#fictional men will be the death of me though fr

[sleepyjupz]

i just binged the artful dodger so this is my personality now

[septembersung]

🤝 please!

How do the characters meet, including the antagonist?

For now I’ll call this story Amaryllis, after the protagonist. I’ve talked about it a little here in the past but if you remember any of that (and I’m not sure I do) please disregard because it’s effectively scrapped.

The characters don’t meet in-story because they already know each other, with one major exception. Amaryllis takes place in a fictional town in Kansas, a mishmash of many details from real small towns from all over; call it an ur-small town of flyover country. The cast all grew up there or have lived there long enough to make no difference to the narrative. Rylla and her husband have known each other since they were in diapers. Rylla's close friend circle includes two women she grew up with and her college roommate, who moved back with her to be part of the "keep small town business flourishing" movement and start the art business they own together.

The primary antagonist isn’t a person, it’s grief and death. Rylla’s 4yo daughter died nine months before the story opens.

The exception to the very local cast is the priest-monk who moves in and ends up being the catalyst for Rylla’s salvation. Rylla isn’t Catholic or even particularly anything - culturally Protestant, basically - and she doesn’t convert in story, but they end up as unlikely friends. Fr. Thaddeus is a member of the fictional order dedicated to St. Michael that shows up in several of my wips. In a group of exceptional men, he stands out. His personality and history is mostly a mystery to me still but I do know he’s a jack of all trades, an artist of some kind (like Rylla), and an exorcist. He's a young-looking middle age, with an unassuming face, and his robes deflect from his powerful physique. The kind of muscle you get from decades of self-discipline and living an active rural life. He's been sent as part of the vanguard of monks establishing a daughterhouse of the order on a large property at the edge of town. The property borders public lands with trails, a lake, etc. This is all relevant to the question because it explains the unusual circumstances of their first meeting.

Fr. Thaddeus meets Rylla before she meets him. Since Amber’s death, Rylla has been increasingly out of touch and detached from reality. He’s seen her around and is aware of her situation. Part of his job is to get to know the people of the town and get a feel for the spiritual landscape. Another part of his job is to explore the lands the order bought and build, not the main church or any of the monastery proper, but the hermitage style retreat chapel they'll need, deep in the property and out of the way. For Fr. Thaddeus, this is practically a sabbatical, especially after his last assignment. Lots of alone time, a private construction project, endless hours for praying? He's having a great time. He's also waiting for the other shoe to drop, because he knows he's not really on vacation, but so far the Lord hasn't put anything in particular in his path.

Rylla is having a particularly bad episode here around the nine month anniversary of Amber's death. She’s wandering the trails late in the day, leaves the trail, finds a spot to rest, falls asleep, wakes up in the dark in a bad storm. If she had a weather radio, it would be screaming 'flash flood warning.' Trying to get back to her car she gets lost and ends up on the order’s new property where he happens to be camping out and he saves her life, though she doesn’t quite realize it. She’s not self aware enough to realize she was passively seeking death. Or isn’t able to admit it to herself. To her he’s like a figure out of a fairy tale. A not very pleasant fairy tale.

For his part, Fr. Thaddeus is an exceptionally grounded man, as well as spiritually astute, and immediately recognizes that this soul, particularly, is why he's here.

[coochiequeens]

Today In Women’s History Month we celebrate the birthdays of Louise-Florence-Pétronille Tardieu d’Esclavelles and Wanda Hazel Gág

Louise-Florence-Pétronille Tardieu d’Esclavelles, dame de la Live d’Épinay, byname Madame D’épinay, (born March 11, 1726, Valenciennes, Fr.—died April 17, 1783, Paris), a distinguished figure in advanced literary circles in 18th-century France. Though she wrote a good deal herself, she is more famous for her friendships with three of the outstanding French writers and thinkers of her day, Denis Diderot, Baron Friedrich de Grimm, and Jean-Jacques Rousseau.

Mme d’Épinay interested herself in literature and the welfare of men of letters after the breakdown of her marriage to Denis-Joseph de La Live d’Épinay, a financier. She set up a congenialsalon in her country house at La Chevrette, near Montmorency, and offered hospitality to the Philosophes, the leading intellectual figures of the period immediately prior to the French Revolution. Her friendship with Grimm was long and untroubled, and Mme d’Épinay collaborated with him on his famous correspondence. Her association with Rousseau, on the other hand, was brief and stormy: in 1756 he accepted her offer of accommodation in the “Hermitage,” a small dwelling near her country house, and wrote his novel La Nouvelle Héloïsethere. But then he quarreled with his hostess, and the two became implacable foes. Mme d’Épinay was the author of several novels and works on education, but her writings are of interest now chiefly for their autobiographical revelations.

Her Wikipedia page had more information about her works

Her pseudo-memoires are written in the form of a sort of autobiographic romance, L'Histoire de Madame de Montbrillant, begun when she was thirty but never published in her lifetime. It intersperses fictionalized set pieces exhibiting the sensibilité of the earliest generation of Romantics,[6] with genuine letters and autobiographical material. Bequeathed to Baron Grimm, a mangled version of the manuscript was edited by J. P. A. Parison and J. C. Brunet (Paris, 1818) as Mémoires et correspondance de Madame d'Épinay with all the names changed to identify the supposed originals: Madame d'Épinay figures in it as Madame de Montbrillant, and René is generally recognized as Rousseau, Volx as Grimm, Gamier as Diderot, who is sometimes credited with major interventions in the text. The work has had a checkered career since.[7] The only accurate edition is George Roth, ed. Les Pseudo-mémoires de Madame d'Épinay, 3 vols., 1951.

Other works

Her Conversations d'Émilie, a dialogue recollecting the education of her granddaughter, Émilie de Belsunce, was published in 1774.[8] The Mémoires et Correspondance de Mme d'Épinay, renfermant un grand nombre de lettres inédites de Grimm, de Diderot, et de J.-J. Rousseau, ainsi que des details, &c., was published at Paris (1818) from a manuscript which she had bequeathed to Grimm.

Many of Madame d'Épinay's letters are contained in the Correspondance de l'abbé Galiani (1818), which provided material for Francis Steegmuller's joint biography,[9] and have since appeared in a definitive redaction.[10] Two anonymous works, Lettres à mon fils (Geneva, 1758) and Mes moments heureux (Geneva, 1759), are also by Madame d'Épinay.

In January 1783, three months before her death, she was awarded the Prix Monyon, recently established by the Académie to honour the author of the "book published in the current year that might be of most benefit to society"; it was her Conversations d'Émilie (1774).[11]

Wanda Hazel Gág, (born March 11, 1893, New Ulm, Minnesota, U.S.—died June 27, 1946, New York, New York), American artist and author whose dynamic visual style imbued the often commonplace subjects of both her serious art and her illustrated books for children with an intense vitality.

Gág was the daughter of a Bohemian immigrant artist. While attending high schoolin Minnesota, she helped support her family by contributing drawings to a children’s supplement to the Minneapolis Journal. She attended the St. Paul Art School on a scholarship, and from 1915 to 1917 she studied at the Minneapolis School of Art. In 1917 she traveled to New York City and entered the Art Students League, where she studied with John Sloan and other noted teachers.

A show of Gág’s drawings, lithographs, and woodcuts at the Weyhe Gallery in New York in 1926 brought her first recognition as a serious artist, and subsequent shows there in 1928, 1930, and 1940 increased her reputation. She was represented in the Museum of Modern Art’s 1939 exhibition “Art in Our Time,” which was presented at the time of the New York World’s Fair. At the suggestion of a children’s book editor, she wrote and illustrated Millions of Cats (1928), which became a classic children’s book. Her subsequent books for children include The Funny Thing (1929), A.B.C. Bunny (1933), Gone Is Gone (1935), and Nothing at All(1941). She also translated and illustrated Tales from Grimm (1936), Snow White and the Seven Dwarfs (1938), Three Gay Tales from Grimm (1943), and More Tales from Grimm (1947). Growing Pains: Diaries and Drawings for the Years 1908–1917 (1940, reprinted 1984) is a memoir based on her journals.

[siobhanroygirl]

finished ugly betty tonight i am completely normal and not in need of psychological help rn

thoughts under the cut

i am obviously so sad that everything was so rushed— the final episode felt like it could’ve been 10 episodes by betty standards AND I SOOOO wish it was. the betty and daniel slow romantic development would’ve been absolutely amazing to watch and its such a shame we never will get to see it, plus i think willie going back to connor was stupid and also no closure on tyler and clare BUUUUT that being said. despite it being horrifyingly rushed i literally think its the perfect ending

amanda reconciliation with her adoptive parents, finding her real dad, becoming a stylist and going single and ditching emotionally unavailable men (sidenote if we get a revival she should kiss more women)

marc getting an important promotion, dealing with the trauma of being rejected and abandoned by his mother for his sexuality, healing his inner child through justin and finding love-ish and recognizing his flaws

willie getting mode AS SHE FUCKING DESERVES!!!!! redemption arc, and she has marc by her side and everything is right❣️ wish we couldve seen a reconciliation with nico and renee though

hilda married and moving away from home finally! coming completely full circle from season 1 and losing santos. also wish we could see her working again maybe (i dont think we even know what bobby does for a living 😭)

justin having his times respected and understood, finding support in his family and marc. i love him so bad

ignacio happy and finally seeing his girls grown up and leaving home ❣️ i loved loved loved how he compared his journey as an immigrant and betty’s. this man is on the top 3 fictional fathers ever im sooo serious

daniel !!!!!! leaving mode !!!!! forgiving his mother, leaving behind stupid flings and trying to build his life on something HE worked on, changing completely from season 1, following betty, his heart. betty who saw everything that was wrong with him and still decided to stay and see the good 😭😭😭😭 then daniel calling her the sun, admiring her while also admitting he’s intimidated by her, protecting her, complimenting her, being a complete ass and realizing it AND CHANGING IT for her. realizing the way to love her is to let her go but not being able to look at her while doing it bc he cant if he does 😭😭😭😭 and then moving across the world to see her, going from boss to assistant with her who has changed him fundamentally and shown him what true love is i could actually die sorry the heterosexuals got me so bad with these two

betty following her dreams!!!!!!!!!!! betty working on something she’s truly passionate about!!!!!!! choosing what SHE WANTS INSTEAD OF TAKING CARE OF PEOPLE LIKE SHE ALWAYS DOES!!!! putting herself first!!!!!! being her own boss, standing up for herself, no more prioritizing others. leaving henry symbolizing that the old betty is gone, she loves who she was and she needed her to become this betty, but she’s different now. finding daniel when she’s changed but still the same in a way, still a spot in her heart for him 😭😭😭😭😭😭😭 she will always have him back and she missed him 😭😭😭😭 she needs a new assistant 😭😭😭 IM GONNA KILL MYSELF

daniel and betty together in london as completely different people and in completely opposite positions from season 1 but still gravitating towards each other, reaching and finding each other in the midst of all this change because they know each other more than they know themselves like im sorry they are soulmates oh my god [dies a thousand deaths]

anyway i love this show so damn much jesus. with like 7 more episodes this ending could’ve developed so beautifully but im fr happy with how things turned out? ofc somethings i’d change like daniel burning the resignation form and calling her an “investment” (kind of makes sense in the context of the episode/arc because it was all about regressing to oldselves before changing but damn we didnt even get a proper apology from him, again probably for time reasons), but yeah in terms of where the characters should be @ this was honestly ideal to me.

i love this silly little problematic ass show and i never wanted it to end. betty is so dear to me and i will always carry her around inside of me my entire life, her bond with daniel is so special, wilhelmina is my queen and i live to serve her, marc and amanda are like my entire inner monologue at this point. ugly betty in general is so special to me and i never thought i would become so horribly attached to it. it was problematic as hell a lot of the times and handled others with so much love and care. it has so much heart. so, so much heart. i’ll love this show forever

[parvulous-writings]

Medbay magic // Angela Ziegler (Mercy) x Reader

Request:    Ello, It's me,Ya bor. So I wanted to request a lil' something- Can we get a one shot where Angela (Mercy, for those of yall that don't know (: )nurses the reader back to health, but ends up falling for the reader with all the time they spend together? Then she's super confused about her feelings and doesn't know what to do about it, and she's too scared to tell the reader, but... turns out the reader has always kinda liked Angela too, and they confess to Angela-And they all live happily ever after- 😭🤌No but fr ily bor ❤

Requested by: @rey-is-not-a-skywalker​​

Summary: The reader and Doctor Ziegler develop feelings for each other :)

Warnings: N/A

Words: 1.3K

Notes: I would like to thank one of my old classmates for the word soup conversation :) My requests are currently open! My pinned post (found here) contains both a list of characters I write for, and a masterlist!

Not my gif

You had been in the medical bay for nearly a week now. It wasn’t so bad, you supposed, you were being looked after well enough. You were frequently seen by several different doctors, one whom you greatly preferred over the others. Your favourite doctor was none other than Angela Ziegler, the best medic on the force. This wasn’t just your opinion either, this was just a common fact that everyone accepted. Under her care you had been nursed back from near death to almost perfect health. You swore on your own life that she was magic, it was like nothing you had ever seen. That wasn’t the only magic she used though, you were sure of it. She had managed to work her way into your heart as well, and you held her higher than any other. 

During your time in the medbay, you had several deep conversations with Angela, when there wasn’t all that much for her to do, and she needed something to keep her mind busy. Most of the time they started as nonsense words that she would respond to fondly- word soup, she dubbed it. It was mostly obscure facts or some line of thought that didn’t make much sense.  Angela’s personal favourite conversation was one from when you were half sedated due to the pain of your wounds, and you started spouting drivel about Sciron- an old figure in Greek mythology, who would ask passers by to help him was his feet.  When they knelt before him, he would suddenly give them a kick over the cliff into the sea, where the victim's body was devoured by a huge monstrous sea turtle which used to swim under the rocks. How you remembered about such an obscure figure in common knowledge Ziegler didn’t know, but your words were even stranger.  “What if the turtle was Sciron’s brother?” You posed, staring up at the ceiling as Angela patted down your bed, making sure you were comfortable. She laughed quietly at the absurd idea and shook her head slowly.  “As interesting as the theory is, I do not think that that is what the Greeks were striving for when telling that tale...”  “But why else would he feed the turtle, well, people?”  “I do not know- but there are many instances of strange stories such as this, yes?”  “I s’pose so..” You mumbled, pursing your lips in thought. “But like it could be his half brother, right? Cause that would explain-”  “Quiet down now, you need rest, not stress over fiction turtles and the men who feed them.” 

Why was this Angela’s most fondly remembered conversation? Purely because of it’s ridiculousness. It wasn’t often that such strange topics popped up; no matter what Captain Amari would have had people believe.  Plus you didn’t remember it, and thus she could use it to entertain you in future.

Soon enough, Angela was conflicted as she walked to deliver you the news of your discharge from the medical bay. She was happy for you; she understood how frustrating it can be to be cooped up in one place for any prolonged amount of time. But she was almost... Melancholy, beneath that joy. With you leaving the medbay, she was unsure when she’d get to see you properly next. She didn’t get much free time when off the field or out of the medbay. Most of that free time was spent taking care of herself and her mental health, and was often only late at night. She wanted to spend more time with you so badly, that it made her heart practically ache from the thought of not seeing you for an extended amount of time. She had become enamoured with you, as unprofessional as that was.  As she approached your bed, clipboard in hand, she took a deep breath. She forced a wide smile onto her angelic features, and cleared her throat to capture your attention when she got close enough.  “Any news, Doc?” You ask with a small smile, to which she nods.  “Yes, actually. You’ve finally been deemed fit to leave the med bay.” At this information you looked rather happy, and Angela couldn’t fault you for such a feeling. 

As you started to sit up and swing your legs over the side of the bed, Ziegler also moved round to offer you some help should you require it. Your legs are a little weak after staying in bed for so long, so you are a little wobbly  when you first get to your feet, but you don’t fall over, which is a very good sign in Angela’s eyes. “Thank you, Angela...” You smile at her, referring to everything she had done for you during your time in the medical ward.  “Bitte.” She replied, quite curtly. “Before you go, actually, there’s a couple of things I’d like to talk to you about...” Your brows furrow as she keeps talking.  “Is... Is something wrong?”  “No, no, not at all.” Angela assured you, understanding why you may be anxious about her words- usually when doctors or medical practitioners say something like that it’s never really good. “Far from it, actually.” This put your mind partially at ease, but not by much. She tried to give you what was an encouraging smile, but all it really managed to do was set your heart a-fluttering. Angela cleared her throat quietly.  “So- it may seem a little bit out of the blue for me to say something like this, I am well aware.” She started, trying to keep herself calm as she started to open up a little bit. “During your time under my care, I have... Grown rather fond of you; attached even.” With every word that passed her lips, you found yourself more and more awestruck. You silence seemed to unnerve Ziegler, causing her nerves to skyrocket. She remained outwardly calm, though. She didn’t know what to add to what she had said to improve it or make it less awkward, so she just stood there, tapping her fingers anxiously against the others. 

“Really?” Is all you can think to ask, your voice laced with an incredulous wonder that sounded closely akin to adoration. You would have asked if she were joking, but you knew very well that Angela wouldn’t joke about something like this. “I...” You trailed off, trying to think of how to phrase your next sentence adequately. “I’m rather fond of you too.” You settled to using her own words to describe your feelings. The look on Angela’s face told you that she probably didn’t think she’d get this far. “Oh...” She seemed at loss for words. 

You both stood their for a moment, trying to think of what to say to each other in light of these revelations. After about a minute or so, you broke the silence. “So.. Would you want to get a coffee, or tea sometime?” Your words seemed to break Angela out of a daze, and she gave you a rather large smile.  “Ah, yes, that would be lovely... Tea, and maybe some chocolates? I can bring some Swiss chocolate... It’s the best.” She told you with a quiet chuckle, and you nodded eagerly.  “That sounds good to me... What about time- when are you free?”  Angela had to think for a moment, “I’m off shift next Thursday.. What about five o’clock?” She asks, and you nod happily. “Wonderful!” She chuckled. “I shall see you then... I think you should get going before Morrison starts complaining that I’m keeping you back unnecessarily... I do believe he wishes to see you.” She informed, the fondness starting to show through in her voice.  You nod in gratitude.  “Thanks, Angela... Could I call you Angie, now?” You asked, rather cheekily. Angela rolled her eyes a little bit at the question.  “We’ll see. Now get going.” She hit your shoulder playfully, before moving away to fill in the paperwork about you being discharged. She gave you a final wave, and blew you a kiss as you walked out. 

[hellzyeahwebwielingessays]

Was Norman Osborn ‘flanderized’?

It has been said that over the years, particularly following his resurrection, that Norman Osborn became a caricature of himself. Does this accusation carry any weight?

First things first, let’s define what the terms ‘flanderized’ and ‘flanderization’ actually mean. The most comprehensive descriptor can be found on TV Tropes. To quote an excerpt from them:

The act of taking a single (often minor) action or trait of a character within a work and exaggerating it more and more over time until it completely consumes the character. Most always, the trait/action becomes completely outlandish and it becomes their defining characteristic.

When it comes to Norman Osborn the accusations hinge upon his evolution into a villain who:

Just wants to kill Spider-Man

Is behind everything bad in Spider-Man’s life

Makes Spider-Man the point of all of his schemes

The latter point is often accompanied by referencing Norman’s original goal of taking over New York’s gangs. The idea being that originally Norman wanted to take over the gangs and then was ‘flanderized’ into being obsessed with Spider-Man.

To an extent these accusations carry merit, but not really the way detractors might think.

I’ll begin by addressing the two most obvious counterpoints.

Firstly, the idea that Norman’s vendetta and schemes against Spider-Man are ‘outlandish’ is a hollow critique in context.

Almost everything in super hero comic books is outlandish, even accepting the pseudo-science of super powers. The majority of super villains could make more money legitimately than as criminals.

Common crooks would be unlikely to go to jail if any masked vigilante beat them up. The world at large would never resemble the real world on any level if even one super powered being existed as it’d redefine what it meant to be human. Not to mention the confirmation of life on other planets, other dimensions, parallel universes, alternate timelines and the existence of deities and the afterlife.

So Norman Osborn’s schemes (the most ambitious of which was the ‘Clone Saga’) are only outlandish if we take it on face value. In context, it’s merely a large-scale version of super villain standard practices. After all, perhaps the two greatest Doc Ock stories of all time respectively involved him having secretly built an underwater base out of a James Bond movie and attempting to nuke New York City.

As for Norman ‘just’ wanting to kill Spidey, I’ve already addressed that in an earlier article.

Moving, on let’s talk about Norman’s schemes. Did they all revolve around Spider-Man? Well, even dismissing his post-OMD stories or stint as an Avenger, this is simply not true.

Osborn actually retained  his gangland aspirations in the 1990s. In fact that was his primary concern in Europe between his ‘death’ and ‘resurrection’.

When he returned to America during the ‘Clone Saga’ it was revealed (through exposition provided by the Rose) that Osborn was still very much involved in acquiring power through the criminal underworld.

Spider-Man: Made Men #1 revolved around various gangland figures vying for power. Osborn was unsurprisingly among the figures depicted.

There was some follow up to this in Peter Parker: Spider-Man #95 when the Kingpin tried to assassinate Norman as a rival gangster.

So Peter was absolutely not at the root of all  of Norman’s schemes.

Nor was he behind the majority of the bad things in Spidey’s life. Between 1997-2007 alone Norman had nothing to do with:

The Chameleon learning Spider-Man’s identity

The resurrection of Doctor Octopus

Mary Jane’s death being faked by her stalker

Spidey’s duels with Morlun

The Venom symbiote seeking out new and more violent hosts, including Mac Gargan

The destruction of Peter and MJ’s apartment and of Aunt May’s home

Peter’s failing health and death in ‘The Other’ arc

Aunt May being shot courtesy of the Kingpin

So when we look at the facts, Norman just doesn’t fit the definition of flanderization listed above. He’s far from a caricature of his early appearances. This is actually fairly uncommon in general among Silver Age characters. The vast majority of all characters who were around back then have developed at least some layers of complexity since then; if anything that’d be the opposite of flanderization if anything.

This is unquestionably the case for Norman Osborn. Through stories and issues like Spectacular Spider-Man Annual #14, ‘Revenge of the Green Goblin’, Spider-Man: Legacy of Evil #1 and ‘A Death in the Family’ Norman Osborn’s personality and psychology has been immensely expanded upon from what it was between 1964-1973.

But I do not deny the idea that Norman has changed and become more focused upon Spider-Man himself. Initially his primary goal was the conquest of the criminal underworld, through which the death of Spidey was a means to an end. But from the 1996-2005 (and arguably since Superior Spider-Man v1 #4 in 2013) Norman’s primary concern seems to have been his feud with Peter.

However, these accusations against the character seem to treat this change as unnatural. As though lazy writing simply kept exaggerating one trait of Norman’s and consequently made that the crux of the character.

In reality though this change in priorities was entirely organic. Norman grew gradually more and more frustrated with Spidey’s interference until he decided to just find out who he was and destroy him. Upon learning one another’s identities that  was when Norman and Peter’s relationship fundamentally changed. It became less about gangland aspirations but far more personal. This didn’t occur due to lazy writing across time, it was an evolution during he same run that invented Norman. And it happened around 2 years following his debut.

From there Norman was integrated into Peter’s social circle and Harry was unwittingly caught in the center of their feud. After ASM #40 every time Norman remembered he was the Goblin he wasn’t going after Spidey to rule the gangs, he was pursuing a personal vendetta against him. ‘The Death of Gwen Stacy’ in particular displayed this as Norman sought revenge for Peter giving him amnesia and for the harm he felt he’d done to Harry.

So, Norman’s priorities had fundamentally pivoted within less than 10 years of his debut. And it wasn’t due to lazy writing that ‘drifted’ him in that direction. It was an entirely believable evolution of what had began as a practical consideration and then spiraled into a personal blood feud.

Detractors though might argue that Norman became a caricature upon his return in 1996.

Even if he was manipulative and at times nasty in the Silver Age, it wasn’t nearly to the same extent as his portrayal in the 90s and beyond.

This is perfectly true. And you know what, the same can be said of the impact he had upon Peter’s life. He became far more integral to shaping Peter’s life from the 1996 onwards than he’d ever been in the Silver Age.

On these counts perhaps it’d be accurate to argue Norman became flanderized.

At which point I must ask…why is that a bad thing?

Let me give you an example that’s a bit left field.

In the 2010 animated show ‘Scooby-Doo: Mystery Incorporated’ the classic Hanna-Barbera meddling kids got a major update. The most starkly different character though was Fred Jones. In the original and majority of Scooby-Doo shows Fred had almost always been both the de facto leader and the guy who planned the traps.

He was also the single blandest character of the main five, even excusing the pretty simple personalities of the rest of the gang.* SDMI however outright flanderized him. He went from the guy who happened to be in charge of setting the traps to someone literally obsessed with traps.

And you know what? He became immeasurably more interesting as a result. Suddenly he had a role within the group as the eccentric, the strategist and his interest in mysteries had more specificity as he actively looked for chances to ensnare would be ghosts and ghouls.

Whilst it’s often not the case, SDMI’s take on Fred proves that flanderization is not inherently  a bad thing.

This is certainly true in Norman’s case. His vendetta with Spider-Man, status as puppeteer and framing as the ultimate evil within the Spider-Man universe has been used to great effect over the years.

As a puppeteer and manipulator he was given greater scope to attack Peter and his loved ones, thereby making him a far more dangerous villain that Spidey couldn’t just knock out with a punch.

His framing as an ultimate evil also helps render Peter’s heroism in starker contrast. Everything that makes Spider-Man a true hero and champion for good is spotlighted whenever he confronts the sheer sadism and malevolence of Norman. Personally, I feel Peter Parker: Spider-Man #75 is the greatest example of this.

Call me crazy or old-fashioned but isn’t this an essential function of a villain in superhero fiction?**

And the emphasis upon the Parker/Osborn feud simply made their encounters more emotionally gripping. We all read Peter Parker’s adventures specifically for Peter’s character. We don’t want just any given person (spider powers or not) in the spotlight. We want to follow the ups and downs of his life, his relationships with his friends, family and colleagues, what job he’s working, where he lives, how he provides for himself and others, etc.

The Spider-Man story is in essence is the life of Peter Parker.

Having a villain who has a dramatic impact upon both halves of Peter’s life is more than creatively justifiable. It makes every encounter personal  and if we read Spidey because we’re personally invested  in his life then Norman’s vendetta renders him perennial relevant.

He is the villain who fundamentally tests the soul of our hero.

This isn’t to say that it wouldn’t be nice for Norman to be written with goals beyond Spider-Man. But my point is that making that his priority was never ever a problem in the first place.

In short, Norman Osborn was better  for his flanderization.

*Noticeably Fred’s character has had the most reinventions over the years when you look at wider Scooby media.

He’s been a cool douchebag in the live action films, something of a conspiracy theorist in ‘A Pup Named Scooby-Doo’, a cameraman in ‘Scooby-Doo on Zombie Island’, etc.

The lack of uniformity to his character is very likely an indicator of how simple and bland he originally was; and has largely remained since.

On a symbolic level one could even argue that Norman’s elevation to this personification of evil was appropriate for an older and adult Spider-Man. As we grow up the world in general grows darker and more sinister, presenting challenges that test our inner resolve.

A great example from modern literature would be Harry Potter. Harry ages from 11-17 across the seven novels, each of which dials up the amount of pain, cruelty and death Harry must confront.

[sophygurl]

WisCon 42 panel Female Friendship

Female Friendships in Our Stories panel description: 

Women are often portrayed as competitive and territorial in media. In science fiction, this can be even stronger as the Smurfette principle often rules, and many of the women characters fill the "not like other girls" trope. It's rare to see genuine female friendships flourish in our stories. For many of us, the "mean girl" trope does not reflect the reality that we live in, and we're hungry for better depictions of our lived experiences. More stories are digging deeper into what female friendships can and do look like, however. Shows like Big Little Lies, Grace and Frankie, and Insecure; as well as female-led movies such as the new Ghostbusters and the Pitch Perfect series are some examples. Few of these are SFF-related though - we need more!

Moderator was Naomi Kritzer, with panelists Karin Gastreich, Crystal Huff, Lauren Jankowski, KJ, and Clarissa C. S. Ryan

Reminder that these panel notes are only my own recollections and the things I managed to write down - my notes are incomplete and likely faulty in places. Corrections and additions are always welcome. Especially please do correct me if I get names or pronouns wrong!

Also I name panelists as that’s publicly available information but not audience members unless requested by that person to have their named added.

[For context - I’ve been proposing a panel like this for years (due in large part to conversations with @prozacpark who sadly was not at-con this year) and was so excited to finally see it happen! It did not disappoint. It gave me ALLLLLL of the feelings and I plan to make some additional posts on the subject once I finish my panel write-ups. This will mostly just be about the panel itself, although knowing me I’ll add in the occasional aside. Also I’m really glad I got to this panel early enough to get a good seat up front because it filled up quickly and became standing room only with people sitting on the floor all over the place. Obviously a topic we WisCon-goers find close to our hearts.]

I neglected to get info down about the panelists introductions - sorry! I did jot down that Clarissa said she occasionally remembers to write male characters because it made me laugh. All of the panelists, I believe, are writers, so do look up their work if you want to find more female friendship rep in your reading!

Naomi started things off asking about the panelists’s fictional favorite female friendships and why they found them interesting. Her example was Anne of Green Gables - Anne and Diana. She liked that Anne comes into the friendship so needy and that Diana just accepts her as-is. 

Lauren said Lost Girl’s Bo and Kenzi (YES) and that even tho Bo is attracted to women, she never sexualized Kenzi. (I especially love this in the context that Bo is a succubus and many of her relationships have a sexual component but she never turns that on Kenzi because Kenzi isn’t into that and it’s just inherently accepted between them that they are strictly platonic but deeply entwined friends - haaa see, I told you I’d have asides)

Crystal talked about Cold Magic by Kate Elliot. Crystal said she is unsure if the characters would choose their friendship over their new spouses in the end and has questions about the heteronormativity of that but overall loved the female friendships in the series.

Clarissa is a big fan of the Ghostbusters reboot. She doesn’t ship any of the women together, and finds that puts her on the outside of a lot of the fandom.

KJ reiterated Cold Magic and said that it is about cousins who are raised as sisters but who choose to be friends and the powerfulness of that choice. She also likes Kira and Dax from DS9. 

Karin said she had a hard time finding examples from within SFF. She really likes the sister friendship in the Little House books, as well as Simple Magic, the Witches of Eastwick book (not the movie), and The Other Boleyn Girl (book).

Crystal talked about Alyc Holmes’s Dragons of Heaven and the transgressive ways it shows female friendship. 

Naomi brought up the issues of shippiness and the line between friendship and romantic relationships and pushback within fandom. 

Lauren talked about a personal story she had of a messy end of a friendship because she was told that adoption is pseudo-family as a defense of shipping adopted siblings. As an adoptee, this was very hurtful. She talked about her frustration with shippers who ship romantically and refuse to acknowledge the importance of friendship. The valuing of romance over friendship and friendship not being valid in and of itself. “Friendship is enough.” [I was kind of obnoxiously cheering this on because this is a huge issue for me. This might be the point at which I made some comment about there not being any way to dissuade shippers once they settle on a ship. For the record - I’m a huge shipper myself, I just happen to ALSO ship platonic and familial relationships and get super frustrated at fandom’s seeming inability to look at relationships in any other way than romantic.]

Crystal also talked about the extent that people will go to in order to ship something. She added “I know that my life isn’t mostly centered on getting people into bed.” 

Clarissa added - why not both? She does want more queer female romances and finds herself sometimes going “oh they glanced at one another ... oooooh”. But friendship is so devalued and friendship breakups hurt!

Karin asked if making the friends sisters made the pressure to ship less - I mostly cackled from the audience, because no.

Naomi steered the conversation toward the topic of sisterhood - both literal and figurative. Also about friendship breakups. There is the classic romance plot of the couple breaking up and coming back together - do we find that in friendship narratives?

Clarissa said that Ghostbusters had an example of that at the start.

KJ said Buffy and Willow do this a couple of times.

Naomi said she often finds this in middle grade YA because this reflects reality at that age. Then asked about friendship tropes - for example she really loved the idea of blood sisterhood. She grew up in the 80′s when the idea of sharing blood = death and how doing that showed such a deep level of trust.

Crystal said it’s hard to come up with female friendship tropes because of how rare examples of female friendship are. Tropes are the things we see so much of they become ingrained. 

Naomi asked - then what should be the tropes?

Karin said it’s hard to find books populated with female characters enough for there to be lots of female friendships in them. She doesn’t like the trope of the friend who only shows up when the main character is having romantic drama in their lives. 

KJ she wants more examples of groups of female friends because that’s closer to real life. [YES] If these do exist in fiction, they are more in the background. 

Clarissa wants more ride or die friendships. She gives Brooklyn Nine-Nine and Ghostbusters as examples of this. 

Naomi wants more moments like the one in Ghosbusters where the one character was talking about her story of being haunted and being made of fun for it as a kid. The other character simply says - I believe you. This is a metaphor for sexual abuse. The validation that women give to one another around this. [Cue me sobbing tbh about being on both sides of this phenomenon]

Crystal wants more female friends who are not Mean Girls to one another. Example: Dreadnaught which is about a trans girl superhero. 

Lauren talked about female friendships where the women are being supportive of one another. And women rescuing one another. Some personal stories about women rescuing one another were shared among the panelists.

KJ mentioned the graphic novel series Rat Queens.

Naomi brought up  Sarah Dressen’s YA books. The example of a friend rescuing another friend from being left alone with a creepy “family friend”. The protectiveness of female friendships. [Me: crying again.]

Karin said she is all into rescuing between female friendships because we all need rescuing sometimes and thank goodness for the friends who rescue us. It’s a different dynamic than when men rescue women.

Clarissa said her “dirty fandom secret” is that she really loves hurt/comfort stories - they don’t have to be romantic in nature. An example is when she took care of a friend who had recently had surgery. She was like “wow this is so intimate - I’ve never seen your bodily fluids before.” [So much crying/laughing, thinking about taking care of my bestie after her double mastectomy last year.]

Crystal mentioned Foz Meadows - An Accident of Stars.

Lauren said that when she’s down, a friend will share pictures she’s taken of her books in bookstores to cheer her up. She also talked about wanting both more big adventure stories about female friendship, and more small snapshots of life.

Crystal said there is some of that in the Nancy Drew series, but looking back on those today - she is really turned off by the racism.

Naomi asked what is a story arc for friendship?

Crystal said that’s as varied as the individuals, and again there just isn’t enough of it in fiction to map out.

Karin talked about that initial connection or bond upon meeting someone that you know is going to become a friend. But then there is a process of trust building. The climactic moment is when that trust is solidified.

KJ said it’s more of an ebb and flow. She wants more honoring of the variety of friendships that exist as being equally valid. 

Clarissa brought up a book - Stiletto? (I didn’t catch full name or author’s name) which includes the enemies to friends narrative.

Naomi said she loves enemies to friends even though she hates enemies to lovers stories. 

Crystal said fiction needs to make more narrative sense than real life does, which causes us to simplify how relationships work.

Lauren wants more friendships that start with meet-cutes.

Naomi posited the question of what is a happily ever after for a friendship arc.

Crystal answered - the book isn’t over.

KJ said different friendships would have different happily ever afters.

Clarissa noted that different cultures have different types of friendships. She was talking about how our culture sees romance as the primary relationship in someone’s life and friendship is secondary or even tertiary. 

KJ said she’s married to a man who is less social than she is, so she wouldn’t be able to meet all her social needs with him anyway. It’s very important to her to keep her friendships. 

Crystal said friendships are often about surviving a thing together. But there is also the idea of creating something together. Naomi said fandom is often built on friendships like that.

Crystal also talked about the idea of rituals in friendships. As society has become less formal, we’ve lost some of those rituals. In fiction, we can create these.

An audience member asked about long distance friendship in fiction. Crystal said - all of my friendships are on the internet! She went on to talk about the tradition of epistolary friendships. 

Naomi said the ritual of friendship these days is allowing someone to call us on the phone [HA]. 

Crystal brought up a book The Belles.

An audience member asked about unique sources of conflict in female friendships. Another audience member shouted out the video game Life is Strange in response.

Crystal said - let’s talk about the elephant in the room: no more conflict about boys. There can be disagreements between friends about politics or moral choices.

Naomi talked about the idea of losing a friend to a boy or the friend who only shows up when they are between relationships. Resolution to a conflict like that is the friend discovering the importance of their friendship.

KJ said another conflict involves distance - either physically moving away or becoming more emotionally distant, even a life change such as one friend having kids and the other one not. 

Clarissa talked about trying to hold on to friendships through time and space as something SFF especially could explore.

Crystal added - or something like magical abilities manifesting in one friend but not the other.

Naomi mentioned fanfic about Hermione pre-Hogwarts and losing her friendships from that era.

An audience member added that part of the conflict in those types of situations would be that one friend couldn’t tell the other what was happening in their life.

Naomi loves it when the friend tells anyway because isn’t that what best friends do? They tell each other everything no matter what. The panelists all agree they hate secret keeping as plot device.

An audience member brought up a series - Heroine Complex about superheroes with secrets.

One audience member brought up Supergirl as an example and I continued while trying not to spoil current storylines for one of the panelists. I think I said it was doing interesting things in regards to how secret keeping was affecting a female friendship and also how the show in general does good at the valuing of friendship for it’s own sake.

Clarissa mentioned Cardcaptor Sakura, a manga/anime.

Crystal mentioned Gwenda Bond’s Lois Lane books. 

An audience member brought up My Little Pony, someone else said Sailor Moon. Clarissa said anime/manga in general does a lot of this but we’re not on recs yet. Naomi said - oh, we’re on recs now. (lol)

Recs:

Clarissa - Princess Jellyfish. KJ - Agents of Shield for the mentor/friendships. Audience - Parasol Protectorate. Audience - Michael/Tily from ST:Disco, Call the Midwife. Audience - Hullmetal Girls, Spinning Silver. Audience - Tamora Pierce’s Magic Circle. Audience - Steerswoman. Audience - Jessica Jones. 

Naomi asked - what do we want to see more of?

Karin said - just more female friendships.

Lauren said acceptance from friends for just who someone is.

Crystal said she is drawn to friendship arcs but also wants wants them normalized.

Naomi talked about found family.

KJ said more women interacting with one another in general.

Karin wants more of the female mentorship role.

Crystal suggested Meg Elison’s post-apocalyptic stuff for how female friendships function in that kind of environment. 

aaaaaand phew! This was one feelsey-ride! I loved it so much and hope we get more panels like it in the future. 

[bridini]

”

I came to the writing of a short biography of Joyce through my earlier biography of Arthur Griffith. The contrast between the two contemporaries is vast, particularly in the context of their current public recognition. Yet both confined their life’s work to their native land. Griffith hardly ever physically left it, while Joyce, though abandoning it physically, never left it mentally or artistically. An Italian visitor to the James Joyce Museum in Sandycove said to me in the summer of 2016: “The great thing Joyce did was to create an international community.” Griffith, though an accomplished Dubliner, was also of Ireland and a high achiever, but has been relatively forgotten. Yet both their lives were intertwined up to the publication of Ulysses in February 1922 and Griffith’s premature death that same year. Joycean scholars and enthusiasts generally shun the Griffith-Joyce links, fearing that the grounded one would delimit their literary interpretations of the artistic genius. I encountered this dichotomy during the four years I spent researching and writing James Joyce Unplugged.

As in any biography, one tries to deal in facts germane to the subject. Éamon de Valera advised his secretary: “History depends on documents; no documents, no history.” A difficulty with Joyce was the surfeit of documentation on his life contained in his own published writings, which as Sean Latham suggests are in essence fiction, though containing much autobiographical material. This is not unusual in imaginative literature, with the author having carte blanche to shape the biographical record to his/her purpose. Normally such a practice will bestow only positive attributes on the author, but Joyce is unique in this as in most things, in that he includes materials which portray him in a very negative light. One example occurs in Ulysses as Buck Mulligan chides Stephen:

O, the night in the Camden hall when the Daughters of Erin had to life their skirts to step over you as you lay in your mulberrycoloured, multi-coloured, multitudinous vomit! The most innocent son of Erin, Stephen said, for whom they ever lifted them. About to pass through the doorway, feeling one behind, he stood aside. Part. The moment is now. Where then? If Socrates leaves his house today, if Judas goes forth tonight. Why? That lies in space which I in time must come to, ineluctably. My will: his will that fronts me. Seas in between.

What is his motivation for including this? The event occurred on June 20th, 1904, four days after he had first met Nora Barnacle. The lady who had stumbled over him was an actress named Vera Esposito. The four men who dealt with the drunken Joyce were the brothers Frank and Willie Fay, Seumas O’Sullivan and George Roberts, who would later give him grief over the publication of Dubliners. Joyce thanked the Fays by soon writing a poem:

O, there are two brothers, the Fays, Who are excellent players of plays, And , needless to mention, all Most unconventional, Filling the world with amaze.

But I angered those brothers, the Fays, Whose ways are conventional ways, For I lay in my urine While ladies so pure in White petticoats ravished my gaze.

Joyce was not averse to “correcting” some facts to suit his purpose. When Herbert Gorman was writing Joyce’s biography, with support from his subject, Joyce insisted that he married Nora in 1904 and that his relationship with his father was sufficiently filial. Ellman wrote that Joyce used the opportunity to “ventriloquize a little” and “to pay off scores”. Joyce insisted that his relationship with Fr Henry in Belvedere was a good one towards the end of his time there. But in fact the opposite was the case, as testified to by a number of contemporaries. Richard Ellmann comments: “Other witnesses indicate that Joyce’s memory was at fault.”

The most difficult and most important area where there is a discrepancy between fact and fiction in Joyce is in relation to Portrait of the Artist. This is the work which is accepted as illustrating Joyce’s abandonment and rejection of his Catholicism and his country. But it was a greatly contrived book, even in the choice of the name of the hero, Stephen Dedalus; Stephen after the first Christian martyr and Dedalus after paganism’s greatest inventor. He was consciously making his life as he was living it into fiction, all the while realising that he could adapt or change it to suit his purpose. He controlled the real people he wrote about, often much to their annoyance. He excised his one loyalist, his brother Stanislaus, deciding that he must be alone in his life ‑ “A brother is as easily forgotten as an umbrella,” he wrote. It is ironic, as Brenda Maddox has written, that eventually it was Stanislaus and his family who gained from “his memories and his brother’s papers”.

Indeed Matthew Hodgart accuses Joyce in Portrait of lying in suggesting that he did not go to a Christian Brothers School for a few months when his father could no longer afford to send him to Clongowes and before he was taken in as a “free” boy to Belvedere. Joyce has his mother say in Portrait:

I never liked the idea of sending him to the christian brothers myself, said Mrs. Dedalus. Christian Brothers be damned! said Mr. Dedalus. Is it with Paddy Stink and Micky Mud? No let him stick to the jesuits in God’s name since he began with them. They’ll be of service to him in after years. Those are the fellows that can get you a position.

He anticipated, even urged, friends, and especially Oliver St John Gogarty, to betray him in his need for a victimhood like that of Christ or Parnell. He wrote: “I will not serve that in which I no longer believe whether it call itself my home or, my fatherland or my church: and I will try to express myself in some mode of life or art as freely as I can and as wholly as I can, using for my defence the only arms I allow myself to use – silence, exile, and cunning.”

A Portrait began life as an autobiographical story intended for the magazine Dana, which rejected it, as the editor, John Eglinton, said he could not understand it. It 1903 Joyce developed it into Stephen Hero ‑ a novel in a realistic style. At this time he was also writing short stories which became Dubliners. In 1907, with twenty-five chapters written, he abandoned Stephen Hero, developed the story instead into a five chapter novel about Stephen’s developing consciousness. It was serialised in The Egoist in 1914-15 and published as a book in 1916.

While writing Portrait, Joyce was an exile in real time, living a different life, in contact with Ireland through reading Arthur Griffith’s newspaper, Sinn Féin. He gradually became to support Griffith’s views on Irish nationalism, writing to his brother Stanislaus;

If a victorious country terrorises over another, it cannot reasonably take it amiss if the latter responds. Men are made that way and no one, unless he is deluded by self-interest or cunning, can still believe that a colonising country is driven by purely Christian motives when it takes over foreign shores – if the Irish have not been able to do what their American brothers did, this does not mean that they will never do so – a moral separation already exists between the two countries.

The practicality of Griffith’s emphasis on trade and consuls abroad, replacing Irish members of parliament at Westminster, appealed to him. When Stanislaus sought to get his brother to support Tom Kettle’s Irish Parliamentary Party, James would have none of it, ridiculing those MPs as self-serving. He also ridiculed the idea of Home Rule, declaring that the British would never grant it to Ireland without partitioning the country. Declan Kiberd remarks that “this was one of the most accurate predictions of partition”. James wrote to Stanislaus in 1907 of Griffith: “ ... so far as my knowledge of Irish affairs goes he was the first person in Ireland to revive the separatist idea on modern lines nine years ago … The Sinn Fein policy comes to fighting England with the knife and fork … the highest form of political warfare I have heard of.”

Even when the IPP held the balance of power after the 1910 general election and Home Rule appeared to be just a matter of time, Joyce remained sceptical, even to the point of visualising that parliament would reduce Irish representation by half. He said that despite Ireland becoming part of British democratic life, she had never been faithful to England nor to herself, as she discarded her own language for English, betrayed her stars and served only the Catholic church. Even when the Home Rule Bill was passed in 1912 he was astute enough, like Griffith and Sinn Féin, to realise that Britain would as usual control taxes. Kiberd writes: “Joyce wrote from the viewpoint of a staunch republican.” Herbert Gorman stated: “Joyce, if anything, was an Irish nationalist at heart.”

Joyce’s most poignant take on Irish independence saw him writing about an unlikely revolution: “One thing alone seems obvious to me. It is way past time for Ireland to have done once and for all with failure. If she is truly capable of revitalizing, let her rouse, or let her cover her head and lie down graciously in her grave forever ... But though the Irish are articulate, an insurrection is not made of human breath and negotiations ... If she wants to put on the show for which we have delayed so long, this time, let it be comprehensive, and conclusive. But telling these Irish actors to hurry up, as our forefathers before us told them not so long ago, is hopeless. I, for one, am certain not to see that curtain rise as I shall have already taken the last tram home.”

But when the performance did unexpectedly occur in Dublin at Easter 1916, Joyce remained quiet. Of course the tragic murder of his old friend Sheehy-Skeffington and the partial destruction of Dublin did affect him. The Sheehy family suffered another tragedy when Tom Kettle was killed fighting in France in September 1916. Joyce wrote a letter of sympathy to the two widowed Sheehy sisters he had known so well. As Richard Ellmann writes, “Joyce followed the events with pity; although he evaluated the Rising as useless, he felt also out of things.” Later in 1918 he was glad when the British had to abandon their plan to introduce conscription to Ireland, remarking “Erin go bragh”. At that stage he looked forward to the time when he would revisit an independent Ireland.

When Nora was in Galway as the Civil War was in progress and had to flee amid gunfire, Joyce felt that it was all part of the ongoing conspiracy against himself. Constantine Curran later visited Joyce in Paris and “found exaggeration of Nora’s danger from the Civil War preposterous”.

The publication of Ulysses had coincided with the coming into being of the new Irish state, with Arthur Griffith as president. Richard Ellmann writes that “Ulysses creates new Irishmen to live in Griffith’s new state … For a moment it seemed that the two events were allied, that Ireland would be a nation once again in terms of both spiritual and political emancipation. But Griffith died after only a few months in power, and Joyce had second thoughts.” The several references to Griffith and Sinn Féin in Ulysses demonstrate that Joyce had an intimate and detailed knowledge of the man and what he was about. The book features many references to the Sinn Féin leader, alone of the politicians of his day, while Joyce also called attention to the ultimately political direction of his own work by having the Irish Stephen, at the end of the brothel scene, beaten up by a British soldier, whom he describes as “The Uninvited”.

Joyce was visited in Paris in 1922 by Desmond Fitzgerald, a minister in the new Irish government. He wrote to Stanislaus that “the Dail Eireann minister of propaganda called on me and wished to know if I intended to return to Ireland – to which I returned an evasive answer. He is proposing me, it seems, for the Nobel prize in his capacity of cabinet minister as soon as the Treaty is ratified at Westminster, though not in the name of his cabinet. I will take a small bet that if he does not change his mind when he sees the complete text he will lose his portfolio while I have not the faintest chance of being awarded the prize.” In the event it was WB Yeats who won the prize and Joyce was never even nominated.

6/2/2019

Anthony J Jordan’s biography is called James Joyce Unplugged and is published bywestportbooks@yahoo.co.uk