#i can get the gist of some simpler articles etc

[dancingindreamlight]

Actually it's kind of sad people in the US aren't exposed to other languages like other countries are exposed to English. It makes it easier to learn another language if you're immersed in media from it from a young age.

[margotverger]

I think Freddie and Alana are interesting parallels to Hannibal and Will in the lens of Abigail’s life. Abigail doesn’t seem the type to look for a “mother” figure since all the emphasis is on her father - I think the idea of trying to look for a mother instead of letting her rest is probably painful for her and only adds to her trauma, since there’s an element of innocence about her mother, being an unaware victim. So Abigail feels responsible for her death since she and her father shared the same “madness” which resulted in the death of her mother. So looking for a mother doesn’t seem like something she’d do.

Although, arguably Alana is compelled to be maternal in a similar way that Will is pulled to be father-like, but I think Alana acknowledges the fact that there is no chance of that sort of intimacy from an early stage (when she realises there’s layers to Abigail that destroy any concept of Abigail she had developed while she was in a coma, which is why she read to her)... like knowing Abigail shows signs of manipulative tendencies and deep mental health issues knock out any “maternal” instincts and bring in clinical, professional feelings. Not that Alana stops caring, but rather she recognises that Abigail needs solid help, not nurturing.

Alana and Will parallel each other in roles, in a way, I think. Alana is sort of the rejected mother archetype (both rejected by herself and Abigail), while Will is the rejected father archetype (although we see that it does develop, but in a much different way than either of them intend). They���re also rejected by Abigail on the basis that they present moral purity to Abigail. Will Graham is a confusing case for her because she met him because he murdered her father, but he also saved her life, and views murder as a disgusting thing. But also retains a terrifying reputation (at least from Freddie’s articles) which makes him entirely strange to her... unpredictable. But on a simpler note, he rejects moral “wrongs” (murder etc) which makes Abigail feel rejected. She cannot be herself. Much like how Alana is a compassionate source, although she’s more consistent, but still too morally pure for Abigail to open up to... it probably ties into the “innocence” complex that led to her mother’s death. 

However, Freddie is a moral ambiguity from the start. Not murderous or dangerous in a way like her father, but clearly ruthless (which reminds Abigail of her own survivalist instinct) and on some moral level that is separate from “good”. She is not innocent. She has her own agendas and it’s obvious; she’s easy to read. Abigail gets a gist of her already, which means she can prepare and deal with her in a way that suits her, while also not having to “protect” her. So, Freddie has a safety about her that Will doesn’t, although she doesn’t have the same draw (Abigail is bound to have some complex relationship with the man who held her together during what she thought was her dying moments while also being the man who caused her father’s death). Not only that, but she’s on a semi-level playing field. Freddie would be, on some level, capable of understanding Abigail’s actions. There’s no doubt she would manipulate it to her gain for articles or whatever, but I think Freddie cares enough about Abigail that she couldn’t vilify her the way she does Will. After all, she cares about the story... but she does care about Abigail’s story, as well. Like Abigail telling the story. I think there must be some degree of compassion, else Abigail would have sensed it from a mile off.

Then that puts Freddie on the safer side, like Hannibal. Abigail talks to Freddie despite the warnings, she expresses desire to talk to her, she feels as if she and Freddie are on the same side despite what everyone else tells her to do. And considering the fact Freddie is the one who she wants to tell her story, there’s an element of trust and confiding in that. Which is similar to Hannibal’s narrative with her: Abigail trusts Hannibal because they share a similar darkness, or so she thinks, and some level of moral ambiguity while also being reliable (until he isn’t) and predictable, compassionate but not innocent... 

Anyway I have no idea if this made any sense whatsoever, but I think there’s not a lot of commentary on Abigail’s relationship with women, or at least not as much as there is with the murder family. But I think it’s important. The women in Abigail’s life mattered. 

(Also, because I just thought of this: my suggested issues with innocence and moral purity tying back to her mother, and her mother’s death, and then projecting that onto Alana? Makes the defenestration scene so much worse because she’s genuinely so shaken up and horrified that she’s put in this position once again, killing the woman she perceived to be totally innocent... and this time directly. It makes the apology so much worse imo because it’s clear although she’s been mentally affected by Hannibal in some large way, Abigail is still there. And Abigail’s trauma is still there.)

[studying-inwonderland]

How to Research in College

Note that I am not talking about doing a research study but how to find them, how to read them, and what to do with them.

Step one: Identify your criteria. 

 Often professors have a set of criteria for articles they’ll consider acceptable.  Generally that means less than 5-10 years old depending on the topic lately my profs want less than 5 but swk is constantly changing and keeping up to date is critical, someones interpretation of shake spear will be relevant always etc.  And almost invariably they want a peer reviewed journal article.  I’m sorry psychology weekly or that weird html website you found on the 10th page of google just don’t make the cut.  And for that matter, neither do a lot of genuine research articles done by legitimate researchers.  Peer Reviewed is exactly what it sounds like.  In order to get into a reputable journal a researcher/experimenter/writer needs to have their article read and approved by a few of their peers.  After that it’s about finding something related to your topic.   Sometime you can find a journal article on exactly your topic (like your thesis is their hypothesis), other times it’s more of a stretch.  It’s also important to use critical thinking when reading an article, you don’t want to choose something and then realize the conclusion doesn’t add up right for your paper.

Step two: Find an article.  

You can go onto your school library website and find your databases.  Mine is called AllKnight Search (go golden knights!) and when I go to my library’s webpage and it’s smack in the center of the screen as a search bar, and along one side there’s a list of databases that are searched with the AllKnight Search.   I generally just use my schools and recommend you do too, it’s simpler and since I don’t usually need to use a specific journal it works just fine for me.  Another good database most schools have is JStore you’re school probably has a bunch for each major.  These Databases have a search function to type in a query and then narrow your results with a year published range, and make sure to select peer reviewed articles only, you can further narrow your search by country published, topic area (child abuse from a medical or social perspective etc.) and a few other criteria.  If you don’t know what to do you can always ask your librarian or whatever for help.  

Step three: Reading the Article!

I have a method that works pretty well for me and I’ll explain why and what each part is. So, a research study has roughly 7 parts (it depends how you break it down but generally its 5 basic parts broken into 7.  

Abstract, All articles have an abstract.  This is sort of like the bit on the back of a book it tells you what the article explores.

Introduction, this part sometimes runs in with part 3.  The introduction is some general information about the issue.  This may include definitions of terms used throughout the rest of the paper.

Literature Review, In this portion the writer examines and summarizes past research and writing.  It uses this as an opportunity to explain in depth the issue that the paper will examine.  It also convinces the reader why this is important, maybe by citing an article on the effects of the disorder you’ll be researching a treatment for.  This section is a gold mine for other articles. You might be reading something and find that last source that you need for your paper.  I was doing a mock research proposal on reducing violence in inmate populations and found the bulk of my argument referenced in another article. 

Methods.  Okay this is where it can get blurry.  The methods section describes what is done in the study and if it’s not a field you understand and you don’t know research lingo it can get kinda crazy.  Just remember Google is your friend.  Don’t know what GB-CBT-IM is?  Google.  What the hell a p-value is?  Google.  Just remember unless your taking a research class or doing a lit review for a higher level class you don’t need to understand the difference between cluster and systemic sampling.  Just that if was random sampling or not etc which is a much easier thing to understand believe me.  

Results, Again this is a really important part of the study.  That you don’t need to understand every single word of.  This is where their going to throw those words like p-value and so and so’s number at you. You don’t need to understand every word just the gist.  And remember that google is your friend.  This is the part with all the charts and stuff, and while those are great for understanding the content it’s weirdly hard to put it into words.  

Discussion.  This is a good place to have all of part 5 broken down.  This is where it says, since we know this, the field can start doing this.  Its important to paraphrase this section into a sentence or two.  Its what says this is why this matters, as well as explains what all those weird numbers and italicized letters mean.  The last thing that it does is to examine any possible faults with the methods.  So it’ll say “due to a small mostly male college student sample, the results may not be generalizable” etc.  basically its a space to examine the faults of the study and to leave suggestions for future researchers.

Conclusion.  This wraps everything up.  It also usually calls for future research on the topic.  I used to be very disheartened  by the phrase “further research is needed” but really it seems most articles close that way because there’s no such thing as definite answers in a lot of feilds.

I like to read an article in the order 1,2,3,6,7,4 I usually only just skim part 5 results are really hard to get through and unless you understand them its a frustrating waste of time.

Step Four: Writing about the article. 

Writing about an article is hard if you didn’t read it SO READ IT.  Don’t try to skim through it while you write do it separately.  If your really jammed for time annotate on the article and then write directly from your annotations.  Start with a single sentence for the abstract, and one for the introduction.  A 2-3 sentences for methods and then 1-2 for the discussion.  That puts you at a 5-7 sentence paragraph.  Repeat for each source you need for the paper and your good!  If you need to do a full page do one paragraph for Intro and Lit review, and then a bulkier paragraph for methods, results, and discussions.  After that finish off with a paragraph critically analyzing the article (small sample size? is there a lack of explanation?) this is the space to argue with some points or to talk about what you would have done differently.  Remember even though this is your thoughts it’s important to stay out of the first person.