more, it only happened here once, four billion years ago with the last universal common ancestor. Life should be treated as a gift, and one that we ought not to withhold from someone. Technology alone with the power to alter life as we know it is not inherently good or evil; it is what we choose to do with it that determines its moral status in society. By all means, we should use the genetic engineering to create a healthier society. However, lines will have to be drawn around editing the parts of ourselves that make us essentially human, namely our ability to rationalize and make decisions for ourselves with little outside influence. As far as “upgrades” go, I would caution people to consider what things are truly problems that need to be fixed and what things would change us in only a superficial way, or those changes which, when made in haste, transform us negatively in the end. To quote Dr. Malcolm one more time, “genetic power is the most awesome force the planet's ever seen,” so let’s not “wield it like a kid that's found his dad's gun.”

*Admittedly, a not-insignificant number of people (Blake 2015), but work with me here.

References

Blagosklonny, Mikhail V. "Answering the Ultimate Question, “What Is the Proximal Cause of Aging?”." Aging 4.12 (2012): 861-77. Print. https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3615154/

Blake, Aaron. “Here's How Many Americans Are Actually Anti-Vaxxers.” The Washington Post, WP Company, 9 Feb. 2015, www.washingtonpost.com/news/the- fix/wp/2015/02/09/heres-how-many-americans-are-actually-anti- vaxxers/?utm_term=.fecac274739b.

DeYoung, C.G., et al. "Testing Predictions from Personality Neuroscience: Brain Structure and the Big Five." Psychological Science 21.6 (2011): 820-28. Print. https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3049165/

Harari, Yuval N. Homo Deus: A Brief History of Tomorrow. Harvill Secker, 2016. Print.

Gabriel, S.E., et al. "Cystic Fibrosis Heterozygote Resistance to Cholera Toxin in the Cystic Fibrosis Mouse Model." Science 266.5182 (1994): 107-09. Print. http://science.sciencemag.org/content/266/5182/107

Lajka, Julian Quinones Arijeta. “‘What Kind of Society Do You Want to Live in?": Inside the Country Where Down Syndrome Is Disappearing.” CBS News, CBS Interactive, 14 Aug. 2017, www.cbsnews.com/news/down-syndrome-iceland/.

Le Page, Michael. “We Still Don't Really Know What CRISPR Does to Human Embryos.” New Scientist, 1 Sept. 2017, www.newscientist.com/article/2146061-we-still-dont-really-know- what-crispr-does-to-human-embryos/.

Lieber, M.R. "The Mechanism of Human Nonhomologous DNA End Joining." Journal of Biological Chemistry 283.1 (2008): 1-5. Print. https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/17999957

Spielberg, Steven. Jurassic Park. Universal Pictures. 1993. Film. https://en.oxforddictionaries.com/definition/cure

[eddiejpoplar]

Rolex and Motorsports: Partners in Speed

LOS ANGELES, California — “Rolexes are indestructible,” says Hurley Haywood, one of America’s most successful endurance racers, as he stands on the terrace during a private reception at a mansion deep in the Hollywood Hills. Haywood pulls back his shirt cuff, gives a small smile—which, if you’ve spent any time with the laconic race car driver, you know a smile means high praise—and starts to tap on the watch’s sapphire crystal as lights from the Sunset Strip below cast a pinkish glow on his grin. “I’m rough on a watch. It’s got to withstand all of the rigors of racing, all the tax I put it through.” Haywood should know about the watch’s durability—he owns nearly every model of Rolex Daytona ever made, most of them hard won from time in a race car.

Rolex employs official spokespeople to talk up the brand, including Formula 1 champion Jackie Stewart and nine-time Le Mans winner Tom Kristensen, but Haywood, crooked grin and all, isn’t on the watchmaker’s payroll. He’s a genuine fan, converted from the moment in 1970 when he bought his first Rolex for $260 at a U.S. Army post exchange while stationed in Vietnam. “Since then, I always had Rolexes. It’s just the watch I want to wear.”

Haywood isn’t the only race-car driver who has had a love affair with the brand, of course. Rolex and motorsports have been inextricably linked since British racer Malcolm Campbell wore a Rolex Oyster while breaking the 300-mph speed record on the Bonneville Salt Flats in 1935. Campbell is said to have mailed Rolex letters extolling the virtues of its products. But when you think of racing and watches, Rolex and the now iconic Daytona comes to mind. The relationship with Florida’s Daytona International Speedway predates the famous endurance race held at the track. It began when Rolex Watch U.S.A.’s then-president, Rene P. Dentan, forged a friendship with NASCAR founder Bill France Sr.

In 1964, Rolex started to award the chronograph to the winning drivers of the Daytona Continental—then an FIA-sanctioned, three-hour endurance race—and added the word “Daytona” to the dial, altering the watch world forever. (The race’s familiar 24-hour format made its debut in 1966.) “It’s all about the watch,” says Scott Pruett, the American racer who has won 15 Rolex watches, including five for overall wins at the Rolex 24, during a career that spans more than three decades. “Every one is sacred, and there are stories behind every one of these watches. It becomes more than a timepiece, it becomes an heirloom and even more so if it says ‘Winner of the Rolex 24’ on the back.”

Aside from its ties to American sports-car racing, Rolex is also the official timepiece of the 24 Hours of Le Mans and Formula 1. Vintage racing is also high on its priority list—it is the title sponsor of the annual Monterey Motorsports Reunion and is also heavily involved with the U.K.’s Goodwood Revival.

Like a Porsche 911, the Rolex Daytona is instantly recognizable, and over the years the changes to both have been incremental rather than evolutionary. It’s these minor changes—and the obsessive nature of collectors of both products—that add to the lore and start to drive collectors crazy as they obsess over the smallest details. Although Rolex is tight-lipped about most of the changes, it’s not too hard to find a hardcore fan to opine about the tiny tweaks to the dial, bezels, pushers, and significantly, the movements.

“With the Daytona, you had this idea that you were going to market these things to people,” says Benjamin Clymer, founder of the watch website, Hodinkee. “Before, chronographs were really ‘tool’ watches for those in the racing industry, and that’s about it. And Rolex said, ‘OK, we’re going to make this the racer’s watch.’ There’s a history of these watches going on the wrists of great racers. And when you have these famous racers wearing this watch because they’ve actually won at Daytona, it creates a secondary level of appreciation and understanding from the motorsports community.”

A paul Newman Daytona sold at Christie’s for $1.1 million. Not too shabby an investment for a watch that cost only $210 in 1963.

If the racing world wasn’t enamored with the Daytona before, it certainly was after Paul Newman, who was just starting his professional racing career, wore a Reference 6239 on his wrist in 1972. Given to him as a gift by his wife, actress Joanne Woodward, these Daytonas are set apart by subtle but important differences, such as an art-deco font for the numerals on the subdials and small squares at the end of the hash marks.

Although never officially named after the actor, the “Paul Newman” Daytona is one of the rarest and most sought-out variants of the timepiece. You can pick one up in good condition starting around $75,000 and, depending on the year, the prices can skyrocket from there. In May, 2017 at Philips Geneva Watch Auction, a Daytona Ref 6263 dubbed “The Legend” and one of three known yellow gold Paul Newman Daytonas sold for $3,717,906. In 2013, a 1969 stainless-steel Paul Newman Daytona sold at Christie’s for $1.1 million. Not too shabby an investment for a watch that cost only $210 in 1963.

“I never really gravitated to the Daytona, and I passed on many when they were ‘cheap,’ but I’ve learned to appreciate them and like them aesthetically,” says Matt Hranek, author of the new book, “A Man and His Watch” (see page 105). In the book, Hranek weaves the stories of 70 one-of-a-kind timepieces from the men who’ve owned these watches via personal anecdotes.

This steel Daytona belongs to Automobile contributor Andy Pilgrim, awarded for his overall win at the 2004 24 Hours of Daytona.

“Rolex makes real tool watches, and I love the fact that they specialize,” Hranek says. “The Submariner for divers, the GMT for pilots. It’s hard not to love the Daytona in terms of its design and because of its iconic status. A lot of that is due to the famous owners. When I visited Mario Andretti for my book, he pulled out every watch he had ever owned and placed them all on a big table. In the middle was an older Daytona, and I said to him, ‘Wow, look at the Daytona,’ and Mario looked at me, shrugged, and said, ‘Yeah, I did win that race a couple times.’ I just sighed and said, ‘Oh yeah, of course you did.’”

Rolex introduced a new Daytona with a black ceramic bezel during the 2016 edition of Baselworld, the watch industry’s top expo, and the news excited even the most jaded watch insiders. The New York Times called it the hottest watch money can’t buy. a waiting list, if you don’t know the right people, can stretch into a yearslong proposition. A few months after its release, we asked Haywood if he had one. “Not yet,” he says. “But I’m working on it.”

The first precision certificate ever issued for a wristwatch, commissioned by Rolex founder Hans Wilsdorf.

Rolex SA, headquartered in Geneva, Switzerland, was founded in London in 1905 by Hans Wilsdorf and his brother-in-law Alfred Davis. Wilsdorf reportedly chose the Rolex name because it was short enough to fit on the face of a watch, consisted of symmetrical letters of the same size, and was easy to pronounce in many languages. Today it is the largest luxury watch brand by volume, producing some 2,000 watches a day. Forbes in 2016 ranked the company the 64th most valuable brand in the world with $4.7 billion in sales.

A classic Rolex Daytona Reference 6239 “Paul Newman” sits next to a brand-new, black-over- black Daytona with the very desirable ceramic bezel, courtesy of BobsWatches.com.

For a brand that revolves so much around wealth, Rolex is hesitant to talk about money. Sponsorship terms are not disclosed to the public, and company executives do not do interviews.

Ariel Adams, founder of seminal watch website aBlogtoWatch.com, says Rolex is secretive in most areas, including money matters. “It spends more than any other watch brand on marketing,” he says, “and it’s a key reason for the brand’s success. I’m not comfortable speculating an amount it spends since I have no idea, but I do know its strategy is to sponsor the top-tier events in each sport and to ensure no other watch brands take its place.”

At left, a trademark document for the Rolex name was signed by Wilsdorf himself in 1946.

Rolex in 2015 extended its title-sponsor contract for Daytona’s 24-hour race with IMSA, signing up through 2025. At the same time, Daytona International Speedway began an ambitious, $400 million remodel and expansion of a towering complex. Rolex announced itself as a partner in the undertaking and now has its name on the new luxury lounge along the front stretch. When asked about financial details on the Rolex partnership, a spokesperson for Daytona International Speedway declined to reveal the deal’s value. But it is not difficult to imagine the sums required to keep the brand front and center of a global audience. In 2012, when Rolex succeeded Hublot as the official timekeeper and official timepiece of F1, it was speculated to cost at least $20 million per year.

Rolex signage is inescapable at modern motorsports events. Look for branded clocks, hats, lanyards, advertisements, banners, and flags at the biggest circuits in the world.

Despite Rolex’s significant involvement in the world of motorsports, a spokesperson for the watchmaker told us that its timepieces have never been used to time the races, and the timing in early F1 years was done with Heuer chronographs. So why do so many get so excited about Rolex and its relationship with racing? You could say the connection is symbolic. A Rolex spokeswoman said, “Rolex is very much about individual achievement. We sponsor people, not teams. Think of a race-car driver. Sure, there is a team involved, but it’s just that one person out there on the track.”

Haywood sees a connection to velocity. “They’re really at the top of the line of motorsports,” he says, “but they also do a lot of other sports—tennis, riding, sports that involve speed and timing. So I think they like to have that identification.”

In addition to its connections with sports, Rolex actively supports music, culture, the arts, and scientific achievement with its Enterprise Awards. So what is the return on investment for all those sponsorship dollars? By some measures, Rolex is considered the most powerful luxury brand in the world, with a cachet no one else in the business has been able to replicate. What can’t be measured in dollars, however, can perhaps be measured in influence and the number of watches you see on the wrists of race fans and automotive enthusiasts alike.

“A Rolex is kind of like a Porsche,” says Haywood, who knows firsthand after spending so many years racing and winning for the German car manufacturer. “It’s a brand that’s got a great history to it. I like simplicity, and I like engineering. And that’s what I like about a Rolex. You look at it, and you know what time it is.”

The post Rolex and Motorsports: Partners in Speed appeared first on Automobile Magazine.

from Performance Junk Blogger 6 http://ift.tt/2lrbI7M via IFTTT

[jesusvasser]

Rolex and Motorsports: Partners in Speed

LOS ANGELES, California — “Rolexes are indestructible,” says Hurley Haywood, one of America’s most successful endurance racers, as he stands on the terrace during a private reception at a mansion deep in the Hollywood Hills. Haywood pulls back his shirt cuff, gives a small smile—which, if you’ve spent any time with the laconic race car driver, you know a smile means high praise—and starts to tap on the watch’s sapphire crystal as lights from the Sunset Strip below cast a pinkish glow on his grin. “I’m rough on a watch. It’s got to withstand all of the rigors of racing, all the tax I put it through.” Haywood should know about the watch’s durability—he owns nearly every model of Rolex Daytona ever made, most of them hard won from time in a race car.

Rolex employs official spokespeople to talk up the brand, including Formula 1 champion Jackie Stewart and nine-time Le Mans winner Tom Kristensen, but Haywood, crooked grin and all, isn’t on the watchmaker’s payroll. He’s a genuine fan, converted from the moment in 1970 when he bought his first Rolex for $260 at a U.S. Army post exchange while stationed in Vietnam. “Since then, I always had Rolexes. It’s just the watch I want to wear.”

Haywood isn’t the only race-car driver who has had a love affair with the brand, of course. Rolex and motorsports have been inextricably linked since British racer Malcolm Campbell wore a Rolex Oyster while breaking the 300-mph speed record on the Bonneville Salt Flats in 1935. Campbell is said to have mailed Rolex letters extolling the virtues of its products. But when you think of racing and watches, Rolex and the now iconic Daytona comes to mind. The relationship with Florida’s Daytona International Speedway predates the famous endurance race held at the track. It began when Rolex Watch U.S.A.’s then-president, Rene P. Dentan, forged a friendship with NASCAR founder Bill France Sr.

In 1964, Rolex started to award the chronograph to the winning drivers of the Daytona Continental—then an FIA-sanctioned, three-hour endurance race—and added the word “Daytona” to the dial, altering the watch world forever. (The race’s familiar 24-hour format made its debut in 1966.) “It’s all about the watch,” says Scott Pruett, the American racer who has won 15 Rolex watches, including five for overall wins at the Rolex 24, during a career that spans more than three decades. “Every one is sacred, and there are stories behind every one of these watches. It becomes more than a timepiece, it becomes an heirloom and even more so if it says ‘Winner of the Rolex 24’ on the back.”

Aside from its ties to American sports-car racing, Rolex is also the official timepiece of the 24 Hours of Le Mans and Formula 1. Vintage racing is also high on its priority list—it is the title sponsor of the annual Monterey Motorsports Reunion and is also heavily involved with the U.K.’s Goodwood Revival.

Like a Porsche 911, the Rolex Daytona is instantly recognizable, and over the years the changes to both have been incremental rather than evolutionary. It’s these minor changes—and the obsessive nature of collectors of both products—that add to the lore and start to drive collectors crazy as they obsess over the smallest details. Although Rolex is tight-lipped about most of the changes, it’s not too hard to find a hardcore fan to opine about the tiny tweaks to the dial, bezels, pushers, and significantly, the movements.

“With the Daytona, you had this idea that you were going to market these things to people,” says Benjamin Clymer, founder of the watch website, Hodinkee. “Before, chronographs were really ‘tool’ watches for those in the racing industry, and that’s about it. And Rolex said, ‘OK, we’re going to make this the racer’s watch.’ There’s a history of these watches going on the wrists of great racers. And when you have these famous racers wearing this watch because they’ve actually won at Daytona, it creates a secondary level of appreciation and understanding from the motorsports community.”

A paul Newman Daytona sold at Christie’s for $1.1 million. Not too shabby an investment for a watch that cost only $210 in 1963.

If the racing world wasn’t enamored with the Daytona before, it certainly was after Paul Newman, who was just starting his professional racing career, wore a Reference 6239 on his wrist in 1972. Given to him as a gift by his wife, actress Joanne Woodward, these Daytonas are set apart by subtle but important differences, such as an art-deco font for the numerals on the subdials and small squares at the end of the hash marks.

Although never officially named after the actor, the “Paul Newman” Daytona is one of the rarest and most sought-out variants of the timepiece. You can pick one up in good condition starting around $75,000 and, depending on the year, the prices can skyrocket from there. In May, 2017 at Philips Geneva Watch Auction, a Daytona Ref 6263 dubbed “The Legend” and one of three known yellow gold Paul Newman Daytonas sold for $3,717,906. In 2013, a 1969 stainless-steel Paul Newman Daytona sold at Christie’s for $1.1 million. Not too shabby an investment for a watch that cost only $210 in 1963.

“I never really gravitated to the Daytona, and I passed on many when they were ‘cheap,’ but I’ve learned to appreciate them and like them aesthetically,” says Matt Hranek, author of the new book, “A Man and His Watch” (see page 105). In the book, Hranek weaves the stories of 70 one-of-a-kind timepieces from the men who’ve owned these watches via personal anecdotes.

This steel Daytona belongs to Automobile contributor Andy Pilgrim, awarded for his overall win at the 2004 24 Hours of Daytona.

“Rolex makes real tool watches, and I love the fact that they specialize,” Hranek says. “The Submariner for divers, the GMT for pilots. It’s hard not to love the Daytona in terms of its design and because of its iconic status. A lot of that is due to the famous owners. When I visited Mario Andretti for my book, he pulled out every watch he had ever owned and placed them all on a big table. In the middle was an older Daytona, and I said to him, ‘Wow, look at the Daytona,’ and Mario looked at me, shrugged, and said, ‘Yeah, I did win that race a couple times.’ I just sighed and said, ‘Oh yeah, of course you did.’”

Rolex introduced a new Daytona with a black ceramic bezel during the 2016 edition of Baselworld, the watch industry’s top expo, and the news excited even the most jaded watch insiders. The New York Times called it the hottest watch money can’t buy. a waiting list, if you don’t know the right people, can stretch into a yearslong proposition. A few months after its release, we asked Haywood if he had one. “Not yet,” he says. “But I’m working on it.”

The first precision certificate ever issued for a wristwatch, commissioned by Rolex founder Hans Wilsdorf.

Rolex SA, headquartered in Geneva, Switzerland, was founded in London in 1905 by Hans Wilsdorf and his brother-in-law Alfred Davis. Wilsdorf reportedly chose the Rolex name because it was short enough to fit on the face of a watch, consisted of symmetrical letters of the same size, and was easy to pronounce in many languages. Today it is the largest luxury watch brand by volume, producing some 2,000 watches a day. Forbes in 2016 ranked the company the 64th most valuable brand in the world with $4.7 billion in sales.

A classic Rolex Daytona Reference 6239 “Paul Newman” sits next to a brand-new, black-over- black Daytona with the very desirable ceramic bezel, courtesy of BobsWatches.com.

For a brand that revolves so much around wealth, Rolex is hesitant to talk about money. Sponsorship terms are not disclosed to the public, and company executives do not do interviews.

Ariel Adams, founder of seminal watch website aBlogtoWatch.com, says Rolex is secretive in most areas, including money matters. “It spends more than any other watch brand on marketing,” he says, “and it’s a key reason for the brand’s success. I’m not comfortable speculating an amount it spends since I have no idea, but I do know its strategy is to sponsor the top-tier events in each sport and to ensure no other watch brands take its place.”

At left, a trademark document for the Rolex name was signed by Wilsdorf himself in 1946.

Rolex in 2015 extended its title-sponsor contract for Daytona’s 24-hour race with IMSA, signing up through 2025. At the same time, Daytona International Speedway began an ambitious, $400 million remodel and expansion of a towering complex. Rolex announced itself as a partner in the undertaking and now has its name on the new luxury lounge along the front stretch. When asked about financial details on the Rolex partnership, a spokesperson for Daytona International Speedway declined to reveal the deal’s value. But it is not difficult to imagine the sums required to keep the brand front and center of a global audience. In 2012, when Rolex succeeded Hublot as the official timekeeper and official timepiece of F1, it was speculated to cost at least $20 million per year.

Rolex signage is inescapable at modern motorsports events. Look for branded clocks, hats, lanyards, advertisements, banners, and flags at the biggest circuits in the world.

Despite Rolex’s significant involvement in the world of motorsports, a spokesperson for the watchmaker told us that its timepieces have never been used to time the races, and the timing in early F1 years was done with Heuer chronographs. So why do so many get so excited about Rolex and its relationship with racing? You could say the connection is symbolic. A Rolex spokeswoman said, “Rolex is very much about individual achievement. We sponsor people, not teams. Think of a race-car driver. Sure, there is a team involved, but it’s just that one person out there on the track.”

Haywood sees a connection to velocity. “They’re really at the top of the line of motorsports,” he says, “but they also do a lot of other sports—tennis, riding, sports that involve speed and timing. So I think they like to have that identification.”

In addition to its connections with sports, Rolex actively supports music, culture, the arts, and scientific achievement with its Enterprise Awards. So what is the return on investment for all those sponsorship dollars? By some measures, Rolex is considered the most powerful luxury brand in the world, with a cachet no one else in the business has been able to replicate. What can’t be measured in dollars, however, can perhaps be measured in influence and the number of watches you see on the wrists of race fans and automotive enthusiasts alike.

“A Rolex is kind of like a Porsche,” says Haywood, who knows firsthand after spending so many years racing and winning for the German car manufacturer. “It’s a brand that’s got a great history to it. I like simplicity, and I like engineering. And that’s what I like about a Rolex. You look at it, and you know what time it is.”

The post Rolex and Motorsports: Partners in Speed appeared first on Automobile Magazine.

from Performance Junk WP Feed 4 http://ift.tt/2lrbI7M via IFTTT

[jonathanbelloblog]

Rolex and Motorsports: Partners in Speed

LOS ANGELES, California — “Rolexes are indestructible,” says Hurley Haywood, one of America’s most successful endurance racers, as he stands on the terrace during a private reception at a mansion deep in the Hollywood Hills. Haywood pulls back his shirt cuff, gives a small smile—which, if you’ve spent any time with the laconic race car driver, you know a smile means high praise—and starts to tap on the watch’s sapphire crystal as lights from the Sunset Strip below cast a pinkish glow on his grin. “I’m rough on a watch. It’s got to withstand all of the rigors of racing, all the tax I put it through.” Haywood should know about the watch’s durability—he owns nearly every model of Rolex Daytona ever made, most of them hard won from time in a race car.

Rolex employs official spokespeople to talk up the brand, including Formula 1 champion Jackie Stewart and nine-time Le Mans winner Tom Kristensen, but Haywood, crooked grin and all, isn’t on the watchmaker’s payroll. He’s a genuine fan, converted from the moment in 1970 when he bought his first Rolex for $260 at a U.S. Army post exchange while stationed in Vietnam. “Since then, I always had Rolexes. It’s just the watch I want to wear.”

Haywood isn’t the only race-car driver who has had a love affair with the brand, of course. Rolex and motorsports have been inextricably linked since British racer Malcolm Campbell wore a Rolex Oyster while breaking the 300-mph speed record on the Bonneville Salt Flats in 1935. Campbell is said to have mailed Rolex letters extolling the virtues of its products. But when you think of racing and watches, Rolex and the now iconic Daytona comes to mind. The relationship with Florida’s Daytona International Speedway predates the famous endurance race held at the track. It began when Rolex Watch U.S.A.’s then-president, Rene P. Dentan, forged a friendship with NASCAR founder Bill France Sr.

In 1964, Rolex started to award the chronograph to the winning drivers of the Daytona Continental—then an FIA-sanctioned, three-hour endurance race—and added the word “Daytona” to the dial, altering the watch world forever. (The race’s familiar 24-hour format made its debut in 1966.) “It’s all about the watch,” says Scott Pruett, the American racer who has won 15 Rolex watches, including five for overall wins at the Rolex 24, during a career that spans more than three decades. “Every one is sacred, and there are stories behind every one of these watches. It becomes more than a timepiece, it becomes an heirloom and even more so if it says ‘Winner of the Rolex 24’ on the back.”

Aside from its ties to American sports-car racing, Rolex is also the official timepiece of the 24 Hours of Le Mans and Formula 1. Vintage racing is also high on its priority list—it is the title sponsor of the annual Monterey Motorsports Reunion and is also heavily involved with the U.K.’s Goodwood Revival.

Like a Porsche 911, the Rolex Daytona is instantly recognizable, and over the years the changes to both have been incremental rather than evolutionary. It’s these minor changes—and the obsessive nature of collectors of both products—that add to the lore and start to drive collectors crazy as they obsess over the smallest details. Although Rolex is tight-lipped about most of the changes, it’s not too hard to find a hardcore fan to opine about the tiny tweaks to the dial, bezels, pushers, and significantly, the movements.

“With the Daytona, you had this idea that you were going to market these things to people,” says Benjamin Clymer, founder of the watch website, Hodinkee. “Before, chronographs were really ‘tool’ watches for those in the racing industry, and that’s about it. And Rolex said, ‘OK, we’re going to make this the racer’s watch.’ There’s a history of these watches going on the wrists of great racers. And when you have these famous racers wearing this watch because they’ve actually won at Daytona, it creates a secondary level of appreciation and understanding from the motorsports community.”

A paul Newman Daytona sold at Christie’s for $1.1 million. Not too shabby an investment for a watch that cost only $210 in 1963.

If the racing world wasn’t enamored with the Daytona before, it certainly was after Paul Newman, who was just starting his professional racing career, wore a Reference 6239 on his wrist in 1972. Given to him as a gift by his wife, actress Joanne Woodward, these Daytonas are set apart by subtle but important differences, such as an art-deco font for the numerals on the subdials and small squares at the end of the hash marks.

Although never officially named after the actor, the “Paul Newman” Daytona is one of the rarest and most sought-out variants of the timepiece. You can pick one up in good condition starting around $75,000 and, depending on the year, the prices can skyrocket from there. In May, 2017 at Philips Geneva Watch Auction, a Daytona Ref 6263 dubbed “The Legend” and one of three known yellow gold Paul Newman Daytonas sold for $3,717,906. In 2013, a 1969 stainless-steel Paul Newman Daytona sold at Christie’s for $1.1 million. Not too shabby an investment for a watch that cost only $210 in 1963.

“I never really gravitated to the Daytona, and I passed on many when they were ‘cheap,’ but I’ve learned to appreciate them and like them aesthetically,” says Matt Hranek, author of the new book, “A Man and His Watch” (see page 105). In the book, Hranek weaves the stories of 70 one-of-a-kind timepieces from the men who’ve owned these watches via personal anecdotes.

This steel Daytona belongs to Automobile contributor Andy Pilgrim, awarded for his overall win at the 2004 24 Hours of Daytona.

“Rolex makes real tool watches, and I love the fact that they specialize,” Hranek says. “The Submariner for divers, the GMT for pilots. It’s hard not to love the Daytona in terms of its design and because of its iconic status. A lot of that is due to the famous owners. When I visited Mario Andretti for my book, he pulled out every watch he had ever owned and placed them all on a big table. In the middle was an older Daytona, and I said to him, ‘Wow, look at the Daytona,’ and Mario looked at me, shrugged, and said, ‘Yeah, I did win that race a couple times.’ I just sighed and said, ‘Oh yeah, of course you did.’”

Rolex introduced a new Daytona with a black ceramic bezel during the 2016 edition of Baselworld, the watch industry’s top expo, and the news excited even the most jaded watch insiders. The New York Times called it the hottest watch money can’t buy. a waiting list, if you don’t know the right people, can stretch into a yearslong proposition. A few months after its release, we asked Haywood if he had one. “Not yet,” he says. “But I’m working on it.”

The first precision certificate ever issued for a wristwatch, commissioned by Rolex founder Hans Wilsdorf.

Rolex SA, headquartered in Geneva, Switzerland, was founded in London in 1905 by Hans Wilsdorf and his brother-in-law Alfred Davis. Wilsdorf reportedly chose the Rolex name because it was short enough to fit on the face of a watch, consisted of symmetrical letters of the same size, and was easy to pronounce in many languages. Today it is the largest luxury watch brand by volume, producing some 2,000 watches a day. Forbes in 2016 ranked the company the 64th most valuable brand in the world with $4.7 billion in sales.

A classic Rolex Daytona Reference 6239 “Paul Newman” sits next to a brand-new, black-over- black Daytona with the very desirable ceramic bezel, courtesy of BobsWatches.com.

For a brand that revolves so much around wealth, Rolex is hesitant to talk about money. Sponsorship terms are not disclosed to the public, and company executives do not do interviews.

Ariel Adams, founder of seminal watch website aBlogtoWatch.com, says Rolex is secretive in most areas, including money matters. “It spends more than any other watch brand on marketing,” he says, “and it’s a key reason for the brand’s success. I’m not comfortable speculating an amount it spends since I have no idea, but I do know its strategy is to sponsor the top-tier events in each sport and to ensure no other watch brands take its place.”

At left, a trademark document for the Rolex name was signed by Wilsdorf himself in 1946.

Rolex in 2015 extended its title-sponsor contract for Daytona’s 24-hour race with IMSA, signing up through 2025. At the same time, Daytona International Speedway began an ambitious, $400 million remodel and expansion of a towering complex. Rolex announced itself as a partner in the undertaking and now has its name on the new luxury lounge along the front stretch. When asked about financial details on the Rolex partnership, a spokesperson for Daytona International Speedway declined to reveal the deal’s value. But it is not difficult to imagine the sums required to keep the brand front and center of a global audience. In 2012, when Rolex succeeded Hublot as the official timekeeper and official timepiece of F1, it was speculated to cost at least $20 million per year.

Rolex signage is inescapable at modern motorsports events. Look for branded clocks, hats, lanyards, advertisements, banners, and flags at the biggest circuits in the world.

Despite Rolex’s significant involvement in the world of motorsports, a spokesperson for the watchmaker told us that its timepieces have never been used to time the races, and the timing in early F1 years was done with Heuer chronographs. So why do so many get so excited about Rolex and its relationship with racing? You could say the connection is symbolic. A Rolex spokeswoman said, “Rolex is very much about individual achievement. We sponsor people, not teams. Think of a race-car driver. Sure, there is a team involved, but it’s just that one person out there on the track.”

Haywood sees a connection to velocity. “They’re really at the top of the line of motorsports,” he says, “but they also do a lot of other sports—tennis, riding, sports that involve speed and timing. So I think they like to have that identification.”

In addition to its connections with sports, Rolex actively supports music, culture, the arts, and scientific achievement with its Enterprise Awards. So what is the return on investment for all those sponsorship dollars? By some measures, Rolex is considered the most powerful luxury brand in the world, with a cachet no one else in the business has been able to replicate. What can’t be measured in dollars, however, can perhaps be measured in influence and the number of watches you see on the wrists of race fans and automotive enthusiasts alike.

“A Rolex is kind of like a Porsche,” says Haywood, who knows firsthand after spending so many years racing and winning for the German car manufacturer. “It’s a brand that’s got a great history to it. I like simplicity, and I like engineering. And that’s what I like about a Rolex. You look at it, and you know what time it is.”

The post Rolex and Motorsports: Partners in Speed appeared first on Automobile Magazine.

from Performance Junk Blogger Feed 4 http://ift.tt/2lrbI7M via IFTTT