#but always standing up for others and challenging them on their worldviews and just casually talking about more liberal (as in free. not

[holyviolence]

omg i spent the whole day cleaning my entire apartment because my family was coming to visit and 1) so so so happy my adhd is being medicated now it's literally changing my life and 2) i FINALLLY got through to my dad about how he probably has ADHD too!!!!! he finally said Yeah i think i might have adhd. and my mom was like Me too (we've had this talk privately before, she knows she has adhd too lol) And my brother is literally transferring to a different school because he can't concentrate and isn't disciplined at his current uni. adhd family.

[onereallygoodlambonastick]

1, 2, 7, 8, 9 and 10 please

finally some good fucking food, thanks anon;

1. What themes would you like to write about that you feel don’t get explored very often?

Generally speaking, I think the in-betweens, the casual time-skips, and the quick intermissions are the things that get glossed over the most. The “missing scenes”, if you will--the hours after a squabble between a team, the morning before the battle, the months where a child sat idle, the dreams that turned into prophecy. 

I also think the theme of re-connection is not often explored--its always “love on first sight” kind of deal, but what about the enduring kind of love, the kind that stays like an ache in your bones? the one you remember and miss? the one you long for like a phantom limb?

2. What are some common elements of stories you are tired of seeing? What would you avoid writing about? 

This varies wildly between fandoms, but probably the thing they all have in common is: mindless smut. Just straight up down and dirty fucking, with no motive or prompting or characterization. Just the author smashing two guys (usually) at the hips and being done with it. 

That’s fine; we all love to see it. It’s just so dull sometimes. 

I need some intricacy, some intimacy, some ache, some angst, some destructive lines and some ruthless gut-punches, you know? Not a guy coming for the fifth time. 

For the AFTG fandom: I’m tired of seeing people being fine with the way Sakavic treated her characters and coddling Neil & Andrew in the face of it. I don’t hate Andreil, I feel like I should say, but so much of it relies on one or the other sticking people with their knives or fists and that’s such a toxic love, a misconception of what a “good” relationship should be. Now, there are some brilliant fics I’ve read that are just gorgeous with the concept of Andreil--that was what I wished Sakavic had the ability to achieve in her series, while giving dignity to Kevin Day and the rest of the characters that were there and LIVED despite the romance. 

So, obviously, I would avoid doing any of the above I just mentioned, and pray that you will too. Just let these ppl breathe, alright?

For the AoT fandom (yeah i dabbled cuz the manga is just. depressing man): same issue---too much fucking, not enough talking and emoting. Why are there so many goddamned high school AUs? My god. I need a fic that gets down and dirty with the shit going down in the manga and take me through it so I can stand to continue. What about the grief and mourning and the betrayal of it all? Can I get me some of that? Lord, don’t go near the Levi/Eren tag. Y’all just don’t even knock it. Go to Levi/Erwin or something. Or just don’t. Don’t.

For the BNHA fandom (lol. a staple): actually, there’s quite a bit of diversity here so I geniunely can’t complain about much. The sheer magnitude of the English-speaking fandom helps on that end, I suppose. I do think there should be more fics looking at the Shit n Grit of Hero’s society tho, Stain-style. The people the heroes couldn’t save or didn’t want to, the forgotten bodies and the cooling hands, the victims that never got closure, the heroes who got maimed and multilated and couldn’t get back on their feet once the limelight left em. Those sorts of things. I think the fact we see thru the rosy-eyed worldviews of a bunch of green-eared kids deludes people to the fact that People Are Fucking Bad and Disgusting almost all the time. So exploring that, I think, is far more worthwhile. 

But I will also take injury aftermath. I’m not a monster.

For the KNY fandom: EYYY we talk about grief and suffering a lot which if you haven’t noticed, is kind of my Jam! Actually, this fandom prob hits a lot of my sweet spots: role reversals, grief/mourning aftermath, SabiGiyuu, Sabito Lives, the usual! Can’t really say much abt this. Except, there’s a lot of Demon Sex and Rape and, uh. Guys? Can we go back for a hot sec?

For the Code Geass fandom (*rubs hands in glee*): SO this is the fandom I’m most active in aside from AFTG at this precise moment. It’s pretty dead, tbh. My favorite two fics in the AO3 archive was published in 2014 and the author hasn’t written for my fav pairing (Suzaku/Lelouch) since. So. There’s that. There’s also a lot of fucking here! And gross cishet dynamics, but, uh, whatever. I think the Emperor Lelouch/Knight of Zero Suzaku has been overused and abused for rough sex and just general Angst-ing it out. I wanna see how their dynamic plays out like that for sure, but what about when they still had secrets between them a mile wide and had to tell each other half-lies and half-truths? How about them coping with the fact of their betrayals and the death of their loved ones at the hands of each other? Where’s the hardcore shit? 

Think this fandom doesn’t want to dig their fingers in too deep. Shame. 

Another thing: CC is not an immortal seductress. My god give her pizza and some fucking DEPTH. She’s a walking encyclopedia, not some mysterious slut machine! Get your stereotypes and fetishes outta here!

Final thing: TALK ABOUT THE SHIT SUZAKU HAS BEEN THROUGH! He’s not just Lelouch’s boytoy or knight! Stop that! Examine his abuse, his time with the military, his span as a pawn! Look at his motivations and his internalized disgust for himself as a Japanese that was ingrained in him by an oppressive fucking system! Why does he bow? Why is he silent? Speak for him!

7. Favorite description in your wip? (If asked more than once, respond with a new piece each time)

Suzaku watched him watch the discoloring, and Suzaku watched the stillness change into the bare bones of animosity. It was almost kind, the way Lelouch turned his face away and shifted his grip to snatch up the antiseptic.

Neither of them spoke as sharp hands dabbed at the slightly split skin and wet bruising. It stung, but only a little. Long minutes passed like this, Lelouch exchanging swabs for cloths, Suzaku sitting still and watching him work.

Neither of them mentioned the scatter of old deadened skin, puckered across Suzaku’s build like a migration of mutilated fish.

8. Favorite dialogue in your wip? (If asked more than once, respond with a new piece each time)

"You know I can't be seen with you two."

"And I just warned you to not be a coward." Lelouch's eyes gleamed. Again, the challenge was there, and like a fool only Lellouch could make of him, Suzaku took it, open-mouthed and open-palmed.

"Fine," Suzaku said, not knowing what he'd promised himself to: a dinner or a duel. Even though the last time Lelouch picked up a sword it was wooden and he was tiny and cute and clumsy. But Lelouch didn’t need blades to cut. "I'll be there. Does Nunnally still enjoy a good scone?"

"Bring the blueberry ones," Lelouch said, extending the comment like a plank between them, and leapt off the wall, into the white sun. "One for the bastardly son and one for the disowned daughter."

Suzaku followed him out into the blaze of heat, feeling the crude perch of his laughter at the base of his throat. He was so fucking dramatic. "Which one of us do you mean?"

9. What scene was the hardest to write for you and why?

From the same wip fic from above--I’m stuck on the “light” kind-of crackish scene where Suzaku is literally just exasperated with Rivalz and his porn mags. Like I just can’t write it. It’s too.....friendly. And “nice”.

10. What scene was the most fun to write for you and why?

Out of the same fic as above: probably the scene from #8. It was fun to see how coy and rough-mouthed Suzaku could get once he’s together with Lelouch. Just to see them fool around with each other whilst keeping secrets but also somehow be honest was very satisfying and interesting to write out. They are just boys, there. Just boys. In love.

[kunrendeotaku]

Chapter 16

I lead us towards Fergusson’s room, figuring his parents would be busy in the kitchen for a while after their customary weird greeting. I used to not bother knocking on my friends door when I walked in, but after a rather terrifying experience that I’m doing my best to forget from last year, I’ve changed my ways.

A couple taps on his door later and I see a thin guy with a curly jew-fro and thick glasses pull it open, “Marco! And random girl I don’t know! Ferguson, we’ve got company.” Alfonzo moves out of the doorway to open up the pathway into Ferguson’s room. I find myself wondering how Star will think of seeing the room of a teenage boy from Earth for the first time, as most people don’t have the same religious devotion to cleanliness as I do.

“Wha? Isn’t that the girl who almost burned down the school?” An overweight redhead with bright green eyes glances up at us from where he currently sits flopped on a bean bag, game controller in hand. Both of my friends are dressed rather casually in sweat pants and t-shirts, Alfonzo’s much too large for him. Is he borrowing some of Ferguson’s stuff again? The room itself is casually decorated with posters referencing various games and movies, and liberally coated in trash, old food, and dirty clothes. Smells about like you’d expect from a fourteen year old boy’s room.

“I have no idea what you’re talking about.” Star claims innocently, widening her eyes. I had no idea she was half that good an actor. Either she really doesn’t remember, or she’s had a criminal amount of practice claiming to be innocent of her ill deeds. I think both possibilities are about equally likely.

“I’m just glad it apparently ended with only ‘almost’. This is Star Butterfly, the new exchange student. She’s from Mewni, which is uh. Apparently a different dimension. Go figure, we aren’t alone in the universe after all.” I shrug, realizing why Star tends to cast a big spell whenever she does her introductions. The claim is more than a little bit impossible to believe without seeing it with your own two eyes. Honestly, I’ve been so caught up in the craziness that is my life with her that I haven’t really adjusted my worldview to realize how much bigger everything really is. Who knows how many dimensions there are? How many have sentient life, or things we couldn’t even comprehend?

Ferguson struggles up to his feet in what I’m sure he thinks of as a graceful maneuver, before swaggering over to me. He leans an elbow on my shoulder with a confident smirk, “Marco Diaz, my man. Serving up a hottie on a platter for me, right here in my room? I knew there was a reason we’re friends.” Completely ignoring anything outside of the fantasy world he lives in, as usual. He’s a great guy, but I swear he’s even crazier than his parents. Star doesn’t seem to know what to make of the round red-head’s ridiculously forward nature. Honestly, I think she’s still trying to come to grips with how this kid had managed to come from his overwhelmingly attractive parents.

“Ferguson O’durguson, sweet cheeks. I’m into foreign chicks. Where’re you from again? Like, past New York?” Alfonzo wrings his hands behind his much wider friend, clearly worried that the redhead is going to get himself slapped again. At least ‘Casanova’ here isn’t using his sharpied on stomach face trick yet, most of the time he starts with that one.

“I’m the Crown Princess of the Butterfly kingdom! And you aren’t exactly my type, sorry. Wait-” Star squints at Ferguson, taking this whole thing much better than I expected. Maybe she’s already pretty experienced with dating, or something? She comes off as immature as hell, but I really don’t know much about Star yet, “Maybe with a stache?” Her wand snaps up and flashes a pink beam at Ferguson’s face. The spell resolves itself into a truly impressive red mustache wider than the rest of his face with twirled up tips. “Nope! Sorry, better luck hitting on the next princess you find.”

Both of my human friends stare with wide eyes at Star, who descends into a giggling fit. The first glimpse of real magic is always a shock, as you come to slowly realize that you aren’t dealing with just a crazy girl lost in her own imagination. You’re dealing with a magic princess, who happens to also be both crazy and often last in their own imagination. Alfonzo reaches around Ferguson to tug at his mustache, and both of them yelp when they simultaneously realize that it's real.

I disengage from the trio as they begin bombarding Star with the standard nerdy questions a teenage boy might ask a magic user upon finding out that it’s real. What her world is like, are elves real, can they learn magic, can he keep the mustache, you get the picture. I busy myself with some desperately needed cleanup while they manage their introductions, Alfonzo eventually getting around to explaining that his father is a very very busy Veterinarian. He tends to stay with Ferguson rather than sitting around an empty home.

Once I have the room in a livable state, I begin setting up a game for us. You might think I would feel used, cleaning up someone else’s room and doing all the prep work for us to have fun. The thing is, I’ve never once been asked to do anything for Ferguson but I literally can’t help myself sometimes. He’s just such a slob now and again, organizing chaos is writ into my bones. And what kind of friend would I be if I didn’t plan out something we could all enjoy getting to know each other with? They might never notice how I smooth things along, but it’ll never stop me from doing so.

“Hey, kids. I’ve got zombies set up. Who wants to see how many rounds we can go?” I call over to the trio of excited teens still standing around the doorway. Each of us has a beanbag and game controller set out, the game ready to start on the television with a press of a button. Ferguson was kind enough to always keep a spare bean bag for any exchange students I brought along, after getting a set for the rest of us.

Star gasps, her eyes sparkling, “Soft chairs!” she makes a face first dive onto the one clearly set for me by its maroon color. I don’t really blame her for ignoring the bland grey exchange student one, but it still stings to have my seat taken! Ferguson thumps back onto his prison jumpsuit orange bag, while Alfonzo delicately folds his legs under himself before taking a seat on his beige bag o’ beans.

“C’mon Star, that one was mine.” I whine a little, before obediently taking the bland leftover. At least it's still super comfy, as they all are. Star only wiggles around on the bag in answer, happily exploring the brand new feeling. I wonder how a medieval age person would react to sitting on a beanbag for the first time? Maybe a normal person might even panic a bit, but Star reacts to the new experience as she always does-with joy and excitement at the new challenge.

Once she masters sitting up straight on her chair, we move onto the next exceptionally difficult task. The following few hours consist of all three of us Earthlings doing our damndest to teach Star how to play videogames, primarily the zombie killing multiplayer game we tend to prefer. It doesn’t go that well, unfortunately. While she loves the idea of the game with a passion even I wasn’t expecting, she’d never before even seen a gun, much less a video game controller. There was a lot to go over. Shockingly, she seemed to remember all of it with a burning zeal that I can only attribute to her monster slaying side. I imagine a few more study sessions like that one, and she’ll be ready for actually playing.

[adorable-elsanna]

I don't mean to be rude, and I apologize in advance if I am!! But why do you ship this nd WHY does this ship exist? Aren't Elsa and Anna sisters? And blood related at that. I don't want to hate on ships, you can ship washer you want as long as you aren't hurting anybody!! It's just that ships like these with incest startle me a bit. Maybe I'm just confused since I really shipped Kistof and Anna so I'm missing out on this? Ahhh sorry if this is annoying!! -confused anon

 Hi Confused Anon ( aren’t we all? ;) ),

Thanks for your polite ask, lol finally I get to dust off this blog’s ask box! :)) I’d love to respond with a whole essay xDD but I don’t really have time :’( so maybe I’ll just give a quick rundown for now. 

I might not be the most representative person to pose this question to lol because I am an outlier in general, meaning due to my life experiences, my development, my major in college, my deep meditation practice, and more, I do not abide by normative, dominant, hegemonic social structures and social constructs (nor do I actively resist them per se), so I am unfazed by anything. 

I started shipping this after I watched the first movie when it came out in Nov. 2013. One of my first posts on this blog, 7 years ago, was me explaining how I came to ship this (I had made the post private, but now you can read it here. Also this other post, but I wrote it when I was a college student, so it’s a little too analytical for my tastes now. Those were my views at the time). 7 years is a long time, so my mindsets and reasonings have changed, but all the reasons I had for shipping them from before are still with me today. 

I didn’t go into the movie with the intention to ship them, but while watching it, I picked up on a lot of chemistry between them because their interactions and even storyline were infused with strong popular romantic tropes, tropes that were used in other classic Disney movies themselves. I used to watch a lot of romantic comedies so I was very familiar with common romantic tropes. Of course, having came away from the movie having noticed all these romantic notes between them, I was a little confused and thought maybe it was just me. But when I went online to search a bit to see if others saw/felt what I saw, I found out it wasn’t just me! 

So one of the reasons why this ship exists is because people picked up on the romantic tropes that colored some of Elsa and Anna’s interactions, tropes that have usually only appeared between romantic couples, in films and in real life. Even if the creators didn’t intend to and didn’t actively put the tropes there, they are there. 

If we apply the principles of Buddhism (not the religion. Many ppl mistakenly practice things as devotional worship or for superstitious reasons. But if ppl really want to know everything about the mind, how the world works, the universe, who they are, about themselves and “other” people and why people do what they do, the meaning of life, true happiness, the end of suffering and stress and conflict, and consciousness, then forget psychology [not saying it’s not useful though]. Buddhism, or rather Buddhadharma, is the true science of mind, or at least the much more effective tool), it says that there is the law of cause and effect, the universal law. Everything that is created in the universe and each phenomenon that happens is the result of the momentary coming together of causes and conditions that make that thing happen. There are many many causes and conditions and intricacies and things are interconnected and interdependent, no one person can control something to happen (certain conditions have to be there for something to happen). Something can not come from nothing. If something happens, then certain causes and conditions have been created to bring that result. A seed was planted. If we plant an apple seed, what comes out will be an apple tree (provided the right conditions were met, like water, soil, sunlight, etc.). It will never come out as a banana tree. And so we can understand the underlying principle behind how each situation and phenomenon arises, about existence itself, why each thing exists. 

Now WHY did I go off on that tangent??? LOL All of this is to say that certain causes and conditions have been created to result in the effect of many people shipping Elsa and Anna together and there being a fandom for them. (These principles and explanations might seem very simple and like kindergarten stuff, but despite that, many people can’t accept it. ESPECIALLY when it applies to heavy stuff in their regular everyday life. Or even trivial things tbh lol) The last I checked, there were people from at least 26 different countries shipping Elsa and Anna together. 

Everyone thinks they see reality exactly as it is and takes it for granted, and thus attach strongly to the notion that they’re right. But if that’s the case, then why are there so many fights over who is right? So who is actually right? Even if someone were to follow the majority consensus or some popular, ingrained, long-standing ideas / societal rules, it doesn’t necessarily mean they’re right. There are many cases of the blind leading the blind. People used to follow the geocentric model of the universe before they discovered heliocentrism. Ideas are always in flux and keeps changing and transforming, sometimes faster, sometimes slower, sometimes imperceptibly and sometimes conspicuously. If you ask 100 different people why they ship Elsa and Anna, you will get 100 different answers (with a lot of overlap of course) with unique spins on their reasons. Because in the world, each person sees reality through their own color-tinted glasses and filters and adherence to labels, concepts, beliefs, upbringing, etc. And then the person seeing “reality” through red-tinted glasses gets mad at the person seeing with blue-tinted glasses for not seeing the world how they see it (and gets frustrated not understanding why), and vice versa. In this scenario, what is actually best? To realize you’re seeing “reality” through color-tinted glasses, and so you should take them off and truly see reality without any filtered lenses. (This is a little off-topic, but I had to bring some Buddhism into this because first of all, dharma applies to everything lol, and secondly, Buddhism is all about dispelling confusion. There is definitely a way to see reality exactly as it is, it typically involves meditation.) 

Yes, Elsa and Anna are sisters. But I’ve never seen any pair of sisters act like them before (if there are, then that’s great!). I have a sibling myself, and we are very close, but we don’t act like how Elsa and Anna act with each other. With most siblings, I would say there’s a lot more joking around, teasing each other, sarcasm, pranks, and casual relaxed communication than the intense intimacy, deep eye-contact, and soul-bonding that Elsa and Anna share. Disney has portrayed many other sibling relationships before, but it seems like they tried something a little different with Elsa and Anna’s relationship that made it pretty easy for many people to ship them together. 

I ship Elsa and Anna together because their pure true love for each other transcends all labels, concepts, preconceived notions, and time and space. They are completely selfless when it comes to one another and that’s what true love means. They make each other better people and it empowers them to extend this selflessness toward other people. Their sacrificing themselves for each other and selflessness in action is true love exemplified. No one deserves Elsa more than Anna, and no one deserves Anna more than Elsa (speaking from my shipper heart xD). Confining and defining their love as just sisterly seems limiting and not allowing the full potential of their true, expansive, infinite love to manifest. (A sibling relationship is really beautiful, but it still has to be shaped and look a certain way, it has to fit into a particular mold and box and abide by certain conditions. Otherwise, as we have incontrovertibly seen, people will scream bloody murder and be squicked out and all hell will break loose.)  

We can even go one step further to say that the same similarly applies to people’s definitions, notions, concepts, ideas, and beliefs about love. They say this love is like this and that love is like that, this is what love should look like, this person can love this person but only if it’s like this and not like that, this is what it means to love and to be loved, etc. Again, it’s limiting, and placing restrictions on something whose essence is boundless. In Buddhism, with the realization of Enlightenment, one realizes that true love is selfless, unconditional, boundless, free, all-encompassing, nondual, timeless, compassionate, wise, nondiscriminating, infinite, universal, endlessly flowing, non-judgmental, creative, indescribable, and inconceivable. So THIS is the love that I see and ship between Elsa and Anna. I love their relationship as sisters, but their love is so grand that it cannot be contained inside that label, so it transcends and goes beyond any attempts to neatly define and characterize it.

It’s okay if incest ships startle you. Uncomfortable feelings come up whenever the ego experiences anything that challenges its worldview and everything it’s ever known and held to be true, and that prompts it to question and reconsider its mind-constructs. We have a knee-jerk reaction to grasp, hold, and attach to what we like, and to avoid, reject, and push away what we don’t like and what makes us feel uncomfortable. For what it’s worth, Buddhism tells about the cycle of life, death, and rebirth from beginningless time, so we have all lived infinite past lives and been each other’s lovers, mothers, fathers, brothers, sisters, friends, enemies, grandparents, etc. at one point or another. (Deep, but intriguing!, topics for another time.)  

If you really like to ship Krist0ff and Anna, then go ahead and ship happily. First rule of Buddhist meditation: Whatever you do, ONLY DO IT, 100%. ;) And if you don’t do something, then don’t do it, 100%. And then move on to the next moment. Be in the present moment. And remember that everything is changing moment by moment. Mind is changing moment by moment. Don’t need to anticipate the next moment. Who knows where our shipper hearts will take us. 

I like to ship people based on their chemistry and characterization. Elsa and Anna have a great true love story that is theirs and theirs alone. I don’t like to ship relationships that seem contrived, thrown in there for the sake of it, not fleshed out, lacking in substance, trite, and with characters who are underwhelming or underdeveloped. 

Lol no worries, this is not annoying, I’m sorry this is so long and that I took 7 days to get back to you. I wish I could give specific examples from the movies with beautiful gifs to explain why I ship them (I’ve probably written such posts in the past. Maybe I’ll come back to edit this reply one day), but I’ve gotta skedaddle! I’d like to hear your thoughts about my reply if you actually read this, so please send me a message in the ask box again if you can. 

Also I’m a girl if that makes any difference, but yeah anyway, skedaddle time, love you all! 

Oooooh I never finished replying to someone else’s ask box message asking me why I shipped them, it’s from years ago :’(, I started typing my reasons and saved it in my drafts, but it’s incomplete. But here’s what I wrote at the time!

1. I just love everything that Elsa and Anna feel and do for each other. Elsa isolates herself from Anna to keep her safe, and Anna persists in trying to get Elsa to open up to her and goes to find her when she runs away. They’re always thinking of each other and worrying about each other. They act selflessly for one another and their unconditional love is expressed so genuinely. This kind of devotion in any relationship is rare.

2. There was a lot of chemistry between them in the movie. At the coronation ball scene, I get that the creators were trying to depict awkwardness between them since they haven’t spoken in a long time, and Anna wanted reassurance that Elsa didn’t hate her so she was nervous about getting Elsa’s attention and approval, but the scene came off as Elsa being kind of suave and flirty and Anna being flustered because her crush just complimented her. Then Anna gave Elsa a playful smile when she was dipped upside-down as if she only had eyes for Elsa.

When Anna stares admiringly at Elsa as she stands atop the staircase, it was like a scene straight out of A Cinderella Story or Enchanted where the prince stares at his true love like she took his breath away.

[seksipomminpurkaja]

24-36, 44 for yu-wen, trias and maya

i may have been procrastinating but at least i was procrastinating outside

How quick is your character to trust someone else?

Back when she was with her clan she didn’t really have to make that decision herself as she had her clan either assure or warn her about certain individuals. Now it’s much harder for her to trust people who don’t share her experiences, men especially. 

Very slow, after her entire worldview was challenged. She was only looking out for herself a long time before landing in the outer rim

Maybe bit too fast, and it got her into a lot of trouble before Nayden picked her up from a city sewer basically (ironically she hadn’t learnt her lesson and went with him). Now she’s just a tad bit slower to trust strangers

How quick is your character to suspect someone else? Does this change if they are close with that person?

She’s constantly on the edge, but there are people she trusts more to not do something to cross her.  But yeah, when something happens she’s already on the lookout for the perpetrator

For her, if something crazy happens she just assumes she had a part in it. Someone broke into some home? Well she was drunk last night. A town explodes? Might’ve been that unmarked package she forgot somewhere, oops

She also assumes everything is her fault (thanks mama), but unlike trias, she get really self deprecating over it, constantly apologizing until it’s proven it was not her fault

How does your character behave around children?

Children love her, for some reason, she’s towering over them with her height of 6′2′’ and she just lets them climb all over her, before her husband died they were talking about getting their own but, oh well

She’s constantly afraid she will say or do something that upsets or hurts them, it’s like jenga for her, she’s not at all used to kids. but she tries, when needed, to protect them, she may be harsh wit handling them but would die for any of them

She loves kids, she’s basically a big kid too, just one pleading look at Nayden and a nod of approval and she’s already playing with them

How does your character normally deal with confrontation?

She stands tall with her mountain ass and lets the other one say what they have to say, and then decides to either ignore it or pull out a dagger, back off chump

Hand already on one of her six knives just in case either party starts to escalate the situation

She’s never alone so she just has to go behind lucas’ back and let him handle it

How quick or slow is your character to resort to physical violence in a confrontation?

If given reason, she will first threaten with a dagger, and if that doesn’t work she will cut, if the other responds then it’s a fight

Any conflict she’s in she has a knife on hand. But will never make the first attack 

She’ll be trying to defuse the situation first but if it doesn’t work and having a physical threat of a demigod isn’t enough to make the other(s) back down, then it’s showtime

What did your character dream of being or doing as a child? Did that dream come true?

She wanted to be a soldier, it’s a proud tradition of at least one woman of the family to be a warrior for the good of the country. And she was, for a while, then her husband was killed and she was their next target, so she had to run away. Then she found Jalana and her ship

She never got time to dream, ever since her parents gave her away she was raised to be something that was already set out for her. She was in her thirties when she saw there’s so much more out there than being bossed around

She always wanted to travel, the island she grew up on wasn’t that big and it was forbidden for her and the other kids to go out to the sea. When she ran away she first went with a fisherman to the next island and so forth, until she reached the mainland, and she got to travel from there on

What does your character find repulsive or disgusting?

Deep sea creatures, as much as she loves the open sea and being on a boat, just never let her drop into the water

The terenlasi labs, she has seen some shit they do actual living beings and was one of the reasons she chose exile over being sent there

Rotting animal corpses and bugs and worms they attract, it’s such a waste not to use the whole thing

Describe a scenario in which your character feels most comfortable.

The ship is docked, but no one has left for the town for the night, they have a small fire going, and music, she’s on the upper deck watching over this little moment of peace wit ha cup of ale

In a bar with plenty of people, she knows no one, and she has a whole corner booth for herself and unlimited mozzarella sticks

Evening campfire, Wane and Romir are having a metaphorical sword fight, Lucas is roasting game and she’s bundled in a blanket and snugged to Helga

Describe a scenario in which your character feels most uncomfortable.

Raging storm in the middle of buttfuck nowhere in the open sea

When asked about feelings

When left alone

In the face of criticism, is your character defensive, self-deprecating, or willing to improve?

Defensive at first, how dare you tell her that. Later, much later she will come back and apologize

She’s used to brushing it off completely, but now with krea as her moral backbone she gets a little self-deprecating, but will watch out for that certain behavior for he future

Complete and utter self-deprecation, maybe little unintentional guilt-tripping thrown into the mix, she’ll be much more careful the following days

Is your character more likely to keep trying a solution/method that didn’t work the first time, or immediately move on to a different solution/method?

She’s a woman of many solutions so she’ll got though many possible ones 

She’s pretty stuck on her methods so far, but she also has the willpower to make it work

More like she tries something and then gives up when it doesn’t work, please hold your daughter’s hand everyone

How does your character behave around people they like?

She’s calm and attentive, blink and you miss her smiling

She’s cracking jokes, oversharing, you get to hear her conspiracy theories

She’s pretty much just warm mash potato, idk how else to describe it

How does your character behave around people they dislike?

She has a permanent snarl on her face, and looks even more intimidating than usual

utter lack of regard and doesn’t really comprehend anything that’s being said 

She tries to stay polite but some people make it so hard

How easy or difficult is it for your character to say “I love you?” Can they say it without meaning it?

It’s a big thing for her, so she never says it without meaning

She probably chokes every time she says it, so many flies flying straight into her mouth every time, weird

She says it a lot, but never without meaning it, but for her it’s pretty casual. If you appreciate someone in your life you should say it every chance you get

[bookandcover]

[Note: Most of this post was written in July/August 2020.]

The second book my family read for our Anti-Racism Book Club, Just Mercy, details decades of Black attorney Bryan Stevenson’s fight for criminal justice reform, particularly focused on the sentencing and treatment of prisoners on Alabama’s death row. Stevenson’s experiences seem like those of a military doctor—harrowing, horrifying, and addressing at breakneck speed each horrible emergency in case-after-case immediately before him. While his organization, Equal Justice Initiative, continues to bring about policy change and positive impact in diverse ways, I was struck, repeatedly, by how often this book matter-of-factly captured and expressed the challenges of a tremendous uphill battle—Bryan Stevenson looked like one person (or one of a small group) trying desperately to hold back an overwhelming tide. The book captures being “on the ground,” “in the field,” “in the heart of battle,” in the cruel, immediate fight for racial justice and human dignity. 

The novel’s structure reflects this proximity to the fight. Each chapter, while addressing a different element of criminal justice reform (women’s experiences, children charged as adults, mental illness and the death penalty) chooses as its central focus a specific case or few cases Stevenson worked on. By telling the stories of these cases—which Stevenson does with a sharp eye for detail—our author reveals the humanity and individuality inseparable from each case. I loved this. Stevenson knows that, in making policies and laws, we tend to talk about statistics, numbers, and averages. We build “systems” for justice (ideally, that is...acknowledging that we’ve mostly built systems for injustice). But it’s the specific cases, and the specific people (such as innocent Walter McMillian, who spent six years on death row and returned to a life completely obliterated by the process of his wrongful conviction, multiple trials, imprisonment, and overwhelming press coverage of his case), that reveal the miscarriages of justice that show where our systems (and our hearts) need a lot of work. 

The structure of this book around the stories of specific people achieves several things central to both Stevenson’s mission and worldview. First of all, it puts humans first. Stevenson is a lawyer. He knows the law and he believes in it. But he also knows it exists (or should) to serve and to protect people. He maintains incredible humanity when faced with diverse people and perspectives. “We’re more than the worst thing any of us has ever done,” he writes. Even with those who stand in his way, who express cruel and racist viewpoints, Stevenson is always looking for positive change, is always aware of the capacity of humans to grow through receiving mercy. Stevenson talks about the poorly-trained and ill-prepared workers who are given the job of delivering lethal injections because doctors cannot do so under the Hippocratic Oath. He is sympathetic for these workers. He includes the guard at one of his client’s prisons who gives him a very hard time when he comes to visit. The Confederate-flag-toting, blatantly racist guard, trumped up on his own power, is given the opportunity, and the grace, to change. Stevenson even acknowledges change in the man who stood strongest against Walter’s retrial. 

Stevenson’s capacity for mercy seemed, to me, superhuman. I cannot imagine displaying the grace he did in so many situations. [Later, I also pondered whether other Black writers I’ve read this year would agree with Stevenson’s approach? Did his grace in the face of racism present an unrealistic bar? Did it school his tone and his approach into one that others would view as too non-confrontational, too loving? I’m not sure. I will try to do some research about how other Black writers and activists have responded to his book.] At the same time, I did feel incredibly moved by Stevenson. I believe him, believe in his conviction and poignant insistence that we, as humans, have incredible capacity for mercy and that mercy is the tool that can reshape our systems of injustice. As he turns his capacity for mercy on the criminal justice system, which enacts harsh punishments on people, even when correctly “judged” (if such a thing is possible) to be criminals, he shows how quick we can be to disregard human life. Why do we—any of us—think we have the capacity to judge another’s life? To enact a punishment as final as the death penalty? 

In addition to humanizing the systematic criminal justice process and focusing on the humanity of criminals, Stevenson’s narrative structure in this book highlights the overwhelming scope of the problems in criminal justice that are in desperate need of reform. This could be a different book if it focused on political science or on legal policy—more systematic, more big picture. Instead, it makes a connection with our hearts. It shows how, as I’ve mentioned, Stevenson struggles to get through the bare minimum of what he’d like to achieve. He helps the people with the closest execution dates first. He cannot take on every case. Over and over he fights for a stay of execution. In many ways, this work is like putting a band-aid on a gushing wound. 

But Stevenson more than justifies this work through his narrative focus on individual humans. One significant impact of the structure of this book—of its focus on individual people as people, humans, real and complex—is that it pits the weight of EVEN ONE human life against the whole criminal justice system. Even one failure of justice, even one wrongful sentencing, becomes a crime weighing on all of us as human beings. Because how can we sit, complacent in our own homes and lives, while any one of the situations Bryan Stevenson describes occurs? We, through our own willfulness or our own blunder, condemn other people to the situations described in this novel—brutal execution by failing electric chair of a mentally-ill young man, repeated rape of a child tried as an adult and sent to an adult prison, imprisonment for years of a completely innocent individual—these are crimes that have no reckoning. How do we answer for them? Should we ever, this book asks, have this kind of power over another human being? The power to condemn another person to death, to choose extreme punishment over mercy? 

And, yet, we do these things, and we exert this power. We have imperfect systems and the idea that we have systems at all keeps us in complacency, complicit. Of course, this is the world and not utopia—any justice system designed by humans, even with superhuman attempts at fairness and racial equity, will be imperfect. But some systems could, certainly, be much better than others depending on who designs them and for whom they are designed. Stevenson’s central focus on humanity—on the experiences and cases of individuals made real and concrete to us through his depictions—reveals a worldview focused on the idea that any improvement of an imperfect system has incredible significance. Because each human life is worthy of every iota of effort. One life saved, one innocent man freed—the improved, the better system that saves only one more person than the slightly less good system—this is not a slight difference at all. This is a human life. Something that should never be traded in casually nor played around with. Any miscarriage of justice, Stevenson shows us, ought to rest heavily on all of our souls. 

[Here I am, again, looking back at and editing writing I did about racism and racial justice six months ago. I can see the ways in which my thinking has evolved in this span of time. I feel like, with each piece of reading and thinking and talking and acting that I do about race, I am more aware of how far I have to go. I’m alarmed by huge blunders I’ve made in the past. But what I should feel worse about was all that time, before now, of ignorance. I’ve been ignorant enough to not see my racism. I still am, I’m sure. I’ve got to keep going. 

Also, I write these book reviews for myself. But I put them on the internet. If anyone who reads this wants to talk to me about anything I have written here, I hope that you feel you can. Thank you.]

[sergeant-angels-trashcan]

I’m having too many feelings about Arya’s characterization on the show, so here we go:

I feel really, really strongly that D&D decided that Arya was going to be the “Strong Female Character” trope, and they took away all of her...softer character development/relationships and grafted them on to Sansa. It kind of reminds me of book Hermione and Ron vs. movie Hermione and Ron--by removing one character’s flaws and giving them another’s strengths, it shortchanges both.

So let’s just dive right in, shall we?

"I will remember, Your Grace," said Sansa, though she had always heard that love was a surer route to the people's loyalty than fear. If I am ever a queen, I'll make them love me.  -A Storm of Swords

So, Sansa knows that fear is no way to rule. That’s important. The thing is, this is pretty much the first time we’ve seen this sort of awareness from Sansa. I don’t know that, apart from Joffrey, we’ve seen her worry about gaining the love of others. She gets along well with other lords and ladies, so it’s never really been an issue for her, though at this point in her story, she’s being shunned by the court. Still, it’s interesting to see her realize that she should observe what Cersei does, and then do the opposite of it. 

How do you make people love you--specifically, people you rule? The phrasing of this is interesting, too. “I’ll make them love me.” Make is a forceful word. Compared to later in the series, when the Tyrells bring carts of food to win the love of King’s Landing for Margaery, make implies a certain amount of fear, or compulsion. 

The Bread Riots are the first time Sansa is forced to reckon with the reality of poverty in King’s Landing, and the first time she’s really confronted with the fact that people who have never even met her hate her. In a lot of ways, you could say it’s the first meaningful interaction she’s had with people below her station. She has maids and servants, of course, but up until this point I don’t think Sansa truly comprehends how fortunate she is. She still faces danger in the Red Keep. Any wrong move could result in being beaten and humiliated, but that’s danger of a different sort than starvation or rape or death.

Arya, on the other hand, is, from the beginning, defined by her ability to connect with people who are different than her. Unlike Sansa, who enjoys the people at court, nobles and knights and lords, Arya loves the smallfolk. Blacksmiths and butcher’s boys, cooks and horse masters. Not only is this important enough that Sansa comments on it, it’s so different from Sansa’s own worldview that it is spoken of with derision.

Sansa knew all about the sorts of people Arya liked to talk to: squires and grooms and serving girls, old men and naked children, rough-spoken freeriders of uncertain birth. Arya would make friends with anybody. This Mycah was the worst; a butcher's boy, thirteen and wild, he slept in the meat wagon and smelled of the slaughtering block. Just the sight of him was enough to make Sansa feel sick, but Arya seemed to prefer his company to hers.  -Game of Thrones

Everything Arya has done since this observation was made has only driven the point further home. Arya can make friends with anyone--from her tentative friendship with the Hound to her friendships with the Brotherhood to Lady Smallwood--as she continues on her journey, she has started to learn better how to interact with nobility, something Sansa has always excelled at. In Braavos, Arya is quite literally putting herself in someone else’s shoes. 

Cat had made friends along the wharves; porters and mummers, ropemakers and sailmenders, taverners, brewers and bakers and beggars and whores. They bought clams and cockles from her, told her true tales of Braavos and lies about their lives, and laughed at the way she talked when she tried to speak Braavosi. -A Feast for Crows

Arya’s ability to make friends isn’t just a casual thing, either. Maybe it’s the wolf in her. Maybe it’s the nobility in her--chivalry in the classical sense--but she protects people. She looks out for others, to the point where she knows she might do better on her own, but they wouldn’t, and she can’t leave them. This holds true for people she knows:

She would make much better time on her own, Arya knew, but she could not leave them. They were her pack, her friends, the only living friends that remained to her, and if not for her they would still be safe at Harrenhal, Gendry sweating at his forge and Hot Pie in the kitchens. -A Storm of Swords

"You leave Weasel alone, she's just scared and hungry is all." Arya glanced back, but the girl was not following for once. Hot Pie must have grabbed her, like Gendry had told him. 

The roof was gone up too, and things were falling down, pieces of flaming wood and bits of straw and hay. Arya put a hand over her mouth and nose. She couldn't see the wagon for the smoke, but she could still hear Biter screaming. She crawled toward the sound...Jaqen saw her, but it was too hard to breathe, let alone talk. She threw the axe into the wagon. -A Clash of Kings

And people she doesn’t:

"He is not a lord," a child's voice put in. "He's in the Night's Watch, stupid. From Westeros." A girl edged into the light, pushing a barrow full of seaweed; a scruffy, skinny creature in big boots, with ragged unwashed hair. "There's another one down at the Happy Port, singing songs to the Sailor's Wife," she informed the two bravos. To Sam she said, "If they ask who is the most beautiful woman in the world, say the Nightingale or else they'll challenge you....”

...Don't do that either," said the barrow girl, "or else they'll ask for your boots next, and before long you'll be naked." ...And suddenly there was a knife in the girl's left hand, a blade as skinny as she was. The one called Terro said something to his fair-haired friend and the two of them moved off, chuckling at one another. -A Feast for Crows

Arya’s training arc in Braavos is simply giving her better tools to do what she has always done: defend people. Superficially, yes, she’s learning how to kill people. The show seems to think this is the most important thing she learned in Braavos, but there’s more to killing people than just killing:

"Are you some butcher of the battlefield, hacking down every man who stands in your way?" -A Dance With Dragons

As a Faceless Man in training, Arya is learning discretion, patience, and temperance. Particularly with what she saw as she traveled Westeros, this emphasis on the value of life, and the importance of not taking more than is needed, is pretty profound. 

Sansa’s character growth is leaning more towards political savvy--just her proximity to Littlefinger would lead to that conclusion, but she’s taking part in his plans, she’s learning how to play the game, and far more convincingly than she ever did at King’s Landing. In the books, she’s learning how to manage a household--managing the resources at the Eyrie--and how to interact with people whose default is not to treat her with respect. As Littlefinger’s bastard daughter, she doesn’t have the protection of being a lady.

In the books, this is a really important part of Sansa growing as a person, something the show doesn’t give us.

It wasn't fair. Sansa had everything. Sansa was two years older; maybe by the time Arya had been born, there had been nothing left. Often it felt that way. Sansa could sew and dance and sing. She wrote poetry. She knew how to dress. She played the high harp and the bells. Worse, she was beautiful. Sansa had gotten their mother's fine high cheekbones and the thick auburn hair of the Tullys. Arya took after their lord father. Her hair was a lusterless brown, and her face was long and solemn. Jeyne used to call her Arya Horseface, and neigh whenever she came near. It hurt that the one thing Arya could do better than her sister was ride a horse. Well, that and manage a household. Sansa had never had much of a head for figures. If she did marry Prince Joff, Arya hoped for his sake that he had a good steward.  -A Game of Thrones

Arya has practical skills, Sansa the glamorous ones. I think it’s important to note that, as Arya lists off the skills Sansa has, she does not deride them. Arya isn’t maligning the things Sansa is good at--Arya just knows that she’ll never be as good as Sansa at them. And even though “managing a household” is tacked on at the end there, as if Arya herself isn’t too impressed with this skill, it’s so incredibly important, particularly when paired with other foreshadowing we get about her future. Having a head for figures, being able to connect with the smallfolk--these are all skills rulers need. 

Of course, in the show universe, we don’t see Sansa learning these skills--it’s just sort of assumed that she has them. Again, this undercuts the importance of her book training arc and completely disregards certain things, like Robb striking Sansa from Winterfell’s succession line and the fact that, with Bran and Rickon presumed dead, Arya not only has a claim to the North, but the ability to rule it. 

Sansa is cultured. She’s a proper lady, the kind of girl who would do well at court, who has the potential to become great at court politics. In some ways, given her stated affinity for children, GRRM might be leading her to becoming a Master of Whisperers. A little bird commanding a flock of little birds.

"Nothing happens in this city without Varys knowing. Ofttimes he knows about it before it happens. He has informants everywhere. His little birds, he calls them. One of his little birds heard about your visit." -A Game of Thrones

Arya reads, and writes. She rides, and can fight with a sword and a dagger. She’s learning to speak different languages, and she was raised with the old gods and her mother’s faith, and has a respect for all religions that she is learning through being a servant of the Many-Faced God. She’s hunted and cooked worked for her food and been hunted. She has lived with people who wanted her dead, she’s gone hungry and begged and hang on a minute. 

This sounds familiar. 

"He is here. Aegon has been shaped for rule since before he could walk. He has been trained in arms, as befits a knight to be, but that was not the end of his education. He reads and writes, he speaks several tongues, he has studied history and law and poetry. A septa has instructed him in the mysteries of the Faith since he was old enough to understand them. He has lived with fisherfolk, worked with his hands, swum in rivers and mended nets and learned to wash his own clothes at need. He can fish and cook and bind up a wound, he knows what it is like to be hungry, to be hunted, to be afraid. Tommen has been taught that kingship is his right. Aegon knows that kingship is his duty, that a king must put his people first, and live and rule for them."  -A Dance With Dragons

In the books, it seems pretty clear that Arya is the one being groomed to rule. The show (D&D) seem intent that Sansa will take that role. A lot of Arya’s defining character traits have been reassigned to Sansa, leaving Arya as just an assassin. The show truncated book!Sansa’s journey to becoming a political operator for a reason I don’t get, and in the process managed to completely eliminate Arya’s interpersonal skills as well as her and Jon’s bond.

In the books, the oldest Starks (or Stark-adjacents, if we’re operating under the assumption that R+L=J) are, or have the potential to be, highly complimentary. 

Jon has command experience. He’s dealt with military, with strategy, with battle. Sansa has political experience. She has seen and lived with some of the shrewdest minds in Westeros, and has the potential to be a diplomatic link between the North and the South. Arya suited to the boring, hum-drum aspects of ruling, the day-to-day. She is a good listener. She is learning the value of patience in the House of Black and White as well as humility. She’s sweeping floors and scrubbing dead bodies. She’s not afraid of hard work, and since she started her dancing lessons with Syrio, has been learning that change only happens if you keep working at it. It doesn’t happen all at once. She knows what life is really like for the average person in Westeros. 

More than that, she’s seen firsthand the cost of war. This is so, so important. Arya has fought, she has walked through burned fields and castles, she’s been on the run, she’s killed, she’s saved people. Of all of the potential queens--Daenerys, Sansa, and Cersei--Arya is, I would argue, the only one who has truly experienced the horrors of war. Cersei and Sansa survived the Blackwater, true, but they weren’t fighting in it, and neither of them have seen the extent of damage the war as a whole has had on Westeros. Daenerys has seen more--she has waged war, but she has not fought, or killed, though she has seen the devastation of war.

Now, I’m not saying that hand-to-hand combat is required for someone to be a good ruler; I just want to point out that, of all the nobility who currently have the ability to angle for a throne, only Arya and Stannis have actually witnessed the toll war takes on the land and the people. Arya being disguised as a commoner would also vastly change what she and Stannis saw.

When show!Sansa walks through Winterfell, coming up with a plan for the surrounding areas to send grain, when she notices the armor being made should be covered with leather--these are not things Sansa would know. We’ve never seen her in a situation where she would have this knowledge, unless simply being raised in the North is enough of an explanation.

Book Sansa is a selfish character. There’s no way around this. She’s selfish, and petty, and shallow, and her journey is so poignant in the books because she comes to realize that the things she thought were important actually aren’t, and the people whose approval she once yearned for are terrible and she’d really just rather be around her obnoxious siblings. Even then, her thoughts of her siblings tend towards...well, snotty.

Sansa had once dreamt of having a sister like Margaery; beautiful and gentle, with all the world's graces at her command. Arya had been entirely unsatisfactory as sisters went. 

A Storm of Swords

That’s...Sansa, your sister could be dead, for all you know. The fact that GRRM includes this thought is, again, interesting. As much as Arya and Sansa disagree, Arya’s thoughts never have this sort of flavor to them. When Arya thinks of Sansa, it is more often with worry, or regret, and occasional bitterness. It’s fascinating to me how immature Sansa often is in comparison to Arya. Of course, Arya has her moments. I’m not denying that. 

Honestly, rereading Sansa chapters--I’m not sure if we’re supposed to like her in the beginning? She never strays into hate territory, but she does some pretty crappy things. She thinks some pretty crappy things. The fact that GRRM shows us these things and lets us be privy to these thoughts is important. I didn’t like book Sansa until she escaped King’s Landing. This is when her life takes a pretty sharp turn from “pampered and scared” to “lying for survival without the comforts of home”. Her journey to the Fingers is the first time she’s started to experience the things all of her remaining siblings or presumed siblings (hi, Jon) have been experiencing since the first book in some cases. She’s lying about her identity. She’s around people who can overpower her and won’t care because they don’t know she’s a lady. Even then, she’s not starving, or begging, or freezing, or fighting for her life. 

Sansa’s journey is almost purely internal. It’s all about her mental and emotional growth. Maybe she’ll wind up in a place of compassion. Maybe she won’t. Maybe her ability to detach from a situation will help her family stay alive and they ante up for the game of thrones. 

Arya’s journey, by contrast, is very external. She travels all over Westeros, to Essos. She learns how to change her outward appearance. She learns how to physically protect herself. I would argue that this is because she already has all of the internal character traits she will need to reach GRRM’s final goal for her--compassion, understanding, and a genuine love for people. 

Arya’s importance to the narrative is undermined so much by D&D’s writing. I think it’s pretty clear that they don’t understand either Stark sister. Sansa does not need to be put through more pain to be compelling; Arya doesn’t need to be emotionless to be badass. 

Here’s the thing: GRRM doesn't write strong female characters. He writes female characters well. None of them are perfect paragons. Arya and Sansa, Brienne and Cersei, Catelyn and Melisandre, are all deeply flawed just like real people. They each have strengths and weaknesses. They are petty, or impulsive, or narrow-minded. They are naive or jaded or willfully cruel. They are kind and soft and honorable. this is one of the greatest weaknesses of the show--it’s unable to let its female characters be people, and it’s Arya and Sansa who suffer.

[levelstory]

My Favorite Podcasts

I had intended on writing a stellar introduction to this piece, talking about how important podcasts have been to my life and how much I have learned and blah, blah, blah. But if I am being honest, now is not the time for philosophical musings on why podcasts are freaking great. Instead, I just want to talk about my favorite podcasts, the podcasts that I can listen to no matter what. And don't underestimate me when I say no matter what. I am talking about podcasts that I never grow sick of. Sure there are times when I love a podcast, but then there are equal the amount of times when I return to the podcast and grow bored or just don't enjoy it like I did at one time. The podcasts I am talking about are the ones that I have stuck with through thick and thin and never can't enjoy. They are just too good to pass up. I know, it is a high bar I am setting. But I stand by these top 5 picks and I hold them in high regard. So without further ado, my top 5 podcasts that I never, ever get sick of...ever.

Up Yours, Downstairs

Now this list is in no particular order, but if it was then this podcast would be at the top of the tier. I never knew a love as deep as the one I have for this podcast. It specializes in recapping the PBS/ITV period soap opera, Downton Abbey. I tell people to watch Downton Abbey just to listen to this show...because if I am being honest, Downton isn't all that good. It is this podcast that makes watching all six seasons and a tacked on movie worth while. Hosts Kelly and Amy are hilarious and super smart, creating an atmosphere that is relaxing and educational. There are a handful of podcasts that have made me laugh out loud at work, but none have been able to do so with such consistency. And this is one of the few shows that I relisten to since new episodes are not currently being put out any longer (sad face). Choosing to listen to this podcast will be the best decision of your life, even more important than deciding what college to attend or what to name your first born child. Okay...that may be slightly sarcastic but you get the idea. 

Listen: Apple Podcasts | Pippa

In the Books (Game of Thrones Book Club)

Like the previous podcast, this show is no longer producing episodes which is a real shame because my gosh I crave new episodes. But listening to the episodes we were given is always super enjoyable. Hosts James, “Graessle”, Chelsea, and Joel recap and analyze chapters from A Song of Ice and Fire by George R.R. Martin. Although never officiated via the podcasts gods on iTunes or other audio platforms, this show was primarily hosted via YouTube. The Practical Folks, the channel that produced this program, are a comedy YouTube channel known primarily for their Drunk Disney show. The channel also used to post a lot of Game of Thrones / A Song of Ice and Fire content. Throughout its run the show was known as the Game of Thrones book club, with a name change coming shortly before the decision to bring the show to an audio platform vs. live streams and video. Sadly, shortly after the name change came the news that the team just did not have time to dedicate to have these book clubs. While I understand the reasoning, it is a real shame as this is by far the best A Song of Ice and Fire book club on the interwebs and I could have used their insight on the later books. Regardless, it is a great show and has a lot of re-listening value.

Listen/Watch: YouTube

Witch, Please

Harry Potter is the reason I became a podcast fanatic. In college all I wanted to do was study the Harry Potter books. Being that there were no classes on the series at my school, I turned to the internet where I found a plethora of podcasts to fill my Potter cravings. At this point I've listened to almost all of the podcasts about these books that are out there and it is safe to say that I have grown a bit bored. Listening to the recaps saying very similar things over and over again becomes dull and if I am being honest, Potter has lost its luster for me over the years due to Rowling's inability to leave the series behind and my own growth as a person. The series still holds a candle but it isn't as strong and I am okay with that. For a while I was beginning to think that all Potter podcasts were the same old rodeo...but Witch, Please is a breath of fresh air. Finally, a podcast that offers something new to the Potter community. What has become increasingly obvious over the years since Potter's publication is that the books, nor Rowling, are not as woke as we once believed. This podcast dives into these ideas, challenging the books while also celebrating them for the wonders that they are. I seriously love these ladies and love this podcast. Definitely take a listen.

Listen: Apple Podcasts | Google Podcasts

fiction/non/fiction

Self described on iTunes as, "[a podcast that] interprets current events through the lens of literature…" If ever there was a podcast for me, it would be this one. For the longest time, since high school, I have firmly believed that literature offers a window into our lives that helps us not only understand ourselves but the world around us. Good literature has long felt like a requirement for my life. After all, how can I live without these amazing books that seem to be written directly to my own soul and speak to my very experiences while at the same time speaking to others with completely different ones? During this time of political unrest, literature feels more important than ever to understanding ourselves, our neighbors, and political climates. If literature has taught me anything, it is the need to practice empathy and to have a better understanding of those whose experiences are different than mine. I grew up with a very sheltered, conservative worldview. Reading literature has expanded my mind and forced me to wrestle with ideas and I feel better for it. I never want to become content with the way things are but always question and try to understand. This podcast is the perfect outlet for these feelings. The hosts and guests talk about current events and relate them to works of literature. This podcast seems to feed my very soul and I can't get enough of it. I am still catching up on episodes and I imagine I will be a bit sad when I am all caught up, but I am excited for the future of the show and new episodes!

Listen: Apple Podcasts | Google Podcasts

Team West Covina

The CW musical drama Crazy Ex-Girlfriend is a show I have a mixed relationship with...on the one hand I absolutely love it. It radically defies television and musical tropes while also being crazy funny and a strangely accurate depiction of relationships and mental health. On the other hand, the show can sometimes drag and the plot can feel forced. But at the end of the day, it is a show I find highly enjoyable and always recommend. As with most things in life, once I began watching this show I immediately started looking for podcasts to listen to. I found one that I stuck with for awhile but never loved. Then this one was suggested to me via a YouTuber and I figured, it is worth giving a shot...and I am so glad I did. The podcast analyses each episode in depth, paying particular attention to the characters and the themes being presented and talking about this on a larger scale by referencing past and future episodes. Clearly "Paisley" knows her stuff, and I could not imagine it being in more capable hands. Her analysis is on point and really makes you appreciate the show so much more than the casual watch. 

Listen: Apple Podcasts | Spotify | Google Podcasts

I listen to a lot of podcasts...A LOT! My podcast library is current made up of...well I would tell you but iTunes is failing to load. What else is new. (Yes, I am bitter that iTunes can't load properly in 2019. And yes, I still use iTunes and an iPod in 2019). Again I must emphasize a lot. Sometimes I download podcasts and collect their episodes for listening far off in the future. Other times I download one episode and wonder months later why a certain podcast is in my library.

These podcasts are without a doubt the ones I always find myself listening to and returning to. They bring so much joy to my life, and I always look forward to them.

Let me know in the comments what some of your favorite podcasts are! 

[endlessceaselessboundless]

Humanity & Faith & Fan service

So the only other real life person I know who watches SPN is what you’d call a casual viewer. She thinks it’s fun, she likes watching them kill the monster of the week, and she thinks Cas and Dean are just really good friends. 

She finally just watched the first 4 episodes of S13 and I was dying to hear what she thought since I knew she didn’t ship it. And after watching those eps, she still doesn’t. Which is mindblowing and completely fascinating to me, because I felt like the show was really bludgeoning us over the head with the Dean and Cas love story during those eps. 

We discussed some moments from the show, Dean praying in the first episode for God to bring back Cas (and everyone), the Cas/Mary beers at the start of ep. 3, the mix tape and “I love you” scenes from S12, and basically she waved all of that away. A mixture of fan service and misplaced emphasis it seems. 

Now, I have also just finished reading, The Things They Carried for my book club, and the rest of this is gonna get cray cray, so it’s under the cut. 

The Things They Carried  is about the Vietnam War, and the author talks a lot about what makes a “true” war story, and basically he says all the stories he tells in the book are not true, but that they happened exactly like this. He breaks up several of the stories with his own sort of author commentary about truth and how a story should work. He says, “All you can do is tell it one more time, patiently, adding and subtracting, making up a few things to get at the real truth.”

This is so true, because this is how stories work. If we told a story exactly as it happened and included every possible detail then the story would be terrible (I know b/c I have a tendency to do this and everyone looks terribly bored in the middle of my stories). ALSO because the story likely involves people we can actually never know the whole story because some part of it, some very important parts of it, are locked in their brain forever. For instance- when Cas says “I love you” in S12, we must all interpret that in the way that best makes sense to us, because it is just never clarified. Cas’ final and real intentions in that scene can only be guessed at, I mean he was dying! Maybe he wasn’t even sure what his intentions were. That’s why we can never know the full truth about a story. 

That’s what I think Tim O’Brien the author of The Things They Carried meant when he said “making up a few things to get at the real truth.” Dean and Cas and Sam are never going to just tell us the real “truth” if they did the show would be terrible. Also, we often don’t know the real “truth” ourselves, so keeping the characters from telling us the truth is part of what makes them believable. 

When I told my non-shipping friend about the number of Cas beers versus Mary beers that Dean had next to his bed at the beginning of ep3 I was talking about something SPN had made up to get at the “real truth” of that scene and Dean’s headspace. This is ep.3 after all, we all know Dean is sad, the real “truth” of this scene is exploring what that sadness is about because we already knew he was fucking sad. The number and types of beer he drank are all part of explaining  the sadness, it’s showing the viewer something to get at the “truth” of his sadness. 

Now truth is highly flexible in some cases, and the thing that has really been pinging around my brain since we talked was her dismissal of certain things as fan service. The mention of fan service suggests that the scenes in question are not as legitimate because they were done to appease a certain faction of fans. That's the “truth” that some casual viewers live. I’m not terribly familiar with fan service, I thought it was just when anime girls wore skimpy clothes for no good reason, but apparently Dean giving Cas a mix tape off screen and then them having a convo about it later is also fan service. This seems wrong to me. 

Here’s the thing though, one character dressed in a sexy manner is not going to impact your plot that much, but creating a bunch of deeply emotional scenes between two major characters on a show, now that’s going to change the nature of your show.  So what is the nature of our show? I would argue there are several levels, there’s that casual viewer level where it’s just fun to watch the brother’s kill monsters and save the day. There’s a deeper level where SPN, like any good story, is about what it means to be human. Obviously, the deeper level covers a lot of ground. After 13 seasons we also have to accept that the nature of the show has changed. Sam and Dean are in very different places in their lives than when we started in season 1. The things they want, the questions they are asking themselves are very different. So....what is fan service then?

Season 1, the episode “Hookman,” Sam and Dean are at a college party trying to talk about the case. Sam looks uncomfortable, Dean wants to have some fun, he’s already making eyes at the party goers and scoping out his chances for the night. Fine. We don’t see who he’s looking at, it could be anyone, this could be Jensen ad libbing because Dean is into PEOPLE, he’s into SEX. Fine. BUT THEN a male extra walks into the frame and has a reaction to SAM and DEAN has a reaction to this. Sam is reading something and does not see this guy who is...checking him out? It’s unclear, pesky humans not revealing their true intentions! But DEAN CLOCKS THIS GUY IMMEDIATELY and has a STRONG reaction. He grabs Sam and moves him away and we cut to them in a different room of the party. Now it’s clear this WAS ALL INTENTIONAL on the part of the show. Someone had to tell that extra what to do and I wish,OH GEEZ I WISH SO HARD SOMETIMES, that I could know what the direction to that extra was. This is a tiny scene, it’s only a few second long, but it’s there to show us something about the characters. It shows us that Dean knows what’s up, he knows when a guy is cruising and he doesn’t want Sam involved in that, they don’t have time, Sam wouldn’t be interested, he’s a little jealous that some guy is checking out Sam and not him, could be anything, we don’t get to know what his final personal inner thoughts are. It shows us that Sam is disengaged from people, he’s not a partier, he’s still upset about Jess and he’s not looking for a good time, he’s looking for revenge, he’s looking for death, so he misses all the life going on around him, including the sex. 

What was my point again? Jensen is dreamy? I mean always, but no not that, Dean is bisexual? Yes, but more importantly it’s been there, it’s been intentional, it just wasn’t part of the plot. So was this small scene fan service? It would seem to suggest that Dean has a different relationship with men than Sam but at this point in the show none of the fans were asking for that, so is this not fan service? The nature of the show in season 1 was very different from where we are now - Sam and Dean didn’t have love interests because they were both going to die or the show was going to end after Season 5. So why was this short scene there? It was there because it makes things interesting, it reveals thing about our characters, gives them more depth.  

But now look at SPN, we are 13 seasons in and what are these two guys doing? I mean WHO are they doing? Because as Sheila O’Malley likes to point out in her recaps Sam is NOT getting laid enough. Even Dean has really slowed down in the one night stand department. Inevitably as we age we think about our life, what is our legacy? Oh wait, Sam and Dean have totally been talking about this for like 3 or 4 seasons now because they have finally reached a place in their lives where it makes sense to talk about it, to wonder about it, to look at your devastatingly handsome bestest bud angel and be like “You know what? Maybe I DO want to know the name of the person I wake up to in the morning.” Because maybe Sam was right back in Season 8 and ALL YOUR FRIENDS ARE DEAD except this one sexy, sexy angel who’s been there through think and thin, the end of the freaking world and he still just looks at you with those sad, sexy eyes and what else are you supposed to do? Find some rando girl? No, I don’t think so. Also Sam was into that Eileen girl (as the representation of official culture this makes perfect sense for Sam, good job Sam. Sorry they killed your girlfriend). 

But, oh no! I made it about sex, which is apparently just me being a perv when it’s two dudes. If anything I think it should be about sex, because dudes, life is fucking about sex! That’s the whole point and that’s who Dean Winchester is, he is humanity, I’ve felt strongly that he should be canonically bisexual ever since he held up a whoopee cushion in, I dunno, season 4 or something and I realized he was the embodiment of humanity. It also makes sense that he should be in love with Cas, the representation of Faith on the show. Where would humanity be without Faith after all? We would be no where, we would all be monsters. I’m saying this as a devout atheist, so I don’t mean faith in God, SPN has clearly stated that God is not the answer, God will not be there for anyone. What we have to have faith in is ourselves, in each other. We have to have faith in the idea that we are enough, that we can overcome the challenges life throws at us and keep on living, keep on being good. 

So yeah, don’t tell me stuff is fan service. I’m not buying it. The show has a very consistent worldview you could say, and Dean and Cas’ relationship is a big part of that, it makes sense. I don’t think it’s invalid just because a bunch of fans like it and want more of it. That’s dumb. It becomes a chicken vs. egg argument. Which came first - the themes and symbols the show is working with to tell it’s story or the fan service of Dean and Cas making eyes at each other? *exasperated face*

If I could just bring this back to The Things They Carried, O’Brien says about people who misunderstand his war stories -

“It wasn’t a war story. It was a love story.”

[vitalmindandbody]

Haruki Murakami and Seiji Ozawa talk music, art and creativity

One writes fiction, the other conducts an orchestra, but Murakami and Ozawa share a drive, determination and a passion for music. They discuss the creative process, inspiration and the eclecticism of Mahler

Until we started these interviews, I had never had a serious conversation with Seiji Ozawa about music. True, I lived in Boston from 1993 to 1995, while he was still music director of the Boston Symphony Orchestra, and I would often go to concerts he conducted, but I was just another anonymous fan in the audience. Not long after that, my wife and I happened to become friends with his daughter, Seira, and we would see and talk to her father now and then. But our acquaintance was casual and had nothing to do with either his work or mine.

Perhaps one reason we never talked seriously about music until recently is that the maestros work kept him so fully immersed. As a result, whenever we got together to have a drink, wed talk about anything other than music. At most, we might have shared a few fragmentary remarks on some musical topics that never led anywhere. Ozawa is the type of person who focuses all his energy on his work, so that when he steps away from it, he needs to take a breather. Knowing this, I avoided bringing up musical topics when I was in his company.

In December of 2009, however, Ozawa was found to have oesophageal cancer, and after major surgery the following month, he had to restrict his musical activities, largely replacing them with a challenging programme of recuperation and rehabilitation. Perhaps because of this regime, we gradually began to talk more about music whenever we met. As weakened as he was, he took on a new vitality whenever the topic turned to music. Even when talking with a musical layman such as myself, any sort of conversation about music seemed to provide the refreshment he needed. And the very fact that I was not in his field probably set him at ease.

I have been a fervent jazz fan for close to half a century, but I have also been listening to classical music with no less enjoyment, collecting classical records since I was in high school, and going to concerts as often as time would permit. Especially when I was living in Europe from 1986 to 1990 I was immersed in classical music. Listening to jazz and the classics has always been both an effective stimulus and a source of peace to my heart and mind. If someone told me that I could listen to only one or the other but not to both, my life would be immeasurably diminished. As Duke Ellington once said: There are simply two kinds of music, good music and the other kind. In that sense, jazz and classical music are fundamentally the same. The pure joy one experiences listening to good music transcends questions of genre.

During one of Ozawas visits to my home, we were listening to music and talking about one thing or another when he told me a tremendously interesting story about Glenn Gould and Leonard Bernsteins 1962 performance in New York of Brahmss First Piano Concerto. What a shame it would be to let such a fascinating story just evaporate, I thought. Somebody ought to record it and put it on paper. And, brazen as it may seem, the only somebody that happened to cross my mind at that moment was me.

When I suggested this to Ozawa, he liked the idea immediately. Why not? he said. Ive got plenty of time to spare these days. Lets do it.

To have Ozawa ill with cancer was a heart-wrenching development for the music world, for me personally, and of course for him; but that it gave rise to this time for the two of us to sit and have good, long talks about music may be one of those rare silver linings that are not in fact to be found in every cloud.

At the risk of sounding somewhat presumptuous, I confess that in the course of our many conversations, I began to suspect that Ozawa and I might have several things in common. Questions of talent or productivity or fame aside, what I mean here is that I can feel a sense of identity in the way we live our lives.

First of all, both of us seem to take the same simple joy in our work. Whatever differences there might be between making music and writing fiction, both of us are happiest when immersed in our work. And the very fact that we are able to become so totally engrossed in it gives us the deepest satisfaction. What we end up producing as a result of that work may well be important, but aside from that, our ability to work with utter concentration and to devote ourselves to it so completely that we forget the passage of time is its own irreplaceable reward.

Seiji Ozawa rehearses with the Vienna Philharmonic Orchestra in Salzburg, 1999. Photograph: Ali Schafler/AP

Secondly, we both maintain the same hungry heart we possessed in our youth, that persistent feeling that this is not good enough, that we must dig deeper, forge farther ahead. This is the major motif of our work and our lives. Observing Ozawa in action, I could feel the depth and intensity of the desire he brought to his work. He was convinced of his own rightness and proud of what he was doing, but not in the least satisfied with it. I could see he knew he should be able to make the music even better, even deeper, and he was determined to make it happen even as he struggled with the constraints of time and his own physical strength.

The third of our shared traits is stubbornness. Were patient, tough, and, finally, just plain stubborn. Once weve decided to do something in a certain way, it doesnt matter what anybody else says, thats how were going to do it. And even if, as a result, we find ourselves in dire straits, possibly even hated, we will take responsibility for our actions without making excuses. Ozawa is an utterly unpretentious person who is constantly cracking jokes, but he is also extremely sensitive to his surroundings, and his priorities are clear. Once he has made his mind up, he doesnt waver. Or at least that is how he appears to me.

Creative people have to be fundamentally egoistic. This may sound pompous, but it happens to be the truth. People who live their lives watching what goes on around them, trying not to make waves, and looking for the easy compromise, are not going to be able to do creative work, whatever their field. To build something where there was nothing requires deep individual concentration, and in most cases that kind of concentration occurs in a place unrelated to cooperation with others, a place we might even call dmonisch.

Still, letting ones ego run wild on the assumption that one is an artist will disrupt any kind of social life, which in turn interrupts the individual concentration so indispensable for creativity. Baring the ego in the late 19th century was one thing, but now, in the 21st century, it is a far more difficult matter. Creative professionals constantly have to find those realistic points of compromise between themselves and their environment.

What I am trying to say here is that while Ozawa and I of course have found very different ways to establish those points of compromise, we are likely headed in pretty much the same direction. And while we may set very different priorities, the way we set them may be quite similar. Which is why I was able to listen to his stories with something more than mere sympathy.

This conversation took place on 22 February 2011, in my Tokyo office. We talked a great deal about Mahler. As we spoke, I realised what an important part of Ozawas repertory the music of Mahler has been. I myself had a problem getting into Mahler for a very long time, but at a certain stage in my life the music began to move me.

Haruki Murakami: Among musicians who perform Mahler and maybe among his listeners, too there are many who think a lot about the composers life or his worldview or his times or fin-de-sicle introspection. Where do you stand with regard to such things?

Seiji Ozawa: I dont think about them all that much. I do read the scores closely, though. On the other hand, when I started working in Vienna more than 30 years ago, I made friends and started going to the art museums there. And when I first saw the work of Klimt and Egon Schiele, they came as a real shock to me. Since then, Ive made it a point to go to art museums. When you look at the art of the time, you understand something about the music. Take Mahlers music: it comes from the breakdown of traditional German music. You get a real sense of that breakdown from the art, and you can tell it was not some half-baked thing.

HM: I know what you mean. The last time I went to Vienna, I went to a Klimt exhibition at an art museum. Seeing the art in the city where it was created, you really feel it.

SO: Klimts work is beautiful and painted with minute attention to detail; but looking at it, dont you think theres something kind of crazy about it, too?

HM: Yes, its certainly not what youd call normal.

SO: Theres something about it, I dont know, that tells you about the importance of madness, or that transcends things like morality. And in fact, at the time, morality really was breaking down, and there was a lot of sickness going around.

HM: A lot of syphilis and stuff. Vienna was more or less pervaded with this kind of mental and physical breakdown: it was the atmosphere of the age. The last time I went to Vienna, I had some time to kill, so I rented a car and spent four or five days driving around the southern part of the Czech Republic the old Bohemian region where Mahlers birthplace was located, the little village of Kalischt, or Kalit as they call it now. I didnt go there on purpose, I just happened to pass through. Its still tremendously rural out there, nothing but fields as far as the eye can see. Its not that far from Vienna, but I was surprised at how different the two areas were. So Mahler came from a place like this! I thought. What a huge turnabout in values he must have experienced! Back then, Vienna was not only the capital of the Austro-Hungarian empire, it was a colourful centre of European culture and probably ripe to the point of being overripe. The Viennese must have looked upon Mahler as a real country bumpkin.

SO: I see what you mean.

Seiji Ozawa conducts Mahler Symphony No 9.

HM: And on top of that, he was a Jew. But come to think of it, the city of Vienna gained a lot of its vitality by taking in culture from its surroundings. You can see this in the biographies of Anton Rubinstein and Rudolf Serkin. Viewing it this way, its easy to see why popular songs and Jewish klezmer melodies pop up in Mahlers music all of a sudden, mixing into his serious musicality and aesthetic melodies like intruders. This diverse quality is one of the real attractions of Mahlers music. If he had been born and raised in Vienna, I doubt that his music would have turned out that way.

SO: True.

HM: All the great creators of that period Kafka, Mahler, Proust were Jews. They were shaking up the established cultural structure from the periphery. In that sense, it was important that Mahler was a Jew from the countryside. I felt that strongly when I was travelling around Bohemia.

…

Gustav Mahler in 1907. Photograph: Imagno/Getty Images

HM: Just listening to this third movement of the First Symphony, it seems pretty clear to me that Mahlers music is filled with many different elements, all given more or less equal value, used without any logical connection, and sometimes even in conflict with one another: traditional German music, Jewish music, fin-de-sicle overripeness, Bohemian folksongs, musical caricatures, comic subcultural elements, serious philosophical propositions, Christian dogma, Asian worldviews no single one of which you can place at the centre of things. With so many elements thrown together indiscriminately (which sounds bad, I know), arent there plenty of openings where a non-western conductor such as yourself can make his own special inroads? In other words, isnt there something particularly universal or cosmopolitan about Mahlers music?

SO: Well, this is all very complicated, but I do think there are such openings.

HM: I remember when we talked about Berlioz and you said that his music had openings that a Japanese conductor could exploit, because it was crazy. Cant you say pretty much the same thing about Mahler?

SO: The big difference between Berlioz and Mahler is that Berlioz doesnt put in all these detailed instructions.

HM: Ah, I see.

SO: So we performers are a lot freer when it comes to Berlioz. We have less freedom with Mahler, but when you get to those final, subtle details, I think there exists a sort of universal opening. We Japanese and other Asian people have our own special kind of sorrow. I think it comes from a slightly different place than Jewish sorrow or European sorrow. If you are willing to attempt to understand all of these mentalities, and make informed decisions after you do so, then the music will naturally open up for you. Which is to say that when an easterner performs music written by a westerner, it can have its own special meaning. I think its well worth the effort.

HM: You mean you have to dig down to something deeper than superficial Japanese emotionalism to understand it and internalise it?

SO: Yes, thats it. I like to think that a performance of western music that also makes full use of Japanese sensibilities assuming the performance itself is excellent has its own raison dtre.

HM: When Im listening to Mahler, I always think that there are deep layers of the psyche that play an important role in his music. Maybe its something Freudian. In Bach or Beethoven or Brahms, youre more in the world of German conceptual philosophy, where the rational, unburied parts of the psyche play the most important role. In Mahlers music, though, it feels as though he is deliberately plunging down into the dark, into the subterranean realm of the mind. As if in a dream, you find many motifs that contradict one another, that are in opposition, that refuse to blend and yet are indistinguishable, all joined together almost indiscriminately. I dont know whether hes doing this consciously or unconsciously, but it is at least very direct and honest.

SO: Mahler and Freud lived at just about the same time, didnt they?

HM: Yes. Both were Jewish, and their birthplaces were not far apart, I think. Freud was a little older, and Mahler came to Freud for a consultation when his wife, Alma, had an affair [with the architect Walter Gropius, whom she married after Mahlers death]. Freud is said to have been deeply respectful of Mahler. That kind of straightforward pursuit of the underground springs of the unconscious may make us cringe but I think it is probably what helps to make Mahlers music so very universal today.

SO: In that sense, Mahler rebelled single-handedly against the sturdy mainstream of German music, from Bach through Haydn to Mozart, and from Beethoven to Brahms at least until the emergence of 12-tone music.

HM: When you stop to think about it, though, 12-tone music is extremely logical, in the same sense that Bachs Well-Tempered Clavier is logical music … Twelve-tone music itself has hardly survived, but different elements of it were absorbed into the music that came afterwards … But this is really quite different from the kind of influence that Mahlers music has had on later generations. I think you can say that, dont you?

SO: I do.

HM: In that sense, Mahler was really one of a kind.

…

HM: What is the biggest difference between reading a score by Richard Strauss, for example, and reading a score by Mahler?

SO: At the risk of oversimplifying it, Id say that if you traced the development of German music from Bach through Beethoven, Wagner, Bruckner, and Brahms, you could read Richard Strauss as part of that trajectory. Of course, hes adding all kinds of new layers, but still you can read his music in that stream. But not Mahler. You need a whole new view. Thats the most important thing that Mahler did. There were also composers like Schoenberg and Alban Berg in his day, but they didnt do what Mahler did.

Portrait of Arnold Schoenberg by Richard Gerstl. Photograph: Archivo Iconografico, S.A./COR

HM: As you said a minute ago, Mahler was opening up very different areas than 12-tone music.

SO: He was using the same materials as, say, Beethoven or Bruckner, but building a whole different kind of music with them.

HM: Fighting his battles while always preserving tonality?

SO: Right. But still, in effect he was headed in the direction of atonality. Clearly.

HM: Would you say that by pursuing the possibilities of tonality as far as he could take them, in effect he confused the whole issue of tonality?

SO: I would. He brought in a kind of multilayering.

HM: Like, lots of different keys in the same movement?

SO: Right. He keeps changing things around. And hell do stuff like using two different keys simultaneously.

HM: He doesnt discard tonality, but he causes confusion from the inside, really shakes things up. Thats how he was, in effect, heading toward atonality. But was he striving for something different from the atonality of 12-tone music?

SO: Yes, it was different, I think. It might be closer to call what he was doing polytonality rather than atonality. Polytonality is one step before you get to atonality it means that you use more than one key at the same time. Or you keep changing keys as the music flows. In any case, the atonality that Mahler was aiming for came out of something quite different from the atonality and 12-tone scale that Schoenberg and Berg were offering. Later, people like Charles Ives pursued polytonality more deeply.

HM: Do you think Mahler thought he was doing something avant garde?

SO: No, I dont think so.

HM: Schoenberg and Berg were certainly very conscious of being avant garde, though.

SO: Oh, very much so. They had their method. Mahler had no such thing.

HM: So he flirted with chaos, not as a methodology, but very naturally and instinctively. Is that what youre saying?

SO: Yes. Isnt that exactly where his genius lies?

John Coltrane By Lee Friedlander.

HM: There was a development like that in jazz, too. In the 1960s, John Coltrane kept edging closer and closer to free jazz, but basically he stayed within the bounds of a loose tonality called mode. People still listen to his music today but free jazz is little more than a historical footnote. What were talking about may be kind of like that.

SO: Wow, so there was something like that in jazz?

HM: Come to think of it, though, Mahler had no clear successors. The main symphonic composers who came after him were not Germans but Soviet Russians, such as Shostakovich and Prokofiev. Shostakovichs symphonies are vaguely reminiscent of Mahler.

SO: Yes, very much so. I agree. But Shostakovichs music is very coherent. You dont feel the same kind of craziness you do in Mahler.

HM: Maybe for political reasons it wasnt easy for him to let anything like craziness come out. There is also something deeply abnormal about Mahlers music.

SO: Yes, its true. The art of Egon Schiele is like that, too. When I saw his pictures, I could really see how he and Mahler were living in the same place at the same time. Living in Vienna for a while, I got a strong sense of that atmosphere. It was a tremendously interesting experience for me.

HM: Mahler says in his autobiography that being director of the Vienna State Opera was the top position in the musical world. In order to obtain that position, he went so far as to abandon his Jewish faith and convert to Christianity. He felt the position was worth making such a sacrifice. It occurs to me that you were in that very position until quite recently.

SO: He really said that, did he? Do you know how many years he was director of the State Opera?

HM: Ten years, I think.

SO: For somebody who spent such a long time conducting opera, its amazing that he never wrote one of his own. I wonder why not. He wrote all those Lieder, and he was very conscious of the combination of words and music.

HM: Thats true, now that you mention it. Its too bad. But given the kind of person he was, it might have been hard for him to choose a libretto.

English translation copyright Haruki Murakami and Seiji Ozawa 2016. Extracted from Absolutely on Music by Haruki Murakami and Seiji Ozawa, published by Harvill Secker on 15 November at 20.00.

Read more: www.theguardian.com

The post Haruki Murakami and Seiji Ozawa talk music, art and creativity appeared first on vitalmindandbody.com.

from WordPress http://ift.tt/2rI3Ov5 via IFTTT