#informal review

[lemonlilypufftangerine]

I have bought Apollo Justice Ace Attorney Trilogy and i just know I'm going to spend 100+ hours in the Orchestra Hall.

Comparing Great Ace Attorney Chronicles to AJ trilogy solely as collections of games, I'm conflicted. AJ has literally more content but different as well.

None of the art or music has commentary to read like TGAAC but the presentation i feel is so much more. Maybe it's the RE engine, idk. I wonder what engine the other games were on?

So bc I'm a big ol nerd, i technically prefer Chronicles because i LOVE further insight into games. But AJ is still an outstanding collection with extra content for all the games. If only any of these collections actually came with ALL previously released DLC (Sengoku Basara costumes and asinine ace attorney cases).

[schmergo]

Time for one of my long, rambling informal reviews! This one is for RAGTIME at Signature Theatre and unlike some of the other reviews I've written, this show is still running for 3 more weeks, but tickets are selling EXTREMELY fast, so I'd recommend you snap some up if you haven't already! I will add that Signature's discounted 'partial view' seats are extremely good value and actually not a bad view at all, so don't sleep on those.

TLDR: This show is absolutely amazing and totally does the material of one of my favorite musicals justice in an intimate, innovative staging.

Ragtime is one of those musicals with a name that belies the complexity and darkness of the subject matter (along with Parade and Carousel), and yet there's no other simple name that could tie together such a dense and varied piece of musical theatre. If you're not familiar with it, this musical set in the early 20th century follows three different groups in New York: a white suburban upper class family, a family of new Jewish immigrants, and a star-crossed young family in the emerging Black middle class of Harlem-- plus a half dozen real historical figures of the period. Their paths intersect and intertwine in many unexpected ways, changing all of their lives forever. Expect some very intense themes like racism, sexism, gun violence, and exploitation of the working class, but also moments of surprising levity and loveliness.

It's one of my favorite musicals of all time, but it's also so complex and such an example of the '80's-'90's megamusical' that it's expensive and tricky to stage. So you might not think of the intimate blackbox venue of Shirlington's Signature Theatre as a prime candidate for this piece. But I can report that director Matthew Gardiner and the whole cast and crew knocked this piece out of the park (teehee, yes, this musical has a song about a baseball game). It was a spellbinding night of theatre and there wasn't a dry eye in the house at the end of the show.

I've seen some other shows at Signature-- including Sweeney Todd earlier this season-- where the goal of 'get creative with the intimate space' actually distracted from the material, but the biggest sign that this staging worked was that I barely noticed it at all or thought 'ooh, what a creative idea'. It just... worked. Fitting 33 performers and a 16-piece orchestra onto a small stage, plus massive set pieces like a WORKING REPLICA MODEL T FORD (absolutely show-stopping when it drove out) without feeling cramped or sacrificing audience sightlines shouldn't have been possible, but it all flowed seamlessly. Actors hung around on the sidelines when not part of the action, observing and serving as a backing chorus. This was the first Signature show I've seen with a turntable stage and it helped the show glide from scene to scene without being overused or feeling gimmicky. The use of the aisle space, staircases, and sharing the upper balcony with the fully visible orchestra also served the piece well.

The arched industrial-chic design of the set feels gritty and elegant at the same time, easily standing in for a factory, seaside pier, tenement, ocean liner, or train station, with gorgeous lighting design by Tyler Micoleau adding to the seamless transitions between scenes. Sumptuous costumes by Erik Teague set the tone from the moment the show started. (Mother's dreamy outfits give her an extra shimmer while also giving the impression of extreme restraint; there are outfits for a person whose job is to be decorative rather than effective.) My only true complaint was the sound balance: at times, the orchestra and the backing vocals drowned out soloists. I'm sure it can be difficult to fine-tune this when you have a fairly large band in a small space where natural acoustics battle with amplification.

The theatre is so intimate that you can see the subtlest expressions in the characters' eyes and that makes Signature stand out among other local theatres as a place where musical theatre truly feels led by actors and not just spectacle. In a mega musical like Ragtime, that human element is desperately needed, and it's why this production and the one Ford's Theatre presented several years ago stand out to me as the best I've seen rather than the Kennedy Center production that transferred to Broadway.

Almost every single member of this cast was a standout, even the hardworking ensemble members. This is where I simply have to ramble on about everyone and how beautifully they acted and sounded. My personal favorite performer of the night, in a show more crowded with stars than a planetarium, was Awa Sal Secka as the desperate young mother Sarah. The challenging score sounded like it was written for her, which is saying something because her role was originated by Audra McDonald. Her powerful but sweet voice pours effortlessly from her mouth as though raw feelings have been distilled into pure music. Sal Secka’s simple, earnest characterization of the young woman is utterly heartbreaking. I won't spoil her character's trajectory, but expect to feel every possible emotion in the spectrum. She's incredible.

As her love interest and the show’s anti-hero, Coalhouse Walker Jr., Nkrumah Gatling is perfectly cast. I’ve rarely seen someone in a stage musical act so effectively with just his eyes, flitting from mischievously charming to stone cold in mere seconds. There’s an edge to his rich baritone that might remind you of Brian Stokes Mitchell, who originated the part, but he puts his own spin on the music and gives it a new texture. I’d have loved to have seen Gatling’s take on Sweeney Todd earlier this season. Still, I didn’t get the ‘main character energy’ from this character that I typically have in past productions. Rather than feeling like the show’s central figure, he blended into the rest of the cast—which may say more about how wonderful his co-stars were than any fault of his.

Teal Wicks did exude star quality as Mother, a disaffected housewife who awakes to the world’s injustices and starts to see her life through new eyes. She conveyed every turning point in her character’s life with clarity. Her mellifluous, creamy voice soars on big ballad numbers and her relationships with the show’s many characters feel fully realized. One of the only things I knew about her before seeing this show was that she had played Elphaba on Broadway in Wicked. But here she uses more of a classical-sounding mix voice that fits right into this antique setting.

Matthew Scott plays her stuffy husband, Father, as more sympathetic than I’ve seen before. He seems younger than most actors who’ve played this role (he and Wicks are both in their early 40’s, while I’ve often seen Father cast as significantly older than Mother), and as we see him try to fulfill his role as ‘patriarch,’ we can tell he’s insecure and uncomfortable there.

We had an understudy for the other major role, Tateh, a Jewish immigrant with big dreams and artistic gifts who wants above all else to give his daughter a better life. I was disappointed to see this because Bobby Smith, who usually plays the role, is one of my favorite local actors, but his understudy Edward L. Simon did an absolutely charming job. He imbues Tateh with an impish lightness at times that only make the dark moments more heartbreaking and nimbly navigates musical numbers with a lovely voice. Like many understudies, you could tell he was giving 110% at all times and his energy sparkled. Still, there were a few dramatic moments that I’d have loved to have seen given more power and the orchestra drowned him out more than any other character. I’m guessing that sound levels may have been calibrated to a performer with a bigger voice.

Simon is also by far the youngest-seeming Tateh I’ve seen. This works, adding to the earnest naivety his character shows when he first arrives in America, but I’d be so curious to see how the dynamic works with the usual actor, Bobby Smith, who seems to be about 30 years older than Simon. I’m so tempted to go see the show again with Smith and compare the two performances, but rest assured that if Simon is the understudy at your performance, the role is in deftly capable hands.

I loved Jake Loewenthal as Mother’s Younger Brother, an awkward young man in search for meaning in life. I previously enjoyed him as the Baker in Signature’s Into the Woods but thought, “This guy was born to play the Baker, but I can’t picture him in any other roles. He’s just TOO specific and TOO good as the Baker to play anyone else well.” I was wrong. He’s perfect here, filled with a tightly coiled intensity that is, in his character’s own words, ‘like a firework, unexploded.’ There’s a quirky piercing nasality to his voice, but it shines out in Younger Brother’s effusive self-discovery. Among other family members, Declan Fennell is adorable and NOT annoying as the family’s weird (and slightly psychic) little son Edgar and Lawrence Redmond is a hoot as the drily snarky Grandfather.

Among the smaller roles, standouts include Dani Stoller’s impassioned firebrand Emma Goldman, Jordyn Taylor as show-stopping soloist “Sarah’s Friend,” and Tobias Young’s Booker T. Washington, more memorable than I’ve ever seen this character portrayed. But more than any of these, Maria Rizzo stole her scenes as vaudeville sensation Evelyn Nesbit. She seemed to be having an absolute blast up there and gave the character both more depth (hints of trauma!) and risqué sultriness than I’ve seen before. If sometimes she verged into showboating, I couldn’t possibly complain. She was just too much fun to watch.

This is a score full of HARD-HITTING ballads and intense big production numbers, with almost every number including dramatic swells of the orchestra and singing to the rafters. Every time you think you've seen the showstopping number of the night, another one comes along to blow you away. Some of the standout songs in this piece include Sal Secka's haunting lament "Your Daddy's Son," Wicks' journey of self-discovery in "Back to Before," Gatling's anthem "Make Them Hear You" and the adrenaline-pumping duet "Wheels of a Dream," but you will find that some of the smaller numbers between them will also send chills down your spine and bring tears to your eyes. One of my personal favorites was the sweet duet "Our Children," which sees the spark of a potential relationship forming as two parents watch their children play together.

What does this show say about America? Basically everything up to and including the kitchen sink. Is it a land where people can triumph against adversity and succeed? Yes! Is it is a place where dreams are broken and crushed by reality? That, too! Is it a place where understanding can win out over hate and people find they’re more alike than different? Yes! But is it a place where hatred and bigotry can tear lives and families apart in the blink of an eye? Yes! Is there a hope of a brighter future for the country? Yes! But do we see the struggles of present day reflected in these characters from over a century ago? A resounding yes. Every audience member will come away with different moments resonating in their minds, but the rich tapestry of humanity in all its strengths and flaws showcased in this production is a marvel to behold.

I’m attaching a few clips from the show in the comments so you can see some of what it was like for yourself! Please consider seeing this show if you can. It’s the most powerfully affecting piece of musical theatre I’ve seen in the DC area since before the pandemic and will no doubt stick with you long after the cast takes its last bow.

[akwaak1]

My Sonic Frontiers Experience (Spoilers?):

I’ve never played a Sonic game but I love the characters!

This is really fun!

That hit the feels but I’m not gonna cry because of a sonic game

Is fishing really gonna be my favourite part?

That boss was hard

Alright this is a little formulaic but I like it

I’m not crying because of you Sonic stop it

I’m getting really good at this, Sonic is a beast!

Fishing really is my favourite part

Oh wow that boss was so much easier was parrying really the answer

Even though the gameplay stays the same the changing scenery is nice

Don’t cry, don’t cry, the Blue Bastard doesn’t deserve my tears

Ok so am I just an obsessive collector or does the pacing feel off

Finally there’s the fishing spot!

Woah a change in the formula this is neat

That was the most rage inducing experience, camera and climbing controls must be purged!

Alright the story and the game play seem disconnected “oh no we need to hurry” but first I must explore, beat all levels and collect every trinket on this entire island

Ok why was the first boss so much harder than the final, like yeah they were menacing but holy crap did you see the first guy he literally clapped me

I saw that sacrifice comings mile away but… ah I’m on the verge of tears

Welp he did it. The blue bastard did it. I’m crying at a Sonic game.

Sure it played like a 7/10 but the experience is truly a 9/10 (climbing controls hold it back, the mere thought brings me flashbacks and terror)

[sizzlingsandwichperfection-blog]

The duality of goodreads.

[3gremlins]

i've been too stressed out to play ffxiv atm (idk my brain is weird) so i started playing ac: valhalla and have just been viking about with it. i like how the whole plot is unapologetically "lets go terrorize and colonize the english" (which is historically true but still hilarious, idk it's unexpected in a more modern game i guess? ). only slightly ashamed to admit i *am* enjoying burning monasteries in the raid mechanic lol like i'm a monster when i play video games, esp if the combat and crafting systems are fun/reward you for it (i got a flail weapon and was surprised at how much i like it, tho i am mainly a stealth archer, the final endpoint of any rpg type character regardless of how you start out) Also they're using the historically appropriate terms for the land areas which unfortunately has been ruined forever by Monty Python & the holy grail (which also does) so everytime someone mentions "mercia" my brain goes "IN MERCIA!? THE COCONUT'S TROPICAL!" anyway it's pretty fun? but not quite as fun/polished feeling as odyssey. I haven't had the opportunity to romance anyone yet so we'll see (i really liked that you could romance LOTS of people in odyssey and they all had mini sorts of questlines) but apparently this game is sort of enormous so maybe it's further on (i spent a lot of gametime in norway which was just the prologue so i'm not very far into the actual plot) Oh! also i love the flyting! it's essentially the insult sword fighting from Monkey Island (but w/o the sword fighting) and I realize it's a real thing but also it feels influenced by those games a bit too. But anyway, i met that npc and was like OHO I know this game! so that was exciting it's kinda low stakes/fun to grind and be a buff viking man, it makes me feel slightly less anxious for a few hours anyway

[i-am-l-ananas]

Reading papers and stumbled upon a

[probablyasocialecologist]

More than 40 leading scientists have resigned en masse from the editorial board of a top science journal in protest at what they describe as the “greed” of publishing giant Elsevier.

The entire academic board of the journal Neuroimage, including professors from Oxford University, King’s College London and Cardiff University resigned after Elsevier refused to reduce publication charges.

Academics around the world have applauded what many hope is the start of a rebellion against the huge profit margins in academic publishing, which outstrip those made by Apple, Google and Amazon.

Neuroimage, the leading publication globally for brain-imaging research, is one of many journals that are now “open access” rather than sitting behind a subscription paywall. But its charges to authors reflect its prestige, and academics now pay over £2,700 for a research paper to be published. The former editors say this is “unethical” and bears no relation to the costs involved.

Professor Chris Chambers, head of brain stimulation at Cardiff University and one of the resigning team, said: “Elsevier preys on the academic community, claiming huge profits while adding little value to science.”

He has urged fellow scientists to turn their backs on the Elsevier journal and submit papers to a nonprofit open-access journal which the team is setting up instead.

He told the Observer: “All Elsevier cares about is money and this will cost them a lot of money. They just got too greedy. The academic community can withdraw our consent to be exploited at any time. That time is now.”

Elsevier, a Dutch company that claims to publish 25% of the world’s scientific papers, reported a 10% increase in its revenue to £2.9bn last year. But it’s the profit margins, nearing 40%, according to its 2019 accounts, which anger academics most. The big scientific publishers keep costs low because academics write up their research – typically funded by charities and the public purse – for free. They “peer review” each other’s work to verify it is worth publishing for free, and academic editors collate it for free or for a small stipend. Academics are then often charged thousands of pounds to have their work published in open-access journals, or universities will pay very high subscription charges.

[the-magpie-archives]

I wish real life academia was more like The Magnus Archives because I'd much rather face otherworldly evils than have my research blocked by INFINITE PAYWALLS. Jonathan Sims might've suffered immensely and nearly ended the world but at least he didn't have to cite inaccessible sources.

[techtimechronicles24]

🇯🇵 Unveiling the Toshiba T1100: A Journey into the Dawn of Portable Computing!

💻 In the early 1980s, a revolutionary device emerged, transforming the landscape of personal computing forever. The Toshiba T1100, released in 1985, marked a significant milestone in the history of portable computers. The Toshiba T1100 has subsequently been described by Toshiba as "the world's first mass-market laptop computer".

🌐 The Toshiba T1100 was among the first truly portable computers, designed for professionals and enthusiasts seeking computing power on the go. Weighing approximately 4.1 kilograms (9 pounds) with its lead-acid battery, this innovative machine provided users with unprecedented mobility.

⚙️ Equipped with an Intel 80C88 processor running at 4.77 MHz and boasting 256 KB of RAM, the Toshiba T1100 offered impressive computing capabilities for its time. Its 9.6-inch monochrome LCD screen provided a crisp display, while the detachable keyboard enhanced usability.

💾 The T1100 introduced several innovative features, including a built-in 3.5-inch floppy disk drive—a rarity at the time—which allowed for data storage and transfer with ease. This model also featured MS-DOS as its operating system, providing a familiar computing environment.

📈 The Toshiba T1100 set a new standard for portable computing, demonstrating the feasibility and practicality of laptops for business and personal use. Its success paved the way for subsequent generations of laptops, influencing the evolution of mobile computing worldwide.

👨‍💻 For professionals in various industries, the Toshiba T1100 represented a game-changer, enabling efficient data management, word processing, and spreadsheet tasks on the move. Its portability and functionality empowered users to work beyond traditional office environments.

🌟 Today, the legacy of the Toshiba T1100 lives on in the sleek, lightweight laptops and notebooks that have become indispensable tools for modern professionals and digital nomads. This groundbreaking device remains a testament to Toshiba's commitment to innovation and excellence in the field of computing. The Toshiba T1100 remains an iconic symbol of the dawn of portable computing—a chapter in the ongoing story of technological progress that continues to shape our digital world.

[sleepyyghostt]

got curious abt disco elysium so i was checking the reviews on steam and-

[leonardcohenofficial]

me when sitting down to write the dissertation so i can receive the degree that i have been working towards for almost six full years actually requires time and effort

[deepseametro]

my hottest take of all time is that nobodys ever been able to convince me that the mockery of oh joy sex toy was motivated by anything other than "haha eww weird sex stuff!!!!"

[riverbeatsaber]

Hello all! Here's a Stormlight Archive observation I'd like to share. Shallan's coping mechanisms are not:

❌ Veil

❌ Radiant

Veil, Radiant, and headmates in general are actually people! How would you feel if someone called you a coping mechanism or an unhealthy coping mechanism, or implied or outright said that you were not real? Yes, Veil and Radiant are characters, but there are also systems who exist in real life and can hear how you talk about them.*

To be fair, I know that for the first two books, Brandon Sanderson himself was not writing Radiant and Veil as their own people, and there is an argument to be made that he never fully pivoted away from that, but I believe/hope that we as a fandom can do better than him.

In addition, what Shallan's coping mechanisms are, from my observation:

Drawing, to distract herself from things that are stressing her out.

Being a scholar, especially in the earlier books.

Dissociation, which, interestingly, in the flashback chapters seems to be fully blanking out for a while, and in current time is written more as active repression (maybe so that Shallan can just decide not to repress her memories and achieve Character Development more easily? Not sure.)

This is kinda a sneak peak of a giant character analysis of Shallan that I've been doing for a while. I got stuck writing down quotes in Oathbringer, but I've been picking it up again recently. I hope to be posting more thoughts from that in the future:]

*I am the host of one of those systems who see y'all posting. just to make it clear

[keelanrosa]

started reading the cass review because i'm apparently just Like That and i want everybody crowing about how this proves sooooo much about how terfs are right and trans people are wrong to like. take a scientific literacy class or something. or even just read the occasional study besides the one you're currently trying to prove a point with. not even necessarily pro-trans studies just learn how to know what studies actually found as opposed to what people trying to spoonfeed you an agenda claim they found.

to use just one infuriating example:

Several studies from that period (Green et al., 1987; Zucker, 1985) suggested that in a minority (approximately 15%) of pre-pubertal children presenting with gender incongruence, this persisted into adulthood. The majority of these children became same-sex attracted, cisgender adults. These early studies were criticised on the basis that not all the children had a formal diagnosis of gender incongruence or gender dysphoria, but a review of the literature (Ristori & Steensma, 2016) noted that later studies (Drummond et al., 2008; Steensma & Cohen-Kettenis, 2015; Wallien et al., 2008) also found persistence rates of 10-33% in cohorts who had met formal diagnostic criteria at initial assessment, and had longer follow-up periods.

if you recognize the names Zucker and Steensma you are probably already going feral but tldr:

There are… many problems with Zucker's studies, "not all children had a formal diagnosis" is so far down the list this is literally the first i've heard of it. The closest i usually hear is the old DSM criteria for gender identity disorder was totally different from the current DSM criteria for gender dysphoria and/or how most people currently define "transgender"; notably it did not require the patient to identify as a different gender and overall better fits what we currently call "gender-non-comforming". Whether the kids had a formal diagnosis of "maybe trans, maybe just has different hobbies than expected, but either way their parents want them back in their neat little societal boxes" is absolutely not the main issue. This would be a problem even if Zucker was pro-trans (spoiler: He Is Not, and people who are immediately suspicious of pro-trans studies because "they're probably funded by big pharma or someone else who profits from transitioning" should apply at least a little of that suspicion to the guy who made a living running a conversion clinic); sometimes "formal" criteria change as we learn more about what's common, what's uncommon, what's uncommon but irrelevant, etc, and when the criteria changes drastically enough it doesn't make sense to pretend the old studies perfectly apply to the new criteria. If you found a study defining "sex" specifically and exclusively as penetration with a dick which says gay men have as much sex as straight men but lesbians don't, it's not necessarily wrong as far as it goes but if THAT'S your prime citation for "gay men have more sex than lesbians", especially if you keep trying to apply it in contexts which obviously use a broader definition, there are gonna be a lot of people disagreeing with you and it won't be because they're stubbornly unscientific.

Also Zucker is pro conversion therapy. Yes, pro converting trans people to cis people, but also pro converting gay people to straight people. That doesn't necessarily affect his results, i just find it funny how many people enthusiastically support his findings as evidence transitioning is… basically anti-gay conversion therapy? (even though plenty of trans people transition to gay? including T4T people so even the "that's actually just how straight people try to get with gay people" rationale for gay trans people is incredibly weak? and also HRT has a relatively low but non-zero chance of changing sexual orientation so it wouldn't even be reliable as a means of "becoming straight"? but a guy who couldn't reliably tell the difference between a tomboy and a trans boy figured out the former is more common than the latter + in one whole country where being trans is legal but being gay is not, sometimes cis gay people transition, so OBVIOUSLY that means sexism and homophobia are the driving factors even in countries with significant transphobia. or something.) anyway i hope zucker knows and hates how many gay people and allies are using his own study to trash-talk any attempts to be Less Gay. ideally nobody would take his nonsense seriously at all but it doesn't seem we'll be spared from that any time soon so i will take my schadenfreude where i can.

Steensma's studies have the exact same problem re: irrelevant criteria so "well someone ELSE had the same results!" is not exactly convincing. This is not "oh trans people are refusing to pay attention to these studies because they disagree with them regardless of scientific rigor", it's "one biased guy using outdated criteria found exactly the numbers everyone would expect based on that criteria, i can't imagine why trans people are treating those numbers as relevant to the past criteria but not present definitions, let's find a SECOND guy using outdated criteria. Why do people keep saying the outdated criteria is not relevant to the current state of trans healthcare. Don't we all know it's quantity over quality with scientific studies. (Please don't ask what the quantity of studies disagreeing with me is.)"

Steensma also counted patients as 'not persisting as transgender' if they ghosted him on follow-up which counted for a third of his study's "detransitioners" and a fifth of the total subjects and. look. i'm not saying none of them detransitioned, or assuming they all didn't would be notably more accurate, but i think we can safely treat twenty percent of subjects as a bit high for making a default assumption, especially when some of them might have simply not been interested in a study on whether or not they still know who they are. Fuck knows i've seen pro-trans studies which didn't make assumptions about the people who didn't respond still get prodded by anti-trans people insisting "the number of people claiming they don't regret transitioning can't possibly be so high, some of the people who responded must have been lying. (Scientific rigor means thinking studies which disagree with me are wrong even if the only explanation is the subjects lying and studies which agree with me are right even if we need to make assumptions about a lot of subjects to get there.)"

and this is not new information. not the issues with zucker, not the issues with steensma, not any of the issues because this is not a new study, it's a review of older studies, which in itself doesn't mean "bad" or "useless" -- sometimes that allows connecting some previously-unconnected dots -- but the idea this is going to absolutely blow apart the Woke Media, vindicate Rowling and Lineham, and "save" ""gay"" children from """being forcibly transed""" is bullshit. At most it'll get dragged around and eagerly cited by all the people looking for anything vaguely scientific-sounding to justify their beliefs, and maybe even people who only read headlines and sound bites will buy it, but the people who really believe it will be people who already agreed with all its "findings" and have already been dragging around the existing studies and are just excited to have a shiny new citation for it.

the response from people who've been really reading research on transgender people all along is going to be more along the lines of "……yeah. yeah, i already knew about that. do you need a three-page essay on why i don't think it means what you think it means? because i don't have time for that homework right now but maybe i can pencil it in for next semester if you haven't learned how to check your own sources by then."

[arson-09]

its very interesting to me how Tamlin is the character and High Lord that is heavily vilified (I would almost say even more than Beron strangely) when he is the only High Lord to have talked about d how he has gone about removing slavery within his court, protecting lower fae in general, and his court was open to immigration from other courts (i cant remember if its mentioned again in acomaf but in acotar fae from other courts are free to move to the spring court. example, Alis) and how overall he is a great leader. Especially when you compare him and Rhysand as High Lords.

The Court of Nightmares is well, a nightmare. Its existence is extremely strange and makes Rhysand look very odd. as well as its unclear how Rhysand gets his wealth. Velaris was a hidden city until acomaf-ish, which means it was locked (so no immigration or emigration which isn't bad per-say but does bring up how it works economically) and Rhysands inability or unwillingness to protect his citizens (not enforcing the wing clipping ban and allowing people to be abused in the CoN. and before anyone starts about him not being able to control the illyrians, why did he make it a law in the first place? It just makes him look bad) makes him look like a shitty ruler. His supposed "feminism" and friendship with the people of velaris doesnt answer these very important questions or justify the strange shit he does. Versus Tamlin, which you can refer to my opening statement for the comparison. Also to note, his rule only came into question and stability after Feyre broke into people minds (which I do feel is extremely gross and a huge violation of ones autonomy and privacy) and had to sabotage him. I won't comment how I feel about this in this post, but it says a lot that she had to go through such lengths to break him down. Especially after it was revealed he was in fact a double agent and never actually siding with Hybern.

The only time Tamlin is an arguably bad high lord is in acofas and acosf where he is in a severe mental crisis and not in a position to properly rule. But even then, it's not clear if this is actually causing harm to the land and people. It's probably not good because they don't have a proper leader but I can't believe it's a severe issue.

Its definitely a strange choice, isn't it? Cause I think anyone in their right mind would choose the anti-tyranny, anti-slavery leader who does his best for his people... and its somehow not our supposed 'hero'

"I once told you I would fight against tyranny, against that sort of evil. Did you think you were enough to turn me from that?"

Acowar, chapter 44

[forlix]

now that the global strike has started, here’s your reminder that not having the fiscal availability to do so is NOT a valid reason NOT to support palestine.

boycotting is FREE. retweeting, reblogging, or boosting well-informed news to your friends and family is FREE. arab.org has been donating a portion of its adsense to the united nations relief and works agency for palestine refugees in the near east (UNRWA) for the past seven years and requires nothing, no identity verification, no captchas, none of your money whatsoever, and NO MORE THAN TWO CLICKS.

doing nothing makes you complicit in the ongoing genocide. oblivion is a privilege and neutrality is a vice. wake up