#mostly just a lot of grounded stories with superfluously weird elements

[jfktalkstomeasacoin]

JFK’s Doom Patrol Review of S3E10

I’ll be honest, the middle of this season was a drag to get through. I wasn’t happy with the direction the show was going, I didn’t care about the new characters introduced, and I was ready to stop watching. I am glad to say that this season finale has changed my feelings.

I am a lot happier with everything that happened in this episode compared to every other this season. Instead of more “Sisterhood of discount X-Men”, we got compelling interpersonal drama between characters, like Rita and Rouge, Larry and Keeg. Plus, everyone is getting a good ending! Cliff and Jane are at a good place with each other! Rita is doing something other than being sassy! Madame Rouge is gonna get a redemption arc come S4! the only outliers in this are Vic and Larry.

Vic is a tough character for me to talk about this season. If It’s not obvious by know, I have lived a white experience in America (My genetic make-up is not entirely white but it’s a complicated issue and nun ya business). I have not faced racial discrimination in my life, and I don’t have many people in my life that have (not by choice), so I don’t believe I can give a meaningful statement about the scenes in this season that depict racial discrimination and what that does to a child. I would imagine however that the show tackled the topic well, given the few things I have read on the subject.

Larry in this season has been a rough watch for people who really like his dynamic with The Negative Spirit. I know that some have sworn of the show because of this, citing that it’s just not the same or more personal reasons. It’s not surprising that many would, because a large amount of people seem to really only enjoy Larry and his relationship with The Negative Spirit in this show (or at least an affinity for him that outmatches anyone else). For me personally, I enjoy the direction the writers are taking him and Keeg (Sidenote: I’m making a difference between the alien being inside Larry in S1-2 and the alien being in S3-beyond because I’m not sure they’re the same). I think Larry needs some love in his life that is parent/child based and Keeg is a good way to bring that to him.

This episode is so poetic to S1. When Vic tells Rita “We’re not heroes”, my eyes fell out of my head. I was so amazed when Rita stopped Cliff at the baseball game, not only being able to use her powers, not only being able to use her powers like in the comics, but the two of them saying the exact same lines to each other in the Pilot. Like poetry, they rhyme.

Sometimes i think about how this series will eventually end. What I wanted them to do before i saw this episode, is to finally be rewarded for doing something heroic. When asked who they are, they say, “We’re the Doom Patrol.”, Finally deciding that this is who they want to be. So when Rita started to talk about actually being a Superhero team, I leaned forward into my seat, waited for them to say exactly what i thought they would say, and then Cliff made a Doom Force joke. Funny, but my dreams were halted another day. For the best.

I will have to re watch this season again to make an accurate judgment of it, which probably means I’ll have to re watch the show again. For the 4th-5th time. Idk. Hard to keep track. Ta-Ta for now.

[toast-the-unknowing]

any tips for writing dialogue? i struggle so bad to make it sound authentic and as a result always turn to descriptive imagery instead. (which is fine if im writing something angsty, but not cute and fluffy ya feel?) any tips would be greatly appreciated! ty

The other day in my D&D party, our hedgewitch (who learns his magic through intense study of books and nature) asked our sorcerer (who has innate magic powers and also sometimes just blows shit up on accident) if she could teach him how she cast fireball. Our sorcerer said "you, uh, you know -- " and she waved her hands around " -- you do. The spell."

I am kind of feeling like our sorcerer right now, because dialogue more than anything else about writing is the part that just sorta happens for me, and when I try to articulate how I do it, it is hard to say anything other than "the voices say stuff and I write it down real fast before I can forget."

I will say, because dialogue is often the first thing I am writing in a new scene or a new story, it gets written out in long chunks with very few other words popping up. I might note the emotions a character is having or the way a piece of dialogue is delivered, or jot down what the character is thinking that isn't getting said so I have it for frame of reference later, and I will write down an action that's essential to my understanding of what is happening in the scene, but it's really mostly just the dialogue. I'm not even doing tags or punctuation at this point. Without knowing your process, writing dialogue JUST as dialogue may help you find a flow, which generally results in more natural sounding lines. It's a theory I have, anyway.

The absolute hardest bits of dialogue for me are when I have a chunk of dialogue from the beginning of a scene, and a chunk of dialogue from later in that scene, and I have to connect them, because oh man it's so hard to force dialogue down a specific pathway. The dialogue wants to run rampant! It wants to be free! It doesn't WANT to go over there where the plot needs it to! Generally there's a way that I could stitch up the hole in these scenes in two lines that would take us LOGICALLY from point a to point b, but that just...doesn't sound good, and doesn't feel natural.

Sometimes I just literally can't get there from here, and either the earlier dialogue or the later dialogue needs to go, but usually what works is to just follow the last line I have with, "okay what's something that the character might say in response to that. What's something the other character might say in response to that. Is that line something that would evoke an emotional reaction from this character? Is it something that would make them think of another topic of conversation?" And just keep writing and seeing where the conversation goes until I find a more natural bridge to the later dialogue.

This may be helpful even if you aren't looking for a connection per se, but are just trying to make dialogue happen, or if you know the general beats your scene needs to be hitting but don't have anything laid out. We often know what we want a scene to ACCOMPLISH, in terms of the plot or the character arc or the relationship, and that can sometimes put pressure on the dialogue to address that. Asking yourself when you get stuck "how would he feel about that" or "what would she have to say about that" or "what mood or agenda or thought process is this person having that their conversation partner doesn't know about" can get you unstuck and ground the dialogue in what's natural for your characters.

Maybe the way the conversation goes when you do that is not where you thought it would or where you need it to. That's awesome! I love letting a conversation wander and just see where it goes. I used to watch one of those shows with a giant ensemble and a dozen story lines every week, and I noticed after a while that there would be scenes where a character would walk into a room, say all of the things that were important to the plot, and then leave, without anyone reacting. Obviously that's a pacing problem, they just had too much story to tell and not enough time, but it was SO WEIRD. And it was boring. The little moments in a conversation where the characters are talking about something "unimportant" are the best moments, I love those! So if you're worried your dialogue is getting off point, maybe follow it, it might lead you to a really authentic moment.

Obviously, don't just have your characters talk for five minutes about, like, the latest Marvel movie, just for the sake of saying something off topic. But this is a really good way of incorporating other elements from your story. Is there something that's thematically relevant to the story even if it doesn't have anything to do with the plot? Is there a side character who's not in this scene that your characters might be worried about, or annoyed with, or making fun of? Is there something that exists in the space because you created it with your descriptive imagery, and now that it exists the characters might comment on it or be affected by it? Is there something that happened earlier in the story that has been dealt with on a plot level but that your characters might still be having some residual emotions about?

I do realize that this tip for writing dialogue basically turned into "write more dialogue," but maybe in and of itself that would help! Practice makes perfect?

I will say, keep each character’s turn with the talking stick SHORT. Speeches rarely sound authentic. You want back and forth. Short lines are good. Short sentences within lines are good, too, although I fully admit to having a weakness for stupidly long sentences. But dialogue lets you bend the rules, go ahead and break out the sentence fragments.

Dialogue also sounds better if it has a chance to breathe; this is something I do actively work at, because it's the part of dialogue that isn't dialogue. If one character says something kind of heavy, or something unexpected, or something that puts a pin on the current topic of conversation, there's probably going to be a beat before anyone else says anything. Sometimes the character needs to take a beat FOR THEMSELVES before they continue with the thing they were saying! Screenwriters have it so fucking easy here, man, because they just get to write (beat) and then the directors get some close ups of actors' faces and the editor cuts that moment to breathe in for them. Prose writers gotta do it for themselves.

For a little beat, sometimes just placing your dialogue tag where you need it to be -- e.g. "he says" before the dialogue instead of after -- can do it. Sometimes you gotta get creative. This is where you can get cliched things like characters constantly raising their eyebrows or shrugging or smirking, which, cliches become cliches for a reason, they work, but you don't want to overdo it. Sometimes it helps to draw on the surroundings and the set up. Put your characters in a setting where things are happening around them, then you can take a beat while you describe one of those things that’s happening. Give the characters an activity to do, and intersperse that action through the dialogue. For the "this is a place that hurts" conversation in it all will fall, fall right into place, I knew I was going to want to have LOTS of beats in that conversation, so I made them go get lunch, and every time Adam wasn't able to say something one of them would eat some pizza or pick up a napkin. I am not a very visual thinker and I write all my dialogue first, so I have to find ways to fill these beats after the fact, and sometimes I struggle with it. This might be something that you can do a great job with, if descriptions and imagery are happening in your head anyway! Put them to work!

The flip side of "keep it short" and "let the dialogue breathe" is don't write superfluous lines. Look for places that you can condense. If you have a conversation where one character isn't really saying anything of substance, but is just kind of interjecting questions like a sidekick asking the late night host "no, I don't know, who was it?" that's probably a place you can crunch your back-and-forth down into one (not too long) line delivery.

Also, seriously, if descriptive imagery is what's easy for you, lean into it! You can totally write fluff that is more narration-heavy than dialogue-heavy, for one thing. But beyond that, is there a reason that descriptions are easier for you to write? Are there tools you use in that writing that you can apply to dialogue? If you're a visual thinker, can you use that to visualize where the characters are to help get in their heads? If you like finding fun little turns of phrase for your description, oh man, puts some fun turns of phrase in that dialogue. I think dialogue can seem like a completely different thing from narration, but at the end of the day, they're both writing. If you can do the one I absolutely have faith you can find a way to do the other. Good luck!

[reblogthiscrapkay]

The Myth of Persephone in “Mythic” The Musical

Most of these Persephone Project posts are for books or chapters of books so it’s always exciting and mildly anxiety-inducing to encounter a visual medium to write about. I’ve only done one musical in these Persephone Project write-ups and that was for my favorite musical, Hadestown. Now the myth of Persephone is underlying in that musical, which is part of what made writing about it a unique experience and I eventually expanded and edited my original write-up for the Hadestown Zine. But then my buddy Suzi told me about this musical. It took me a while to work up the nerve to listen to it as it’s a teen pop rock musical version of the myth of Persephone. If you couldn’t tell from me saying Hadestown is my favorite musical, I should say that teen musicals are not really my thing. I think “Heathers” is the only one I would cite as really liking. I wasn’t even into teen musicals when I was a teen. But in the interest of post consistency, I’m going to divide this into two parts: one where I specifically talk about the way the myth is done and one where I just talk about the show. The Myth In this version of the myth we get a lot of interesting character development for Persephone and Demeter that is happening concurrently throughout the show. Because of the “teen musical” concept the main theme is heavy on the ideas of growing up, finding one’s place in the world, and accepting your children’s adulthood.

To zero in on Persephone first, we find out somewhat repeatedly throughout the first three songs that she has lived her whole life on Earth and hasn’t really met the other gods but is motivated by a desire to find a place where she feels like she belongs. We get the sense that she feels smothered by her mother, a bit superfluous next her mother, and that while she’s okay with her life she hasn’t seen enough of the world to feel like she’s sure she wants to stay where she is. She wants her own purpose basically. The idea of shifting a focus to Persephone and giving her these motivations gets an A+ from me and is obviously a common feature of modern adaptions of the myth (I think this is most comparable to George O’Connor’s Hades comic).

She bumps into Aphrodite and convinces her to take her to a party Zeus is throwing for Athena (Aphrodite and Zeus are main characters numbers 4 and 5, by the way, and have their own motivations that I will get to). Seph says some not at all nice things to her mother before she leaves when Demeter tries to stop her. At the party Persephone doesn’t really have much fun and bumps into Hades who has come to yell at Zeus about a surplus of virgins in the Underworld. They chit chat a bit, she tells him he’s nice and he denies it, but this is an establishing of their chemistry. Another common trope in modern retellings: having them meet before going under.

Aphrodite then decides she wants to “stir shit up” and plans to do that by getting Hades to hook up with her. He shoots her down and as revenge she curses him to kiss Persephone (who I think is also cursed because she goes from “wow, my first kiss” to “take me to bed” in literally twenty seconds). Now the idea of their relationship starting from a love god’s influence is an interesting detail that is uncommon but certainly not unheard of. Ovid did it as was the case with Allison Shaw’s Persephone comic but I think both of those used Eros instead of Aphrodite. Either way, the force of their passion (or like, the force of Hades’ horniness at this point) leads to them going underground and Aphrodite is immediately sorry for what she did. We get this unique detail about how spells are broken underground which I’ve never heard before but kind of organically makes sense. Like, why would earth/sky god magic have any effect in the land of the dead? It works.

Once underground, they break apart and get awkward. I haven’t really addressed it yet but the interpretation of Hades in this one has elements I have never seen. First of all, his primary motivation in this one is just to be left alone. Persephone asks him to take her home and he tells her he can only go above ground once every six months. This six months rule I have really never heard of but I guess it does set the audience up for six months being an important concept later on and provides a reason for him to not help her. I mean, that reason could have been a lot of other things but it’s a reason. He then tells her to just go away and stay out of trouble and when they meet up later he apologizes for getting her stuck down there but basically says there’s nothing he can do. Overall, his characterization at this point reads as someone who is trying very hard to be perceived a certain way (a “deep, dark damaged soul”) but is actually just kind of socially awkward and not in any way bad.

Alone Persephone basically decides to go around sprucing up the Underworld through interactions with Charon, Ascalaphus, and Minos. Hades gets annoyed about it (annoyance is kind of his primary emotion) and after he thinks about locking her up over it, they have a heart-to-heart about his daddy issues and this reputation he never wanted. It’s kind of their starting to fall in love moment. Persephone then gets attacked by furies and Hades saves her. They have another actually falling in love moment where Persephone convinces him that the Underworld is actually kind of great and he believes her.

This should clinch things for their relationship but then Aphrodite shows up in the Underworld to try to fix things (a thing that definitely never happens and also kind of can’t) and Hades tells Persephone to go with her because he seems convinced that his feelings are still a part of the spell or something. Persephone refuses and basically tells him off that she likes it here and runs away. Then she chooses to eat the pomegranate mostly for personal reasons but one seed is definitely for “the guy I love”. The whole interaction is curiously hostile. It leaves me in this weird place of wondering if I should even be supporting this relationship.

After eating, Demeter shows up (again, a thing she probably can’t do) and she and Persephone make up and offer some tearful goodbyes since Persephone can’t leave now. Hades comes after hearing about the seeds, apologizes, offers to make her Queen of the Dead, and they kiss or something. Then Aphrodite and Zeus show up (WTF) for some Zeus Ex Machina that doesn’t work. Persephone gives Demeter back her powers since she’s Queen, which she lost going underground I guess because of the established curse rule but it’s kind of flimsy, and Demeter sets the six months rule since she is the maker of fruit anyway. While this ending feels sloppy in a lot of ways, I like the idea that Persephone and Demeter did these things for each other. I just wish Demeter’s decision didn’t come off so self serving and this probably could have been solved with a tip from, of all things, the Hercules: The Legendary Journeys interpretation where Persephone says outright that she doesn’t want to be forced to chose between them. At least it’s better than Zeus setting the rule, which is how it is in basically every other telling (except like, Hadestown). 

In Demeter’s concurrent plot, her primary motivation is find Persephone, of course, but to do this she has to get over this fact that everyone thinks of her as a lesser goddess without any real power. This was really strange to me, but that set up does pay off. She takes down a cyclops, confronts Zeus (a thing from most myths!), and then destroys the crops on hearing what happened to Persephone (also good). So her story is actually fairly in line with a lot of myth retellings except for this inferiority thing. Where does this come from? Well, that’s where her plot rubs up against Zeus (and also Aphrodite and implicitly Hades). Zeus’ primary motivation is to stay in charge and part of how he does this is by belittling everyone else. The Act 2 reveal for Demeter is that Zeus was lying about her weakness, and she’s only been operating on half a tank forever. Effectively, Zeus is the antagonist of the story. Kind of interesting since in a lot of versions of this myth, Zeus approving Hades suit of Persephone or alternatively offering Persephone to him, is the catalyst to the rest of the story, but this is seen as a neutral thing.

Overall, there were some interesting choices in adapting this myth to a musical for a teen audience. I feel like the Demeter plot works really well and that the Persephone plot works pretty well too. The problem I have is with how the Hades and Persephone aspect of this story is handled. It has a lot of great notes to it, but it doesn’t really come together because of the need for frequent denials and a sort of uncomfortableness with Hades character. From a strict story perspective, the concept of Hades and how his relationship to Seph develops is one of the weakest things about the book.

So that leads me to... The Musical

This musical is, uh, kind of a mess. 

As I said before, the ending is really sloppy and the book handles Hades’ character and his relationship with Persephone really poorly. Aside from eliminating or reframing some of those million times he denies her, I think the musical could have really benefited from a song or a dialogue scene where Hades is the main character. Persephone and Demeter have really well developed motivations and personalities because they have a lot of moments where they are speaking more to themselves than anyone else and we can see what they really think and feel. Aphrodite gets a few moments of this in act one and a whole song (that I dislike so much I can’t even listen to it) in act two. Zeus has a whole song explaining his drive. But every Hades song is in the context of him speaking to Persephone with the exception of a very brief moment in “Summer All The Time” where we get an initial vibe for who he is. A moment in act two when we can actually see his real thoughts and feelings towards Persephone would do a lot for making their relationship (and maybe even his denials of her) make sense. I really like the two songs they have together but the utility of those songs is different from actually showing what Hades really feels.

There are other weird book issues, the relationships between Zeus, Hades, and their father springs to mind, but I gotta move on.

To talk a bit more about the music and lyrics, this musical has a lot of cringe. Like, a lot. I have a whole document of the cringiest lines in it and it’s much longer than my lists of “ridiculous but great” lines and “just great” lines. There are so many failed attempts at being hip that I physically cringe when I listen to the soundtrack and after 20+ times I’m still cringing. I get that it’s directed at a teen audience, but I work with teenagers. I know they would cringe with me. The lyrics that aren’t cringe have a tendency to be kind of trite or unmemorable. I think Demeter’s songs are the least cringe, but they’re also some of the least interesting musically. The music overall is kind of blandly enjoyable really. The songs are fun mostly and I do really like some of them (”My Own Place In The Pantheon” is cute, “Mess Around” makes me want to dance, “Dark, Damaged Soul” is so cringe that it loops back around to fun pop punk, “Rebellious Children” makes me laugh, and both “Not A Chance In Hell” and “Beauty In The Darkness” give me some feelings) but none are a brilliant work that I would send to my non-musical friends as purely a good song. 

So about the acting and singing. Well, let me be clear that I did not see either the London or the Montreal productions (although tragically I think the London production was running at a time I was in London and Montreal is a long but not in any way unreasonable drive from my house so I’m not pleased to discover this musical so late). My opinion is based on the London soundtrack and an audio bootleg of the Montreal show (which is how I know all the dialogue bits too). 

I think London Persephone has a better voice but Montreal Persephone makes better acting choices (pitches her voice down a bit so she sounds a bit more mature, reads lines in much more reasonable ways, etc).

Both Demeters are good singers but I think Montreal Demeter makes better acting choices. She feels more authentically Demeter to me by mitigating the coward aspects of London Demeter.

Between Hadeses there is no contest. I love London Hades’ voice. As a Hadestown fan I was skeptical of a tenor Hades but his voice has this very beautiful sound in the lower notes (he doesn’t sound like Michael Arden but Michael Arden’s voice also has this quality and I love it) and it’s very powerful and he has just the right vibe to sell it. Montreal Hades has a very reedy voice and overall gives off a distinct whiny teen vibe that is just all wrong. Young Hades I am totally fine with in a story like this but he has to be mature to compensate.

Both Aphrodites are great. The character of Aphrodite is a type, and I’m fairly certain you will always be able to find a good Aphrodite.

The Zeus situation is weird because the interpretations of Zeus are wildly different in both productions. London Zeus has a nasally voice and a kind of guido look and vibe that I think works great. He’s really slimy. I feel like he’s going to pull out a wad of cash to make someone sleep with the fishes. Montreal Zeus is more big personality gospel singer and is styled accordingly. It doesn’t feel right for the character as written but it’s a fully integrated performance.

For our minor Underworld characters, they were all male in London but Montreal made Ascalaphus and Minos women, which I wholly cosign but I think Minos should have been an alto. Also Alecto is in it but male which is weird because Alecto is female. She’s a fury. Basically they genderbent everyone but Charon, I guess. Okay.

If you’ve got a choice of which to listen to (like if you have a Montreal hook-up) I still say go with London overall. It’s on YouTube.

So finally, I’m going to talk about the aesthetic. Both shows seemed to have really minimalist sets, which I’d kind of have to see in action to understand. It seems like an odd choice but it might just be a cost effective one. Every image from London looks more like a concert than a show (by product of the success of Six, maybe?) but the Montreal shots look a bit more “acting-y.”

As for costumes, oh boy. Let me present an image of our mains from London:

So let me ignore the obvious for a second to say that Demeter in both shows is very hippie and Aphrodite is always blonde and wearing some kind of shiny silver thing. Both of these things work. The Zeus’ as I said before are very different but tailored to the performance being given.

Now, um

A list of responses from my musical-going and myth-aware friends about this picture: * That is NOT THEM. * Oh no. * Looks like the costume designer was really inspired by American Idiot. * This takes me right back to high school in 2003. For the reference this is Persephone’s underworld look specifically but since her above ground look is a black t-shirt, jean shorts, fishnet tights, and Converse it’s not much of a change. I think both shows adopt this idea that the Underworld changes your wardrobe.

This mid-2000s pop punk styling is just a weird choice all around (although you could argue that Hades is actually more classic punk while Persephone is very specifically mid-2000s but still). On a more minor note, what’s with the hair? I mean there’s nothing saying you can’t have a blonde Persephone but why do this when you already have two other blondes in the main cast? Usually Persephone is a redhead or has brown hair and that would have been nice. With Hades hair I don’t even know what to say aside from why? I’m not going to say that Hades should only have dark, grey, or white hair depending on age (I’m gonna think it though) but this was a really curious choice. Also, the facial hair. Is that a John Waters mustache or am I losing my mind?

Montreal did a lot better here.

Hades’ look is solid. I like the warlock coat and how it’s kind of a fast track to intimidating. I like how without it he’s kind of at an intersection of art student and goth. It’s all good. I don’t even mind the hair because at least it’s not silly.

Persephone’s look is fine. I’m a little ruined by my friend pointing out that her above ground outfit is really 70s, but I’m trying to forget it. It’s better; I didn’t say it was the best they could do. Her underworld look is a great idea but that dress looks really unflattering to me. Maybe something like a black leather-y obi belt would really improve the shape and bring a bit more underworld to the look. Not sure what’s going on in the middle picture unless she has two underworld outfits but it looks fine. The barrettes were definitely a choice. Was flowers too obvious? Flowers would be better.

Also, Ascalaphus is adorable.

So in conclusion, someone hire me to red pen this musical so it can be good enough to continue its life after covid. I have a special place in my heart for flawed musicals that need a good red penning.