#i grew up anglican so i had no idea about ANY of this

[panlight]

What do you think of the "Everything in twilight is because of Mormomism" theory going around? I'm always in some random comment section that's discussing twilight(either the lore, the characters, or SMs writing) and that's the only thing anybody will ever bring up

I think she was definitely influenced by her religion and the culture she grew up in, but I don't think most of it was like, intentional.

In fact she seemed to intentionally try to avoid Mormonism in the story; Charlie is Lutheran, Bella doesn't really have any faith, Carlisle is/was 'Anglican' and Edward seems to be vaguely Christian. She chose not to make any of the characters canonically Mormon, but they sometimes feel Mormon to readers because of how she wrote them.

SM herself had this to say:

The main theme that I consider to be LDS is that of free agency. These books are all about choice to me–people’s ability to rise above (or sink below) what is expected of them. There is a little bit of Helaman’s stripling warriors with the pack, too (they fight to protect their families, who are not able to fight the way they can). There is some overt discussion of religion, particularly in New Moon, and a little in Eclipse. For me, that is more about realism rather than my specific religion. Religious or not, real people have to wonder sometime about where they came from, why they’re here, and where they’re going. Characters who didn’t ponder that a little would feel pretty shallow to me.   As an author, I consider NOTHING, ha ha ha. I just tell a story. All the symbolism and themes and archetypes are things I discover after the fact. All that stuff in the above paragraph–I didn’t think of any of those things until after the story was done. Then I would read through it and think, “Hey, the pack kind of reminds me of those Ammonite kids. Wonder if that’s where I got it from?”

So I don't think she set out to make Carlisle 'look like Joseph Smith' but can imagine that when she was trying to imagine a young leader she might have been influence by Smith. I can definitely see how her attitudes toward marriage, motherhood, Indigenous peoples and race could have been influenced by her faith and culture. Imprinting seems to be related to a common trope in early Mormom fiction (tl;dr - everyone exists as souls before we are born and sometimes pair up in that spirit realm and have to find each other on Earth and when they do it's this instant, powerful recognition), and this based on an essay by a fellow Mormon (tw: for religion talk). And the whole idea of eternal families relates to ideas about 'sealing' and the Mormon afterlife.

But I don't think she set out like, "bwahaha I'm going to write a MORMON vampire romance!!!" She's not that deep, she had a weird dream and wrote it down and then built on that going wherever her imagination took her, but that imagination was certainly influenced by her faith and lived experiences.

And plenty of conservative religious types hate the books on principle for having vampires and werewolves in them at all because that's occult and that's of Satan. Also because of the 'sexual content.'

[ryttu3k]

Thoughts on Doctor Who - Boom! Some negativity ahead, maybe a 6/10 overall.

Well that was about as subtle as a sledgehammer XD Yes yes the algorithm is bad, yes yes capitalism is bad, yes yes war industry is bad, yes yes religious extremism is bad. I agree with all that! And tbh there are people who do need that message to be about as subtle as a sledgehammer because they Do Not Get It!

But holy shit, this one made Orphan-55 look subtle XD

(That said, kind of adore the chutzpah of doing the Capitalism Is Bad story in the first season of the show as owned by fucking Disney.)

A… weird aesop at the end. "Blind faith is bad. Also, just because I don't like it, doesn't mean I don't need it, because apparently I need religious people to tell me what to do."

Splice was… odd. Grew up in a warzone, also launches herself into said warzone because Dad sent a weird message. Seems singularly unable to recognise what had happened despite, y'know, growing up in a warzone, but that's okay because Holodaddy mentioned seeing antelopes. I feel she was written to be much younger (like, five-ish), which is an issue with the casting, actually, because as it is she just kind of came across as dense as a sack of bricks. No, stupid child, you do not run into the minefield! I did see commentary about how chilling it was for her to be so easily placated by the AI, though, so that could be a deliberate choice, I guess?

Mundy is okay. Didn't make me go, "Yes, she absolutely needs to be the new companion!", which is a pity, and the whole romantic tension between her and the other dude felt whoppingly out of place. Yes, half the planet is going to blow up but that's okay, her crush likes her back! Hoping that either she's playing someone totally different as companion (like Freema Agyeman and Karen Gillan having smaller roles before being cast as companions, to say nothing of some of the actual Doctors!), or that Mundy actually develops some personality beyond 'romantic yearning', 'Christianity', and 'portents of doom'. That said, if she is playing Mundy again, I do enjoy the idea of Mundy Sunday XD

Last annoyance, promise - lmao god if Moffat's head was any further up his arse he'd be a mobius strip. Villengard (although setting the episode in the 51st century is at least consistent with its destruction), the Anglican Marines, preservation of dead people in incomplete digital formats, the president's wife poem/song thing, even fish fingers and custard. Dude. I know. You're still salty about being replaced as showrunner. Doesn't mean you have to yell about how great your era was by throwing in every single self-congratulatory reference you could think of XD

(That said: I much prefer him writing standalone/double episodes. Do Not let him write arcs or be showrunners, but he certainly can work a single narrative.)

Positive notes: Even if it was as subtle as a sledgehammer, I did enjoy the reveal - that there wasn't actually any war, and it was entirely a self-perpetuated conflict based on algorithm and profit. Like the writing could have handled it better, but the premise was really cool.

Ncuti Gatwa's acting was fantastic. Beautiful tension and stress. Loved him monologuing to Ruby's dead body because if he doesn't talk, he can't think right.

"I'm more explosive than I look - and honey, I know how I look."

"Ruby, I forbid this." "Yeah, good luck with that :)"

"- and frankly, your lifespan sucks." (Just wanted Ruby to go, "Dude. I've been dead for the last ten minutes.")

Continuity

Enjoying the continuation of Ruby's snow.

Susan Twist has appeared again, although I still have no idea what this could be building up to. Much bigger role than some of the earlier ones.

This is Ruby's first alien planet, but The Devil's Chord implies she's been travelling with the Doctor for six months? So this would have to be set before Devil's Chord, or else they've just spent six months in space stations and time travelling on Earth alone.

A lot of emphasis on the Doctor as a father, tying in with his mention of Susan last episode, which also dealt with the familial connection between the Toymaker and Maestro and the whole Pantheon thing, and brought up the stuff with Ruby and her lineage again (the AI glitching out when trying to work out her next of kin, although I feel Moffat forgot that… next of kin doesn't mean 'blood relative'… she has a Mum!). I feel there's definitely going to be something about the Doctor's family in this season as well as Ruby's. The TARDIS identified her as human, but could there be a connection?

Season ranking

As of s40e03:

The Devil's Chord

The Church on Ruby Road

Space Babies

Boom

And on a deeply silly note: I initially heard 'Kastarion' as 'Karstarion' and went :D because BG3 ship mentioned <3

[a-devout-shannonite]

So I got to go to the event in Nashville last night with Samantha Shannon like I said and it was amazing I still can’t believe it happened and I’ll never forget it. And I put together some notes today from her discussion and Q&A about her writing methods and the world of The Roots of Chaos. I couldn’t remember everything, but I put together a lot of interesting/funny things she said last night that I could remember so I could share them with you all. And if you’re worried about spoilers, I will say that she didn’t share any spoilers last night that wouldn’t already be known to people who have read The Priory, though she did discuss the characters a little and a few themes of the book. So for anyone interested, here’s the notes I’ve put together!

- Shared a long discussion on drawing inspiration from St. George and the Dragon and its several retellings and the changes the Anglican faith made to enforce their colonialism and crusades (the story itself is incredibly fascinating and I don’t remember the title of the specific retelling she said she drew from in particular, but it was really cool to see just how much inspiration she drew from it)

- Many fun remarks on how St. George was awful and England sucks

- Direct quote from Samantha, talking about St. George: “Men” (derogatory)

- On creating this popular fantasy and her thoughts on the typical cishet white male dominated world of fantasy: she wasn’t creating it to challenge them exactly, but to offer something for the people who are often underrepresented in fantasy, to give them a book where they are the prominent features rather than the typical white male hero, wanted to create something where she felt she represented herself

- On giving multiple examples of motherhood in A Day of Fallen Night: she said that she thought she had given motherhood a small place in The Priory, but she wanted to really create a large space for it within ADOFN, said that growing up she always felt pressured by society that her role as a woman was to have children, and that she was never interested even when she was young, said she kept waiting for the switch to activate where she’d want to get married and be a mother but it never did (cue fun anecdote on how now she knows she’s gay so that explained quite a lot), wanted to show multiple different perspectives of motherhood within ADOFN and different methods of raising a child

- On writing ADOFN and getting the chance to work with this cast of characters: said that getting to write Glorian was her way of reconnecting with her childhood self, Dumai was also exciting for her as Dumai is the same age at the start of the book as she was when she first started writing it, Tunuva in particular was very interesting to her to represent a middle-aged woman in a long established relationship to present a counterpoint to the typical idea in fantasy where the story ends for the protagonist when they are young, she wanted to show with Tunuva that it does continue past that, and also that she wanted to make a character at this age in part for her mother, who said she felt as though she was seeing herself disappear in movies and stories as she grew older and the characters all stayed young, also mentioned that initially Esbar was planned to be a primary narrator instead of Tunuva, but Samantha felt that Tunuva would be more fresh as a character given she’s more the quiet introvert whereas Esbar is a sort of typical protagonist style, bold, outspoken, and a leader (and no spoilers, but an additional note on a character in the book; said she enjoyed writing this character realize they were gay as it felt similar to her experience; called herself as well as the character in question both “useless gays”)

- When asked about how she keeps/organizes her notes on worldbuilding, she responded that she in fact very rarely takes notes and just knows her world by memory (much to the shock of the entire audience)

- On what first inspired her love of dragons: the movie Dragonheart in the 90s, which she watched so many times as a child she could recite it word for word and once brought a tape recorder to the theater to record the audio for when she couldn’t watch it, went to see it for her 6th birthday

- Said that one of her weaknesses is numbers, she cannot keep track of the logistics in her books, (for example, if you asked how big the Abyss was, she wouldn’t know), and she mentioned that Isalarico IV Vetalda, mentioned in ADOFN, should actually be Isalarico II Vetalda

- Said she really enjoys writing books with loose ends, cliffhangers, or bittersweet endings (she apologized for this), shared anecdote of a US editor calling her a day before it went to print completely confused about Tané’s last chapter and very concerned she was actually dead at the end

- Told her editor initially The Priory would be a standalone and she wouldn’t write any more stories in the universe, editor didn’t believe her, he was right

- Her schedule of books to write at the moment is to finish the Bone Season 5 draft, research and start her Greek mythology retelling of the goddess Isis, begin work on Bone Season 6, and then start another Roots of Chaos book which she’s already sold to her publisher

- Next Roots of Chaos book hasn’t been decided yet, will either cover the events following ADOFN, in which the sterren becomes chaotic after the siden withdraws and creates a sort of ice age, or she will write the story of Kalyba, Cleolind, and Neporo (she says she’s aware that the latter is the more popular choice among her readers)

[talenlee]

Fundie Dating

Fundie Dating

I feel like this probably could afford to be a dread month theme, but hey, it’s smooch month so let’s go with it for now.

Content Warning: Religious dating in a church environment. Some mentions of domestic abuse.

How’d you learn to date?

I’m not trying to be facetious here; I know that I had this really weird, unnatural vision of the whole experience because I never really did it, not at least, the way that I understand it’s done. What I know about it is mostly filtered through sitcoms and cartoons aimed at my age bracket of the time, and included things like having money to go out to dinner together and there were rules about having a nice jacket and you had to pay for things, and you needed transport and it was all tied to things that I just never had. I never had a car so I never took anyone anywhere. I never really had steady income as a kid so I never took anyone anywhere ‘nice.’

I knew how I was supposed to date, though. I knew that the right way to do things was to approach the pastor and tell him I had an interest in one of the girls in the church and to ask him what he thought and for his godly guidance. If he was okay with it I should go check with the girl’s dad (who the pastor might talk to first), and then if that was okay, I should go talk to the girl about it (whose dad probably told her). In this exchange, note, that I should not talk to her directly, certainly not to start with. Certainly not to build an engagement; there were two layers of gatekeeping to get through first, and an added component there was that they might talk to my father about it before anything went on in that direction.

I had no idea what girls were meant to do if they were interested in a boy, but I kinda think they had to throw out hints or just tell the boy to go check with the pastor.

I know it went in waves and I know it had some measure of planning to it. When new kids were born into any church, there was always some talk from pastors about what other kids were born, around the same time, and even with their genders being key factors for consideration. I even heard a pastor boast about it when talking about couples my age that got matched up – you know, he thought about that when they were kids and then they grew up and he recommended they date when they came to him and then hey, now they were probably going to get married. And that’s a totally normal thing in that community and it wasn’t really until I was a grown adult that I thought back on that and thought how weird that was.

This wasn’t even in the fundie church, mind you; this was later, in an Anglican church, where a minister was giving me advice for coping with my loneliness and sadness and rage, mostly from the fundie church, where he explained what a good job he did shepherding and counselling his flock, but which also had the inescapable feeling of how weird it was to hear this dude boasting about how he’d managed to call-shot two babies hooking up in fifteen years’ time.

In the fundie church, I was not in a cohort that started dating yet; I was fourteen years old when we left and neither I nor the other three members of my age range had started to reach out. Given that was our options, with two boys and two girls, that wasn’t exactly enticing prospects.

When I escaped into the real world and started trying to build relationships like these, I was both incredibly inept at them and confused by what to do. TV shows relied on you having this big blob of things to work with; you dated girls from your school, but what did that mean? I know I spent a lot of time literally just hanging around a girl I was interested in and that was it, eventually resolving to leave her alone when it became clear that it wasn’t a thing that interested her. Which you know, that’s not bad but maybe I shouldn’t have needed such a long slab of time to piece that one together when I was just told ‘no.’

The thing is, after that point, there were basically two internet girlfriends, one of whom turned out to live near me and went to the same anime club as me and suddenly I had an actual relationship and that one’s been going strong for twenty years. At no point though, do I think that either Fox and I thought of it as ‘dating’ though – we didn’t dedicate times to go to special places, I’d just go to her place and hang out (because her parents were less weird than mine).

I think about this when I think about all those relationships from my childhood, in the churches, that all, literally every one, ended unhappily. I do not know a single relationship in my age range in my cohort from my church days that lasted, and overwhelmingly commonly, it’s because women in those relationships were ignored and their interests or preferences were discarded in the name of being good partners… until something broke.

I think that dating, certainly play dating and social dating in that time tends to be a useful experience so you can get an idea of what it’s even like, being in a relationship. Not even necessarily ‘where’s it going’ or ‘what if you break up’ like those are fake questions – just that I feel that one of the things I and my cohort needed to make sure I didn’t make more mistakes was a chance to date, and learn how to date, was an opportunity to, well play at it.

Check it out on PRESS.exe to see it with images and links!

#Diary #FundieStuff

[vivisextion]

I first saw Slipknot at age 14.

No one knows how I managed it. I'm not sure I even remember. These days, you have to be 16 or 18 to get into Standing areas. I do know I had to buy tickets on the phone, back in the old days (2005, that is). A singular ticket, too - none of my friends, not even the classmate who had gone with me to see Linkin Park the year before, was that into Slipknot.

But I HAD to see them. This was the Subliminal Verses tour cycle, and Vol. 3 was my first and favourite Slipknot album, even to this day. It's the reliable old warm blanket for my soul whenever I need it. It's on right now, as I write this.

My memory isn't that good, but luckily I unearthed a livejournal (livejournal!) diary entry about the event I made the next day.

August 16, 2005. I went right after school. I went to a very conservative Anglican secondary school, too. I tried not to get caught in the bathroom, as I coloured my nails black with permanent marker (I know, don't laugh) and changed into my standard metalhead baby outfit - Slipknot band shirt, black cargo shorts, and my pride and joy: steel-toe boots I somehow managed to cajole my parents into letting me own.

I caught the bus to the open-air war memorial park where the gig was going to be. I got there at 4pm, 4 hours early. A couple other maggots were already hanging around. I found myself surrounded by tombstones, and I read them all. It was the middle of the Hungry Ghost Festival, too - a very fitting time for Slipknot to pay a visit to this godforsaken hellhole of a small town I lived in. (Especially given the paranormal circumstances surrounding the making of Vol. 3.)

While I wandered around the venue (no security or sound guys were around at all), I spotted two white vans pull up to the stage, in the middle of a clearing. It was them! I spotted Joey and missed him by a hair's breadth. I was quickly ushered behind the stone archway entrance by security then.

(Funnily enough, while walking around, I got mistaken for Joey more than once. I am the same height as him, had the same long black hair, same pale skin, and was wearing almost exactly what he had been. One person claimed from behind, I was a dead ringer, apart from when I turned around, and they realised I was Chinese.)

It was soundcheck time. A sound guy testing the mics would say random things, like "testing one two three two one.... fudge fudge, I like fudge...." The band even did Purity, so us earlybirds were given a rare treat, and we screamed along from the entrance, and drummed our fists on the sides of nearby porta-potties. I hope no one was in there at the time. Whenever we got a glance of any of them, we'd scream and cheer. Finally they left again, but were soon to return.

This was the first time I'd been a part of the metal community. I was barely allowed internet in those days. But here, random strangers were friendly, striking up conversations like they'd been friends for years. Two big guys, called Trevor and Ted, looked out for me the entire gig after, keeping other big dudes from crushing me too much (I'm 5'3, remember). Other people commented on me being so baby, because I was only 14, and said they would take care of me.

When we were finally let in, right after the usher cut the rope, I ran in, screamed "WOOOHOOO!" along with a few friends I'd made. I only briefly stopped to receive this RoadRunner Records compilation CD from a roadie, then resumed running like a madman screaming and dashing into the VIP cage.

I was right up against the barricade - the first time I would ever be at a gig. People from assorted magazines and press took photos of us, and I think I got my photo taken about 10 times at least.

(This is how I got in trouble with my parents the next day. My photo had ended up in a local paper - you can see examples of that here. They had no idea what I'd been to see the night before, and were horrified when they saw what Slipknot looked like.)

We saw Sid filming us from the stage with a camcorder and screamed at him. We saw Jim and screamed at him too, and he flashed the victory sign back at us. I remember Metallica playing at the time, another one of my favourite bands.

The concert was a brutal religious experience I will never forget. People with their arms outstretched, crying and screaming out loud, moving like the devil possessed them.

The new friends around me made sure I was alright after every song! There were huge guys fainting behind us who had to get carried out, but I endured, a tiny 14 year old child. We got a family speech as per tradition, of course. "Are you guys out there all looking out for each other? We're all one big family, and we gotta look out for each other." What Corey said held true - strangers hugged, shook hands, talked, and made friends. I was heartened by how close-knit the maggot community was. It really did feel like a family, and it's felt like that ever since.

Of course, I did my first Jump The Fuck Up. It is possibly the most euphoria I've ever experienced all at one go. (Later, in 2020, I was extremely disappointed that I didn't get to do it again in London.)

They did the death masks for Vermilion, and I remember Chris helping Sid fix his mask and shirt when they'd changed back. Sid hung out near Clown's drums for most of the time too, and hugged him from behind and just latched on at one point. It was pretty adorable.

Fun fact: The version of Eyeless you hear on the 9.0 Live album is from Singapore, as is Eeyore. There are very few photos and videos from the crowd of this gig, because in 2005, very few people had camera phones. The crowd at the Slipknot gig in 2020 was a sea of arms with phones, filming the gig rather than experiencing it. Yes, I'm going to be that cranky old geezer who complains about the good old days.

Joey as usual, was fucking amazing and never failed. However, due to the fact that I was right up front, only his tiny head was visible behind his vast drum set, I couldn't see him the entire gig.

Amazingly, the government told Slipknot they were not allowed to do obscene gestures, curse, vomit (possibly due to the decomposing crow pre-show ritual), simulate humping on objects, throw faeces, or jump off stage (looking at you, Sid). I don't think our totalitarian government knew who they were dealing with, because watch what happens next.

Near the end of the gig, Corey tells the crowd “your government has given us a laundry list of things we aren’t allowed to do, your government has told us we are not allowed to swear”. Crowd goes “BOOOOOOOOO” and Corey goes “BUT WE DON’T GIVE A FUCK!!” And they launch into Surfacing, the last song. Everyone riots. Best night of my life.

You can find the setlist from that gig here. It had everything I wanted and more.

This story later got immortalised when Kerrang asked maggots for gig stories, for an article which came out in 2020. I had forgotten entirely, until people began messaging me to tell me, and one friend sent me a scan of it!

On the way out, I managed to get a shirt. I remember calling my best friend at the time, and got everyone at the merch booth to go "IF YOU'RE 555 THEN I'M 666" for her. This shirt has since been lost to the landfill, because my Christian mother took it upon herself to dispose of it the first opportunity she got. Needless to say, our relationship is not very good.

After that, I even managed to get that Roadrunner compilation album they were giving out signed. The band was staying at the Carlton. Unfortunately, Joey wasn't there, neither was Clown, and Mick was swarmed by guitar nerds so, 6/9 it is. It is a great regret of mine that I'll never have anything signed by him, nor will I ever get to see him perform ever again.

The next day, I went to school, my head swimming. Yes, I went to see Slipknot ON A SCHOOL NIGHT. I was a giant bruise, from my ribs and my chest, to my hips and knees, from being slammed into the barricade like a screen door in a hurricane. Most of all, my sore, headbanged-out neck could barely hold my head up. Classmates thought I had been in a fight. I was torn between battle-scarred exhaustion and hyperactive ranting about the most amazing gig of my short life (it still is, to this day). When teachers spoke to me, I wanted to reply, "Fuck trigonometry! I've just seen SLIPKNOT. Do you not understand that my world is different? Do you not understand that *I* am now different?"

My country was a small, conservative town that Slipknot had graced with their unholy presence. Corey Taylor once said that where he grew up in Iowa had a way of making a 16 year old boy feel like a 36 year old man (or something to that effect). I felt that in my weary bones as a teenager, being from a place just like that. Years later, Watain would run into worse trouble, and wouldn't even be allowed to perform. The Christian stranglehold is stronger than ever. It was a good thing that back then Slipknot had the element of surprise, striking serpent-fast and choking this society by the neck for a too-brief time, before they departed.

After that, my desire to play the drums only grew like a weed. Joey Jordison had, has, and will always inspire me as a drummer, and seeing the beast live (or what little I could spy behind the massive riser) had only spurred me on. I had always been a noisemaker, be it driving my parents mad with chopsticks on pots and pans, or driving my teachers mad with pencils on my desk. But of course, my parents wouldn't have any of it. I'd have to wait a good 14 more years before I'd be able to afford lessons and later, a kit of my own. Better late than never, right?

There will never be enough words to describe the impact Joey has had on my life. And it isn't just Slipknot, either. I could write another essay on his time with the Murderdolls and its influence on my own gender-non-conforming ways. Suffice to say, my wardrobe doesn't look too dissimilar to his during the early Dead in Hollywood days.

I told my boss I could not come into work today. I was grieving. I said that my music teacher died, as I didn't think she'd understand the magnitude of my loss. In a way, it's true. And I am not the only one Joey has nudged on the path to being a musician, that much is certain. To the rest of us, I wish strength and love for you in this difficult time. The best way to honour Joey, who truly loved music, both the creation and appreciation of it, is to pass that gift on. Teach it to someone. He is the reason I picked up the sticks in the first place, and one day, they'll be handed on, the heavy metal baton for the next generation.

And finally: remember that the ones we have lost are never truly gone.

Vinnie

P.S. See if you can spot me in the crowd photos in this post!

[fiddlesolo]

Hey! I adore your teen Carlesme AU, do you have any headcanons about it to share?

yes i do! it’s giving very cliche energy. the fics don’t really have much of a timeline. they’re little snippets from the universe

Esme’s parents have lived on their farm since before Esme was born but Carlisle and his father moved into a little farmhouse just outside the Platt property when they were both thirteen.

Esme is three months older than Carlisle and she won’t let him forget it.

When he first moved in, Esme introduced herself and the two didn’t hit it off. He was nervous and she thought he didn’t like her. It wasn’t until almost a year later when they ran into each other on an evening walk that their friendship was born.

Esme’s an adventurous, almost rebellious girl at times and Carlisle is far more careful and obedient. They balance each other out perfectly.

Carlisle’s father is a strict man. He’s a preacher at the Anglican church about a half hour toward the city which leaves Carlisle alone a lot. He spends time at the church sometimes but after meeting Esme, he tries to find reasons to stay home.

Esme’s family life is complicated. Her mother is a first generation American— she immigrated from the German Empire (modern day Poland) with her family when she was just a baby. She met and fell for Esme’s father when the two were teenagers themselves. He was a Catholic while she was Jewish— they burned a lot of bridges to be together. It was a radical idea for the late 1800’s. Because of this, they live a rather isolated life. They don’t have much extended family— it’s just the three of them.

Esme’s parents love her dearly but she’s often not what they expected. They wanted a son, something of importance during those times. They needed someone to take up the farm work when they were old, someone to carry on their name and Esme, as much as they loved her, wasn’t that. She was always a sweetheart but she ran her parents ragged as a young child. She bounced off of the walls, climbed trees, and always managed to find trouble. Because of that, they became pretty strict as she grew into a teenager. They were worried about her, wanted her to learn how to be the young woman that the world expected of her.

Esme finds her parents absolutely suffocating at times. She loves them but she doesn’t want to be some guy’s wife. She doesn’t want to cook and clean and all of the other things her mother insisted she learn. She wanted adventure, wanted an education. She wanted to grab Carlisle by the hand and run away out west.

Carlisle and his father have a complex, distant relationship. His father, whether the pastor realizes it or not, blames Carlisle for the death of his mother. When he lost her, all of the warmth left his body and he remained cold for all of Carlisle’s childhood. He put all of his paternal energy that remained into making sure his son was studious and dedicated to his faith.

Carlisle feels the iciness of his father’s gaze. He knows they aren’t like every other kid and their father.

Esme was the first person to make him feel warm. It was like she alone controlled the sun above them. He was absolutely enamored by the end of that first day spent together.

Carlisle makes her feel invincible. He worries for her, tells her to be careful when climbing tall trees or onto the back of a horse. But when she looks at him, his eyes betray him. All she sees is pride, is confidence in her.

Esme makes him feel brave. Makes the anxious beating of his heart fade away as the adrenaline and feelings for her take control of his body.

The first time she snuck out of her house and knocked on his bedroom window, he screamed so loud she nearly fell to the ground. He had to reach out and pull her inside only to then have to help her roll under his bed to hide from his father when he came running in.

When he admits that he’d like to study medicine one day, she encourages him. Shes the first and only person he tells for a long time. Her encouragement meant the world to him.

The first time he laid eyes on her art, he was blown away by her talent and his kind words made her cry.

[rapunzel-withthegoodhair]

Salty Ask List -

What OTPs in your fandom(s) do you just not get?* (pretty sure I know the answers to this but I love your rants lol)

Has fandom ever made you enjoy a pairing you previously hated?

What is the purest ship in the fandom? (choose your own fandom)

Gonna do these for Midnight Mass since it's rotting my brain (major spoilers ahead)

1) so I'm actually not super into Millie x John. I... I dunno. (Part of it admittedly is that it freaks me out that every single woman on this island is a tall tragic looking pale white brunette with freckles lol like there were so many moments when Millie looked like Bev - did her hair the same, dressed similar, had a similar height and build, and it's weird for me. Would a short blonde or mixed girl have been too much to ask lol).

Also I just can't relate to the idea of staying with someone I don't love. I know she grew up in another time but I don't have that in me.

Mostly what annoys me is... she doesn't really seem to challenge him? I'm not talking about at the end where everyone is literally fighting for their lives. And I give her full credit for the role she played at that point. I don't want to discredit her actions. She's a hero. But let's rewind to what we know of their actual relationship. She's a very devout catholic who never misses Mass. We can say this is maybe because of John more than Jesus. Okay, I'll bite. So, what did their conversations look like? Did she push him? Did she search for answers? It doesn't sound like it. Her own daughter sees her as devout in faith. She's solid in her Christianity. And there's nothing wrong with that, to each their own. But I can't imagine John and Millie are having incredibly profound conversations about faith and theology and the universe. And that's the part of John that I like. His passionate like... bargaining with the universe and desperation to make things fit. To understand whatever comes at him and give it meaning. Because I've been grappling and wrestling with religion my whole life. I grew up in church. I minored in religion in college. Breaking away from the Anglican church growing up was rough for me and piecing together what I did believe in was even harder. But religion still fascinates me. I'll throw down on theology with just about anyone at any time.

I mean, at least with Bev you see some glimpses of passionate theological discussion. Mama Gunning is just portrayed as any other white lady who doesn't want to buck the status quo. I see her faith in the same debilitating toxic way I see my grandmother's and my mother's and my father's. It's just this passive thing she lets be a part of her personality 'cause she has nothing else on the island to fill that void. So, it's like... what they just like...stared at each other their whole lives and mutually acknowledged that they were both the hottest people on an island where the bar was excruciatingly low and that's what they connected on? Or what? lol I don't get it I'm sorry.

She's a great female character, I like Millie on her own. And she called a lot of shit before anyone else did. I respect her, I think she's a badass for shooting the love of her life when push comes to shove. I get the feeling that this is the type of woman that will help you dig in and weather a storm and that's some #girlboss shit. I just have a hard time shipping her with John. Like I ship the fucking Angel with John more than her.

2) Ya'll keep making these gif sets about Bev and John and I'm...starting to see it lol and I hate y'all for that. Stop doing that lol

3) I'm gunna be honest and say all the Father Paul x Self Insert shipping because we all deserve it and we're all valid

[aspicystrum]

Embarrassingly, last night I wrote an exceedingly long and sickeningly heartfelt email to some Netflix people (executives? Idk) based on advice from #saveteenagebountyhunters. It felt important, so I decided to share.

Hi there, friend. 

I don't usually do this, because writing in to a studio about a show that you just watched seems a bit over the top, and potentially just a drop of salt water in a river that somebody has already built a bridge to get over. 

However, on the off chance that this email might make a difference, I just want to say that it would be really, really, super-mega-cool if you guys changed your minds about renewing Teenage Bounty Hunters for another season. I finally got around to watching it this week, and I want to firstly, congratulate you for such a stellar piece of work, and secondly, implore you not to leave it unfinished. Not only is it fantastic and hilarious, but I also think it's kind of important, and I'm going to apologise in advance for the length of time I'm going to spend on telling you why. 

I'm definitely not a teenager anymore, but I was definitely a young christian questioning her sexuality when I was a teenager, and there was just nothing remotely like this on TV at that time. If there had been, I think it might have been a bit easier for me to figure myself out. Much easier, even. I dislike clichés, so I don't like that I'm basically saying the same thing that most queer people over 30 are saying about new media featuring queer representation, but the thing is, there's a reason that we're saying it. And Tropes Aren't Bad. The only thing that was around when I was growing up that had any gay women in it was porn and the L Word. Buffy too I guess, but I never got into it when it was airing (I'm not even sure if I'd have been allowed to watch it, to be frank) and later on, I wasn't interested in the drama and heartbreak. And of course, because I was a young christian, I thought porn was bad (I mean, it's terrible if you're looking for accurate romantic representation, but it's certainly not morally wrong like I thought it was) and because I don't live in the US, I never came across the L Word until I managed to pirate it in university. And while the L Word was massive and so important for representation and visibility... Honestly, I never really liked it. I didn't relate to a bunch of lesbians having sex and being bitchy in LA.

But Teenage Bounty Hunters? Shit. That would have been young Alex's obsession. Or lifeline. Cup of tea. Addiction. Breath of air while feeling like I was drowning? I don't know. Pick one. All of the above. I grew up going to an Anglican, semi-private high school. So while lesbianism wasn't wrong per se; (God still loved the gays - they weren't wrong for loving who they did) it definitely had to be wrong for me. Because it also sure as hell wasn't good. It was definitely no path to happiness. Lesbian was an insult that you used against girls you didn't like on the opposing soccer team. It wasn't until I went on exchange to France when I was 17 that I met girls who were out and proudly, wonderfully, sweetly dating. It's not even like it was illegal or anything, or that the LGBT+ community weren't tirelessly working to be visible and represented. I live in New Zealand. Generally, we're a pretty open, progressive, liberal country. I like to think that most of the time kiwis make pretty sensible decisions in terms of governance (though, believe me, there's always room for improvement). But, there's a difference between what's allowed, and what's socially acceptable. Especially in high school. Especially when you bring religion into the conversation. Or politics. It just wasn't done. Even in public school, you'd be asking to be an outsider. 

So I can't satisfactorily express how incredible it was for me to experience the relationship and character arcs of April and Sterling. A couple of staunchly christian girls, falling in love and unashamed of that. Albeit fucking scared. Their storyline resonated with my queer little soul. I was Chapel Prefect in my final year at school. I was an overachiever like April, and I had no idea how potentially gay I was, like Sterling. I wanted to kiss boys and sort of ignored all the crushes I had on the girls I went to school with. I wanted to be a good student and above all, a good person. I believed in a god. In fact, I wanted to believe in a purpose for existence and God so badly, that I chose to continue to believe, even while I wanted to kill myself in my first and second year of university because I felt like I was a bad student and a bad person. I still believe and it still keeps me alive from time to time.

All this is a very dramatic and unfortunately slightly sad way to say that you've got something incredibly special in Teenage Bounty Hunters. And that's just from one perspective. There's so much else that the show brings to the table. So much that it has the potential to. I could talk about racism, or adoption, or classism, or so many other things that I don't really feel I have the experience or understanding to give voice to, and do them justice, but you get the picture. 

Finally, I just want to say, I think I got my first recommendation for this show after you'd actually officially cancelled it. And it wasn't from your algorithm, it was from a male co-worker. Somebody I wouldn't have expected to recommend something like this show. Both based on judgements from before and after watching it. And I'm not going to lie, I heavily judged the title when I heard him talk about it, because I thought it sounded pretty frivolous and mindless. But certainly after searching for the show (I'm kind of shocked it was never recommended to me actually), and watching the trailer, I was immediately interested, because it's fucking hilarious. Now, after watching it I'm curious to know what he liked about the show too. So if your algorithm is designed to target viewers you think might be in a show's intended demographic, I feel like it needs tweaking. Also, I feel like you need to give more than two months grace-time for a show after releasing it, before you decide to cancel it. It's kind of tragic finding out about and deciding watching a show even though you know it's cancelled and then having your suspicions confirmed about you loving it. Very Fox and Firefly. Congrats, I guess? 

Anyway, I do genuinely want to say thank you for the work that you do and the joy that you've brought me and others through Netflix. I do hope the decision does get reversed, but it is a small hope.

If you made it this far, thank you very much for reading all of this. You're clearly a generous person with your time. 

Sincerely, 

Alex

[serialreblogger]

Hey! I'm thinking of reading Dracula, and knowing that's your eternal hyperfixation, I wanted to ask your thoughts, if you had any comments, suggestions, ect.

HEY WHY DIDN’T I SEE THIS SOONER I’M SO SORRY FRIEND

okay okay okay okay (...several people are typing...) SO

the first thing you should be aware of when reading Dracula is that it’s quite Victorian, so you might find it easier, especially on a first read, to get an annotated version (the Norton Critical Edition version is quite good) that puts footnotes in to explain all the outdated references to like, London penny-meat merchants and stuff. I would say it’s significantly easier to read than Lord of the Rings, but because it was written 200 years ago the difference in language means it’s not a simple read. (However, if you have absolutely any attraction to the Gothic aesthetic, Dracula is so very much worth the brainpower to slog through the rougher sentences. Like. “...the courtyard of a vast ruined castle, from whose tall black windows came no ray of light, and whose broken battlements showed a jagged line against the moonlit sky.” The whole book is like that. A bit stilted to contemporary readers, but also breathtakingly spot-on in its Spooky Factor.)

the second thing you should be aware of is that Dracula is extremely gay, but in a Tormented Victorian Closeted way. There’s a part where Jonathan climbs out a window that just. It’s uh. The descriptions are very,, metaphorical-sounding. Again, the whole book is like that, and sometimes it’s very fun and sometimes (lookin at Lucy’s whole thing) it’s significantly more unsettling if you pay attention to the weirdly sexy descriptions of how the protagonists interact with the vampires, but I think that’s part of what I find so fascinating about Dracula--it’s unsettling and strange and the pieces don’t fit together clearly, and I still don’t know quite what to make of it, but all the same the feeling of what Stoker’s saying comes through quite clearly. There’s a reason why so many Dracula adaptations have this narrative of a protagonist falling in forbidden love with the tormented Vampyre, yknow? There’s something so unmistakeably sympathetic about the character of Dracula, even when the narrative of the story goes out of its way to establish that he has no redeeming qualities or even proper personhood, that he’s just a monster. Because there’s something about the story (even without getting into the whole “Mina and Jon murked their boss” thing) that makes a reader wonder if that’s really the whole truth. If there isn’t something tragic about Dracula. If there isn’t something in him, if not of goodness, then at least of sorrow, instead of only fear.

Anyway I digress but I think we all knew that was gonna happen; point is: Jonathan and Dracula definitely had sex, Mina and Lucy were definitely in love, Seward’s got something weird goin on with the old professor (and also he’s just very weird, full stop. sir. sir please stop experimenting on your asylum inmates. sir i know this is victorian england but please Do Not), and Quincey, well, Quincey is an American cowboy with a bowie knife, and I think that’s all we really need to know.

ok and! the third thing you should be aware of is The Racism. Imperialist Britain, yo. Bram Stoker was Irish so like, it isn’t half as bad as some other authors of his time period (Rudyard Kipling anyone), but the racism is real and I don’t wanna gloss over that. The g**sy slur is used with abandon for a huge assortment of people groups, there’s a tacit as well as overt acceptance of the idea that West is superior to East, and because the educational system where I grew up is a joke and I can only learn things if I accidentally fall down the wikipedia hole of researching the insect genus hemiptera, i genuinely still don’t know how accurate the extensive history of Romania recounted in the first third of the book actually is. Oh also casual and blatant anti-blackness is verbalized by a character at least once. I’m pretty sure the racism has a metaphorical place in the framework of Dracula’s storytelling, but I couldn’t tell you what it is because I am not going to bother putting myself in the mindset of a racist white Victorian man. This is the mindset I am trying to unlearn. So: read with caution, critical thinking, and the double knowledge that even as the narrators are meant to be unreliable, so too is the author himself.

Finally, regarding interpretation: so personally I’m running with the opinion that Dracula is, at least partly, a metaphor for Stoker’s own queerness and internal conflict re: being queer, being closeted, and watching the torture his friend Wilde went through when the wealthy father of Wilde’s lover set out to ruin his life for daring to love his son. Whether this is true or not (I think it’s true, but hey, that’s analysis, baby), you can’t understand Dracula without knowing the social context for it (as with all literature--the author isn’t dead, not if you want to know what they were saying), and the social context for it is:

- Stoker was friends with Wilde, growing only closer after Wilde was outed

- Wilde was outed, as I said, because the father of his lover was wealthy and powerful and full of the most virulent kind of hatred. This is especially interesting because of how many rich, powerful parents just straight up die in Dracula and leave the main characters with no legal issues and a ridiculous amount of money, which is the diametrical opposite of what happened to Wilde

- Stoker idolized his mentor Henry Irving. Irving was a paradigm of unconventional relationships and self-built family, in a world where divorcees and children born out of wedlock were things to be whispered about in scandalized tones, not people to love and embrace. Irving was also famous for thriving off of manipulating those close to him and pitting friends against each other. Given the painstakingly vivid description Stoker provides for his titular vampire and how closely it matches Irving’s own appearance and demeanor, Irving was widely understood even at the time of writing to be the chief inspiration for the character of Dracula

- the book is dedicated to Stoker’s close friend, Hall Caine, a fellow writer whose stories centered around love triangles and accumulation of sins which threaten to ruin everything, only to be redeemed by the simple act of human goodness

- Stoker was Irish, but not Catholic (he was a Protestant of the Church of Ireland, a division of the Anglican Church). This may come as a surprise when you read the book and see All The Catholicism, Just Everywhere. Religion is actually a key theme in Dracula--most of the main characters start out your typical Good Victorian Anglican Skeptics, and need to learn through a trial-by-fire to trust in the rituals and relics of the Catholic Church to save them from Dracula’s evilness. Which is interesting. Because not only do these characters start off as dismissive towards these “superstitions” (in the same way they dismiss the “superstitions” of the peasant class on the outskirts of Dracula’s domain), but the narrative telling us “these superstitions are actually true!” cannot be trusted, when you know the author’s own beliefs.

(Bram Stoker is not saying what his characters are saying. This is the first and most important rule to remember, if you want to figure out Dracula.)

- The second-most famous character in the novel, after Dracula himself, is Van Helsing, whose first name is Abraham. Note that “Bram” is a declension of Abraham. What does this mean? I legitimately have no idea. But it’d be a weird coincidence, right? Like what even is the thought process there? “Oh, yeah, what should I name this character that comes in, makes overtly homoerotic statements willy nilly, and encourages everyone to throw rationality out the window and stake some vampires using the Eucharist? hmmmm how about ‘Me’”

ok wait FINAL final note: you legitimately do not have to care about any of this. I love Dracula because it has gay vibes and I love trying to figure it out, like an archaeologist sifting through sentence structure to find fragments that match the patterns I already know from historical research; but that’s not why you should love Dracula. The book itself is just straight up fun to read. Like I said, Stoker absolutely nails the exact vibe of spookiness that I love, the eerieness and elegance and vague but vivid fear of a full moon crossed by clouds at midnight. The characters are intriguing, especially Quincey gosh I love Quincey Morris but they’re very,, sweet? if i can say that about people i, personally, suspect of murder? They come together and protect each other against the terrible threat that is Dracula, and you don’t get that half as often as I’d like in horror media. I don’t even know if Dracula could qualify as “horror” proper, because it’s not about the squeamish creeping discomfort that “horror” is meant to evoke, it’s not the appeal of staring at a train wreck--it’s not horrifying. It’s eerie. It’s Gothic. It has spires and vampires and found family and cowboys, and to be honest, I don’t know what could be better than that.

[minervacasterly]

First Protestant King of England, Henry VIII or Edward VI? (And why Edward VI's reign was no less important than his father's)

It is important to dispell myths about the most popular English dynasty, so I decided to briefly take on this topic. A common misconception until recent decades is that Henry VIII was the first Protestant King. In reality, it was his son who was the first true Protestant King of England. I’ve written about this before on my blog, building upon the research by great scholars like Chris Skidmore, Loach, and the short introduction to his reign by Kyra Cornelius Kramer. Besides taking after his father in intellect, Edward VI was fairly concerned with the state of the church of England but unlike his old man, he thought that the time had come to make it into the first true Protestant church of England, agreeing to the issuing of the book of common prayer and a revision of it two years later. Edward VI also frowned upon improper clothing. He loved to dance and watch sports, but didn’t think t0 was a good idea to indulge in these frivolities since the Evangelicals believed that this was a gateway to moral decay. (Don’t you just love those who interpret the will of god so good, that they conveniently forget about the passages where their savior rails against the rich and so on?) Edward’s actions had consequences and these, like the contributions of his reign, are often brushed aside in favor of his more famous father and sisters. One of them, was a rebellion in the North and his half-sister’s resistance to his new laws that forbade people to hear the Mass and forced the new English service on everyone. Long story short … lots of people hung, punished and lots of enemies that his councilors (who as always since people couldn’t point fingers at the king unless they had a sick death wish of some sort) were blamed and were punished for during his half-sister’s reign. Some of you might be pointing out that since Henry VIII was excommunicated and labeled a heretic by most of Christendom, that technically he was a Protestant king but no, seriously, he wasn’t. Henry was, despite these labels, still a practicing Catholic. He agreed to Gardiner’s articles of faith that criticized the church and validated his claim as supreme head of the Anglican Church, and God’s representative on Earth, and surrounded himself by obvious Reformists, but other than that, he forcefully kept everyone in line. Catholics who practiced the Mass or adhered to his new rules while still being loyal to their beliefs were tolerated, but if they pulled a ‘Thomas More’ where they denied the king’s supremacy or insulted one of his beloved wives (before he got tired of them, that is) then yes, off to the block with them!

As for Protestants … Ever heard of Anne Askew? She defended Henry’s actions, she thought he was some kind of Moses as his last wife -Kathryn Parr whom she was closely associated with- would paint him as in her two books (primarily in ‘Lamentations of a Sinner’) and then she defied her husband and Henry’s establishment, pushing for a more Evangelist agenda, and what happened? Oh nothing big … she just got tortured and then burned. As long as you played Henry’s sycophant you were fine. There is also a spiritual aspect that ties into his megalomania. As Henry became more obsessed with securing his dynasty, his focus on spiritual matters also grew. By the end of his reign, nobody could predict what the king would say or how he would act so everyone walked a fine line when they discussed important subjects. Kathryn Parr is one of them who learned this lesson early on during their marriage. If it weren’t for gentleness, and the friendship she established among prominent ladies in her household, her accusers would’ve succeeded in convincing Henry VIII that she was a heretic. She would’ve had a sham trial like Anne Boleyn and then beheaded or worse, burned like Anne Aske. Luckily for Kathryn Parr, she was one step ahead of them. Humbling herself before her lord and husband, she told him that she never intended to change his religious views but just challenged him as people did at the beginning of his reign, so he could stir her towards the right path since she was a woman and these things were too complicated for her to fathom, let alone choose on her own. She lived and continued to be a major influence on future Protestant leaders, such as Jane Grey, Elizabeth I and of course, Edward VI.

Edward VI was greatly influenced by his beloved stepmother’s religiosity and mourned her deeply. He referred to her as his mother. Kathryn encouraged his passion for books and aided his Protestant tutors in stirring him towards their faith, ensuring that he’d become the king they’d all be waiting for, that would transform England into a fully Protestant nation.

It was Edward who began to force religious codes on his people in a way that hadn’t been done before. His father cracked on religious houses on the basis of cleansing them from corruption and because of their disloyalty, and open defiance against his supremacy; but Edward made things worse. The monasteries that were sold to his father’s noblemen left many people begging on the streets while forcing others to adapt to their new environment. When people could no longer handle it, they rose up in open rebellion and like in his father’s time, these were brutally squashed. But here is where it gets interesting … Whereas Henry VIII is blamed for all the evils of his reign, Edward VI is not and the reason for this? He was a kid, don’t be so mean. Leave the poor tot alone. Fact: Edward VI died at the age of fifteen and by renaissance standards, he was not a little boy anymore. Even if he hadn’t come of age, he was not an innocent boy anymore who was oblivious to the world around him. In fact. When Edward VI found out that his uncle had been executed, he was like ‘meh … okay’. And sure, Thomas Seymour was a brash individual who thought he could get away with everything but even after he tried to kidnap his nephew, to act in such a manner and for an uncle who was married to your favorite stepmother and someone you claimed to be your favorite relative, that’s pretty cold. But it gets better. After Edward VI finally got rid of his tedious uncle and his irritating set of rules, Edward wrote in his diary (showing no emotion at all) that the former lord Protector died and that was that. Getting rid of Edward Seymour probably made the little critter sigh in relief because out of all his uncles, the Lord Protector was the one who always reminded him of his duties and responsibilities, not to mention all those rules and not letting him be king! How unfair! And then there was also that issue about the rebellions. Edward VI saw these people as traitors and agreed with Northumberland that they should be dealt with immediately but his uncle didn’t think that was wise, which was why people called him the ‘good Duke’ because they saw him as a friend of the people. Now that he was out of the way, his kingdom would not have to suffer any more dissenting voices, nor any threats of isolation or future skirmishes with Scotland. Edward VI was fully committed to the Protestant cause but convinced by Northumberland, he realized that he would not go far if he did not have any allies. And the whole campaign in Scotland had gone awfully wrong and with Mary, Queen of Scots in France, the only way to neutralize that threat was making an alliance with that country, betrothing him to Henri II and Catherine de Medici’s daughter, Elizabeth Valois. Sadly, Edward VI did not live to marry her or do more for the Evangelicals. He died and before he did, he wrote a paper called “my device for the succession” which became the basis to disinherit his sisters in favor of their cousin, Jane Grey. That opened a can of worms that could have easily escalated into another civil war like the wars of the roses but thankfully for everyone involved it didn’t and his sister won her crown fair and square. But as with every Tudor, once her sister became Queen, she began to make good use of the propaganda machine to portray her sibling as a puppet of Northumberland and other evil lords who had corrupted him and turned him against her. Why was this done? Same reason why people who rebelled against their kings often pointed their fingers at their councilors -because doing so against an anointed king meant that they were upsetting the natural order. It was only in extreme cases, when someone had enough support and belonged to a different dynasty, that they would point it directly at them. Edward belonged to the same dynasty as Mary, and a dynasty divided was bad business for everyone, especially for the first Queen Regnant of England who had inherited a divided country.

Mary I also did something else and that was appropriating some of Edward VI’s religious achievements in an effort to make Catholicism appealing to those who were still unsure whether or not they wanted to return to the church or side with the various groups within the Protestant movement. Sections from the book of the common prayer were added to a new set of prayers in Latin and English, and adapted in a way that didn’t contradict church doctrine. During his reign, Edward encouraged many poets and artists to express themselves. These would reenact passages from the bible, or create allegorical paintings that depicted Edward as England’s messiah, and all those who followed him as true Christians as opposed to the decadent Catholics who were portrayed as heathens.

Edward’s religious reformation became the basis for Elizabeth I’s reign who continued with many of these reforms. Although she did not go as far as Edward or his chosen heiress, Jane Grey, would have liked. Elizabeth I was far more pragmatic, recognizing that if she wanted to rule over a divided country she had to maintain some of the older traditions or else, she’d risk losing everything she had. Unlike her siblings, Elizabeth I wasn’t thought of as legitimate by many of her Christian peers. Ideological purity was a luxury that she couldn’t afford and in any case, she did not want because many Evangelicals didn’t like the idea of the supremacy of kings (or queens). Nevertheless, Elizabeth I built her religious establishment upon her brother’s by issuing a new revision of the book of common prayer and encouraging artists and poets to create works that extolled the Anglican Church and the Tudor Dynasty.

[incarnateirony]

I think the issue with death as a happy ending (to a story, I should point out - death can be many things in many places, but I’m specifically talking about it in fiction) is that it’s usually written so badly that it doesn’t feel like a happy ending and it just feels like shit. There’s a very limited number of fictional works that I’ve seen actually manage it well - though in saying that, I have a very limited range, and I don’t really enjoy new things because (reasons). The ones I do recall, it’s because they were just that good and bittersweet is exactly the way I would describe them as a happy ending.

Firebringer was a novel I read when I was 12 or 13, and I still recall it. It was about a deer and it was his entire life - birth to death - and it was a happy ending. I cried through the last few chapters. Then I reread it and cried some more. It was good.

There’s also a fic I want to mention, because it’s on the topic. It’s called The white whale. and it’s by an author named orange_crushed. The entire premise of the fic is that Dean (and Sam, but it’s a destiel fic) is already dead. He died years ago. The title itself should say a lot, and the fic itself is about finding peace. It’s brilliant and beautiful, and I love it.

My perspective on death is a bit. Odd, maybe? I grew up somewhere between Christian (mum and dad and church, a mix of Baptist and Anglican) and animist (local indigenous spirituality), and while bit of both inform my interpretation, I’m very nearly atheist.

I don’t really believe in an afterlife, or rebirth, or anything like that. I believe that this is it. We get one shot at being who we want to be and acting as we choose with what we’re given. (“And isn’t it so wonderful, that we were alive at the same time?”)

I first heard the Freedom From vs Freedom To argument when reading the handmaid’s tale in my English class at school. It wasn’t even presented as an argument, everyone just seemed to agree that freedom to is better. I believe that, too. But freedom from has structure. It’s not “peaceful” and it can’t be when it is enforced, but it is informed by rules, and there it has expectations and is reliable (where reliable means we know what the consequences are, even if they’re awful). Freedom to is anarchy (which I have come to appreciate more). But neither freedom is peace.

There’s a quote I really love, and I can never recall it properly and it goes something like this: “War is an ugly thing, but it is not the ugliest. The decayed and degraded state of moral feeling which thinks nothing is worth war is much worse. A man who has nothing for which he is willing to fight, nothing more important than his own personal fucking safety, is [the worst thing]” clearly I don’t recall it very well. It’s from an old bit of hp fanfic, of all things, a very violent and disgusting version of civil war - as war is. It was the beginning of why I’m not a pacifist.

I dunno. I guess I really feel like peace - true, genuine peace - can’t be done. It’s certainly worth striving for, worth trying, but peace is either isolation and loneliness or death. Peace is knowing you’ve done everything you can, that it was enough, and being able to let it go.

Any way I think I had a point somewhere in this, maybe something about being unable to put down a fight while you’re living, maybe something about how death can be kind, maybe something about how good writing can make sad things happy, maybe that bittersweet is still sweet. Idk.

Feel free to reply to this mess of ideas or not - or pick and choose what you want to reply to, if you’d like to reply to specific parts. I mostly just wanted to share (I can do discussion, but idk if I’m still gunna have any focus later to do so, or if I’ll even see a response) some thoughts and you’re usually the only person I see on my dash with this sort of ~vague philosophy things~.

Woah when did anons get to let someone submit something so long.

Either way, a few points on this.

1. a thoughtful piece, this is a philosophy piece I will gladly entertain. However, if we are entertaining philosophy we must

2. acknowledge this is a nihilistic piece contingent on your personal world views, that while valid, and I will not take any effort to undermine on a personal belief system level

3. do not have much to do with (dependent on fringe atheism or, perhaps, agnosticism) a piece that is far from secular and atheistic while also

4. relying on the idea that “I really feel like peace - true, genuine peace - can’t be done. It’s certainly worth striving for, worth trying, but peace is either isolation and loneliness or death.”, which is itself the very nihilistic idea imparted by Chuck’s matrix but, whether you believe it in the real world, is the active target of subversion within this fantasy world, (eg, a heaven revolution where the doors are opened just like they were in hell.)

5. Finally, presumptuous that it would not be ‘well written’ and predesignating a potential discontent with the delivery that would sour it, especially with the previous points.

That said, while I’m not going to argue directly with your real life belief system -- even if they clearly disagree with my own -- I do remind you--falling back to your point that you do not believe in an afterlife: we know this fictional story does not hold this belief, ergo using that as a judgment for how it would deliver the concept of eternity is itself already wounding oneself to receiving the moral of the canon. One can not suddenly expect SPN to become a secular show just because a viewer has secular and atheistic beliefs. It is inherently asecular, theistic, and gnostic in its bones and the story will thus tell itself within that structure, which then begs if one is willing to suspend a personal belief system for a fictional canon setting they are digesting the story of.

Similarly-and-so, this is contingent on believing that the heroes’ journey will end with them maintaining the current status quo, rather than making a world where--in this fictional world in which an afterlife exists--death does not itself mean loneliness, but rather reunion.

If we can suspend our beliefs in some shows with fighting dragons or farting lightning bolts (after all, nonnie references HP fanfic), I would hope people could suspend them in regards to a moral telling of found family and the sovereignty of man in a divine and moral play.

If one were to demand SPN have entirely atheistic storytelling, the only real way to handle an ending would be to have one of the characters wake up from a 15 year coma where none of it was real and it was all a dream or something to that affect which--lol, we’re not doing, I promise. I’m sorry, but we’re not.  We’re not taking the “none of it mattered because none of it happened” angle. We’re not going to a world where angels and the afterlife don’t exist, we’re not going to collapse it where suddenly death IS the true end and life sucks and then you die, it’s just not going to happen.

So the point then is an active choice on the part of the viewer: is this suddenly the line you draw after watching a theistic show for 15 years, doubling down that this specific theistic point is the one thing we can’t accept (despite it existing in the past already), or do we continue to watch a theistic show and interpret its theistic points as the story is trying to depict? And if it’s the “drawing the sudden line,” that is, quite frankly, a personal choice to have spontaneous discontent with a critical part of a canon story’s telling at a very sudden drawn line in the sand. 

The point to exit would have been pilot 1.01 if we were going to have fundamental problems with spirits and an afterlife as crucial elements of a story. And if not then, 4.01 with angels. And if not then-- you see where this goes on. There were multiple exit ramps if the idea of an afterlife, which became more and more directly explored, was going to be an issue in reception of or enjoyment of a text. So now we’re 15 years later, and we can’t expect the highway to reroute just because we didn’t take the other 100 ramps.

SPN will tell the full spread of its moral and divine play within the full spread of its moral and divine sandbox, which someone has--to reach the ending--accepted for fifteen years at this point. If one has a fundamental problem with the entire premise of the show, it is not an obligation to any writer to cater to someone who intrinsically disagrees with the entire structure of the body of work to fulfill something within a completely different paradigm. It’s not.

Am I lucky in that it matches my beliefs? Maybe. Also cursed. Very very cursed. Because it’s led to being Through The Looking Glass for two years to the point there’s a segment of fandom that treats me as a magic 8 ball--and sometimes rightfully so, not to sound like I’m tooting my own horn or whatever. It just knows I get the structure in play to a fault. But cursed knowledge aside -- and trust me, it’s cursed as FUCK most of the time -- in the end, even when I watch shows that don’t match my personal theology, I don’t sit here and suddenly expect them to do so. There’s plenty of shows I completely suspend my beliefs in to enjoy within the sandbox they were designed in the constraints of so I find it very weird to project a discontent with a body of fictional canon presenting ideas within its own rule set based on personal beliefs in a real life lens. I mean, I don’t believe dragons exist, but if I watch the Dragon Prince for many seasons, I can’t suddenly expect the ending to have nothing to do with Dragons?

I mean, the show is literally called Supernatural. It's right there in the name. There are going to be supernatural elements about the show. My banner image is literally a reborn soul floating down the aisle. This isn't gonna suddenly be irrelevant at the end.

[gravitascivics]

MAY THE SETTLERS FLOWER IN A NEW LAND

This blog is in the midst of telling a story – it began with the last posting and the reader is invited to go back and catch the first segment of this tale.  It has to do with the Puritanical origins of this nation.  And the story goes back to the disappointment Europeans felt over the discovery of the Americas.  During the 1500s, Europeans invested in western voyages so as to find a shortcut to the lucrative markets of the Far East.  No such route was found, but those voyages began the tumbling of various streams of “dominoes” that are still toppling today.    

         The last posting kept the reader in Europe, actually England, and this posting has a few more developments to relate emanating from that nation.  The previous posting left off with Elizabeth I’s (1533-1603) trying to handle the religious strife that befell her country.  Mainly there was the ongoing battle with Catholics who wanted to regain their prominence and that conflict even included an attempted foreign invasion from Spain – the Spanish Armada.  

This religious strife began before she was queen and was particularly intense during her predecessor’s reign, that of “Bloody Mary.” Back then, religious disagreements could and were bloody indeed, and in those earlier years Catholics had a supportive queen, Mary I and her husband, Philip.  Her aim was to reestablish Catholic dominance after her father, Henry VIII, split with the Roman church and made the Anglican Church dominant.  Mary died in 1558 after a relatively short reign of about five years.  What one needs to remember, religion and political leadership of a country were highly interwoven with each other at that time.

         After Mary died and Elizabeth became queen, she, Elizabeth, established the Anglican Church as official and barred open membership to other religions; and that included not only Catholics, but other upstart Protestant sects such as the Calvinists.  The sanctions against the Calvinists were mostly mild but starting in the early 1600s, more radical forms of that religion’s beliefs (the last posting reviews its tenets) began to be promulgated.  

Eventually, and this transcends Elizabeth’s reign, the more ardent, radical Congregationalists or extreme Puritans made their presence known. They took the Calvinist beliefs in the unconditional election; that is, humans are subject to God’s determination as to who is saved and who is not, and irresistible grace; that is, once chosen, a person will not reject God’s grace (the “U” and “I” of the acronym TULIP) up several notches.

         They, according to Guelzo, “… wanted membership in the[ir] church limited to only those who could give testimony and evidence of having received God’s grace, even if that meant separating … from the rest of England’s presumably impure society.”[1]  And the split with the crown grew after Elizabeth’s death in 1603.  Her successor, James of Scotland, intensified the government’s crackdown on these radicals.  

With his and his successor’s policies, the Congregationalists or Puritans started to look for escape from the island nation. And one group of them first sought refuse in the Puritanical Netherlands. Donald S. Lutz,[2] described these people’s experiences before getting to their eventual destination, the New England coastline.  

He has extensively analyzed the connection between these Puritans and original constitutional formulations in American development by studying how early American settlers from England and then Holland went about organizing themselves.  Starting with the Puritans who landed at Plymouth in 1620, certain federalist elements were established.

Lutz points out that the Puritans (this group specifically known as the Pilgrims) were interested in simplifying the religious practices of the English churches.  Being persecuted in England, they sought to “create a new city of God – a society run according to the dictates of the Bible.”[3]

Adopting the notion of a covenant, originally from Hebraic tradition and law of the Old Testament, the Puritans established a society and a “politick” on the following elements: a bonding between the members of the covenant, a calling upon God to witness the bonding, and the consent of each member to join the resulting communal union.  This latter element is a basic component; each member was free to bond and did so of his own volition.

Of course, all of this was accomplished by the drawing up and signing of the Mayflower Compact.  He writes,

 During the 1600s, over 100 other founding documents similar to the Mayflower Compact would be written by American colonists. Some of these agreements would create single settlements, while others (such as the Fundamental Orders of Connecticut) would join several existing covenanted communities into a broader association. In each case the people created by the agreement would be identified by those who signed the document. It is a peculiarly American trait that founding documents like the Declaration of Independence and the United States Constitution have signatures at the end. This expectation is part of the legacy of early agreements like the Mayflower Compact; just as “We the People” is derived from “We the undersigned.”[4]

 And the Mayflower Compact introduced several other important ideas basic to the nation's political perspective.

First, it established the principle of adding or admitting new members to a covenant. Not all the signers of the Mayflower Compact were Puritans. A non-Puritan, though, was not given subordinate status. A new addition was awarded equal status with every individual of the original group.

This provision was the beginning of a standard that led to the constitutional provision that all new states, as they joined the national union, would be granted equal status with the original thirteen states (as demonstrated, for example, by equal representation in the Senate and extends to new citizens as well).

The second significant aspect of the Mayflower Compact was its Lockean logic. Before John Locke ever wrote a word, Puritans in America were living out his prescriptions by creating a society first and then creating a “politick” to govern it. “On the Mayflower we find the colonists doing essentially everything that Locke would later recommend.”[5]

One last contribution of the Mayflower Compact was its clear statement of political values which included commitments to justice, equality, respect for law, and community. Not mentioned was individualism. Instead, the following language dominates the document:

 … these Presents, solemnly and mutually in the Presence of God and of one another, convenant and combine ourselves together into a civil Body Politick, for our better Ordering and Preservation, and Furtherance of the Ends aforesaid … for the General good of the Colony; unto which we promise all due Submission and Obedience.[6]

 Defined in religious contexts, the Puritans brought with them strongly felt values and principles that would evolve in the formative, colonial years and provide the basis of future bills of rights principles.  

This covenant did not present a model for governmental structure. As such, it was not the first formal constitution in America.  That distinction belongs to the Fundamental Orders of Connecticut, 1639.  But it did contain important elements; they are the forming a union based on consent a priori to actual governance, formulation of a formal agreement based on a covenant (a promise which called on God as witness to the agreement), and an integral commitment to equality – which, by the way, appears before any commitment to individuality or individual rights.

But before this tale totally shifts to North America, there are still some important developments to relate that took place in England.  More would happen there that prompted further exodus from that nation to North America.  The events also affected the formal format by which these early settlers departed England and helped determine the formal arrangements the settlers had with the mother country.

[1] Allen C. Guelzo, The American Mind, Part I – transcript books – (Chantilly, VA:  The Teaching Company/The Great Courses, 2005), 25. In the original, this quote begins with “The Separatists …” indicating the other term used to identify these believers.

[2]Donald S. Lutz, “The Mayflower Compact, 1620,” in Roots of the Republic: American Founding Documents Interpreted,” ed. Stephen L. Schechter (Madison, WI: Madison House, 1990), 17-23.  What this posting includes is an edited rendition of what this blog posted earlier in this blog.  See Robert Gutierrez, “At the Beginning: Mayflower Compact,” Gravitas:  A Voice for Civics (January 13, 2012), accessed March 4, 2021, https://www.blogger.com/blog/post/edit/preview/1954479639890698872/7769498729070174796 .

[3]Ibid., p. 18.

[4]Ibid., 19.

[5]Ibid., 21.

[6] Eric Bruun and Jay Crosby, “Combine Ourselves into a Civil Body Politick: The Mayflower compact,” in Our Nation's Archive: The history of the United States in Documents (New York, NY: Tess Press, 1999/1620), 46-47, 47.

[thepinkseat-askthemoonbunny]

Name: Enrico Arthur Emil Hellsing-Maxwell, also known as EJ or Rico.

Gender: Male

Age: 12 (at the beginning of his story)

Hair: Silver, collarbone length

Eyes: Dark blue

Skin color: Light brown

Height: 5’6 (he’s a tall boi)

Weight: 118 lbs

Bio: Rico, like his twin sister really wasn’t supposed to exist...his parents loathed each other, neither of them were ready for a child and it was just supposed to be a casual mistake. When his mother, Sir Integra Hellsing found out she was pregnant, her first instinct was to get an abortion. Not only was she pregnant by the man she loathed the most in the world, she simply wasn’t prepared to have a child. She couldn’t afford to be out of commission for that long, but Maxwell after finding out about her pregnancy (through stolen medical records) was firmly against anything of the sort.

Over the weeks she weighed her options, and decided to keep the child on account that she’d have heirs to her organization, and it would save her the trouble of having to arrange a marriage. They got used to the thought of being parents, and when Rico and his twin sister Lisa were born, they came kicking and screaming into a world of monster hunting and religious upheaval.

Their parents probably should’ve never been parents, but they did do the best they could. Rico never grew up doubting his parents loved him and his sister...loving each other on the other hand, completely out of the question. At first they’d tried to make it work out for the sake of the kids but it was in the best interests of everyone involved that they separate, and eventually they came up with a custody arrangement when the children were old enough to travel. Six months in England, six months in Rome. That way they’d get both parents and not have to worry about them murdering one another. During his early years, he was mostly sheltered from the more gruesome details of Hellsing because Integra had never had a proper childhood, and that was something she wanted to give her children. She wanted them to retain their innocence as long as they could, so it wasn’t until recently that he actually began any monster hunter training. As of a year ago, Rico was declared the heir to Hellsing on account of his choosing Protestantism and joining the Anglican Church, so he’s currently being prepared for that role.

Personality: Rico is a curious and energetic boy, a bit more rambunctious compared to his more quiet and contemplative sister. He’s the hands behind most of their pranks, she plans and he sets into action. To channel that boundless energy he likes to work with his hands and spends most of his time building/tinkering with things. Model cars, computers, you name it. He’s actually a really sweet kid, loves to be around people and make new friends...but can be a little too “in your face” and chatty as it were, he needs to learn how to chill. He doesn’t like conflict, and will excuse himself from the situation when things get too heated, and unlike his sister he doesn’t bottle things up very much.

Relationships:

Elisabetta Hellsing-Maxwell: Lisa is Rico’s twin and best friend, the two of them are practically joined at the hip and you rarely see one without the other. She often has to reign him in and he’s often the voice of reason to some of her crazier ideas, the two of them are utterly devoted to one another even if they do fight sometimes. He often jokes that he’ll never love another woman as much as he does her (even more so after he finds out he’s gay).

Sir Integra Hellsing: Rico very much loves his mother, and often models a lot of her mannerisms as he is going to be her heir one day, so he follows her example in a lot of ways. The two of them are very close, he’s a bit of a “mama’s boy” as it were, but Integra does often worry about his spontaneity as it could get him into trouble. She aims to raise him to be a gentleman-knight, and to transform the world around him rather than being a simple passer-by....he’s going to make his mark in the world as a man, and every door is open to him if he wants it badly enough. Integra tends to be very protective of her children, especially with all the threats that both sides of the fence face from each other and all the supernatural monsters of the world. She’s mama bear, don’t fuck with her cubs or you’ll lose an eye...and sometimes this can lead to her still babying them a bit, trying to compensate for the childhood that she never got to have.

Enrico Maxwell Sr: Rico and his father have had a really good relationship, the two of them would often spend time together, although like Lisa, Rico is a bit scared of his dad’s Catholic extremist tendencies. Since Lisa was the older twin, Maxwell had hoped that his son would grow up to run Iscariot one day after he decided to retire (yeah right)...however, you can see that their relationship has become strained lately after the Bishop heard the news of his son deciding to be Anglican. To say he was disappointed was the understatement of the year, and Rico can sense that. He doesn’t understand why his dad can’t just accept the fact, I mean it doesn’t hurt anybody right?

Alucard: Alucard is like half-nanny, half-attack dog. He did NOT like the kids at first because they were a reminder that that Italian slimeball “defiled” his master, but over the years they’ve kinda grown on him. They have somewhere between a Seras and Integra relationship, he knows Rico be his master one day but he’s also still small enough that he can kinda intimidate and flex on her. But he’s hella protective of the both of them he wouldn’t let anything happen. They have a cross between a bickering siblings relationship with a hint of “scary monsters in my basement.”

Anderson: He’s basically his surrogate grandparent and he, like Lisa, calls him Granddad. He may be a scary, Catholic Paladin but he loves the kiddos...and the twins are kind of special to him. Maxwell is his son, and because of the way he turned out, Alexander feels like he failed. With them, it’s almost a reminder of what their dad could’ve been, so it’s almost like a do-over he’s determined not to waste with them. He and Integra begrudgingly tolerate each other for their sake. He is a bit more partial to Rico because he IS the boy, so he reminds him a lot of a young Maxwell.

Seras: Rico’w second big sister. While Alucard is the older sibling that will encourage you to get into all sorts of holy hell, Seras will reign him back a little.

Heinkel and Yumie: Maxwell often makes them babysit the twins while he’s busy, and they get SO ANNOYED by it. But with him, not with them. Heinkel is that “cool auntie” who will buy her beer and teach you her to shoot guns, Yumie is the kinda neurotic aunt who wants to be by the rules only because she’s terrified of what Maxwell will do if they cross a line. Heinkel and Rico both bond over a love of cool weapons.

Walter: His “other granddad”, he often tells him things that he doesn’t tell anybody else because he’s literally one of the few religiously neutral people in their life. “I think I’m just gonna become an atheist at this point, Walter.”

[kimabutch]

In-depth discussions of Christianity/religion for CW.

I have such a strange relationship with the concept of memorizing the Bible. I was fairly involved in the church as a kid and teen but the poorly organized Sunday School in my Anglican church really didn’t emphasize in-depth reading of the Bible, and neither did my parents. I can only remember one time that I had to memorize something in Sunday School, and that was John 3:16, which is hardly an impressive feat.

Later, I memorized a good deal of the standard eucharistic service from the Book of Alternative Services as well as the Lord’s Prayer and the Creeds of the church, but that was only because I was speaking them every week, not because of any active effort. I similarly came to know many Bible stories from readings in church, but because the church lectionary doesn’t always go in order, I don’t think I really had an organized sense of the Bible — just fragments. I can honestly say that Jesus Christ Superstar (to which my family can sing along in its entirety) did more to solidify my understanding of Holy Week than what I learned at Sunday School, or at the Christian summer camp that I attended for nine years, or in my decade of assisting with services every week, or even in my confirmation class.

And now, I’m actually reading, studying, and contextualizing Scripture, and I’m discovering just how much I don’t know — I regularly come across fairly standard Biblical stories that I’d never heard of, or am shocked when I actually read a story and it’s different than my understanding of it. Which would probably surprise a lot of my non-religious friends, because I think for some people, I’m probably the “most Christian” person they know. 

But I think of the Evangelical (or ex-Evangelical) people that I’ve come to know over the years, and how many of them can pull verses or stories from out of nowhere, having played Draw Your Sword or other similar games. Even if they’re no longer involved in the church, or don’t believe what’s in the Bible (and, I mean, same — I struggle with the text constantly), they have a sort of comprehensive understanding of the Bible that I’m sure I will never, ever have. Interestingly, some ex-Evangelical people have told me that they kind of enjoyed memorizing Bible verses (especially when they were presented as games), even when they had horrible experiences with other parts of the church. For others, I think having a strong knowledge of Scripture probably gave them good reasons to leave the church.

I’m not necessarily envious of people who were raised to rote-memorize Scripture — I have some serious doubts that it often inspires an inquisitive and reflective faith among kids, based on what I’ve heard (although of course, people have a variety of experiences.) And there’s something interesting about being a lifelong Christian who still has so much Bible left with which to wrestle and argue. But I also do worry about people who grew up like me, not actually having a strong idea about what’s in the book that supposedly makes up the centrality of our faith, but still feeling pulled towards Christianity. 

I guess it’s not as much of an issue for people who happily leave the church with no interest in religion, but for people who do want to engage with Christianity, it’s more than a little intimidating. Where do you even start, when you’ve generally considered yourself a Christian but suddenly realize that you don’t know much about your religion? Would you have the ability or urge to seek out a Bible Study, and especially (if you’re progressive) to wade through a sea of non-progressive churches whose social beliefs you know will clash with your own? Or if you’re worried about what the Bible might actually contain? I’m not sure. I’ve found a way that’s good for me personally, but... I don’t know about other people, and I think I’m not the only one who has had this issue. 

And one final thought: as an adult, I really do like memorizing things. I find that there’s a sort of meditation that comes from repetition, and that once something is in my brain, I can start to break it down in new ways — even when I struggle with it, to a degree. Being able to recite things that I feel are important to my faith can be incredibly comforting, and I’ve heard this from people of many different religious backgrounds. I still don’t think it should be forced on kids, particularly without actual reflection on what the words mean, but... memorization can be good, if you want it. 

[helsung]

one conceit of integra’s characterization in canon that i wholeheartedly disagree with & have elected to rewrite completely is her unwavering patriotism & dedication to serving the british crown .  while not at the forefront of her motivations, it’s an implication of her objection to all which mocks the values she upholds, the values of her country, her people & her religion .  integra chastising others for not befitting the british standard & her aversion to that which is foreign ( iscariot ), or other / unnatural ( vampire-kind ) .  it’s persistent & unquestioning, she bows before the queen all the same, she accepts the unfairness of the round table’s treatment, the unreasonable blame based upon her, even when her servant rejects it as the injustice that it is .  she’s molds herself in the archetype of the british gentleman, self-assured, cocky, almost mocking in her adherence as the men she grew up around failed to match it as much as she .

she is presented as a woman whose sense of national & cultural identity is quintessentially british, a woman whose loyalties lie with with the heart of the british empire itself, the royalty which oversees all from the shadows of secrecy .

it’s no surprise then that so many fanworks whitewash integra to hell & back, ignore an aspect of her character written down very clearly in her design sheet, that she’s of indian descent .  the manga & OVA too overlook it, the only attention brought to the fact is in her design, being visibly non-white .  we see the only existing depiction of integra’s mother in the gonzo adaption, wearing what appears to be a saree, & that’s it .  it’s honestly so bad that i’ve had at least two people thank me for choosing to write integra as indian, which is nice to hear but i shouldn’t be thanked for doing the bare minimum & it illustrates just how much hellsing fails at acknowledging that one of its leads isn’t white, not just in the act of never having integra acknowledge or interact with the culture of her ancestry, but having her serve the empire & royalty which has oppressed the indian people for almost a century .

which is why i’m intensely uncomfortable with the idea of integra’s unwavering patriotism, i don’t wanna write the story of a woman of indian descent brainwashed from birth into believing the lie of the greatness of britain’s empire, & i don’t think integra lacks the awareness or ability to recognize that britain’s foundation is built on fabrication .  a history of colonialism & oppression twisted into tales of bravery & heroism, monsters turned into saviors, victims turned into perpetrators, blamed for their plight, every country with a colonialist past rewrites its history in order to justify its continued existence .  britain is a rotten place, with museums filled to brim with the pillaged treasures of more successful civilizations, & integra is not one to ignore the truth the government is trying so desperately to hide .  after all, she’s apart of it .

she serves not the crown nor its bearer, not the interests of the round table on which she sits .  these are merely allies of circumstance, allies guaranteed by birth-right to a woman born in a dying hereditary hierarchy, allies who have spent much of her early life attempting to undermine the authority she was entrusted, allies she grows to resent for more than the injustices committed against her .  in due time, integra reasons that what she does serve is her father’s memory, the legacy he left in her hands, twisted as it was by him & abraham & their duty to the british empire .  she reasons that her duty is to the people of britain, the many whose spirits have been crushed by decades of austerity upheld by her peers, that for them more than herself she must feign unflinching loyalty to the british flag, to the lie of its greatness, for a time, until her power grows greater than its, & hellsing can fulfill its purpose, riding the kingdom of monsters .

integra spent a lot of her early childhood travelling through & from mumbai, her father wanting her to connect with her late mother’s side of the family, who until integra’s birth & jayashree’s subsequent death had maintained little contact with the van helsings .  they too were monster hunters of a sort, with dealings of their own, & not too pleased with their daughter when she ran off with arthur to london, but after the tragedy of jayashree’s death, they wanted to offer arthur & his daughter everything they could .  for arthur these visits were under the guise of selling the helsing estate in mumbai back to his wife’s family, business as expressions of hurt & mourning .  for a young integra, they were a chance to learn about a mother she never had the chance to meet, & she quickly found herself apart of a family which until then felt so much smaller, her aunt was a warm & welcoming figure, a mentor much like her father, her cousins were eager to accept her into their games, & grew to be like brothers in short time .  she learned of maharashtra & its history, its culture, learning to speak marathi, of another aspect of her legacy .  it was a childhood quite unlike the one in london, & arthur took her on many trips in his business dealings with jayashree’s family, they were brief moments of levity from the dread hanging off the hellsing mansion’s walls, until the day of his death .

afterwards, integra could never find time to return, with her father’s organization in her hands & so much training left to do, she could only manage infrequent contact with the other side of the family .  letters, phone conversations, urging her to return, or better yet, urging her to leave behind the hellsing organization & live with them, she was always welcomed there, she always had a place in mumbai should london become a weight too hard to carry .  she’s considered it, many times, of course, the memories of mumbai were her fondest, but duties always came first .  her father had left her much to do, & she owed him for everything he’d done for the semblance of a normal childhood .  she’s tried, constantly, to make time for her family, a large gap is a busy schedule to allow for travel, but it never worked .  instead, her aunt elected to send her gifts, for any reason she can muster, birthdays & other holidays, always packed with food & whatever tokens she thinks will remind integra of mumbai .  for her birthdays, integra always receives a new, finely crafted saree which she wears for special occasions .

it’s a careful balancing act, to forego the values you were taught growing up, to become something other than the role you were prepared for, the role you were made to fit & yet still met with rejection from those who expected someone else .  all the while maintaining the good graces of the crown & the stolen jewels which adorn it .  for a long time, integra tries to unlearn the conservative anglican principles on which the hellsing organization was founded, to which the van helsings gave themselves to in exchange for the power to vanquish their historic enemy .  she grows distant from the memory of arthur & the lessons left to her in the last years of his life .  the more she grows as her own woman, the closer she becomes in spirit to her mother, to the other aspect of her legacy, & she’s better for it .  integra builds something new from everything her parents left her, crafting her own place in history, & the hellsing organization gains a greater purpose, not to defend the united kingdom from the inhuman creatures which reach its shores, but to rid it of the ones already there .

[nickpaterson]

How my religion taught me to hate

I grew up in a religious family, with Anglican roots.  My mother joined a small growing church group, which developed into one of the largest Baptist churches on Vancouver Island.  We were part of this same church family from the time I was 4 years old. Now in my 40s, my mother still attends the same group.   I am proud that our family was part of and still is part of this growing group that dopes a lot of good and outreach locally in her community.  I value relationships and advice from many members of this congregation.

               During the troubles of my teenage years, members of this group reach out to me to provide guidance when I was lost, to be supportive when I needed it, and to give advice.  One of the most influential people from this church weas my pastor, Mark Buchanan.  He was a little man who more often was in board shorts and a Hawaiian shirt with sandals, instead of a stuffy suit.  I loved watching him break the norms, and make people uncomfortable, to make them think about why they felt this way.  He would walk quietly to the stage, and this big booking voice would get your attention.  He put feeling into his speech, and he challenged traditional ideas, kept you rapt to everything he said, made us laugh and cry, and made sure we understood why we did things.  Mark also wrote a book called “Your God is too safe”.  I still have my autographed copy of the book as well as a spare handed down from my mom.  Admittedly, I never read the whole thing, but the title alone caught my attention, and made me want to research more and break the norms to make sure what I thought was right, instead of just safe and familiar.  

               My mother always gave me ideas to make me think. She told me from a young age to make sure I knew what I believed, and to know why, and that she would support me in those choices as long as I could support my argument with logic and faith. She may not have exercised this as much as she would like, making sure I went to church without fail, even when I didn’t want to, and being less than willing to explore alternate churches.  But the idea and the sentiment were there, and they stuck with me throughout my life.

               On my own as an adult, I spent a lot of time talking to people of different faiths, and asking questions about how, why, what for, history of, and more.  I learned a lot about different denominations and faiths, alternate religions, alternate deities, wicca and witchcraft, natural beliefs and more.  Some were fascinating ideas, some were fantasy style stories that kept the attention but not the faith, and some made me incredibly uncomfortable to the point I avoided them in further research.  But nothing fit. So, I stuck to what was safe and familiar, not knowing how or why to believe anything else.  

               In all my research over the years, some ideas stuck and made it into my daily practice, because they meshed with what I read in my bible, and my interpretation of Jesus love and teachings, even if I didn’t see them in practice elsewhere.  Because I spent so much time talking to people of different backgrounds, I had a lot of friends who didn’t believe in the same things I did. My biggest takeaway from all of this was acceptance.  They didn’t believe in my god, or read my bible, but they answered my questions, and taught me, without judging even if I didn’t accept what they taught.  We debated respectfully back and forth and taught each other whatever we could.  Nobody was judged, or ostracised, or ridiculed for those beliefs.  We made for a pretty hodgepodge group.  

I had Jehovas Witnesses try to convert me.  I had coffee and visited with Mormons.  I head my cards and stars and palms read by Wiccans.  I attended Buddhist weddings in a haunted church at the stroke of midnight on Halloween.  I went to church with United, nondenominational, Anglican and more services.  I saw people speak in tongues, and believe they were performing healing prayers.  I even attended a country revival by a river and marched in an anti abortion silent protest.  I spent countless hours debating, and researching to reinforce my debates when I got stuck, and learning different viewpoints.  

               But I accepted everyone regardless of background. I asked questions that may have been ignorant from simply not knowing. I interrupted classes and speeches and took notes.  I stayed open to new ideas, and only asked from others what I would be willing to do myself, such as attending each others services to learn from a different viewpoint. The biggest lesson I ever learned in life was that nobody was lesser because they believed something different, or practiced on a different day, or used a different word for God.  I wasn’t better than them, or right or wrong.  I condemned no one that I could learn from, and hoped that I could teach them some of the same.

               I learned many things I don’t want to be a part of. I learned how I didn’t want to be treated or spoken to.  I learned what people could blame on their religion, and how awful you could be made to feel in the name of the Holy.  I saw some awful bigotry and hate, both in and out of churches. I made decisions that would shape who I have become.  I also learned that no matter who they prayed to or when, or how, the crazy truth of it is:  Almost everybody preached the same thing with a few small differences, while they condemned everyone else who disagreed.

               I even saw this within my own family.  For example, one of my nephews has recently chosen to express himself as transgender.  So he becomes She.  My sister, his mother, chose to support this in the best possible way.  I asked questions like “What name do I use and when” and tried to express the parts I didn’t understand, and learn the rest.  I let this child teach me whats he needed and I have tried to support her as best as possible.  My children followed my example and made me proud.  Come Christmas a couple years later, and our religious mother is visiting from the west, and expressing her opinions.  She wanted to take my sisters child to a counsellor to get fixed, behind my sisters back, and hoped that I would help.  I said no unconditionally. I found out that my older sister had heard our mother venting about this issues, and ripped into her with her opinion that Mom should stay the hell out of it.  I do love that our family is at a stage in life where we can be blunt and rational as we discussed this, since a couple days before Christmas we were throwing around religious and opinion thoughts on the subject.  I got to look at my mother and say “to be honest, your opinion doesn’t fucking matter, since it’s not your child to raise”. My mom looked shocked and started to be offended, but then realised it was not calling her out or insulting her, and that it was correct.  Then I also got to point out to her that at the very least, she should be proud that she raised three children as a single mother, who could all grow into such loving and accepting people that none of us judged or condemned anyone regardless of their way of life or choices.  This is again a very abridged version of this whole conversation, but you get the general idea.  

               One of the biggest wakeup moments that came in my life regarding religion and peoples attitudes towards it came from a church I attended for a while.  After over a year of getting to know people and following their teachings, it came that I would be moving to another city.  I mentioned to a few nice older folks what city I would be going to, and received a few recommendations on a church to look out for.  One particular gentleman, who always went out of his way to speak to myself and my children, and who I believe was an Elder at the church to be respected, gave me this recommendation.  I paraphrase: “You should check out Church A.  They have this and this and would love a new family with plenty of kids. And you wouldn’t have to worry about any of those fags and weird shit.”

               I knew right then that I would never check out his recommendation, and that I would never return to this church.  I have spent time since then really listening extra close to sermons and messages put out by other churches and church leaders, and looking for the nuances and lessons they teach to their youth.  Everything is put forth as support “You can make your choices within your faith”, Pro life, we will support you when you choose Gods way, and so very many more.  Look up newsletters and ads from your local churches and you will see all of these and more in many different wordings.

               Look a layer deeper.  Listen to what these messages say.  “we will support you in gods path, but believe different and you are alone”. “you are evil for choosing different”.  You will go to hell for eternity. Our way is the only way and everybody else is wrong.  Its very thinly veiled, but every church I’ve been to is secretly teaching me to hate those that are different and hoping that I don’t notice.  

               Hate gay people because they don’t follow the bible. Hate abortionists for not supporting this fetus regardless of health or history or any other option.  Our way is the ONLY way.  You cannot be different.  You cannot think your own way.  We can’t prove it except through vague scripture and ask for blind faith because we said so.  You are evil if you disagree.  Don’t look different or act different.  Judge others and condemn them for having an opinion. See a theme here? You can see this in all those local church and religious flyers too.  Just go have a look, I’ll wait here.

                 Here’s what I learned in Sunday school as I see it. Choose to follow and consider my opinion, or don’t.  Your call!

               -The Old testament is a history lesson.  Here is what God wants you to do and why.  Here is what is good and bad, and here is the struggle we went through to get here.  Exactly the same as our kids learning about war and holocaust and local history in school.  Learn the lessons because people already went through them and get the theory behind the fact.

               -The New testament changed everything.  We no longer had to sacrifice because Jesus did it for us. Unclean foods didn’t matter because we were purified in faith. Sinful acts could be forgiven if we asked for it.  Love everybody as you wish to be loved.  Look at the Good Samaritan, he helped a neighbour he should have hated because that’s what he was taught, but he chose to be a good person anyways, regardless of who was on the receiving end.  Jesus spent time with beggars, and the terminally sick, prostitutes, and men who had no other ambition in life.  He loved them all the same and he gave them the same message, regardless of their background, or choices, or personal opinions.  He didn’t ever treat one person as lesser than the next.

               The church teaches us to HATE sinfulness in their interpretation, and to shun those who are different or to try and change them to our own way of thinking.  I don’t care what church you go to, it will teach the same.  Look at these similarities between religions..  Catholicism, Christians of various denominations, jewish, jehovas witness, Mormon, 7th day Adventists, Islamic, Buddhist, even Native cultures.  On a base level, the stories handed down through history are very similar, slightly changed through translation and retelling over time.  The morals of the stories are the same.  Every different denomination of Christianity has the same base teachings and the same roots.  They simply split off because one group within that religion disagreed on a base idea, split off, and taught in their own way.  Now 2 thousand years later, we have Baptists and Pentecostals and Lutherans and Anglicans, and more, all telling us that everybody else is wrong.

               So who’s right?   Only each of us can decide that for ourselves.  Look at all the common base lessons and live your life to the best of your ability.  Follow Jesus teachings, whether you believe he was a man or a prophet, or the son of god, and love your neighbour unconditionally.  Decide where you stand on all the slight differences of opinion. It’s all on your and your choice. But stop spreading hate!

               Hate destroys everything that religions of all sorts teach.  Hate turns religious peoples into conquerers, terrorists, feuding families, and multiple warring factions.  Hate causes pain to those on the receiving end, and stress to those on the giving end. There is no possible positive side to hate.  

               I chose to avoid churches in general for the last few years because I could not handle listening to the hate, and finding the worst possible bigots and liars within the walls of the churches, pretending to be good people on Sunday mornings so other people would look up to them.  One day a week does not get you into the kingdom of heaven.  A band I listened to said it the best way possible when I was a teenager, but even though I always remembered it, I never understood it.  “The greatest single cause of Atheism today are those that praise Him with their words, then walk out the door and deny Him by their lifestyle.”  - DC Talk -What if I stumble

               Stop living hate when you preach love. Practice the words that come out of your mouth, and truly love your neighbour.  His religion, color of skin, gender identity, or relationship status should have no bearing on what kind of person they are.  You don’t have to LIKE everyone, or spend time with people you don’t mesh with, but you have no right to judge those that have never done a thing to harm you.  

               Hate the lies of the church teachings, hate the bigotry, Love the man or woman you see in front of you.  We are all fighting for the same thing: to wake up each morning, and enjoy our lives in the best way we know how. Hate in any form robs us from this enjoyment of life.  You don’t have to believe in God or the Bible to live a good life and be good to others. You only have to have faith in humanity, and making this a good place for everyone to enjoy.  Be excellent to each other.

               Hate is Baggage.  Life is too short to be pissed off all the time. Its just not worth it. – American History X.