#book: yolk | Explore Tumblr Posts and Blogs

hanzajesthanza · 5 months

Note

hi hello i am several pages into your cahir tag and had a couple of questions if you feel like sharing your thoughts! when geralt first confronts cahir on the island in baptism of fire, there's the line "cahir said nothing. geralt felt bad. very bad." and i would love to know what your take on that is - 'very bad' in particular intrigues me. also, you reblogged a great analysis post about cahir and ciri that mentions publishing pressure laced with homophobia - do you have any info on that?

i'm so flattered, and also i love talking about these characters so i'll be glad to share my thoughts!

re: "geralt felt bad. very bad.":

the confrontation between geralt and cahir begins with geralt holding it over cahir's head, reminding him that he spared his life on thanedd. in which he calls him chłystku, "Żal mi się ciebie zrobiło, chłystku." this was translated as "I felt sorry for you, whippersnapper," though chłystek can also be "pipsqueak," "brat." what geralt is saying is, you young man (derogatory, with contempt).

cahir is something like 20, well, actually more like 30 to 40 years geralt's junior, and this is mentioned a couple of times times already (observations by dandelion's POV, that cahir was incapable of growing a beard, haha).

geralt is effectively scolding cahir in this confrontation, and cahir is not fighting him, taking the verbal beating.

‘(...) I’m preoccupied with one thought: to get my hands on the people who harmed Ciri. I’ve sworn that those who’ve harmed her will pay for it with their blood.’ Cahir did not speak. ‘Your revelations, which Milva has told me about, don’t change anything. There’s only one conclusion: you were unable to abduct Ciri on Thanedd, despite your best efforts. Now you’re trailing me, so that I can lead you to her. So that you can get your hands on her again, because then your imperator might spare you and not send you to the scaffold.’ Cahir said nothing. Geralt felt bad. Very bad. ‘She cried out in the night because of you,’ he snapped. ‘You grew to nightmarish proportions in her child’s eyes. But actually, you were–and are–only a tool, a wretched minion of your imperator.’

if cahir had piped up as geralt was scolding him here, if he had denied geralt's accusations, if he had bridled, if he had fought him like he had requested in ch. 2, that would have given geralt full rein to lay the smackdown. as the saying goes... "Go ahead, make my day..."

but cahir didn't make his day.

cahir is not really one to debase himself. as in tower of the swallow ch. 5 when he and geralt fight, cahir, like geralt, is obsessed with his own honor:

‘I’m not what I appear,’ said the young Nilfgaardian in a powerful, resonant voice. ‘Unfortunately, I can’t prove it. But I can do something else. Do what befits me, what I have to do, when I’m being slandered and insulted, when my honour is besmirched and my dignity sullied.’

geralt finally has in his clutches the black knight of cintra, his little girl's nightmare. and, like any father, wants to curbstomp him. badly. he wanted to do the same when he first met him, on thanedd:

‘I know who you are, Nilfgaardian,’ said the white-haired fiend, kicking the helmet with the hacked-up wings. ‘You have been pursuing her doggedly and long. But now you will harm her no more.’

but this is geralt: held back by his morals, by his scruples. who he has isn't the black knight of cintra, anymore.

and this is cahir:

There was no black knight of Cintra. There was a pale, dark-haired young man with stupefyingly blue eyes and a mouth distorted in a grimace of fear, kneeling in a pool of blood. (...) The terrified, cowering young man bleeding profusely was no one.

cahir is now only "a young face, which hadn’t grown much more stubble since the adventure under the beech tree." and again, geralt "[is] getting old, [and] starting to develop scruples."

geralt feels bad, very bad (it's just "źle, bardzo źle" in polish, so no weird translation issues from what i can tell) for two reasons:

‘I don’t know what you did to become a nightmare for her. And (...) I don’t understand why in spite of everything I can’t kill you. I don’t understand what’s holding me back.’

firstly, geralt is recalling how ciri suffered because of cahir, how she awoke in the night due to nightmares, nightmares which he could not help her with (and thus enlisted the help of triss, and later yennefer, who actually helped her with the trauma-related nightmares).

secondly, he is unconsciously holding himself back from killing cahir, because cahir is a sad-eyed young man who is no longer the black knight of cintra. geralt, as we know, loathes harming innocents, and can't bear to kill anything that doesn't deserve it. and cahir isn't doing anything (not being a threat, not even talking back) to deserve it.

and then, of course, further motivation to work together: cahir and geralt have in common that they want to rescue ciri, and they are both dreaming of her.

but geralt's inability to kill cahir always gets me, for how it emphasizes their characters: geralt, hounded by his scruples, and cahir, just a young man...

re: ringkvinna's analysis of cahir, imperialism, his love for ciri and about publishing pressure:

(damn, i love this analysis, haha. i also feel similarly about cahir and ciri, the paragraph beginning "In my opinion, it is the only way in which" is especially accurate, i think).

it was once a speculation of mine that a heterosexual romance was pushed for ciri because of homophobic attitudes from the publisher. nowadays i don't terribly stand by this, it's kind of just a theory, a book theory...

but it is true that there were reactions to mistle and ciri:

( John ) Did you know from the beginning that Ciri would fall in love with Mistle? ( AS ) Of course. It was one of the elements of the plan that was ready from the beginning. ( John ) And the scene in the library? ( AS ) And this is one of the things that came after the plan, there was no place in the original plan for Fringilla Vigo. When writing the scene in the library, I played with the idea of writing it against people who say that it is impossible to do such a thing in Polish without falling into a vocabulary of gynecology or foul words. And I came up with an idea with books. But it still did not help, the newspaper that printed "Lady of the Lake" in parts, demanded from SuperNOWA, to cut that scene as pornographic. They were mocked by SuperNOWA. The Russians reacted to my alleged "pornography" even more ridiculously. I noticed while reading the translation that the Mistle-Ciri scene was heavily watered down. The translator, to whom I complained, stated that I should thank him, because at first the publisher demanded - demanded from the translator, I emphasize - to change Mistle into a boy.

Q&A with Sapkowski from the mid 2000's (Reddit, English translation) | F8 Key (Polish original text)

another time he mentioned this:

A. S.: Can I mention this story? Some lesbian elements were considered extremely dirty and without notifying the author, they decided to solve the problem by changing the gender of one of the girls. T. G .: I would have a stroke. A. S .: And Weisbrot strongly opposed (because I wasn't notified) and made them keep the original text. But even so, the whole fragment was strongly castrated. And since the whole story consisted of the three sentences, after the castration very little remained. Because it turned out, you know, that it is a complete pornography.

"We will not tolerate pornography!" (Reddit, English translation)

(for context, sapkowski had a good friendship with russian translator eugene weisbrot, and actually dedicated lux perpetua (3rd book of the hussite trilogy) to him).

my speculation, then, was that because mistle's assault of ciri happens in time of contempt, and they begin a relationship in baptism of fire, i thought it would be possible for a homophobic attitude to rear its head in-between baptism of fire and tower of the swallow, that: 'ciri should have a male love interest, i hope that she will be delivered from this foulness by a decent boy.'

well, i don't disagree that this a potential thought of a publisher or even a reader, but i also think that sapkowski may have expected this too, and as always, was playing 4D chess with us.

because, in historia i fantastyka with stanisław bereś:

BS: Your women leave the role of the charming concubines. They not only kill as deftly as men, but in addition do not want to go to bed with them, because they prefer their girlfriends. Why, for example, did you make Ciri a lesbian? Why almost all the girls in the "Witch of Derby" tasted the fruits of same-sex love? Or is it some kind of psychoanalytic revenge? AS: I'm not sure. But I am certain that I'm not a lesbian. Although, on the other hand, the attraction that I sometimes feel for women, would claim the opposite. However, so that you do not have any doubts, I declare: I do not intend to shock anyone with such stories. For Russians, for example, as follows from numerous reviews, there were some complaints about these heroines and they even called me perverse and dirty. The Russian publishing house was so outraged that if not for my translator who, like a wolf and a hare in one person, lay down on the threshold and defended the work - they would've changed without the essence of the book, "bringing sex back to normal", that is by simply changing the gender of the characters. However, if there was any intention to show the women in this way - and there was - it was caused by the desire to move away from a stereotype, which states that the appearance of a woman in a transparent bra and lace panties in fantasy pursues one goal: to give rest to a warrior, who should treat this woman as an instrument (read: to fuck). So why can't she be a rest for a female warrior? The fact that I depict female characters in such a way does not mean that I am writing caricatures of real people! I parody the canon. A reader who knows fantasy well, after seeing that a lady in an openwork bra and transparent panties appeared in the book, thinks: "Oh! Another minute and! .. "And then - ay-ay-ay - nothing like that !!! I do this intentionally from purely insidious considerations. However, I was terribly touched by a certain author of fantasy, who stupidly and senselessly deprived his heroine of her virginity. At first he portrayed the heroine in such a way that the reader was 100% sure that she would, like Helena Kurcewicz, wander with her virginal hymn until the last scene of the book, in which she'll give it to the protagonist on the first wedding night. And this author suddenly, for no reason at all, without any seemingly grounded reason, makes his heroine give - excusez moi le mot! - her ass and to God knows who! Oh, how excited I got! "How is it possible?" I exclaimed. But then I thought: no, there is something in it. If I can, then I'll make someone nervous too. The reader will start thinking about, reflecting on which warrior should claim Ciri ... But then! This is the reason that motivated me to describe such female characters in my books. And consequently, this is not projection - in what you suspect me - of my own vaginal complications and phobias. I think if I had such problems, I probably would have known.

Andrzej Sapkowski and Stanisław Bereś "History and fantasy" (2007)

sapkowski often predicts what his readers will think, and then preemptively does something with the story to challenge their expectations.

in the case of mistle and ciri, he wanted to challenge the expectation that any (male) warrior would end up "claiming" ciri, instead it being a woman who takes ciri's virginity, and also showing the realistic, traumatic and devastating reality of this, of rape. all to push back on the fantasy trope of a male warrior "claiming" a girl.

back to cahir, i think that sapkowski may have also predicted that some readers were expecting a boy (as in: male love interest) to 'save' ciri from this relationship, and he introduced the cahir-ciri storyline as something which he knew would not be consummated in the end, which would end tragically.

this 'decent boy' comes across in cahir (who fails, as he is not the grail knight) and later, galahad (who succeeds, as he is the grail knight).

also, for how sapkowski has spoken of cahir and ciri:

Out of nobility (and love, because he protects Ciri), Cahir, a knight and officer, dies. Will a knight and officer defending his lady run away because he "soberly and thoughtfully" decides that it is unwise to fight, even if the opponent is a type like Bonhart? This would destroy the entire legendary history and the entire matiere de la chevalerie! It couldn't be like this! And this is apart from the fact that Cahir, alive, was in no way suitable for me to continue the action.

Sapkowski answers the questions of the active users of "Sapkowski Zone" (2001) (Reddit, English translation) | Active interview of Zone readers with Andrzej Sapkowski (Polish original text)

it's all just playing with tropes, with the fantasy canon...

‘Run away,’ whispered Ciri, seeing who was approaching along the corridor. ‘He’s the devil incarnate. But he only wants me. He won’t come after you … Run … Help Geralt …’ Cahir shook his head. ‘Ciri,’ he said kindly. ‘I’m surprised by what you’re saying. I came here from the end of the world to find you, rescue you and defend you. And now you want me to run away?’ ‘You don’t know who you’re up against.’

#looking up these interviews again and finding three separate times when he complained about it lmaoooo he was pissed #how DARE you alter my lesbians #- me when i had to watch twn #the witcher books #ask #analysis #interview #c: ciri #c: cahir #c: mistle #cahir: ciri... i came here from the end of the world to find you... to rescue you and defend you... i won't run away #ciri: ... okay but you're gonna die then cause bonhart is yolked and fucking insane #also i love how angouleme third-wheels every heated argument or dramatic exchange. this and fringilla and regis earlier in ch 4 #and also when milva told regis he was no coward in ttos ch 5 #she's literally just standing there like... okie...#'I am feel uncomfortable when we are not about me?'

14 notes · View notes

kitschykitchen · 6 months

Text

🍽️Hot and Fresh Review🍽️

Ideal Snacks While Reading:

Fried eggs over white rice, a bottle of soju, and chocolate-covered bananas.

Main Ingredients:

A reckless, free-spirited younger sister with deep insecurities

A narcissistic know-it-all older sister who always seems perfect

A sudden cancer diagnosis that forces them together

Jayne Ji-young Baek is a college student living in New York and trying to figure out life. She’s got the full entourage of New York insanity--including but not limited to a terrible, clownish not-boyfriend-boyfriend, a repulsive apartment that she pays way too much money for, and a blinding desire to be noticed in a city where everyone has the same ambition. Things get even more complicated for Jayne when her older sister, June, enters the picture. June is eldest daughter syndrome personified--a parentified, overachiever who can barely take care of herself and sucks even worse at taking care of others. The two immediately bump heads but things spiral even further when June explains that she’s been diagnosed with cancer. Naturally, this comes as a slap to the face for Jayne, as she’s now forced to juggle all of the other nonsense in her life while also forcibly recognizing her sister as undeniably human.

Now, I’m sure we’ve all gotten used to the wealth of movies in this vein. You’re probably anticipating that June will learn how to let loose and stop being so hard on Jayne and Jayne will become more responsible after realizing that June’s rigid personality isn’t such a bad thing. The two will completely overlook their parental trauma and end with a message on family, love, and happy-happy joy-joy. Allow me to be the first to tell you to manage your expectations.

Yolk may have a familiar purpose, but its handling of the subject matter is so realistic and raw that it leads to discomfort. Jayne is not just a party girl who has poor taste in men. She’s the youngest child whose mother constantly picks at her insecurities and leaves her with a very intense eating disorder. She’s actively in therapy but struggles to utilize it well because she doesn’t want to admit her own weaknesses. Similarly, June doesn’t have it all together. She’s constantly picking on Jayne but finds it difficult to watch her sister crash and burn. She’s apathetic to her cancer diagnosis and struggles to remain herself after the loss of her job. Mary H.K. Choi juggles so many different topics all at once--from unspoken familial trauma to sexual assault and of course, the immigrant child experience--while still making sure the depiction is respectful while simultaneously realistic.

When hearing the intense subject matter, some might question why Yolk is considered a YA Novel (I know I was confused when I first read it). In today’s society, it’s not a secret that we are hyper-conscious of the kinds of media younger audiences are consuming. This is especially true of YA, where we see repeated accounts of toxic romances and poor boundary management among characters. The difference between Yolk and most other YA novels is that Choi isn’t just showcasing heavy subjects for the sake of throwing them in the audience’s face. Her depictions of struggling with mental illness and relationship problems are grounded in realism first and foremost. Intense topics still have a place in YA, so long as they’re handled with care and respect.

If you want a book that will rip you to shreds, call you out on a lot of your paranoid thinking, and hit way too close to home--Yolk is the perfect book for you.

Michelin Stars: 5/5 (⭐⭐⭐⭐⭐)

#book blog #book recommendations #book review #bookblr #bookish #books #yolk #mary hk choi

3 notes · View notes