#has fundamentally misunderstood both events

[creacherviolence]

I love horror stories centered around hubris.

Sure, hopping in a death trap and taking a slow joyride to the soggy depths of hell is arguably the fucking stupidest series of life choices possible. And sure, the majority of these men spent decades hoarding wealth and said wealth made them feel invincible. They disturbed an antique mass gravesite for their own personal enjoyment. And yet, there's this sort of cognitive dissonance surrounding the conversation.

In a work of fiction, the plot would be perfectly set up for them to "have it coming." It's got all the tropes. A dangerous, spooky setting at the bottom of the ocean. Rich men with little regard for human life. Hubris, in their own arrogant assumption that enormous wealth gave them godlike invulnerability. Hubris again, underestimating the raw power of the ocean. Disrespecting the dead, whose ghosts have haunted the world for over a century in the form of a story we never stopped telling. Ghosts who were innocent victims of the same hubris: The Unsinkable's dire shortage of lifeboats and other emergency supplies. It's like it was written to be a story about bad men who get their comeuppance. It's irony layered in irony like a goddamn metaphor ratatouille.

But can anyone have that coming?

Who gets to decide what is justice and what is tragedy?

There is no author figure outside the extremely predictable consequences of their own actions. There's nobody on the other side of the plot typing out a heavy-handed morality tale. There's no intent to force the reader to decide between empathy and condemnation because this is the news and not a short story in literature class. The whole thing is built like a sick twin of some lost Ray Bradbury tale but it isn't.

And not only is it real, it's happening right now. I don't know how long an actual event needs to cook before it becomes modern mythos, but it sure as shit is longer than yesterday. Though some facts are lost to the water, the broad strokes of the sinking of the Titanic are largely known. The events in the sub are a complete mystery because Schrödinger's boxheads are still nowhere to be found.

Now, maybe analyzing the last moments of the missing-presumed-dead like a piece of literature is in poor taste. But I think the most chilling, the most compelling part of this whole shitshow, is how quickly someone can change from a person into a story. Both immortalized and already dead before they even knew they were doomed.

[booksandmate]

On understanding and other things

I think part of the reason why that final talk is so painful is because it shows that they don't know each other as well as they wanted to believe. Both of their ideas about who the other is and what they want are based mostly on what they want the other to be and not on who they really are.

They both want to be together, but in different ways. Aziraphale wants them to be on the same side, on the side of heaven. Crowley wants them to be on their own side, one apart from heaven and hell and everything they know, one where they can be themselves as Crowley and Aziraphale, not as angel and demon or even angel and angel.

And I think the reason they want such different things has to do with a number of things that could be summed up in their different life experiences and, consequently, their views on idealism and big changes.

Aziraphale never got over who they were in the beginning. I think for both of them that might have been one of the most beautiful moments of their lives, because they were still together, on the same side, simply in awe of the beauty of creation and unaware of the problems that would arise in the future. It is the only part of their history where they could be on the same side without breaking the rules, so it is only natural that Aziraphale remembers it as the best of times. But it ended with Crowley being unfairly cast out, so it's only sensible that he has a completely different perception.

And Aziraphale still believes Crowley to be an angel. He interprets his rejection of evil and his pursuit of goodness as a remnant of the angel he used to be and his desire to be one again. And actually, this interpretation makes sense, but it’s just not the correct one. Crowley has again and again denied his demon nature, doing everything in his power to do as little evil as possible without his head office noticing, yes, but not because he wants to be an angel.

Crowley has given up the idea of heaven as fundamentally good a long time ago, as it has proven, in more than one ocassion, to be capable of as much cruelty as hell itself in the name of an imagined greater good. Crowley's experience as an angel was good only at the very beginning. Once he learned that heaven was more about following rules than doing good, his idea of it was lost.

In short, Crowley doesn't want to be a demon any more than he wants to be an angel. It is not a matter of which side, but of the existence of sides per se. He does not like the system and does not want to be part of it from either side.

That is why he is hurt, because after so long, Aziraphale misunderstood his true nature. Crowley wants to be good, yes, but not in an angelic way. He doesn't want to go back to the place where rules and great plans matter more than real goodness. He just wants to be himself, outside of preconceived ideas of good and evil.

And so Aziraphale's offer to return to all that comes to Crowley as a disappointment. To realise that after all these years the one person you can consider a friend doesn't really understand you, the one person who has stood by you, listened to you, protected you, and done everything that no one else ever did. That even that person can't understand what you are, well, it must have felt like a stab in the chest.

And the same is true the other way around.

Crowley wanted to think that after the events of s1, Aziraphale had finally accepted who he was and what he (they) wanted. In the same way that Crowley hasn't been good at being a demon, Aziraphale hasn't been good at being an angel, and Crowley thinks that puts them in the same place. But it doesn't, because although Aziraphale is not just a clueless angel who silently follows the rules, neither has he been let down in the same way that Crowley has.

As I mentioned earlier, their difference of opinion is based (not entirely, but largely) on their different experiences of heaven. Aziraphale has been let down by heaven a couple of times throughout history, but none of them could match what Crowley had to go through when he was cast out. Aziraphale knows this, but he can never truly understand it.

So even when they both understand that heaven is not ideal, one of them approaches it with exasperating idealism, while the other doesn't even try anymore.

[goldenspecter]

Did the ask about the whole Leo being above and manipulative not go through? I'm not pressuring you or anything it's just that sometimes I get anxious if people don't give me some kind of responds to an ask such I'm not answering this types and what not it's completely fine if you don't of course also I'm talking about the ask that was made about the 2007 fight post about Leo and raph fighting constantly here's some of what your wrote in case you don't rember the post it's kind of old

your post: Once again, I am wishing Rise fans can praise the movie without insulting/demeaning other iterations of TMNT. It's absolutely frustrating, as a fan of all the iterations plus Rise, constantly seeing people go "Rise did the Raph/Leo fight better than other where it's not just "Who's a better Leader/Leader" fights!" when not that's not the case. Rise didn't do it 'better' than the others, they just made it much more explicit, without using leadership as the framing of the fight, but the other iterations are not actually fighting about Leadership.

again sorry if this comes off as peer pressuring I'm just trying make it clear what post I'm talking about so were both on the same wave length again I apologize if this is annoying.

Hi anon!

Yes your ask did get through, the only reason I didn't answer quite immediately was due to me not really being on Tumblr this past week. I saw your ask and was intrigued because it's a BIG /pos question, I had to ramble to my partners @dakotafinely and @namiikilo about this, and share my thoughts with them about what you asked first.

I also wanted to present my answer in a way that makes sense, hence why it took me so long. So don't worry about pressuring me, I just wanted to take time and make sure I could convey my point in a coherent manner. Sorry about causing the anxiety /gen

This is the original ask:

Since the way you worded your ask leans more towards Bayverse Leo from how you included certain actions only he does, I have to compare him to 07 Leo to make my point. Here are my thoughts, as coherent I can make them:

The Short Answer: I think Bayverse Leo, as a whole, was an attempt by the writers to expand upon 07 Leo's characterization, but fundamentally misunderstood what made 07 Leo so infuriatingly perfect.

The Long Answer(buckle up):

07 Leo is, at his core, a natural evolution of how Leo would have matured as an adult Pre-Rise. Perfectionism and having such a high standard on himself of all people combined with the knowledge of him being so good at what he does, would heightened his arrogance and beliefs in his own skills.

This is how it was/is before he took the journey, across the world that kept him separated from his brothers for over a year. Leo has been expected to be perfect for so long there would only be a matter of time before that expectation jades him, that he would become a bit of an asshole who wrongly believes he doesn't need to lower himself to anyone's standards because he is the standard.

*I discuss things that are mentioned in the prequel comics, specifically the issue that discuss and expands upon Leo's Journey. So I'll include screenshots from the wikia that explain the events in that.

** I also own these 5 prequel comics!

However, since he went on the trip by himself, and with none of his brothers, especially Raphael, to keep him in check, his ego and sense of self got warped, and especially with the things he's gone through on his journey. He learned all of these things from his journey but never actually put them in use towards his own family in several different ways:

Leo lacks compassion when it comes to his brothers and why they took on their jobs and new roles and scoffs at April when she's explains to him what they do. He lacks the compassion to inquire with his brothers and the way they were all hurting-- Mikey feeling like his family isn't whole anymore, hence his nostalgia for the good days, Donnie having to care for their arguably disabled father while also working an at home job, Raph having the trauma of witnessing an former vigilante who seemed to understand him die in front of him, and that being how he got the Nightwatcher armor we see in the movie(Promise he would take it because David, the vigilante, didn't want anyone in his family/police to figure out who he really was.) Compare this to Bayverse Leo, who audibly and explicitly hears and knows how his actions harm his family, but chooses not to engage with it and dismiss their feelings.

Leo lacks humility and refuses to understand his brothers as they've changed. Because of that, he refuses to try and understand his brothers as the people they are now.

07 Leo is extremely selfish and shortsighted because of how he constantly frames the journey he went on was for them, to better himself for them.

He lacks the courage having the courage to even consider how badly they were effected by him going on this journey.

He most importantly lacks community that he continually estranged himself from

Each one of these things that's bolded or italicized is a trait that he was supposed to have learned and fully understood on his journey.

In my eyes, the things that makes 07 Leo stand out from Bayverse is more so how all of these external components worsened his fractured development. Bayverse, in a way, engineered those components that fractured his development.

07 Leo has never actively gone out of his way to revoke or invalidate his family's autonomy, right in front of them compared to Bayverse(who as a reminder forced Donnie to lie to his brothers about the possibility to be human and got on Raph when he called him out for revoking their autonomy to make a choice at the chance of gaining privilege where they are currently systemically disadvantaged), but does it in the way that can be perceived as him doing what is best for his family. Examples being him not wanting to admit or entertain the idea that the night watcher is going good or that his own family made the choice to idolize the vigilant on their own—he believes that night watched is encroaching on his territory and also being a bad influence to his brothers, primarily Raph and Mikey and fights to stop Nightwatcher from being a bad influence on the two and the fact that Leo perceived his own methods to be effective, combined with his own hypocritical view of Nightwatcher—or him attributing fault to everywhere else but 07 Leo potentially being part of the problem as well.

However, you can possibly argue that because the world has jaded him so hard and he has forgotten the point of community, the world had literally made him hate humans on his training journey. It eroded him of certain things that by the time he gets back home, he just doesn't have that compassion he supposedly learned on his training and doesn't learn to dig within himself to practice empathy to his brothers and doesn't bother seeing them as who they are now, he literally scoffs at the idea of who they have become when April tells him and expects them to fall inline as perfect soldiers and obey orders, to erase what made them them, doing unto them as what has been done to him.

In addition, along with him being a pretty perfect development for a character like Leo, pre-rise,he has been expected to be perfect for so long there would only be a matter of time before that expectation jades him, that he would become a bit of an asshole who wrongly believes he doesn't need to lower himself to anyone's standards because he is the standard.

Leo's and his family's arc in the 2007 movie is about growing up and fixing a broken family caused by abandonment from pretty much all angles, Bayverse Leo is the one who's the agent and inevitable cause of abandonment nor is he mired by the tenets of nostalgia among him and his family either and the unwillingness to grow up and mature.

Could this be more coherent? Absolutely, maybe in the future I'll make a video essay giving a full retrospective on the 2007 movie and especially with the frustrating yet beloved nuance of 07 Leo's character.

Either way! Hope you enjoyed hearing my (still somewhat disjointed) thoughts! <3

[llau-ren-ti-a]

I know, I know, people bawl their eyes out to this song, but it will forever be my Tech & Crosshair anthem.

Just oh my god I can’t even put it into words. Put this in any regular scenario, put this in any scenario in which Crosshair finally returns to the Bad Batch and does not fit in with them right away. Either another person is urging one to talk to the other or one of them takes initiative without any prodding from the outside.

“Oh brother, I can't, I can't get through

I've been trying hard to reach you 'cause I don' know what to do

Oh brother, I can't believe it's true

I'm so scared about the future, and I wanna talk to you.”

They are both SO BAD with changes and readjustments, I feel like the whole empire/Omega/Crosshair situation has taken such a tremendous toll on them and not even having each other simply breaks my heart for them.

“You can take a picture of something you see

In the future where will I be?

You can climb a ladder up to the sun

Or a write a song nobody has sung

Or do something that's never been done”

Tech’s hobby LITERALLY being recording things; Crosshair wondering how to fit back into the puzzle of his family, of his relationships. Both being amazed (and intimidated) by each other, still having this brotherly bond despite all of that happened, both unable to phrase how they feel.

“Are you lost or incomplete?

Do you feel like a puzzle, you can't find your missing piece?

Tell me, how do you feel?

Well, I feel like they're talking in a language I don't speak

And they’re talking it to me”

Tech canonically (and literally) being interested and proficient in languages and communicating cannot find the words to talk to his own brother. Everything that has happened has fundamentally disrupted their structures, their relationships, their beliefs, their perceptions of each other. Crosshair, feeling misunderstood, unable to convey, hell, even comprehend what happened, what he did to civilians, to his family - what has been done to him. Crosshair not finding a connection, a way back into his family. He’s with them, but not part of them.

“So you don't know where you're going and you wanna talk

And you feel like you're going where you've been before

You tell anyone who'll listen, but you feel ignored

Nothing's really making any sense at all, let's talk

Let's talk, let's talk, let's talk”

Crosshair having no idea how to cope, how to heal, how to deal with his situation; having no goals, no direction, simply getting by from one day to another, no structure, no future, nothing to look forward to, not knowing what the future will bring - he’s was floating in nothingness; meaninglessness before he escaped the empire, and now that he’s back with his brothers nothing has changed.

“You’re going where you’ve been before.”

His mind is going to all these dark places, to Kamino, to Onderon, to Bracca - he can’t detach him from those events, from the mistakes and wrong decisions he made himself and those forced upon him.

No one seems to understand, no one seems to care, no one seems to put an effort in to actually sit down and talk to him.

But Tech talks. Tech talks a whole lot. And he fills all this deafening silence that Crosshair once appreciated and now has come to resent. Tech’s seemingly never-ending chatter one day turns into a heart-to-heart that makes them discover how much they mean to each other - despite everything.

- - -

I could shit out an entire analysis about this song itself and at least five for the Tech & Crosshair context and I simply cannot stop thinking about it.

[lasnevadaslaborunion]

Credit to this post by @enderwalking and some Discord convos with @thequackcity for getting me thinking about this topic again (please let me know if you'd rather not be tagged)

Okay so my short answer to the disc duo "obsession" question is that a good chunk of it is a silly semantic debate. They obviously have a toxic and abusive dynamic, and they're obviously crucial to each other's narratives. Whether or not the word "obsessed" is appropriate is a minor quibble, imo.

My longer answer to this question requires me to analyze why their relationship is the way it is. What I'm going to say here hinges on my interpretation of both characters as being fundamentally afraid of change and instability. Which for c!Tommy manifests as needing someone to follow, look up to, and idealize (even as he chafes against authority he thinks is flawed), and for c!Dream manifests as needing control over his environment.

On c!Tommy's end, it's not exactly fair to call it an "obsession" if his fear of c!Dream is repeatedly justified by experience. After all, this is the person who nearly drove him to suicide, who blew up his home multiple times, who killed him and revived him and gleefully promised to do so over and over again. But his feelings are very complicated, because the man who ruined his life was his friend once, too. Think about the repetition of his exile, the cycle of creating and watching those creations destroyed, and how c!Tommy latched onto the routine even as he spiraled into depression. These events happening in the aftermath of losing c!Wilbur only support his craving for a steady friend. Even after he snapped himself out of that rut, he keeps coming back to the person who abused him, both physically and in spirit. He can't fully rest as long as c!Dream is alive, and who knows if even his death will give him peace. In that way, it's an incredibly lopsided bond; c!Dream's very continued existence gives him power over c!Tommy, whereas c!Tommy can't directly influence c!Dream as strongly or consciously.

On c!Dream's end, the "obsession" with c!Tommy is sometimes misunderstood as a monomaniacal fixation, when his goals are clearly a lot broader, all wrapped up in his quest for peace and unity (whatever that entails...) on the SMP. And I think that's where a lot of miscommunication between the two sides of this argument happens. c!Dream isn't singularly focused on making c!Tommy's life hell, or on possessing him in the most literal way we might think of it. Nor do I think his controlling and ruthless personality is exclusive to just one person or situation.

But c!Tommy does take up a disproportionate place in c!Dream's mind. The kid is an easy symbolic scapegoat for the server straying from the original ideal, given that the Disc Wars were some of the first big conflicts on the server, that he was one of the founding members and arguably the "muse" of L'Manberg, and that he has a (somewhat earned) reputation as a troublemaking gremlin. However, I think c!Dream finds c!Tommy's presence a strange comfort as much as his mischief is an annoyance. Especially as time passed and the number and scale of the wars increased, c!Tommy became a convenient "stress toy" due to his emotional transparency and, later on, the conditioning from months of history. c!Tommy is uniquely frustrating to him, but that also makes him uniquely satisfying to put down; if c!Dream wants to feel powerful, scary, and competent, he can count on c!Tommy's reactions to give him that boost. It's a combination of practical motivations (intimidating the server members into responding in ways that suit his plans, starting with the one who fears him the most) and more emotional ones (feeling control over something or someone in a world that rapidly escaped his ability to cope with its transformation) that make c!Tommy the perfect victim.

And yes, there is once again an uncomfortable awareness that they were buddies once, if vitriolic ones, and that they've remained constants in each other's lives even as they've become bitter nemeses. That combination of chaos and consistency keeps them so horribly entangled, and both of their emotions are so much more complicated than simple hatred.

As a final note, I like the interpretation of c!Dream seeing c!Tommy as a wayward little brother figure that he needs to "correct" by any means necessary and also has fun tormenting, much like one would pretend to be a big scary monster or put a spider in their sibling's hair to make them cry after being irritated one too many times. (This twisted familial dynamic also opens the door for a lot of thematic parallels with c!Wilbur, a more explicit brother figure, though his dynamic with c!Tommy is hardly healthy, either.) But I also think the idea that c!Dream opportunistically ruined the life of a teenager who once admired him and rarely gives a second thought to the harm he caused because he's so obsessed with a "united server" that never truly existed - thus making c!Tommy's devastating trauma mere collateral damage - is very terrifying and tragic in its own way. They're both compelling frameworks to play around with, and I don't think either one is entirely right or wrong.

Anyway, those are my thoughts. I'll leave it to more prominent discduo enjoyers to add on or correct details, but for now I'm leaving it here

[300iqprower]

Astrea dead pissed me off with that impartial judge talk in Atlantis,,,, like if you don't wanna help just say that don't hide behind your class, especially if you see someone at a disadvantage that literally goes against what your class is meant for,,, why were you even here if not to info dump and dip?

Which leads to my next point—I hate Ruler Jeanne and Astrea because they use their class to excuse their impartiality in situations where being impartial is fucking useless? Apoc!Jeanne had a little "country girl, will chase you with a sword if you interfere don't fw me" vibe but Fgo!Jeanne is the most flavorless mf on the planet that you forget she exists outside of Jalter.

Which is sad because I like the idea of Jeanne being the embodiment of what people thought she was, someone far removed from human error and so saintly that the idea of being friends feels wrong, like your actively tainting her by breathing in her direction which leaves her lonelier than she should be....

I have nothing to say about Astrea as a character simply bc I don't care for pseudo servants that aren't treated like the vessels of the Gods and just an excuse to say "Hey look it's a fate character that's outside of fgo!"

Bazette should've been summonable without the need to bullshit and grab a celtic god.... she has a noble phantasm as a normal human she might as well have a slot in the Throne for that.

Agreed Bazzett got screwed by pseudo garbage

can't speak for Lady Reines event and whatever pseudo crap was going on there but I can 110% speak for the Atlantis Astraea bit, so

I am now going to have a very long discussion of what the Ruler class is and how it is fundamentally misunderstood - TLDR, Ruler servants are not supposed to be likable or even benevolent. It's not a matter of hiding behind a class, it's a matter of the class's inherent disposition being one of stagnation, the same way madness is inherent to the Berserker or suffering to the Avenger.

Remember when I responded to this ask about about why Avenger-adjacent characters are so compelling? To restate and directly jump off from it:

"Astraea the impartial god, Qin Shi Huang the mechanical 'one true human', Jeanne the inhumanly pure Saint, even Sherlock who is so rational in his thinking that it goes from sensible to a lack of empathy, all of these are examples of how the Ruler is marked by an explicit lack of humanity that directly results from them lacking the most human quality there is: Desire. The ability to want something, to strive towards something, to truly care about something for reasons beyond cold logic, to act in a sense of being morally right or wrong, is a concept antithetical to the class itself."

And I guess now I have an excuse to elaborate on this. I'll use both Astraea and Jeanne as case studies, starting with Astraea (Or at least her only canon role of Olympus; haven't done Reines but given it's status as focusing on Nasuverse OCs rather than the actual servants, it shouldnt matter)

Astraea is our enemy in Lostbelt 5. She may claim otherwise, but she is our enemy, not our ally or "guide". She is vain, unfeeling, and inhuman. Why do I say that? Because her priority is maintaining impartiality at all costs. Despite her human host, despite not being a proper lostbelt servant, despite having every reason to help us, she refuses to do so directly on the ground of "impartiality". She is an obstacle in our way, because she would rather be opposed to everyone to allied to anyone, all in the name of her "role".

Compare this to Jeanne at the start of Apocrypha. Familiar, isn't it? The "Protector" who regulated bloodshed. The "Rebel" who adhered to a corrupted system. The "Saint" who would watch Children die. (#AtalanteDidNothingWrongTM). Jeanne, until Sieg came along, was a villain. A slave to the Holy Grail. A lie concocted to enforce rules unquestioningly. The Ruler Class is not one of justice, but one of arbitration, and none embody that more than Jeanne, whose only motive at first was to uphold a status quo even though her life was devoted to the exact opposite. Key words, at first. But what caused her to change? Was it Amakusa's interference? Was it the requests of the servants under her watchful eye? Was it her sense of justice seeing the potential for disaster if Amakusa or Darnic succeeded? No. No. And No. It was a random innocent life completely removed from all matters servant-related being swept up into the events of the grail war that made her question herself. Only when something so pure a blank slate began to suffer did she so much as question herself, and even then she could not accept that until Shakespeare completely broke her with ease. Shakespeare who was described as the worst possible opponent for Jeanne. Do you know why that is? Because he is everything she is not. He seeks emotions, he seeks plot twists, he seeks performances, he seeks the greatest story ever told, he seeks change. Jeanne is exactly the kind of person he can play like a fiddle: A fool dancing on strings. Because that's what the ruler class is, a puppet to the grail's sense of order. A slave to the status quo. Devoid of emotion for the sake of keeping up this idea for impartiality.

I want to highlight something you said

"they use their class to excuse their impartiality in situations where being impartial is fucking useless"

That's exactly the point. That's why the Ruler class is antithetical to humanity. It is the concept of balance regardless of what the balance achieves. But in life there is no absolute good and absolute evil. There is no universal set of rules you can apply to everything - life is too unique and too nuanced. But the Ruler class revolves around the idea of absolutes, of a set of rules you can never break under any circumstance, a sense of perfect order. But you cannot be an arbiter in a system that is inherently arbitrary. Look at the list of ruler servants. Not only are there noticeably a LOT of them by extra class standards, but the majority of non-gag event characters who qualify are very explicitly villains. Out of Jeanne D'arc, Sherlock Holmes, Astraea, Qin Shi Huang, Amakusa, Karl der Große, Young Moriarty, Zeus, BB, and Morgan, all but the first 3 of those are major villains. Now look at ALL of them. Ruler Moriarty and his obsession with academic rigor, Zeus and his stagnation, BB's role of judge jury and executioner in a programmed system, Karl's goal of complete unity at the cost of free will, Amakusa's desire for much the same, (Even some gag examples such as Quetz's godly inability to comprehend humanity through anything but physical exertion!) Qin Shi Huang discarding his humanity for complete order, etc.

And that's what it all boils down to. A lack of any humanity, living as a drone for their role. That's why the Ruler is opposite the Avenger, because if the Avenger is an embodiment of pure humanity, than the Ruler is defined by their lack of true humanity.

[niconebula]

homura akemi ?

I got the same character twice so I am going 2 reply directly to my friend but yes I saw you too anon!

favourite thing about them: her girlboss swagger. noo but seriously shes just such a one of a kind character. she's incredibly intense which I like and she's the star when she shows up, has an incredible amount of depth behind her actions and is taken really seriously as this fully fleshed out person.

least favourite thing about them: even her negative traits are part of the appeal so. hmmm. i'm not as much of a fan of glasses "moemura" that they keep pushing in the game to make her cute and marketable. i dont really care for magireco as a whole though.

favourite line: most famously: "more passionate than hope, and far deeper than despair, love".

brOTP: kyoko and homura. everyone talks about it but it's still so underrated. i think a lot of people forget how much she cares about kyoko. they fundamentally understand each other, the way they're both trying to protect the people they love. both traumatized by their religious upbringings, both experienced death prior to the events of the series, they're both misunderstood and labelled as the enemy but push forward anyways. homura obviously has a lot of respect for kyoko considering she personally reaches out for her help in every timeline including rebellion. love them.

OTP: i wonder what this is! its so classic its so iconic its the blueprint its a shakespearean tragedy they are ying and yang they are literally god and satan it is great. not influenced at all by me watching madoka at the ripe age of 13 and it changing my braincells for the worse.

nOTP: the incredibly cursed spin-off where she marries ... tatsuya... to get closer to madoka. this is real and i do not know who the audience was.

random headcanon: this is interesting because even though madoka is my longest running fixation, I never really "fandomized" it and my interest is mostly kept within the realm of source material - i don't make or think of my own scenarios. that being said, I have dabbled in lots of doujins and the idea of her existing solely on calorie-mates (japanese meal replacement bars) is canon to me

unpopular opinion: trying to think of a truly unpopular opinion is hard but. as a homura / madohomu enjoyer it's like well, just maybe, their relationship is kind of toxic and that it's part of the enjoyment that she or they both are a little krayzee and incredibly dramatic

song i associate with them: "hunger" by florence and the machine :)

favourite picture of them:

certified classic, drew this during art class in grade 9 except also with the top of her head cut off and I think that scared some of my classmates

[beardedmrbean]

The House on Thursday passed the Respect for Marriage Act, which will require the federal government to recognize same-sex marriages performed in states where they are legal but does not go as far as some Democrats wanted.

The bill won approval in a 258-169 vote, after the Senate passed it 61-36 last week. The legislation now heads to the White House for President Biden's signature into law. Despite warnings from Republicans in both chambers that the bill doesn't do enough to protect religious liberty, 39 House Republicans voted for the bill.

Supporters of the bill hailed it as a safety net in the event the Supreme Court reverses a ruling that says the Constitution guarantees the right of same-sex couples to get married.

"This legislation is the latest step in House Democrats' fight to win full equality for LGBTQ Americans and forge a more perfect union that our children, and their children… all of our children deserve," outgoing Speaker Nancy Pelosi, D-Calif., said from the House floor Thursday. 

"I find it deeply poignant, that as we prepare to bring the 117th Congress to a close, we are on the cusp of a great bipartisan moral victory in defense of a fundamental right of all Americans, a victory that will provide stability and reassurance to the millions of LGBTQ and interracial families that have come to rely on the constitutional right to marry," added House Judiciary Chairman Rep. Jerry Nadler, D-N.Y.

KEY GOP SENATOR SAYS SCHUMER'S ASSAULT WEAPONS BAN 'NO LONGER ON THE TABLE'

The Respect for Marriage Act was whipped up by Democrats in the Senate after Supreme Court Justice Clarence Thomas issued a concurring opinion in the case Dobbs v. Jackson Women's Health Organization, which overturned Roe v. Wade. Thomas said that in light of the decision to let states decide abortion, the court should also "reconsider all of this Court’s substantive due process precedents," including theObergefell v. Hodges case that took same-sex marriage out of the hands of states and said it is a right guaranteed by the Constitution.

The Respect for Marriage Act says the federal government will recognize same-sex marriages performed in states where they are legal, and includes a similar protection for interracial couples should the Supreme Court overturn a decision on that issue, Loving v. Virginia, that bans states from outlawing these marriages.

Republicans said the bill was an unnecessary overreach that addressed a nonexistent threat.

"The Democrats want Americans to believe… that at any moment the Supreme Court could step in and overturn its opinions on Obergefell and Loving. It's just not true. The Supreme Court is not poised to overturn its opinions in either of those decisions," Rep. Jim Jordan, R-Ohio, said from the House floor.

Jordan added that the Supreme Court said in the Dobbs opinion, which overturned Roe v. Wade, explicitly stated that decision should not be misunderstood, or mischaracterize to cast doubt on precedents that do not concern abortion.

PROGRESSIVES GRUMBLE AS RESPECT FOR MARRIAGE ACT ADVANCES: ‘I HATE THE SENATE BILL’

The bill is the result of months of negotiations between both parties in the Senate and was introduced despite calls from some progressives to make the measure go further. The bill would not go so far as to require states to permit same-sex marriages, which is what has some progressives disappointed.

When the bill was in the Senate, Sens. Susan Collins, R-Maine, and Tammy Baldwin, D-Wis., wrote an amendment aimed at adding religious liberty protections that the Senate approved. But some Republicans and conservative groups say that amendment doesn’t go far enough to protect people who fear litigation or government retaliation for their belief in traditional marriage.

BIDEN WARNED ON ‘HEAVY-HANDED’ ESG POLICIES HITTING COMPANIES, FAMILIES

"While the tension between same-sex marriage and religious liberty might not be obvious to many, legal experts have long understood that there is a legitimate risk that, without robust protections in place, federal recognition of same-sex marriage could – read against the backdrop of various federal statutes and the way they have been interpreted by the Supreme Court – inflict harm on those who, for reasons rooted in sincerely held religious belief or moral conviction, do not embrace same-sex marriage," Sen. Mike Lee, R-Utah, wrote in an op-ed last week.

Lee also wrote an amendment with stronger religious freedom protections, but it was ultimately rejected.

Tim Schultz, president of the 1st Amendment Partnership, told Fox News Digital that the passage of RMA is about "political realism," and that both sides had to cede some ground in order to turn the language into law. "I think that this is actually a big political deal," Schultz added.

"I think that legally the RMA is not a huge deal. And I think that's why people are hyperventilating for no good reason. But I think like politically it's a very big deal. Because I think it shows that there is a kind of center that wants to get things done on this issue,' Schulz said.

[hopeshoodie]

if you don't mind, what's the reason behind your tumblr username?

So it's LITG themed (obv lol), but specifically referencing the scene(s) in S2 where a string comes out of Hope's hoodie, Hope gets upset, Noah says to just buy a new one, Hope snaps that he can't afford to buy her a new one and that's not the point anyways. And then this argument inspires a series of events where both Noah and Hope reckon with if they should be together.

Hope storms off the to terrace but then realizes that it's not about the hoodie (it is, she's partially but upset about that being broken and Noah being dismissive about it, but ALSO) it's about how she's been lying to herself that everything's right with Noah.

It bothers her that he makes less money than her and doesn't have career ambitions as lucrative as hers.

It bothers her that he isn't bothered by that difference, she feels like he should be but obviously can't say that.

She feels shallow for the two points above, because she's the only one in the equation worried about money. So she resents him for the thing, and also how she feels about the thing.

But it feeds into a bigger fundamental difference about the two of them- Hope wants to be a career woman, and Noah is content with his current position and wants to settle down and have kids.

On it's face, she's upset that a object she cares about broke and Noah was dismissive about it (and again made her feel shallow/materialistic). He didn't make effort to understand where she was coming from, and she's frustrated that she couldn't effectively communicate her feelings to him.

Despite all of these things, Hope really likes Noah (and has been intimate with him) and it's activating her commitment issues. She's questioning herself and the relationship and is feeling super insecure

And Hope can't communicate the sum of all these things to Noah without feeling misunderstood or dismissed (and then she yells/turns it into an argument because of those feelings). But she IS able to communicate them to MC because they're in love.

And then MC goes downstairs and sees Noah trying to fix the hoodie. And its this ironic moment because both Noah and Hope are trying to figure out how to show the other they care, but are having the communication they need to have not with each other but with MC.

Because Noah communicates that

He's overwhelmed by the fighting/yelling

He's beginning to regard Hope as immature, because of the fighting and her preoccupation with his income (and that she would make snarky comments about it in anger) and for other reasons

He's realizing that their style of handling disagreements is different and that they might not be compatible

He's starting to question his relationship with Hope because of the above items

And again, instead of telling Hope this or trying to work through it with her, he's trying to fix her hoodie. It's a super sincere gesture, but he's focusing on the straw that broke the camels back- Hope's not really that angry about the hoodie. So presenting her with a fixed hoodie doesn't tangibly solve anything.

But that's what Noah does. He avoids conflict, focuses his attention on tiny parts of the problem instead of trying to understand the scope, and lets problems fester. And worst of all, when there's conflict with his current partner, he starts to look elsewhere for comfort, which continually manifests in the story as him cheating on Hope/developing feelings for other women without doing anything to break up, communicate, or reconnect with Hope.

And idk I just. I love these back to back scenes. Nope is my favorite part of S2, I love both Noah and Hope so much and I love the nuance in their relationship. They genuinely do care for each other, but they also bring out the worst in each other. They're just so wrong for each other and I love watching them push the other to the brink. It's way more compelling to me than anything else in the story.

[transselkie]

about iwtv, firstly, the timeline will be messy looking from early on the adaptation since key elements might be altered and we have no clue how. The new interview with Jacob and Sam makes clear that half of the interview will be the first season. Now... Makes sense the second season is the second half, okey. But, since so much that happens to Lestat is motivated by the interview book being released in the 70's, how much of his journey already happened, and why? We know the world is still oblivious to vampires so his career was different, or it might not even have started yet. So, what about the later books is included then? Lestat and Louis reuniting is the only other thing that might have affected Louis' shift in narrative, so I'm 99% sure they met again and Lestat is a changed vampire. But that's how far I've got in my thoughts. What about you?

It makes sense that the first season only covers a portion of Interview seeing as I have heard nothing about a casting for Armand. It would be a very interesting adaptation indeed if he just did not show up in it lol.

Honestly, I have just as many questions about what the timeline changes do to Lestat’s backstory.

There isn’t a whole lot of time between Lestat’s transformation and Louis’ in the book but the show implies that Lestat has been a vampire for a while. What happened in all that extra time in between? Are they going to adapt The Vampire Lestat? How will the time discrepancy change things? Are the events of that novel dragged out over a longer period of time? And which events?

So much of Lestat’s behaviour with Louis is a reflection of his experiences with Nicki. We know that’s still a fundamental part of Lestat’s history because they make sure that Nicki’s ghost haunts this narrative. In the books both Lestat and Nicolas were turned in 1780, he died in 1789, and Louis was turned in 1791. This is a very different sequence of events if the first two dates stay the same and the latter jumps ahead another century plus.

What did Lestat de Lioncourt do alone for a century? I know he’s prone to periods of self isolation, but I don’t get the impression that he was just sitting alone or beneath the Earth all that time. Did he still go back to his ailing father?

Skipping back to 1984/2022... What IS happening? Clearly not the exact same events as in TVL. (Though I confess that the idea of Lestat climbing out of the ground in 2022 and still deciding to be an 80s style rock star is hilariously delightful to me.) I have also questioned whether or not Lestat is already awake and reconnected with Louis, if this is what has changed his tone on him. At first I thought it was just a reference to the fact that we know now that the books end with them back together. And maybe that is what it is. But they could have just had the interview take place in 2022 without aging Daniel, making him ill already, and implementing the concept of a second interview. They could have shifted the years and the ages and the races and kept the continuity in tact, but they decidedly didn’t. Please correct me if I’ve misunderstood, but when Louis spoke of hearing a woman in Egypt from his balcony the implication was that Akasha is already awake, right? And if I did understand that correctly, how? Who woke her if Lestat is not yet awake, and how did they do it? And if he is awake, how long has he been awake and what’s been happening?

I’m also horribly curious about their plan for Daniel in the show. His storyline clearly did not continue from the first interview as it did in the books. Are they planning on doing the Daniel/Armand story at all? They make sure we know he’s ill, and in the books Armand changes him when he is dying. But if he doesn’t know Armand yet I don’t really know if he’d be his progenitor. It would be a VERY different dynamic to what we see in the books.

It’s so impossible to know what they plan on including and how it might be altered in the adaptation. I mean, do they even intend on adapting anything outside of Interview?

[y2kbugs-moved]

Reverse Unpopular Opinion Meme: Viktor Arcane? Or Jayce if you want to do Jayce Defense

 I want to do BOTH because these guys are a PAIR and should not be seperated. This WILL be long so I’ll put it under readmore

Jayce will go first because his character is still quite misunderstood by the fandom and he still gets unnecessary hate for some reason? He might be a flawed man (just as all the characters are), but I don't think anything he does warrants so much hate in my opinion?

Especially if you look at the context of the events within the series and how he reacts to these events, and knowing his background helps. He's a man who grew up privileged though he did have a traumatic childhood experience that was the driving force for his ambition in science and magic/hextech. His lifestyle beyond what happened when he was a child could probably be described as "comfortable".

But that could go on a whole rant about why he’s misunderstood by the fandom and why him being a flawed person does not make him a fundamentally bad person, and this is about good things I like about the character, so:

1. He’s very handsome. I’ll get this out of the way first, he’s super good looking and the designers knew that. He has the same eye color as Viktor and I’m a sucker for eyebrow scars! Also LOVE his hammer weapon. He looks a lot better than his game counterpart, and speaking of...

2. His personality and ambitions in the series are a lot more admirable and attractive to me than what I’ve seen from the game lore. He just seems a lot nicer (though grows bitter towards the end)? I get that he probably will spiral further into his game-self in some way in season 2 and that’s going to be something to see! I guess it is a corruption arc but on a smaller scale than Viktor’s. Kind of a fucked up Superman.

3. I adore his relationship with Viktor, especially when compared to the game again (at this point it sounds like I’m dissing on the game lore...I mean, the lore has some really good bits in it! And I’m sure the series will make use of those good parts of the lore! Just other parts are a little less...great and also can be inconsistent). He isn’t afraid to put his hand on Viktor’s shoulder or back and it’s usually pretty clear he cares for him, even if in some scenes it might not look like that (this could just be my interpretations of specific scenes however). I’m 100% of the interpretation that he always cared and his sudden promotion into a political position and the stress that came with it + the potential war from Zaunites coming on really jeopardized things for both characters, and from there we can see where they’re breaking up and going to spiral down. This is why their divorce era in season 2 is going to be even more tragic!

Now it’s Viktor’s turn! My blorbus maximus, the scrunkly etc etc Spamton who (I’m kidding, I still love him).

Viktor is also misunderstood but kind of in the opposite way to Jayce? I’m actually seeing similarities in how some of the Deltarune fandom treats Spamton when it comes to Viktor’s character, and that’s going to be something to consider when we get season 2 since we get his villain arc! But pretty much I’m seeing some similar ableism and infantilization of his character, making him seem weak and helpless and I get it, hurt/comfort is great but you can write that without going into offensive tropes and stereotypes?

1. Like Jayce, he’s also hot. In a very different way, though. I’ve always been really drawn to his eyes in particular, they’re so cool to me. How do people draw those? Teach me. But the other thing that makes him different is that, I feel like the animators still kept him attractive even as he got very sick? He’s hot in a Victorian period tragedy sort of way. I have a type.

2. Beyond just his looks, he is just such a good character in his arc, and I love how he works as disabled representation. Now he isn’t perfect of course but he’s probably the best I’ve seen in a long time. He isn’t portrayed as pathetic or middling because of his disability or illness, if anything it’s the opposite! He actively shows himself to be self-assured, though reserved as a person, and he works so hard to try to make the world a better place, and does everything he can to keep himself alive instead of just...”giving up” on his sickness. Of course we all know where this ends up but to be honest I am excited!

3. He has so many good lines, probably some of the best in the series in my opinion? I also love how emotional he is and how that will absolutely affect him later on in his corruption arc!

There’s absolutely more but my mind’s gone blank again.

[byrone]

The one reason why I liked Euphoria

Even though it's been a while since the show aired, I think it's important to talk about this at any time. Euphoria's not perfect. It sure has it's flaws, especially the S2. But that's not what this post is about (I'll get to that some other time, don't worry). What I wanna get into is one of the things I liked about it and the number one reason why I feel like it's important to watch.

All the characters you go through the story with are flawed, that much is obvious. Rue has mental issues and grieves her father's death, both of which she deals with by taking opioids. Jules has mental problems and a very complicated relationship with her own body. Cassie has dependence issues. Maddy has a toxic image of herself in her mind she wants desperately to achieve. Lexi is ignored and not appreciated and uses her bitterness to make the infamous musical. Kat has her internalized misandry. Cal has personality problems and a hidden regret for not being ever able to explore his relationship with Derek. Nate has the toxicity of Cal's views of the world to fight with and is scared to explore his own sexuality because of it. Fez can't escape the net of drug dealing he was caught up in as a young boy. Ali became an addict as violent as his father - the one thing he swore he'd never be.

What's the interesting part - what makes this show so fucking significant - is the fact that there is a great effort to tell us precisely why the characters are the way they are. What made them struggle and be imperfect. They've taken care of that by making every episode's prologue into a summary of each character's backstory. Now I'll admit - they aren't all 100% equal in quantity, some characters are given more space than others, especially in the overall story arch. But it's close enough to equal (in the S1 at least) for everyone to be able to get a good picture of them all.

This aspect of the show is by my standards the most fundamental part of it. I believe in determinism (and incompatible free will, I'll get to that in a moment), which is a term that gets misunderstood a lot, so let me explain it really quickly. Determinism states that all events are determined by the previously existing causes. That means everything that happens did so because of something. A person builds a house because his previous one got blown off by a tornado, for example. Now, determinism applied to people's actions (and there it gets to my own personal understanding of the term) means that everybody is not only heavily influenced by their surroundings, but actually our surroundings ARE what makes us. Everything we are, everything we do in life, is based on something or someone else. Every decision we make is acting upon our belief system that was created from our life experience - what our parents tought us (conciously or unconciously), what we learned at school, what people influenced us. Every time you decide to do something, the 'free will', as we call it, is actually just a bunch of patches of your life experience and knowledge and all of that is created by the context of your past. Taken to the extreme, I don't think we have any free will at all. This is of course highly philosophical and in real life people couldn't act upon this (by which I mean act like nobody has a free will and thus can't be responsible for their actions), because we wouldn't be able to function as a society. But that doesn't mean it's not true. For example every murderer, every rapist, every person deemed by society as 'pure evil' did what they did because something drove them to do it and they weren't able to decide otherwise because of their life experience. What they did was bad and it should be dealt with in some way, and although I firmly believe that punishment is not the answer, it is true that we should react to a bad behaviour. And we should do it with as full as possible context in our minds.

That's what I love about Euphoria. They tell you about the characters' actions, whether they be good or bad, and let you base your decision of what to think about them on what they've been through and on the real reasons behind what they're doing. That's also what made me actually like all the characters, not just have my favourites. Even though we might not like what they're doing throughout the show, their actions can be neatly traced back to their backstories, and yeah, I know this should be a standard in writing, but it sadly isn't, so I'm really glad to be able to experience it in the show.

[the-alan-price-combo]

In The Beginning (1959-63) -

All Sections | Next Section

[Interviewer: “But then, of course you came together as the Animals. Now, tell us about the Animals, because that was the first time you really made it, wasn’t it? Was the Animals?”]

“I don’t know whether you can say there’s a first time. I think, really, when I met Eric for the first time was when I ‘made it’, because I found somebody with a common soul, you know?” - Alan Price, Northerners, 1975.

Alan… Alan, I swear!! What a way to describe your connection with someone…

Anyway, this section is going to be dedicated to miscellaneous things from ‘59 to early ‘63, most of these events not having exact dates tied to them, but still documented and decidedly pre-Animals.

Friendly Competition -

An interesting group of shared events Alan and Eric talk about involve talent competitions they would compete in; not with bands, but by themselves. The date of Eric’s particular recounting is unknown, but it appears to be sometime in ‘58 or ‘59, during a talent competition at the Majestic Ballroom:

“...I saw a list of the other competitors. One name stood out, and I caught a glimpse of him at the bar. His name was Alan Price. I’d seen him before at the Methodist Church Hall, doing Larry Williams’ ‘She Said Yeah!’ with a group fronted by Thomas Hedley. He was fucking good. And on this night, he was planning to do his rendition of Jerry Lee Lewis’ ‘Whole Lotta Shakin’’. I kind of knew then that I was sunk. This guy sang and played piano. I figured I didn’t stand a chance just singing with a big band, especially with such a straight crowd…

“…I knew before either of us went on who was going to take the show.

“At the side of the stage, Alan came up and said hello. He told me that he’d been playing with Hedley’s group, but that he was playing guitar, not piano, which he would have preferred.

“‘Well,’ I told him. ‘We’re thinking about putting a real R&B band together. You can play piano with us anytime.’

“When the band leader announced Alan’s name he climbed onstage, headed right for the big black Steinway, and the 88s began to roll. Microphone stand between his legs, hair flopped over his forehead, Alan got into it, speeding up at the end and throwing off the big-band drummer, just like Jerry Lee.

“When he walked off, Alan seemed surprised at the enthusiasm of the applause, but this was basically a straight crowd seeing and hearing live rock and roll for the first time!

“At least he warmed them up, I thought as I was called on next.” - Eric Burdon, Don’t Let Me Be Misunderstood, 2001 (p. 11).

Eric ended up winning this particular competition, however, Alan has a little more to say about these talent shows…

“Eric is an old, old friend and figures a lot in the formative days of Alan’s musical career. Alan recalls a holiday with him at Butlins.

“‘We paid for it by winning talent competitions,’ he says ‘Eric did a wonderful Presley act and I won the musical section with my Jerry Lee Lewis impression.’” - Beat Instrumental, November, 1966 (p. 6).

…So you went on a private vacation, just the two of you, that you paid for with the money you pooled together from talent shows? …hmm… Said holiday doesn’t seem to be elaborated on further by either of them, besides by Alan in this one article… but to be fair, it doesn’t need to be.

Anyway, this is a perfect representation of the immense amount of respect they had for one another’s talents. A common, misguided observation of most interpretations of their relationship is the idea that neither of them seem to want to “back down” in relation to one another, per-say (which is somewhat true, they are both quite stubborn). However, if there’s one undeniable consistency within their dynamic, it’s that they never lose respect for one another and will always acknowledge when the other is performing well. Enjoying the other’s talents, unabashedly.

Emergence of a Combo -

Amongst all of this, the fundamental elements of what we now know as the Animals were beginning to take shape. Once Alan had joined the Pagans, they had changed their name to the Kansas City Five (KC5); however, he didn’t stick together for too long. After performing with the KC5 for a few months, Alan ended up being a no-show at a particular gig, having been snatched by another band known as the Kontours. It was within this group that Chas Chandler entered the picture, supplying bass guitar within the Kontours. Around this time, the Pagans/KC5 were beginning to disband, with Eric making a trip down to London to explore the scene there and John taking on a real job while playing music on the side. The Kontours had their own fluctuation in members, with Chas and Alan seeking out musicians and the Alan Price Combo emerging from this unit (John was in and out of the band for a time). Like the others, working slightly more stable jobs alongside their musical hobbies, Alan was employed at an income tax office during this time.

Meanwhile, for Eric, London was an unforgiving place; musically and as a general environment, and he was intrigued, especially by the blues music he was hearing. While Alan describes Eric coming back from London as “with his tail between his legs” (Alan Price tour program, 1975), Eric seemed to have a much more excitable, hopeful outlook on things.

“I returned to Newcastle full of enthusiasm, going from one friend’s house to another, telling them they must see what was cooking in London. I made a special trip to Alan’s place of employment, a tax office in the city centre. I told him he must go to London. But Alan was very serious about finishing his time at the tax office and making sure he was secure for life. One day, when the time was right, he too would feel the pull of the smoke.”  - Eric Burdon, I Used to Be an Animal, but I’m All Right Now, 1986 (p. 35).

Such a great description of Alan’s outlook on things, courtesy of Eric… I love the phrase, “feel the pull of the smoke”, which can mean just as much or as little as you want it to. Eric knew Alan had reservations, and even once he was physically in the city, he still wouldn’t entirely be there and Eric didn’t pressure him; not too much, at least. Instead, he provided excitable suggestions, wanting their band to flourish. Wanting to work together again.

The Alan Price Combo, circa 1962. Note Chas on the bass!

Giving Up the Reigns -

However, Alan’s hesitation didn’t just surround “moving to the big city”. No… he had further reservations… mostly revolving around Eric himself. This is where things get just as speculatory and muddled as they are clear-cut. Alan definitely harbored a bit of jealousy towards Eric, which became obvious when Eric held the ‘lead singer’ role in their groups. Just by the nature of this musical position, Eric is the focal point of the band; the focal sound of the band. This was true in the Pagans and KC5, and would be true in the Animals… and if Eric was to join the Alan Price Combo, it would happen there. Eric’s voice would dominate the others, dominate Alan’s piano, dominate Alan’s own voice, and this was something the prickly and stubborn Alan Price didn’t like very much at the time. Sure, Chas and John didn’t take any shit, but their particular instrumentation meant they were never a “threat”. Eric was a “threat” to his image and his sound…

“I don’t think AP could deal with me as the front guy. His attitude is, ‘Here I am, I’ve studied piano all my life, I’m the musician in the band, and this fucker’s out front getting all the adulation.’ The guy’s got problems. Always had problems. Great player, no doubt about it. He was the Animals to a certain degree.” - Eric Burdon, Animal Tracks: The Story of the Animals, 2012 (p. 82).

Now, this sounds mighty antagonistic, doesn’t it? …Yeah, it does. However, this behavior in Alan doesn’t last too long. And the fact that he did harbor these feelings at this time makes many of the things he does a few years from now hold a lot more meaning, indicative of how much he will embrace Eric’s presence in his life… but, we’ll get to that later.

Though, as a small aside - and I might just be reading too much into this - but Alan’s behavior in trying to avoid the inevitable (Eric eventually joining their group) gives me “furiously avoiding his crush” vibes…

Here’s some of the Animals’ takes on the early Burdon-Price dynamic:

“It was Alan who had organized the band from the start. But he realized that he didn’t have the voice for that kind of material. He had to get Eric in. From then on, it was Eric who had the ideas, even though Alan was the leader of the band.” - John Steel, Wild Animals, 1986 (p. 21).

“[Price] did the administration, he was the one that got the money and divided it out, but Eric seemed to be the dominant one.” - Hilton Valentine, Animal Tracks: The Story of the Animals, 2012 (p. 30). (lol thanks Hilton, I kind of figured)

[Interviewer: “Was there an element of frustration with Alan Price wanting to be lead vocalist when he knew damn well that you were doing a fine job, and he really didn’t have much of a chance?”]

“To the outside world, it would appear to be that it was a problem of Alan and his need to be heard, vocally. Maybe it was. I didn’t see it that way because my relationship with Alan was always a love-hate, delicate relationship from the very beginning.” - Eric Burdon, BBC Interview (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SFTtReqO9bs&t=0s)

“Love-hate, delicate relationship”... believe me, the first time I heard this, I just about fell apart at the seams. Because, yeah, despite the tension, there was something very delicate there…

Anyway, hello, Hilton Valentine! Of course, he was the last piece of the Animal-puzzle, joining in mid-’63, after Chas had seen him performing around clubs with a skiffle group known as the Wild Cats. He was honestly the perfect final addition, not only providing the lead guitar the group desperately needed, but also more of that rock-image, which Hilton was practically schooled in. John also permanently joined around this time, truly rounding the group off. At this point, the band was still referred to as the Alan Price Rhythm and Blues Combo, however, this wouldn’t last for too much longer…

Music to His Ears -

I talked enough about Alan being a bit prickly and restating what dozens of online articles who don’t read obscure Beat Instrumental articles daily have said already, so let's get to the beginning of the absolutely soft content. Again, this is something they were basically doing since ‘59, and probably later on throughout the decade, but it’s most documented and palpable here.

Eric had a huge impact on Alan musically, because one of the things Eric would do was sit him down and play Alan records that he hadn’t heard much before; of pianists he hadn’t heard much before. Pete Johnson, Memphis Slim, accompanying pianists on Gene Vincent and Elvis records… and, of course, Ray Charles. This was a world of wonder Alan had never had the chance to fully be exposed to before, and after hearing this music for the first time, he would try and emulate it on a piano as soon as he possibly could. Eric knew how good Alan was with his jazzy, more lounge-ish style, as well as church-esque music… but he also knew he could foster a more bluesy, more rock-based sound within him as well. And Alan not only let him… but considers these moments they shared to be some of the most formative in his entire career.

“Eric was always introducing me to new artists which I hadn’t come across before.” - Alan Price, Beat Instrumental, November, 1966 (p. 6).

“Eric is an old, old friend and figures a lot in the formative days of Alan’s musical career. …It was the music he heard through Eric that made him a follower of quality, a seeker after big sounds, as near perfect as perfection itself.” - Beat Instrumental, November, 1966 (p. 6).

“I think, perhaps, if there were any big influences, musically there was Ray Charles, in the beginning, and all of rock and roll, but Ray Charles, because he sang like I felt. I didn't want to imitate him, I didn't want to do a Joe Cocker.

“The next one was Eric Burdon, who educated me to blues music in the real sense of the word, Joe Turner, Pete Johnson, and I found I could play like these people. It's funny to find out you can actually play. I mean, when you're self-taught and you can't read, and you suddenly play and you find that you are playing what these people are playing, as well as getting the same thrill, that's a nice sense of identification…

“…I'd say I owe most to those two, Eric and Lindsay [Anderson].” - Alan Price, interview from October, 1975 (http://www.muzines.co.uk/articles/alan-price/6673)

“Alan didn’t know much about blues until Eric started ramming Ray Charles at him. He was more into Jerry Lee Lewis. But it was always Eric who had dug out some good, unheard-of blues thing or other. …It was Eric who was always looking for that kind of stuff, and Eric who was always wanting to play it.

“If it hadn’t been for Eric, I expect Alan Price would still be a tax inspector, playing Jerry Lee Lewis on the side.” - John Steel, Wild Animals, 1986 (p. 17).

Shout-out to John Steel for saying one of the absolute most telling statements up to this point. Because… yeah, he’s completely right: Eric changed Alan’s life for the better… and Alan seems to agree. Eric completely shifted his outlook on music and the way he would approach his own style… and this would have a profound impact on the sound they created together.

Also, the image of an excitable Eric and a curious Alan huddled around a record player, just the two of them, is adorable. Wonder if they did a lot of “listening” on that holiday they went on together…

All Sections | Next Section

[grim-wildwood]

Getting Started

Chapter One: The Fundamentals of Witchcraft

What is Witchcraft?

•☽────✧˖°˖⛤˖°˖✧────☾•

Witchcraft is a term that has been used throughout history to describe the exercise or invocation of supernatural powers to control people or events, often involving practices that are considered sorcery or magic. The concept of witchcraft has been defined differently across disparate historical and cultural contexts, but it has often been associated with the work of individuals who meet to engage in rites and perform spells believed to affect the physical world, health, and weather, among other things.

The origins of witchcraft are difficult to trace, but it has been present in various forms across many cultures and periods. In the West, particularly during the European witch hunts from the 14th to the 18th century, witchcraft was often seen as the work of crones who consorted with the Devil and performed black magic. This stereotype, however, is a far cry from the objective reality of witchcraft as a cultural and religious practice. Witchcraft has also been understood as a form of wisdom and knowledge, often associated with natural healers and wise women who were misunderstood and sometimes persecuted for their practices. Throughout history, witches have been both feared and revered, and their practices have been intertwined with the religious and spiritual beliefs of their times.

In modern times, witchcraft has been re-evaluated and is often associated with Wicca and other neopagan movements, which view it as a spiritual path that emphasizes the duality of the energies and respect for nature. Witches in this context are practitioners of a craft that involves rituals, spells, and the use of magickal tools to bring about change in accordance with one's will. The practice of witchcraft specifically involves various tools and techniques, such as casting spells, performing rituals, and utilizing visualization and mental clarity, which can take various amounts of training depending on how connected a person is to their energy. There are different paths within witchcraft, each with its own set of beliefs and practices. Some see witchcraft as a spiritual path, others as a philosophy, and some as a way of life. The ethical practice of witchcraft emphasizes responsibility, self-reflection, and adherence to a set of practical and empathetic principles that guide the practitioner's actions.

To study witchcraft academically, one must delve into historical texts, anthropological studies, sociological theories, and psychological aspects. This multidisciplinary approach helps to understand the complex role witchcraft has played in human societies. By studying witchcraft, one gains a deeper appreciation for the diversity of human belief systems and the complex ways in which they interact with societal structures. Witchcraft is a multifaceted phenomenon that has been part of human culture for centuries. Its study offers valuable insights into the human condition itself. Aspiring witches or scholars should feel empowered by the knowledge that their study contributes to a greater understanding of the human experience.

Key Learning Points 🌿 Witchcraft is a term used to describe the use of energy manipulation as a personal tool. 🌿 The concept of witchcraft varies across different historical and cultural contexts. It is wise to do research on different sects, even ones you choose not to participate in. 🌿 During the European witch hunts, witches were seen as evil and in league with the Devil. This is not true and was unjust persecution. 🌿 Witchcraft has been seen as a useful form of knowledge-seeking for academic purposes. 🌿 In modern times, Wicca is one of the most well-known neopagan movements regarding witchcraft. 🌿 Witchcraft involves rituals, spells, and the use of magickal tools. 🌿 The ethical practice of witchcraft emphasizes responsibility, self-reflection, and empathy. 🌿 Studying witchcraft requires a multidisciplinary approach. Focus on the history of your craft, the anthropological and social context of your craft, and the psychological background of the work itself. 🌿 Studying witchcraft contributes to a greater understanding of the human experience.

•☽────✧˖°˖⛤˖°˖✧────☾•

[truckreincarnation]

tele(vee)sion mute button | Vee | Trial 4.3 | Re: Esmée, Germain, Shin, the confession

They had expected that their suggestion would be received poorly, but they shoulder the backlash head-on without cowering away. "I do like Luz, and in m-most other circumstances I wouldn't be bringin' what I did up, b-but I wanted to throw the possibility out there because I c-couldn't fully convince myself that it wasn't impossible that this was just another s-series of unfortunate events brought on by the stress of the motive. I needed it to b-be shut down definitively, and it is now. Still, I'm sorry for insinuatin' it. Luz... Yeah, no, I don't think she wouldn't do any of t-that in the end. I'm sorry." Vee apologises. "That... does mean the next likeliest option could be--"

...

Well. That. That sure was a confession, and in Theophania's own special way, she somehow managed to make it worse.

Bian's breaking down, Avery's breaking down, and she can hear the pain in her girlfriend's voice as she asks if Theophania had truly hated them this much. The answer was both more and less surprising to them, but they still force the knee-jerk reaction away from the forefront of their mind. Twice over, when she cries that she still tried to save Frank. You're only human. Don't you wish you didn't feel like this all the time? Does it hurt now to see that your actions can destroy others even when you don't want them to? Has it ever occurred that you might just be an arrogant selfish-

They breathe. They breathe again. Vee flips to the back of their journal and scribble a name, before closing it.

"My participation in t-this trial, by all accounts, is over." They remark tiredly. "I doubt anythin' else I h-have to say is necessary or welcome in these circumstances, and I have n-no interest in yellin' and screamin' when there's no point in doin' so."

...There are a good many things he would like to say to Theophania Valentine, actually. Maybe yell, given the emotional turbulence deep in their core. That in their eyes, she has fundamentally misunderstood the lack of a transactional relationship in the art of healing, because you don't have to believe in or trust someone to give them kindness. You're not supposed to expect something in return, you know? Or that they don't derive any grim satisfaction from this outcome, even in light of their own outburst towards her actions in the end of the last trial. Actions have consequences, don't they? Once again, she's unintentionally put people in the line of fire, and this time there were very permanent consequences, weren't there? Or that now, as she breaks down, part of the blame has been put on their shoulders and other people's shoulders for not caring enough before, that their collective attitudes and actions have pushed her towards this rotten end because she felt like she couldn't take this farce anymore. As if she was the one hurting the most, or the only one who continued to hurt and struggle with relationships after that trial, or that nobody would be hurt even if she succeeded in what she tried to do.

But what would voicing any of that help? It wouldn't make them feel any better, any less tired over what's happened. Luz and Frank were still dead, and now everyone else got to hurt more than they did. 

The best they could do was the gift of silence.

[kemetic-dreams]

Never been a beef between Africans and African American it was a plan to divide us.

I have notice, whenever you speak or act proudly about being African. Everyone who is non African becomes an expert. Your not a real African, “they don’t like African Americans or African American hate you etc.

You never been to Africa, you don’t look like them!!!!

They feel comfortable when your Christian, because they feel they can control you and tame you, and in the end fight for their cause.

They feel comfortable when you wear their names and feel proud to wear their names. Makes them feel like their ancestors may have been rough with us, but did a good job that was needed.

Notice their are no African languages in most public schools

Notice how African religions are demonized!!!

This Document is Exhibit 10 of U.S. Supreme Court Case No.00-9587

NATIONAL SECURITY COUNCIL MEMORANDUM-46 MARCH 17, 1978

Presidential Review Memorandum NSCM/46 TO: The Secretary of State The Secretary of Defense The Director of Central Intelligence SUBJECT: Black Africa and the U.S. Black Movement

The President has directed that a comprehensive review be made of current developments in Black Africa from the point of view of their possible impacts on the black movement in the United States. The review should consider:

1. Long-term tendencies of social and political developments and the degree to which they are consistent with or contradict the U.S. interests. 2. Proposals for durable contacts between radical African leaders and leftist leaders of the U.S. black community. 3. Appropriate steps to be taken inside and outside the country in order to inhibit any pressure by radical African leaders and organizations on the U.S. black community for the latter to exert influence on the policy of the  Administration toward Africa.

The President has directed that the NSC Interdepartmental Group for Africa  perform this review. The review should be forwarded to the NSC Political Analysis Committee by April 20.

(signed)

Zbigniew Brezinski cc: The Secretary of the Treasury The Secretary of Commerce The Attorney General The Chairman Joint Chiefs of Staff

Objective of our policy toward Black Africa is to prevent social upheavals which could radically change the political situation throughout the area. The success or failure of our policy in the region depends on the solution international and internal issues whose importance of the United States is on the increase.

II. A. U.S. INTERESTS IN BLACK AFRICA

A multiplicity of interests influences the U.S. attitude toward black Africa. The most important of these interests can be summarized as follows:

1. POLITICAL

If black African states assume attitudes hostile to the U.S. national interest, our policy toward the white regimes; which is a key element in our relations with the black states, may be subjected by the latter to great  pressure for fundamental change. Thus the West may face a real danger of being deprived of access to the enormous raw material resources of southern Africa which are vital for our defense needs as well as losing control over the Cape sea routes by which approximately 65% of Middle Eastern oil is supplied to Western Europe. Moreover, such a development may bring about internal political difficulties by intensifying the activity of the black movement in the United States itself. It should also be borne in mind that black Africa is an integral part of a continent where tribal and regional discord, economic backwardness, inadequate infrastructures, drought, and famine, are constant features of the scene. In conjunction with the artificial borders imposed by the former colonial powers, guerilla warfare in Rhodesia and widespread indignation against apartheid in South Africa, the above factors provide the communist states with ample opportunities for furthering their aims. This must necessarily redound to the detriment of U.S. political interests.

2. ECONOMIC

Black Africa is increasingly becoming an outlet for U.S. exports and investment. The mineral resources of the area continue to be of great value for the normal functioning of industry in the United States and allied countries. In 1977, U.S. direct investment in black Africa totaled about $1.8 billion and exports $2.2 billion. New prospect of substantial profits would continue to develop in the countries concerned.

IV. BLACK AFRICA AND THE U.S. BLACK MOVEMENT

Apart from the above-mentioned factors adverse to U.S. strategic interests, the nationalist liberation movement in black Africa can act as a catalyst with far reaching effects on the American black community by stimulating its organizational consolidation and by inducing radical actions. Such a result would be likely as Zaire went the way of Angola and Mozambique. An occurrence of the events of 1967-68 would do grievous harm to U.S. prestige, especially in view of the concern of the present Administration with human rights issues. Moreover, the Administration would have to take specific steps to stabilize the situation. Such steps might be misunderstood both inside and outside the United States.

In order to prevent such a trend and protect U.S. national security interests, it would appear essential to elaborate and carry out effective countermeasures.

1. Possibility of Joint Action By U.S. Black and African Nationalist Movement.

In elaborating U.S. policy toward black Africa, due weight must be given to the fact that there are 25 millions American blacks whose roots are African and who consciously or subconsciously sympathies with African nationalism. The living conditions of the black population should also be taken into account. Immense advances in the field are accompanied by a long-lasting high rate of unemployment, especially among the youth and by poverty and dissatisfaction with government social welfare standards. These factors taken together may provide a basis for joint actions of a concrete nature by the African nationalist movement and the U.S. black community. Basically, actions would take the form of demonstrations and public protests, but the likelihood of violence cannot be excluded. There would also be attempts to coordinate their political activity both locally and in international organizations.

Inside the United States these actions could include protest demonstrations against our policy toward South Africa accompanied by demand for boycotting corporations and banks which maintain links with that country; attempts to establish a permanent black lobby in Congress including activist leftist radical groups and black legislators; the reemergence of Pan-African ideals; resumption of protest marches recalling the days of Martin Luther King; renewal of the extremist idea national idea of establishing an "African Republic" on American soil. Finally, leftist radical elements of the black community could resume extremist actions in the style of the defunct Black Panther Party.

Internationally, damage could be done to the United States by coordinated activity of African states designed to condemn U.S. policy toward South Africa, and initiate discussions on the U.S. racial issue at the United Nations where the African representation constitutes a powerful bloc with about one third of all the votes.

A menace to U.S. economic interests, though not a critical one, could be posed by a boycott by Black African states against American companies which maintain contact with South Africa and Rhodesia. If the idea of economic assistance to black Americans shared by some African regimes could be realized by their placing orders in the United States mainly with companies owned by blacks, they could gain a limited influence on the U.S. black  community.

In the above context, we must envisage the possibility, however remote, that black Americans interested in African affairs may refocus their attention on the Arab-Israeli conflict. Taking into account; the African descent of American blacks it is reasonable to anticipate that their sympathies would lie with the Arabs who are closer to them in spirit and in some case related to them by blood. Black involvement in lobbying to support the Arabs may lead to serious dissention between American black and Jews. The likelihood of extremist actions by either side is negligible, but the discord may bring about tension in the internal political climate of the United States.

3. Political options

In the context of long-term strategy, the United States can not afford a radical change in the fundamentals of its African policy, which is designed for maximum protection of national security. In the present case, emphasis is laid on the importance of Black Africa for U.S. political, economic and military interests.

RECOMMENDATIONS

In weighing the range of U.S. interests in Black Africa, basic recommendations arranged without intent to imply priority are:

1. Specific steps should be taken with the help of appropriate government agencies to inhibit coordinated activity of the Black Movement in the United States.

2. Special clandestine operations should be launched by the CIA to generate mistrust and hostility in American and world opinion against joint activity of the two forces, and to cause division among Black African radical national groups and their leaders.

3. U.S. embassies to Black African countries specially interested in southern Africa must be highly circumspect in view of the activity of certain political circles and influential individuals opposing the objectives and methods of U.S. policy toward South Africa. It must be kept in mind that the failure of U.S. strategy in South Africa would adversely affect American standing throughout the world. In addition, this would mean a significant diminution of U.S. influence in Africa and the emergence of new difficulties in our internal situation due to worsening economic prospects.

4. The FBI should mount surveillance operations against Black African representatives and collect sensitive information on those, especially at the U.N., who oppose U.S. policy toward South Africa. The information should include facts on their links with the leaders of the Black movement in the United States, thus making possible at least partial neutralization of the adverse effects of their activity.

V. TRENDS IN THE AMERICAN BLACK MOVEMENT

In connection with our African policy, it is highly important to evaluate correctly the present state of the Black movement in the Untied States and basing ourselves on all available information, to try to devise a course for its future development. Such an approach is strongly suggested by our perception of the fact that American Blacks form a single ethnic group potentially capable of causing extreme instability in our strategy toward South Africa. This may lead to critical differences between the United States and Black Africa in particular. It would also encourage the Soviet Union to step up its interference in the region. Finally, it would pose a serious threat to the delicate structure of race relations within the United States. All the above considerations give rise to concern for the future security of the United States.

Since the mid-1960s, when legislation on the human rights was passed and Martin Luther King murdered, federal and local measures to improve black welfare have been taken, as a result of which the U.S. black movement has undergone considerable changes.

The principle changes are as follows:

*Social and economic issues have supplanted political aims as the main preoccupations of the movement. and actions formerly planned on a nationwide scale are now being organized locally.

*Fragmentation and a lack of organizational unity within the movement.

*Sharp social stratification of the Black population and lack of policy options which could reunite them.

*Want of a national leader of standing comparable to Martin Luther King.

B. THE RANGE OF POLICY OPTIONS

The concern for the future security of the United States makes necessary the range of policy options. Arranged without intent imply priority they are:

(a) to enlarge programs, within the framework of the present budget, for the improvement of the social and economic welfare of American Blacks in order to ensure continuing development of present trends in the Black movement;

(b) to elaborate and bring into effect a special program designed to perpetuate division in the Black movement and neutralize the most active groups of leftist radical organizations representing different social strata of the Black community: to encourage division in Black circles;

(c) to preserve the present climate which inhibits the emergence from within the Black leadership of a person capable of exerting nationwide appeal;

(d) to work out and realize preventive operations in order to impede durable ties between U.S Black organizations and radical groups in African states;

(e) to support actions designed to sharpen social stratification in the Black community which would lead to the widening and perpetuation of the gap between successful educated Blacks and the poor, giving rise to growing antagonism between different Black groups and a weakening of the movement as a whole.

(f) to facilitate the greatest possible expansion of Black business by granting government contracts and loans with favorable terms to Black businessmen;

(g) to take every possible means through the AFL-CIO leaders to counteract the increasing influence of Black labor organizations which function in all major unions and in particular, the National Coalition of Black Trade Union and its leadership including the creation of real preference for adverse and hostile reaction among White trade unionists to demands for improvement of social and economic welfare of the Blacks;

(h) to support the nomination at federal and local levels of loyal Black public figures to elective offices, to government agencies and the Court.

This would promote the achievement of a twofold purpose: first, it would be easier to control the activity of loyal black representatives within existing institution; second, the idea of an independent black political party now under discussion within black leadership circles would soon lose all support.

One more thing. I was on a program in Illinois recently with Senator Paul Douglas, a so-called liberal, so-called democrat, so-called white man, at which time he told me that our African Brothers were not interested in us in Africa. He said, the Africans are not interested in the American Negro. I knew he was lying, but, during the next two or three weeks, it is my intention and plan to make a tour of our African homeland, and I hope that when I come back, I’ll be able to come back and let you know how our African brothers and sisters feel towards us. And I know before I go there, that they love us. We’re one, we’re the same. The same man who has colonized them all these years colonized you and me too all these years, and all we have to do now is wake up and work in unity and harmony and the battle will be over -Malcolm X

And the reason this tendency exists, the strategy of the white man has always been divide and conquer. He keeps us divided in order to conquer us. He tells you, I’m for separation and you for integration, and keep us fighting with each other. No, I’m not for separation and you’re not for integration, what you and I are for is freedom. Only, you think that integration will get you freedom; I think that separation will get me freedom. We both got the same objective, we just got different ways of getting’ at it.-Malcolm X