#damn that’s a great book

[motheyes]

oh and new podcast episode came out i’m pumped for that

[monstermoviedean]

everything sam is doing to "save" dean from the mark is predicated on the belief that dean can't handle the mark. that he will lose. that he's not strong enough.

[krash-and-co]

she’s the worst i miss her so much

[ifindus]

1660 - Cavalryman - Several wars under Denmark against Sweden.

1697 - Gunner - pre-Great Nordic War under Denmark against Sweden.

1774 - Skiing Soldier - pre-Theater War under Denmark against Sweden.

1785 - Infantryman - pre-Great Northern War under Denmark against Sweden.

1808 - Coast Guard Officer - Napoleonic Wars under Denmark.

1845 - Infantryman - pre-First Schleswig War under Sweden against Germany.

1855 - Infantryman - during the Crimean War (Sweden-Norway debated joining the UK and France against Russia).

1905 - Hunter - preparing for wars of independence against Sweden.

1914 - Engineer Officer - First World War.

1940 - Infantry Officer - Second World War.

[ilovemesomevincentprice]

Bringing this back

Vincent Price as Joseph Curwen

The Haunted Palace (1963) // dir. Roger Corman

[shadow-pixelle]

One of the great experiences with waiting to catch up to RE: Dracula until the days where I'm doing laundry is that I get to watch Tumblr have a meltdown about things (for example, Quincey Morris) while silently fearing for my life lol

[ddeck]

legends Quinlan, you will always be famous. served cunt, lost his memory, was hunted for sport, served more cunt, killed his evil granny, served darksider cunt, went back to regular cunt again

[vivitalks]

Last night I saw the Great Gatsby musical. Before I went, I reread the Great Gatsby book (for the first time since 11th grade!) to get a refresher on the source material and the original story. Having the book so fresh in my mind made seeing the musical really interesting, and now I am going to do something I never thought I'd do, which is post some lengthy meta about The Great Gatsby. If you haven't seen the musical, this post may still be interesting to read, but it does contain some mild spoilers, so I leave that up to you. If you also haven't read the book, godspeed lol.

There's a lot I could talk about here when it comes to the way the book was adapted for the stage. But there's one particular thing I want to zero in on in this post, and that's the "unreliable narrator" of it all.

In the book, Nick Carraway is our narrator. He's an unreliable narrator practically by default - the idea is that he's retelling events that occurred two years prior, from memory. But even knowing that Nick is probably not reporting all events and characters with complete accuracy, it's hard to know which parts exactly are wrong, or what might have happened in reality, because even though he's an unreliable narrator, he's still the only narrator and this is the only version of events we know. We're forced to take Nick as our surrogate and take him at his word. Until the musical.

(I wondered how the show was going to deal with the fact that the story of Great Gatsby is not only told by an unreliable narrator but also by an outside perspective - generally speaking the events of the Great Gatsby aren't happening to Nick, they're just kind of happening around him. Yet he's the voice of the story, so in that way he's central to it, and I was curious how they were going to balance that fact with the fact that Gatsby is functionally the main character.

I think they struck a really good balance in the end. Nick's beginning and ending lines, lifted verbatim from his book narration, frame him clearly as the anchor of the story - I think that's the best word for it; the audience jumps from scene to scene, many but not all of which contain Nick, but we know that Nick is always going to be where the action is, or that he will at least know about it. He may not be the main character, but he's an essential character. But I digress a little bit.)

The difference between the way the story is imparted to the audience in the book versus in the musical boils down to this: in the book, Nick "plays" every character, so all their dialogue and actions, their mannerisms and the way they're described and reported, it's all informed by the beliefs Nick holds about them. Whether he means to or not, his biases paint certain characters in certain lights, and because he is our eyes and ears to the story, we have no choice but to absorb those biases.

But in the musical, every character is literally played by a different actor. Nick can only speak for himself. Nick can only tell his own parts as they happened. He may be "telling" the story, but we're watching the story. We have the benefit of an unblemished perspective on things - we can watch the events the way they actually unfold, regardless of how Nick believes or remembers they went down.

This difference - between Nick as the narrator and Nick as merely his own voice - is crucial in how the musical develops each character, some of them fairly different from how Nick described them in the book. And there's one book-to-stage change - a fairly small one, all things considered - that, to me, illustrated this difference perfectly.

There's a line towards the end of the Gatsby book. Something Nick says in narration, after his final conversation with Tom Buchanan, talking about how Tom gave away Gatsby's name and location to George Wilson (which ultimately led to Gatsby's death). Nick writes:

"I couldn’t forgive him or like him, but I saw that what he had done was, to him, entirely justified. It was all very careless and confused. They were careless people, Tom and Daisy — they smashed up things and creatures and then retreated back into their money or their vast carelessness, or whatever it was that kept them together, and let other people clean up the mess they had made…"

When I read this line in the book, I couldn't help vehemently agreeing. Screw those rich assholes! Money does corrupt! Tom and Daisy ARE careless wealthy people! It was easy to side with Nick, not only because he was the only perspective on the situation that I had, but also because he said this in internal response to a conversation with Tom, who, I think we can all agree, is a major jackass and a deeply unsympathetic character.

But in the musical, this line is spoken aloud by Nick. And he says it to Daisy, in her house, as she's packing up to skip town after Gatsby's death. In fact, he doesn't just say it; he shouts it, visibly and audibly outraged at her audacity to lead Gatsby on, ghost him, skip his funeral, and then move away to avoid the fallout. Nick is angry and highly critical of Daisy. But because we're no longer confined to his shoes, we also get to see Daisy's reaction - not as Nick remembers it, but as Daisy actually reacts. And because of that, we're able to really see, and confirm, that "Daisy is rich and careless" is not the full story.

I have to credit Eva Noblezada for a phenomenal performance (duh). Daisy in this scene is emotional, grieving, and it's clear she has been trying to contain these feelings for the sake of her husband and her own sanity. She's remorseful, not that Gatsby is gone necessarily, but that she allowed herself to entertain the fantasy of running away with him, only for it to be torn from her. She is trying to make the best of her unavoidable reality. And then Nick tears her a new one, calling her careless, accusing her of destroying things and being too rich to care.

And as I watched that scene, I was no longer wholly on Nick's side. I understood that this situation was so much more complex than Nick's chastisement acknowledged. Sure, Daisy wasn't innocent, but she also wasn't the callous rich girl Nick made her out to be. She did love Gatsby. And she also had a whole life with Tom. She had a daughter. She was a woman in the 1920s! That's a kind of life sentence even wealth can't erase.

The way Daisy responded may not quite have landed with Nick (if we consider the kind of fun possibility that the musical is the events as they happened and the book is Nick retelling those events as he remembers them two years later, then clearly Nick's disdain for Daisy's actions overtook whatever sympathy he felt for her), but the musical gave Daisy the opportunity to appeal to us. The audience. Having this omniscient perspective of things allowed us to draw our own conclusions, and I found myself a lot more sympathetic towards Daisy when I could both see and hear how she responded to Nick's verbal castigation.

In the book, Nick is the narrator. In the musical, Nick is a narrator. But he's no longer the sole arbiter of the story. The audience got to make our own judgements on the events as we witnessed them. Every one of us was a Nick - beholden to our own biases, maybe, but at least not beholden to his.

[vaguely-concerned]

still thinking about everyone goggling at rael like 'why, master averross -- you're beautiful!' when he cleans up nice for once before fanry's coronation like he's a girl in a movie letting her hair down and taking off her glasses

[jessieren]

[amemoryofwot]

“Tear! It’s Callandor, then … I swear I’ll hang her in the sun to dry! … He cannot be ready for that yet!”

“Burn him!” Siuan barked. “By now, he could be dead! I wish he had never heard a word of the Prophecies of the Dragon. If I could keep him from hearing another, I would.”

(Min) “But doesn’t he have to fulfill the Prophecies?”

“The Prophecies aren’t what makes him … all that takes is for him to admit it … If Moiraine can keep some control over him, she will guide him to the Prophecies we can be sure of - when he is ready to face them!”

(Min) “so you do mean to control him”

“Do you think we could just let him run about loose? …. If Moiraine cannot reef his sails, he very well may get himself killed.”

[skullsandcorals]

https://www.tumblr.com/skullsandcorals/738285799236321280/im-dyslexic-im-not-stupid

1. Holy shit I am so happy I found another person who gets how smart Percy is, and gets that every instance of Percy looking/getting called stupid is due to his dyslexia or people not telling him anything.

2. Which book/chapter is this from? I need to bookmark it ASAP and start shouting it from the metaphorical tumblr hills.

3. We really don't talk about how good a mom Sally is? Like yeah she's badass and gentle but like. She respects Percy. When the school system failed Percy, she's the one who still not only believed that he was smart but still acted like it and probably taught him too. Queen mom Sally Jackson right there.

1.) YEAHH EXACTLY. Or his ADHD 😭 It drives me NUTS whenever Percy is treated as the dumb + comedic guy. Like I get what they're saying and why they're saying it, but sometimes his character gets reduced to JUST that and it hurts my soul. I get that he's funny as a narrator and as a character and sometimes he can be a little "clueless" but it just feels like some people like to think of that as either all he is or a huge part of who he is. I believe I've also seen Leo get this treatment despite literally being insanely smart at such a young age so. that's...fun. They can be funny and smart too 😞

2.) It's from the 10th Anniversary edition of The Lightning Thief! It's Rick's cover letter for the first readers of the manuscript & a note from the narrator. I don't have a copy of that edition myself, but I've seen some pictures of it on Rick's blog and someone posted one of the pages on Reddit (where I got it from).

Here's the full page from Reddit (source) & the picture from Rick's blog where the page is visible (source):

3.) YEEEAHHHH I LOVE HER SO MUCH!!! What I would do to get adopted by her rn. The way she talks to him makes me kinda teary-eyed because she's just so...you can just tell how much she loves Percy and that she would do anything to make sure he grew up resilient and kind in a world that's always out to get him. She believes in him so much that it just makes me lose my mind a little. It's just so sweet and I can't help but feel so moved by it.

I'm not sure if you've read Chalice of the Gods, but there's this scene where (spoilers, kinda) Sally talks to Percy after the whole thing with Hebe and honestly this scene makes me want to sob and cry and weep

“You are a lot of things, Percy. But helpless isn't one of them.”

[blue-thief]

the thing that's so frustrating about the babel controversy is the fact that babel was already dumbed down so much for white people to understand. YET SOMEHOW SO MANY WHITE PEOPLE MISSED THE FUCKING POINT

[frommybookbook]

I just finished reading my penultimate Perry Mason novel. I only have one left to read and I already have it in my possession (thanks, local library!) but I'm not ready. I'm not ready to not have any new Perry books to look forward to. I'm not ready to no longer be the Perry Mason cryptid at my local library. I'm not ready to check off yet another thing from my Perry Mason completion list. I'm just not ready.

[lovegrowsart]

i'll be honest every time i see atla fandom defend characters' unacknowledged flaws/mistakes/underdevelopment using some comic panel or another i have to laugh, as if bryke constantly relying on extratextual material to atla and tlok to try and fix the holes they write themselves into isn't a massive indicator they're generally quite bad at writing a good and cohesive story on their own/when they insist on complete creative control 🫠

[rosielav]

Someone on here that I follow has recently gotten big into the Great Gatsby and I would love that person to know that the only critical thinking I did about that book was in 11th grade English Honors II. We finished the book, like I'm talking the back cover closed on the last page, and my teacher instantly said 'so you all got that we was gay and in love Gatsby, right? Nick is gay? And this whole story is kind of about that?'

And us, a group of 24-26 queer, all collectively said HUH???? bc this teacher has never once not one time used the word gay, ever, in class, and then just so confidently was like yall get it right this man is gay?

And I think about that and exclusively that anytime I see a post about TGG. Well, that, and the eyes of Dr TJ Eckleberg but that's not on me. That's author's intent.