Izzy Hands: The Moon.
Re-imagined from the traditional Ride-Waite-Smith tarot, this version of the Moon shows Izzy taking the shape of a lone Lover, longing for what he cannot reach.
Longer exploration of the card's symbolism under the cut.
Symbolism of the card
I initially meant this card to be specifically Izzy's, but he is once again unseparable from Ed. Though the moon itself is depicted as Ed, it is through Izzy that I interpret the journey of the card. Feel free to invent your own interpretation as well!
In the original version of the Moon we see a dog, a wolf, and a crayfish. Izzy takes the place of the wolf, marking him as wild and untameable. He is accompanied by a dog, symbolizing his loyalty. The crayfish has retreated, and we can see a monster lurking in the depths of the water, reminding us of the beasts that lie within.
Rachel Pollack (2011) writes: "The Moon signifies the dangerous time between the end of one world structure and the beginning of another. On the emotional level it can indicate the strange state when something powerful has ended and you find yourself thrown back on your instincts."
In the card Izzy already has his wooden leg. He his stepping into his role as the Unicorn, marking a shift in his loyalty and his place in the world. His reign as Blackbeard's first mate is ending, and a whole new world order is being imagined.
Ed is also seen in a new light. With his short beard, he is at the end of his captaincy, possibly even at the end of his piracy. He as the Moon is illuminated by the light of the Sun, personified by Stede in another card, The Sun.
Izzy bears witness to their combined light, unreachable to him on the ground. He teeters at the edge of the water illuminated by that very light, and is faced with a choice. Will he turn, follow the path and try to reach the unreachable? Or will he explore the unknown waters in front of him?
In tarot, water symbolizes emotions, intuition and subconscious. Pollack writes: "Here in the unknown territory our animal selves take over. We cannot suppress the wild emotions but only travel through them." The message of the Moon beckons Izzy to step into the water and face his emotions.
However, there are also dangers in the murky waters of the subconscious. Pollack continues: "The Moon card calls forth powerful dreams, visions, and the power of the feminine." In tarot water is a feminine element. Izzy, a beacon of masculinity, has in the past confused the feminine with the monstrous. He is now dared to invite the feminine within him to the surface. His posture already mirrors that of the feminine lover from the Lovers-card. It also calls back to the Fool, to someone at the beginning of their self-discovery.
Tl;dr: Izzy, the Fool and the Lover, is on a journey from one world to another. Will he follow the path and try to reach the unreachable, or will he find the courage to plunge into unknown waters?
A comparison between the original Rider-Waite-Smith card from 1909 and the re-imagined version
Izzy's pose mirrors the feminine Lover
Sources
Image source: Pamela Colman Smith, 1909, republished as Tarot of A. E. Waite, 2016, AGM-Urania, Germany
Text source: Rachel Pollack, A Journey of 78 Steps, 2011, as cited in the booklet for instruction and guidance of Tarot of A. E. Waite, 2016, AGM-Urania, Germany
182 notes
·
View notes
Guys so I visited a medieval smithy the other day (ca. 1300s) and it reminded me a lot of Gobber's workshop... it was easy to imagine that I had just literally stepped into Berk's smithy with my own two feet... and to be honest, seeing this stuff in real life made the whole deal of Hiccup apprenticing in one of these infinitely funnier and Stoick's decision to put him there weirdly...understandable???
Let me elaborate: So you're in approx. 900 AD, you live on a tiny island under rough conditions, EVERYONE, and I mean EVERYONE WITHOUT A SINGLE EXCEPTION is a craftsman of some kind who has to work manually, and you've got a noodle of a son.
Also you're the Chief, no less than that. Let me tell you that this makes the whole thing just so much worse.
Looking at all those solid iron tools - mighty bellows operated by a beam larger than me, forging tongs that would have been half of Hiccup's size and exactly as heavy as this shot implies,
...swords with hilts longer than a cucumber and crude, brutal design, plus all the firewood that constantly needed to be chopped and carried around... even if Hiccup had turned out to be completely untalented at smithwork, that would have built him some muscles.
You don't understand. Hiccup having no muscles was a death sentence. The environment that he was surrounded by, which I was reminded of in that irl smithy, could - at that time! - only be overcome by hard manual labor, aided by the most basic mechanics. Even if he had become a breadmaker, that still would've built him some muscles. All the kneading, the weightlifting of flour and wood and water, the carrying, would have done the same job. Forget Snotlout bragging about working out in his parents' basement. EVERYONE on Berk was burly not because 'they were vikings' training for war or whatever for funsies every day, but because it literally was a requirement of everyday life to be able to carry something heavy from A to B, and be it only a single sack of grain.
So it's really funny to me how Stoick intentionally put this skinny rat of a son of his into the most merciless and dangerous job that probably existed on the island, just to put him to some use. Poor Hiccup. He's like a wet kitten under the command of a bloodhound. But at the same time, it makes so much sense?? Stoick didn't just put him into a job to gain some weight, he put him into a job that would teach him all about tools and weapons, how to defend himself and about the irreversible price of violence. I imagine a blacksmith would have to know how to use a sword to know what makes a good one, so Hiccup would've naturally learned swordfighting on the side. It was an important skill not just against dragons. We see the gang fight all kinds of human enemies in later years as well.
So what Stoick was basically doing was to prepare him for life. The need for abs back then is comparable to today's education about taxes and insurances. Hiccup needed some brawns to survive Berkian conditions, and not just for fighting dragons. Even though Hiccup had the brilliance to invent mechanical devices that could make life on the island easier, he didn't have electricity and he couldn't just press a button anytime he wanted the laundry done or needed some newly tanned leather. He had to work with his own two hands anyway. No dragon, once tamed, could assist the villagers in ways that an ox or buffalo hadn't done before. Despite his marvelous innovations, there's no changing that Hiccup would remain a craftsman and a warrior throughout his life.
So now there's the fact that Hiccup was a noodle. Having established that with Berk's living conditions in mind, you would basically have to avoid working any daily task ON PURPOSE to NOT develop muscles from early childhood, there are exactly two interpretations as to how Hiccup remained this scrawny for so long: a) he was disabled in some way that prevented him from doing chores, or b) he was spoiled and lazy beyond common sense.
Stoick spoiling someone is unthinkable, and Hiccup doesn't appear disabled. He could be struggling with anything from a muscle-degenerative disease to a fast metabolism to mental issues. But it's not implied in the movies. So how did Hiccup avoid manual labor And what kind of message did that send to the rest of the villagers???
Look, if they thought that he was lazy, or perhaps not quite right in the head, they were probably absolutely right. It would have been maniacal for the Chief to spoil his son to the point where he couldn't fend for himself and expected Berk to serve him and supply him with food. Stoick wanted his son to be Chief, so he would have to school him in some trade that enabled him for economics and warfare. As neither was the case though, it didn't put Stoick in a great light to have a son as Hiccup. How could this have happened - a noodle on Berk? It would have made both father and son the laughingstock.
The only reason that I can think of is neglect. Stoick may have been so grief-stricken about Valka's death that he went easy on Hiccup for a while, and then, when he got possessed by running dragon nest campaigns, he may have simply forgotten that he still had a child at home. And then, once Hiccup became old enough to get into trouble, Stoick may have remembered him because he got complaints from his villagers, and so he hurriedly stuck him with Gobber. Lol.
So that's how a skinny noodle rat with no survival skills whatsoever ended up in the weapon forge of Berk. Gobber has a point being sarcastic about it: "Oh, perfect. And while I'm busy, Hiccup can cover the stall. Molten steel, razor-sharp blades, lots of time to himself - what could possibly go wrong?"
And wrong it goes. I love it. WHAT WERE THEY EXPECTING?? XD
75 notes
·
View notes