There’s something I find quite curious about the Captive Prince trilogy.
The lack, or paucity, of any references to religion. Or mythology or folklore. I find that a really interesting creative choice, because I think most readers feel the shapes of the fairytales and myths and beliefs that lie, like bones or the foundation of a building, under the surface of the story.
So let's discuss.
Firstly, belief systems. We know Akielos, much like the Ancient Greece it’s modelled on, has philosophers, even if we never hear about them in any detail.
We know there are Veretian and Akielon rituals regarding death. Aleron and Auguste are entombed, and so is Damen's faked body with Theomedes.
Akielon rituals are told to us in more detail via Nikandros:
There is an Ancient Greek death ritual called the ekphora, a “ritual procession of the deceased’s body from where it had been laid out to the place of burial”. The prefix ek meant ‘out’ and phora ‘to carry’ so it literally denotes the carrying out of the body to be buried. I couldn't find 'ekthanos' as a real extant word, but with the same logic ekthanos means out + thanos- a word that can mean immortal or death depending on how you might interpret the etymology of it.
It sounds like Nikandros completed a mourning ritual and lit something (a votive lamp?) symbolically (perhaps it symbolises the leaving of the spirit, as that which removes or leads out the immortal soul from the body, hence ekthanos?). I would assume it was a funeral pyre if it weren't for the fact that Damen's body was interred (could it have been ashes that were interred? That would be safer if you're going to fake someone's death, but that's honestly me very much extrapolating from nothing. Also damn, Nikandros loves Damen. My heart honestly feels so warm about him. If that happened, and he stepped up to light the pyre when Kastor didn't, than he really is his real brother).
But for all this, there is no sense of an afterlife nor praying to deities.
More after the jump:
Edit: Unless you count Jokaste’s note to Damen, which seems to point to Greek ideas of metempsychosis/reincarnation.
Regardless of that though there are no powerful institutions, no churches or temples, no religious figures to appease.
At first I thought there were no mentions of gods at all.
But there is.
Firstly in the very first description of Laurent in the baths:
And secondly, in the Akielon epic Erasmus sings:
There’s also an unusual mention of Nereus who has a collection of statues in his garden. At first, because Nereus was a Greek god and because it felt faintly familiar, I took it for a classical allusion then swiftly realised on googling that it wasn’t. Or at least I don’t think so? Someone enlighten me, and I'll edit if I'm wrong.
So I think we can safely assume Akielos once had gods, but the religion died out perhaps (thought not due to the rise of Christianity). And their pantheon may have been pretty much been the Greek one as the influence might linger in names like Nereus, literally a god of the sea (and Damianos from Damia, a minor goddess of fertility, and Nikandros which has a root in Nike, goddess of victory…).
Edit: having now read The Training of Erasmus, Nereus is a slave owner, and his gardens a place for young pre-pubescent slaves to have their initial training. Sigh. Reading that story really is just heartbreaking.
Keeping to the topic I suppose (even with the lingering sense of disgust that ran through me while reading it) did he collect statues that were relics of the times before and keeps them in this garden? You can see statuary fitting into this strange rarified space for the most beautiful youths. It could be some echoing of Roman pleasure gardens which generally had that sort of statuary? Or is it a mirroring of Renaissance Italy where they tried to recreate Roman gardens, taking classical statues from ruins to restore and place in them? Who knows!
Without being explicit, Pacat makes it clear that beautiful Laurent is classical-statue-beautiful. Greek god beautiful. A Ganymede, perhaps or an Adonis. And slave beautiful, too.
And, of course, Damianos has so many parallels to Achilles, from his unparalleled strength and prowess on the battlefield, to his ability to strategise as if Athena is guiding him, to how he can become blinded by rage. The warrior-hero.
Ultimately, I guess what’s interesting is Pacat’s choices. It’s really hard to avoid any religious references in writing, as these allusions are baked in so deep to language. Damen being made a slave is called a “living hell”. Laurent presents an “angelic countenance”. Damen "prays" the training arena is empty so he can escape. Orlant thinks that Akielos sounds like "paradise". Interestingly, all those quotes are from Captive Prince, and it seems as if, as Pacat went along, she steered away more and more from any kind of religious reference.
I mean, I get wanting to steer clear of religion. After polytheistic religions came the monotheistic- and then suddenly we have a whole heap of reasons why homosexuality is a sin. If we cut that off, and there is no spread of Christianity across Europe, it seems we get the bisexual culture of Vere and Akielos and Patras.
[Edit: But also sex as a sin in general does not exist. The policing of heterosexual premarital sex came into being to control reproduction, which in turn helps secure bloodlines in a patriarchal society. And so Pacat very neatly invents another social taboo as a substitute; the fear of bastardry, which means no heterosexual premarital sex EVER, and thus bisexuality becomes the norm (Damen is against this seeing it as potentially leading to situational sexual behaviour which doesn’t feel right to him).]
I also think it may have distracted from Pacat’s pared down yet evocative writing style. And added layers of unnecessary complication as the Veretian version of the Church would be another tricky, powerful and corrupt institution for him to battle and there really is no room for that in the narrative.
And just as a mini musing of a postcript, we know Laurent reads illuminated manuscripts:
We know these surely can't be prayerbooks, so I think we can assume that they are histories and works of poetry and stories.
Stories of courtly love perhaps? Fables, legends and folklore? Old Akielon myths? I would love to know what he read.
There are two French/European stories that do come to mind when I think of Laurent.
Beauty and the Beast, of course, with Laurent-the-beautiful and Damen-the-'giant-animal', and the trope of the kind-hearted lover who thaws the heart of the one who has grown cold and cruel.
And Reynard the fox, the trickster figure, whose "sly amorality" is "sympathetic as it is needed for his survival".
And whose main antagonist is, of course, his uncle.
148 notes
·
View notes
After taking the time to really sit and process the roller coaster of information that was the recent People Make Games video about the drama surrounding Studio ZA/UM, I wanted to make this post to go over some of my thoughts that I had about the video. If you have not watched the video but are curious what people are saying about it or you have and you want to read someone else’s perspective, then I invite you to read through as I babble incoherently.
Overall, I thought it provided an interesting, in-depth look at the timeline of events leading up to Kurvitz, Rostov, and Hindpere’s dismissals while also giving us a proper inside scoop to the interpersonal relationships of both the former and current Studio ZA/UM employees. However, I do think the video has a couple of problems specifically with the way some of the information is presented on top of the fact that it loses focus partway through from the real issue which is the alleged fraud that took place by the investors to acquire the majority share within the company.
A big problem that I had with the video was the way in which Kurvitz behavior and final statement are disproportionately framed in the narrative. Now I am not about to go on a lengthy rant to dismiss everything Robert Kurvitz did to his friends during his time at the studio. In fact, the thing that I really liked about this video was how Chris Bratt, the writer and interviewer, holds no punches when it comes to the accusations of misconduct we heard from current Studio ZA/UM employees against him. Instead, I think it needs to be addressed that Bratt left out background context, whether intentionally or unintentionally I do not want to speculate, that could potentially explain what happened to everyone leading up to the expulsions to make Kurvitz appear far worse than how he might’ve been. I fully believe every word Argo Tuulik, Kaspar Tamsula, and Petteri Sulonen has said about working under Kurvitz and his inner circle so by piecing together all their statements to create a timeline of events the investors start to look far less innocent than how they portray themselves to be in the video.
It’s abundantly clear that Kurvitz was notoriously hard to work with. However, what’s also clear was the tremendous amount of stress everyone was under while also still being in the throes of burnout after working on the game nonstop for months. I think the investors (Kender, Haavel, and Kompus) purposefully set the team up for failure by creating impossible deadlines without informing the writers, approving Kurvitz and his inner circle to take time off while disallowing the others from taking theirs, and attempting to restructure the company in preparation to franchise Disco Elysium against Kurvitz wishes and thus he felt scared enough to push for his role to be de facto creative leader anywhere he could. What seems to be three full years of forcing everyone to crunch, miscommunicating when important deadlines were, setting impossible work standards to meet, and readying themselves to snatch more power within the company may have helped sow the seeds of animosity the writers began growing towards one another.
All of this is nothing new for those of us who have been keeping an eye on the drama from the start. We were told long in advance by the likes of Martin Luiga, who although left the project early on has been friends and worked alongside him for the better part of two decades, that Kurvitz possesses less than stellar leadership skills and that there was no merit in what the investors would end up accusing him of doing to warrant his dismissal. That confirmation was given long before the release of the PMG video and cements the idea in my mind that perhaps Kurvitz erratic behavior that was described by the current Studio ZA/UM employees was not the cause but rather a symptom of a much larger problem happening around him (i.e. a toxic work environment brought on by the investors using manipulation tactics to further stress and cause resentment amongst the collective). Yes, Kurvitz was at times uncooperative and dismissive towards his fellow employees, but this aspect of his character and the situation was played up to be a far greater problem in the PMG video than what the context suggests. I’m also inclined to believe this interpretation because Argo Tuulik, despite having legitimate, unresolved issues with his friend, does still regard Kurvitz very highly and even believes that he should still have artistic access to Elysium.
When you think about it from this perspective, it makes perfect sense as to why Kurvitz was acting erratically around his fellow coworkers who eventually lashed out at him. On top of Kurvitz’s subpar leadership skills, he clearly was rapidly losing control of the situation which caused a great amount of stress for everybody involved as he scrambled in every which way to hold onto his position within the studio. It does not surprise me when it’s admitted by Sulonen that Kurvitz was thinking of taking the source code to potentially start over with a newly founded company since the situation was rapidly deteriorating and everyone was getting more and more frustrated with him and his inner circle. The impossible working conditions they found themselves in was a pressure cooker for the animosity and resentment building within the disillusioned group. Clearly the investors made their workers run themselves ragged in order to divide everyone and make it easier for them to take advantage of Kurvitz’s now frequent outbursts to finally push him out of their way.
Everything that I’ve said above can easily be discerned from the context clues found in the interviews from the current and former ZA/UM members. Which if you think about it is an unfortunate statement because Bratt does not seem to register the complaints of mismanagement by the hands of the investors from either side and instead only points the spotlight at Kurvitz’s past transgressions. What I am describing is one of the major issues I have with the PMG video. The video talking about the ongoing legal battle to determine if corporate fraud took place seemed to disproportionately focus on the problems Kurvitz and his inner circle had with other team members and not issuing a public apology to his former colleagues. Now that doesn’t sound all too bad on paper, right? If Kurvitz apologized, it could help begin the healing process and make for a good closer for the video. Well, that’s where the problem comes into play because Kurvitz response to Bratt’s request for comment regarding what Tuulik, Tamsalu, and Sulonen said about his poor conduct should not come as a surprise to anyone who had been paying attention. In the video, Bratt hails the email Kurvitz sent back to him as arrogant and dismissive which he then uses to accuse him of not standing with his fellow workers in solidarity and not taking accountability for his actions. However, right at the start of his interview, Kurvitz informs Bratt that at the behest of his lawyers he does not want the full interview to be published as they are worried Studio ZA/UM might take something he said as an admission of guilt and use it against him in a court of law. Therefore, when asked to comment about what his former colleagues said about him, he fires back an email that basically says that he wants the focus to be on the thing that really matters, the lawsuits and the shady activities of the investors. Bratt, clearly not liking his response, decided to attack his statement even though had Kurvitz given PMG what they wanted he could potentially be incriminating himself. Whether he denies or fully understands that his actions hurt others, the way he responded is 100% justified and did not deserve the level of vitriol he got from both Bratt and the public. It seems like a double standard that Ilmar Kompus can deny answering a question by claiming he cannot comment due to the ongoing lawsuit during his interview but when Kurvitz does it for the exact same reasons he is attacked. Again, Kurvitz is fully responsible to rectify the hurt he caused others but legally he’s in the clear and Bratt seemed to purposely neglect that aspect of the ongoing narrative.
Now, I’m not about to pull a whole reddit conspiracy in my write up. I do believe Chris Bratt, who directed this video, went into this with the very best of intentions to tell the full story with an emphasis on the workers who were affected by the situation. However, the problems that I’ve listed above make me worry what will be the takeaway from someone who is only a casual observer of the ZA/UM situation. Personally, I have been following this from the beginning so I’ve had a lot of time to develop my own insight into things but that’s usually not the case for most people. What I’m concerned about is whether Bratt may have unintentionally furthered the investors narrative by pushing people’s focus away from themselves and onto Kurvitz who has largely had the support of fans and outside viewers up until this point. Studio ZA/UM as it stands is desperate for a leg up in the PR battle it’s had with Kurvitz since October 1st, 2022. They lost so much support once the announcement was made that Kurvitz and his inner circle had been terminated, and lost even more upon the release of collage mode, that it makes logical sense that they want more people to be on their side so when the time comes for the studio to announce another game their reviews and sales numbers won’t immediately be tanked by angry fans. So, the fact that this video seemingly only held its focus on the misgivings of Kurvitz closing statement and personality instead of what is actually being fought over, alleged corporate fraud and theft of IP, may have unwittingly handed the investors that distraction that they have been looking for. Since the release of this video, I’ve seen an unfortunate mix of people arguing over the ethics of the situation, those switching sides to now support the studio, and outright calling for Kurvitz to lose the right to access his life’s work. This is not the outcome me and many other like minded fans want to see from this mess. At the end of the day, Elysium is Robert Kurvitz’s life work, and he deserves a chance to legally regain those rights even if he is a prideful and arrogant person. His personality should not dictate whether he is allowed to prove in a court of law that the investors took something that isn’t theirs. Bratt’s well-meaning but deeply misguided efforts to report on the ZA/UM situation may have done more harm than good. I consider this to be the biggest flaw of the video and the reason why the contents ultimately did not sit right with me despite the accuracy and importance of the reporting.
Just as a quick reminder for those who aren’t entirely up to speed or want a refresher, the reason why Kurvitz and Studio ZA/UM are fighting over the IP rights in the first place started when Kurvitz was promised by the investors that if he signed over the rights to Elysium and his book he would eventually be able to buy back a portion of the shares to the company and upon release of the sequel buy back even more. At no point was anyone supposed to possess a majority percent of the shares in the company to remain equitable amongst all participants. So, Kurvitz signed this contract under the assumption that the investors would hold up their end of the bargain while in the short term he would get the funding needed to complete the rest of the game. Unfortunately, when Margus Linnamäe left his position within the company, Ilmar Kompus agreed to buy him out of his share allegedly using the money intended to produce the sequel thus acquiring the majority share which tipped the balance of power. Now, the IP rights are currently held by the company YESSIRNOSIR Ltd. which no one holds shares of but is still owned and controlled by sources within Studio ZA/UM. The lawsuit itself is Kurvitz claiming that the way Kompus bought into the majority share of the company was done illegally and should he be able to prove in a court of law that fraud took place it would immediately delegitimize and invalidate Kompus’s control which would then give Kurvitz and Rostov a chance to reclaim power along with all the subsidiaries of the company which includes YESSIRNOSIR Ltd.
From the way I saw it, it certainly felt like Bratt went out of his way to put blame on the deteriorating work environment and splintering of a two-decade old artist collective squarely on Robert Kurvitz shoulders. If I were to speculate, I think in his anger after not receiving the conclusion he had been hoping for from his interviewee, Bratt refused to acknowledge the very real fact that his hands are legally tied with the things that he can publicly talk about which had the unintentional consequence of villainizing Kurvitz. Bratt is still correct in his assessment that Kurvitz is arrogant and people were hurt by his actions but whether intentional or not misrepresenting how much Kurvitz and his inner circle was responsible for the strife while neglecting to even acknowledge the amount of meddling the investors were doing behind the scenes only detracts from his argument and puts into question who he’s really representing in his video.
109 notes
·
View notes