#my theory is that all good childrens books are written with LOVE

[larissa-the-scribe]

guys I had this realization the other day that Redwall works really well for reading aloud, and kinda half-remembered something about the author reading to kids? So I looked it up to see if I had made a connection.

And it turns out, yes, actually, because he read aloud to kids at a school for the blind. But all the books they gave him to read were depressing. So he wrote Redwall, a story about heroism and courage and making it through struggles, and filled it with so many sensory, visual details so he could give them something better and I just-- that's so wholesome-- help

[emmitaaa4]

Addressing some fandom BS inconsistencies

Gwyn was shadow mommy, Az was shadow daddy, they were gonna have shadow babies with her extra super pliable bones.

I audibly chocked when I read this @nikethestatue (btw everything said in this post was on point). No but seriously this is how they sound, too many of them insisting that there is nothing wrong with basing the likelihood of a ship on who has the more suitable uterus to be with a man... cause supposedly they're just picking up on the hints SJM wrote for them? She likes babies for HEAs so ofc children are the end all be all of a relationship, plus there's absolutely no way that she could ever write an adoption plot SJM is literally adopted and has done it in other series. Selective reading strikes again.

A minimum amount of critical thinking would tell you that 1) the infamous *magical uterus change* scene was about nessian (& feysand), not about any ship; 2) if SJM had written Nesta changing Elain's uterus, it would have given too much away, not to mention 3) how disturbing/violating it would have been for Nesta to change her sister's reproductive anatomy WITHOUT HER CONSENT?! None of it makes sense narratively; my girl Nes would never, especially given the trauma they both suffered from having their bodily autonomy--and so much more--ripped away by the Cauldron.

This argument is so trivialized that I see it every other day on reddit/tiktok/*insert media app*, and yet elriels are the toxic side of the fandom? The ones whom people are allowed to insult, to ridicule for theories all made in good fun, the women that are villainized over a difference of opinion? Don't get me wrong, there's assholes on both sides and people keep calling one another variations of delulu (and the nastier personal attacks). But by painting this fandom-wide villain there is such a lack of accountability for the plethora of harmful talking points spread by other portions of the fandom. (I've been silently reading the anti-elain & anti-elriel tags for like a year, and I'm on tiktok. Yes, I have self-destructive tendencies).

Anyways.

I never understood either how people ever actually thought (or well still think) that gwynriel would happen BEFORE elucien?? It makes no sense logically, narratively, or in terms of characterization & the arc she's set up for Elain, Azriel, and Lucien. Yet it took one controversial bonus chapter for people to decenter Elain in her own story, that is make her choice of romantic partner--which SJM spent 3+ books setting up--Azriel's. It took one bonus chapter that soo many readers are still unaware of, to brush Elain off as a "sexual object" Az is using to distract himself until his therapist-extraordinaire Gwyn comes in and heals him all up. Because ofc she will: she's badass and not the "passive and weak and boring" Eplain (aka "Plant" or "brain dead gardener"), she fits the YA archetype of the spunky warrior-girl so she can handle his darkness, and SJM supposedly spent time fleshing her out because she wrote her as a LI for Azriel; she's made for him, she is what he needs to grow (I actually enjoyed Gwyn's character btw, just pointing out how silly it all sounds). “Next book is a love triangle between Elain/Az/Gwyn” “Elain will turn evil or is secretly evil”. So you're telling me that SJM would pit Elain & Gwyn against each other in a love triangle over a man... all because of a necklace that was not even mentioned once in the actual books? Please, let's be logical for a second.

All this because instead of reading the bonus chapter in the context of the books, some people are reading the books in the context of the bonus chapter. Which now that I think of it is probably why so many people mischaracterize Az the way they do--because yes we know enough of his character to know half of the stuff the fandom diagnoses him with is questionable. Azriel? Entitled incel x fuckboy hybrid (gotta be the first of his kind, minute slay ig)? Interesting tell me more. No joke I saw a semi-popular post on here where a gwynriel said they read the bonus WITHOUT HAVING READ ANY OF THE BOOKS. I'm sorry, ship wars are silly and believe it or not idc who ppl ship, but it makes it hard to take some of the things they say seriously.

All this to say that the fandom isn't even debating the right thing. If you consider everything SJM has said in her interviews:

(she's been planting seeds for Nesta & Elain's book since acomaf; she knows who she is writing the first 2 books about + is keeping things open for the 3rd one--with 5 different ship options--which automatically rules out "Elain will close the series"; she said she's doing research for Elain's book in the ACOFAS bonus & there's seeds for future bookS in acofas; all she said recently about her beloved *heroines* and the themes of fate/true love/choice she finds *very* interesting & wants to discuss)

and if you also consider all she's written in the actual books (elain's characterization + the overarching plot in general & how she fits into it), then it's pretty evident that Elain's book is next.

The question then would be who is the MMC / 2nd PoV in her book, aka would acotar 5 be an elucien or an elriel story? Because logically, gwynriel was always a consequence of elucien. I honestly do not understand how people don't see that.

Oh and they always think they're gagging elriels with the "obviously Azriel is the next MC" as if elriels aren't saying the same thing? And we're the ones twisting info and not making sense. It's just funny at this point.

---sidenote: I realize that this post generalizes some things, and I just wanted to say that I have interacted with lovely eluciens / people on either side of this headache of a ship war. My hard limit is Elain haters though... back off I say 🤺 BACK OFF 🤺

---sidenote 2: I would have written this as a reblog except im not entirely sure how tumblr works and I get no visibility from them rip.

[largecucumber]

19 and 20

19. Adam Zamoyski’s “Chopin: Prince of the Romantics” And I have the signed copy! 😚 I absolutely adore Chopin because I play the piano. The book is so well written, sometimes I forget that I’m reading about an actual real person. But some descriptions, the very gritty and depressing parts of his life, are so raw and emotionalllll gurlll I cried! 😭😭

20. Uhmmmmmmm. I have sooo many. Prepare! 🤭💕

The one and only, Johann Sebastian Bach! He’s incredibly talented like omggggg how does he even come up with all these amazing pieces of music?!? 😨😳 His genius is unmatched. There will never be another composer like Bach! I have dozens of portraits and stickers of him and even a t-shirt. Omggggg it’s so embarrassing 🙈

Glenn Gould, the quirky autistic Canadian Bach wizard! He’s so handsome even well into his older years. And he’s soooo eccentric, like you should read about some of his quirks, it’s really out there💀👀 Also, did I mention how talented he is?! He gets criticised a lot for his weird playing style and humming (sometimes singing) during his performances. I love it tho 😘 it really adds something to the records

Louis👏Nicolas👏Davout👏 How can you not like this absolute beast of a man?! Sure, he was a bit rough with his soldiers, but I like a leader who doesn’t fuck around! We need more men like him! I feel for him though. He really was the least liked out of all Napoleon’s marshals, I relate to that because my fam doesn’t like me even though I’m a girl boss 👹 Poor old Davout was just doing his best! Here’s a quote that he wrote to Berthier —

“I cannot help admitting to myself that often my exactingness and my severity alienate good officers from me even before they barely have time to assess my true intentions."

Ommmgggg 😭😢

Ahemmm…. As a student I kinda have a love-hate relationship with this guy. I’ve suffered so many sleepless nights because of him 👩‍💻📚📚📚 But without this guy we’d probably still have our children working 16 hours for absolutely nothing (we still do actually, it’s heartbreaking). His works literally had soooo much impact on history, it’s unbelievable.

And of course, how can we forget our hero!?! I wanna be like him soooo much it aches 😫 My family genuinely don’t understand my obsession with this man, like how could they not?!! His image is literally on the wiki page for the “Great Man Theory” — that individuals with certain traits are able to affect the course of history rather than it being due to some larger force or something I dunno it’s an IR/history thing I’m studying 😢

[viatagrinner]

Many of you write such interesting theories about Gilbert.

I want to participate too... (Lol, the route will be out in less than 24 hours.)

But my theories usually don't come true and I pay attention to unnecessary things.🤣😅

Here are some thoughts on Gilbert's route.

Childhood.

1. I don't get the feeling that Gilbert was born in the palace and lived there originally.

It seems to me that his situation is the same as Jin's. Lived somewhere far away until father found out/remembered he had a son. Perhaps Gil lived in an orphanage or a place with lots of kids. Maybe the foster parents had a lot of children.

Why?

He's good with kids (communicating with little Luke as well as the kids from the Christmas event), the kids trust him, he knows tricks, how to entertain the kids and how to communicate with them.

Yes it is manipulative, but a man who grew up in the cold and cruel court of the emperor could hardly have found common ground with such ease.

2. (I get a sense of deja vu, as if I read this in someone else's post a long time ago.)

He is not the emperor's son at all.

Gil is from a captured kingdom. And the emperor adopted him.

国王 - kokuou - king.

This title, for example, was used by Silvio's father.

"王" (ou) means "king".

But Obsidian is an empire.

皇帝 - That's what Gilbert calls his father.

皇子 - ouji - imperial prince.

But "王子" is used to describe Gilbert.

A traumatic accident.

The implication is that Gilbert used to be ordinary, perhaps somewhat like Emma in his kindness.

1. What happened to the prince? The answer in the "More Love with the Beast" event.

In "More Love with the Beast," Chapter 2, there was an episode when Gilbert saw a book with a "sinister black cover" in the bookstore where Emma worked. The girl does not know what country it is from, but it is written by a promising author.

The darkness of the imperial court was depicted in detail, a very realistic description of the darkness of the human heart.

But she liked the main character.

Gilbert was interested. (Even the heroine paid attention to it.)

What did she like about the character? She liked his unwavering conviction, and whatever intrigue he faces, he insists on his innocence.

Even in the face of great evil, the hero never gives up, sticks to his convictions.

Emma wants to emulate this hero. Gilbert remarks that this character is like a girl. "Honesty and purity." And he asks her never to change.

2. In the recent event, (The Prince is a bodyguard.)

I think we will meet this character again.

???: Listen, Gil. I'm on your side no matter what.

???: I promise. I won't leave you alone. So... okay?

It's a male.

Because he used 俺 - ore. For women, that's rude.

3. In Clavis' dramatic ending, Gilbert notes that he and the 3rd prince are similar.

Both don't trust people. People are tedious until they "break".

So, my guess:

It doesn't take a genius of deduction to figure out that the book describes the court of Obsidian.

А) The main character in this novel is Gilbert.

This man, who told Gilbert that he would be at his side, ended up betraying the prince.

From that moment on, Gil's behavior changed.

There used to be "honesty and purity" in him, but not anymore.

B) And you know, while I was writing, I remembered something else... Clavis' dramatic ending again. (Chapter 24)

Gilbert: People can be controlled by fear, and there's no fear more effective than love.

Perhaps the main character was this unknown man who promised not to leave the prince, but the fear of losing this man made Gilbert give up on him and everything good about himself.

Current Situation.

Again, thanks to the story of Clavis and a bit of Silvio, we know that there are two factions in Obsidian: the Imperial faction and Gilbert's faction.

The Imperial faction is brutal, corrupt, and "rotten".

The emperor and his men spare no one.

Again the story of Clavis, and again the Dramatic ending: Liden, the head of the area where Emma and Clavis ended up, was the Emperor's man brutally suppressing the resistance (I don't remember very well what he was killing people over).

Thoughts about what happens next.

1. Why is the prince in such a hurry? Maybe he found out that his father wants to go to war again with Rodolite, Benitoite, and Jade?

He doesn't want to let that happen. And he needs to take the throne. Why then is he hanging around in another country? He wants to get to know a future ally and then maybe an enemy.

2. It's not a violent game after all. It is unlikely to show or tell that Gilbert killed his father. More likely to send him off somewhere and take the throne (second CG.)

I think the art where we are shown a "gothic" Emma, and where Gilbert said that "bad guys don't care if they're loved or not" (sorry, I don't remember his exact words, and I'm too lazy to look) is the dramatic ending. The prince hasn't changed. He remains a sinner, will "repaint" the heroine in darker shades, but will be happy with her. Here he became an emperor, perhaps a slightly better version of his father.

3. The prince sometimes (though in events) calls himself a sinner, and he kills people very easily, but does not repent of it. Perhaps even for him, killing his father (even his adopted father) is a sin.

4. Does Gil have a second eye?

I wish... And a different color. 😍😅 But most likely the eye is lost. Perhaps it was a punishment from the emperor. Maybe it has something to do with that unknown man.

5. Yves & Gil

This is where I looked. Because I didn't really remember the plot.

The only thing I found.

Willow's mother was a princess (English version) and 王族 - Royalty (Japanese version).

What does that give us?

Imperial family - royalty

Difference between 皇族/王族.

皇族: Emperor's (天皇's) family

王族: King's family

Yves' mother may have been a member of the royal family of the fallen kingdom.

It is unlikely that Yves is the son of the emperor. But he could be related to Gil.

[supersoakerfullofblood]

Great Books About Gender Identity

Seeing some posts about how new-adult romance novels popularized by BookTok don't show genuine queer experience and largely tokenize queer characters. And look, the prose of these books is ass too. One of my reading interests is how themes of gender/masculinity/femininity interact with other elements in a novel, and with the culture from which the novel was written. I've read a lot of great books on the topic!

As a disclaimer, most of these books don't have explicit queer representation. I read a lot of old books where that wasn't a thing you could openly write about, but you could write about cultural perceptions of masculinity/femininity (a lotta people still didn't like this, but like, you usually weren't stoned for it), which is where modern queer theory and identity comes from! So if you want to feel understood by a novel, here are my book recs on gender, in no particular order:

The Earthsea series by Ursula K. Le Guin: a series of children's fantasy novels that build the foundation for modern children's and YA fantasy (Harry Potter, Percy Jackson, some Neil Gaiman, Brandon Sanderson, etc.). Men and women's roles in society and relations with magic are a major theme in the series, and while no character is queer (though there's a reference late in the series about witches living together), characters are always bound or freed by the gender they express. Also, all the characters are black, which was unheard of at the time of the first book's publication (1968) and is frankly still unheard of today. And it's just a fun read!

The work of Virginia Woolf: My favorite author and one of the largest players in what we today call gender studies. Highly recommend Orlando, where the titular character changes inexplicably from a man to a woman halfway through the novel (it's tempting to call them "the first trans character," but the label feels disingenuous. Transsexuality as we know it didn't exist then, and Orlando didn't choose or want to switch genders. It just happened to them); A Room of One's Own, Woolf's essay on life as a woman author; and The Waves, a book less about gender identity and more about wholistic identity.

The work of Kate Chopin: Chopin is a huge player in starting the feminist literary movement of the 20th century, influencing the work of many authors on this list. If you can stomach Victorian prose, Chopin is for you!

The Bell Jar by Sylvia Plath: Plath's novel is written from an intimately feminine perspective and wrestles with questions of mental illness from such a perspective. A must-read.

The work of Oscar Wilde: Thrown in jail for a bit for likely being at least a little gay, Wilde's writing frequently riffs on and critiques gendered social customs. Highly recommend The Importance of Being Earnest, Lady Windermere's Fan, and definitely other stuff of his I haven't read yet.

The work of Madeline Miller: I think Circe is the only "BookTok book" I've read that I thought was good, and boy is it fantastic. Its ideas of gender feel a bit cliche or elementary at times (Circe sometimes reads like an "empowered girlboss" stereotype), but how it plays with this identity at the same time it plays with Circe's identity in her family and pantheon make this book special. And Miller really is a delightful prose stylist. Galatea is also pretty good, and I haven't read Song of Achilles yet.

The Hours by Michael Cunningham: based on Woolf's Mrs. Dalloway, Cunningham reprises Woolf's themes for a book set in the 90s! Great read, and another master of the craft.

The poetry of Sappho: The popular conception of Sappho is that she's this girlboss prodigal lesbian in a patriarchal society, which isn't true. There's definitely some truth there, but it's much more nuanced, and certainly Sappho couldn't conceive of the labels we put on her today and those labels' connotations. In any case, her poetry is some of the first, if not the first, love poetry from a feminine perspective.

Any piece of literature about slavery/colonialism written by a woman: This is a broad category, but the intersection of femininity and race is a broad topic which many writers fall into. You really can't go wrong here. My recs are Toni Morrison, Jean Rhys, Zora Neale Hurston, Oroonoko by Aphra Bein, and Jean Toomer. I still need to read Gwendolyn Brooks, Octavia Butler, and Alice Walker.

The work of Shakespeare: You can't go wrong here. Obviously not explicitly queer, but many of his plays deal with cultural gender perceptions and, of course, crossdressing! Twelfth Night is probably his strongest play on this front, but The Winter's Tale and Measure for Measure are both great here, and most of his plays have at least a little commentary on the gender front.

Leave other recs in the comments/rts! :)

[heir-less]

Thoughts on these recent leaks and speculation:

Not going to lie, I think Charles and Camilla are on to something that might harm William and Kate's image. Buckingham Palace is shrewd with what's getting put out and they have the experience to match. Assuming it's not Kensington Palace sending out these courtiers, and assuming Kate really is getting lies printed about her from "rogue sources", I believe it's Charles's team leaking stories about how much Kate doesn't like being around Meghan. And I believe they are intentionally trying to single her out and make her look bad. This refocuses the drama on William and Harry's families and it makes Charles seem like a bystander in the drama between his two boys.

Notice how all the leaks about Charles are that he's pleased and glad to have Harry at the coronation. There was also a Sussex spokesperson trying to spin a narrative of Harry attending being a personal family choice done out of love for his father. This is an olive branch narrative of struggling to break free and Charles is vapidly reciprocating it (in reality I don't think any resolution will happen). Royal expert mouthpiece Richard Fitzgerald has claimed that Charles is happy both sons will be there with no comment about Meghan.

All the negativity about disliking Meghan is being placed on the Wales's, with Kate being the main target. In fact, Kate is the only named royal we have who is described as being uncomfortable. Sure, the rest of the family is relieved, but it's Kate who they single out as being distinctly uncomfortable by Meghan. Why is this?

My theory is that the palace understands it's a bad look for Charles to have these rumours about his maltreatment of Meghan and her children floating around. It's a bad look for Camilla to have stories about her being friends with the people who manufactured Meghan's harassment campaign. They understand that being painted as Meghan's enemy isn't a good long-term strategy and justifies the allegations of racism and general cruelty in the eyes of many people. Meghan being excluded from the coronation, Charles's big day, also reinforces this. So, Charles and Camilla are doing what they do best: they're looking for a scapegoat.

Kate is the scapegoat.

I believe Buckingham Palace is throwing Kate under the bus to save their own skin. After all, she was the main benefactor of Meghan's smear campaign, and she was the one who reaped positive comparisons at Meghan's expense for years. It would be easy for the palace to reframe the nastier side of the conflict as a personal grudge on William and Kate's behalf.

Charles? He loves both his sons. He doesn't want any of this. He's hurt by what Harry and Meghan have done, but he wants his son happy. He just wants to escape all the drama the Sussexes caused and return to his work.

But Kate? Kate makes it so personal! She's so uncomfortable around Meghan. She hates Meghan and whats to see her off forever!

Here's a source with a big headline about how relieved Kate is (singling her out) about Meghan not being around. Let's run these headlines everywhere with her face plastered all over them.

Here's a scoop from an upcoming book written by royal biographer Robert Jobson! Kate found that 15-minute walkabout with Meghan the hardest thing she's ever had to do! What's the name of that book again? Oh, yeah: Our King: Charles III: The Man and the Monarch Revealed. Jobson himself claims in the book's introduction that he wants to give an authentic and honest portrayal of Charles, a man he 100% believes is worthy of the Crown. Hmm, I wonder who will benefit from the promotion of that book. Also, don't look up what Jobson has to say about Diana, don't

Here's a piece by Gordon Rayner from February that calls Meghan Kate's "nemesis" and that Kate's rebranding will "see her off for good". He gloats about how much more popular Kate is with a cherry-picked batch of stats.

The tone in which Kate is portrayed in relation to Meghan has changed drastically in tone. Back a few years ago, the media loved to paint Kate as a peacekeeper (despite all evidence). Now, it seems that the gloves are off and the media has no issue leaning into Kate's distaste for Meghan. It's sort of ironic that all of this is now happening after Queen Elizabeth's death. Kate has displayed hostility toward Meghan since 2019 and it sometimes went to print (take the controversial Tatler story where Meghan is called selfish for making Kate's life harder), but the media is now reporting on that fact more aggressively than ever before.

Now this is just my personal theory based on what I'm seeing coming out and from who. I might be wrong and this might change or go away since the tabloid news cycle has a short life span. Maybe there will be a new strategy in a few months.

It's also completely possible that this isn't just a Charles and Camilla thing. Maybe Kensington Palace has absolutely no issue amplifying Kate's dislike of Meghan and doesn't think it's a detriment to her character. I'd beg to differ, but Kensington Palace has often botched its PR strategies, so who knows.

For now, this is what I think is happening, Kensington might happen to let their dislike of Meghan be known, but I think Buckingham Palace is taking advantage of that and twisting the narrative to absolve Charles and place him in the middle ground. Like Harry said, Camilla and Charles know how to play the long game.

[orlissa]

I was at a book launch with a friend last night--the book itself was a richly illustrated album containing biographies of women from history wo, for different reasons - forward in romance, having power, demanding recognition - were labelled a whore during their lifetime. It was written by two very sweet women, and whole launch was just lovely.

The friend bought the book and some of their earlier stuff (the yhave written several similar books on women's history before, and one of them also has several historical novels published), and we remained behind to have them signed and to have a few words with the authors - and I mentioned them that they would surely find William Moulton Marston's story fascinating with his "pro-women" crusade and two wives who pretty much enabled his carreer (the authors were fascinated, made a note of it, and thanked me for the tip).

And then somebody behind my back just yelled in "akshually, the two women were in love with each other, not with Marston."

First of all, RUDE. Second of all, you have seen Professor Marston and the Wonder Women, have you? Bless your heart.

I hate that movie. Okay, I have a love-hate relationship with it, because it does a good job at explaining Martson theory. But all the historical bits are basically bullshit, and let's be clear here: the movie was written and directed by a lesbian woman, and she pretty much pushed the envelope on the clear lesbian angle.

The truth is... we will problaly never know the whole story. But the facts: 1, Marston brough Olive into the relationship, and pretty much said that Elizabeth either accepts her, or he is choosing Olive. Elizabeth wasn't present for the beginning of the relationship. 2, Marston did have this idea that a woman who has sexual relations with another woman will be a better lover for her man 3, The children (both Elizabeth and Olive had two kids from Marston) didn't know that they were biologically half-siblings, or that Olive and Marston were lovers. Olive An, Elizabeth's daughter, still said, as late as in 1999, that Olive was their housekeeper. 4, After Marston's death in 1947, Olive and Elizabeth lived together for the rest of their lives, altough Marston's biographer, Jill Lepore, puts it down firmly that they had seperate bedrooms (which the other end of the envelope pushing, imho).

So it's likely that there was something between Elizabeth and Olive, but it's clearly Marston who was the center of this relationship-universe. To say that the primary relationship was between Elizabeth and Olive is inaccurate.

...And to yell it from behind my back while I'm talking to the authors is rude.

[xxgothchatonxx]

So.. I think Jude Law might be my second favourite Captain Hook now.

I said it recently - Jude Law has never given a bad performance, in my opinion. So my thoughts going into this were “ok if the writing is crap, at least Jude will be fun”. But thankfully the writing was really damn good. I’d go so far as to say this Hook succeeds where so many attempts to make live-action Disney villains sympathetic and complex have failed. And the reason why this doesn’t bother me as much as, say, Maleficent or Lady Tremaine, is because of all the villains that should have sympathetic backstories, it should be Captain Hook. So the fact that Disney even allowed this is a huge win in my book!

What I loved the most is that these writers understood that while Hook is a villain, he should also be written with some sympathy. Don’t get me wrong, I love the classic animated version and Dustin Hoffman is an absolute delight, but the other Hooks I consider to be the best have that extra layer of complexity and tragedy. Jude chewed quite a bit of scenery at the start which was wonderful, but then reality comes in and he gives one hell of a powerful, emotional performance. It actually made me cry.

The “twist” on his relationship with Peter is predictable (yep it’s a very popular fan theory on here - a theory I really like) but I thought it was a good predictable. It made sense and it didn’t cross the line into being stupid. He’s not suddenly hugging Peter and the Lost Boys and giving the Darling children a first-class escort home. No no no. I love that they left it ambiguous in the end as to whether he’s changed or not. That last smile could mean anything.

So, while it’s not exactly how it is in the book, that doesn’t bother me. Because the writers understood the basics - Captain Hook is a bitter old man who has wasted his life over a pursuit of revenge, and he feels it’s too late for him to change. Add an dash of an OUAT-esque (seriously there is one part that made me go “oh so he’s Baelfire!”) twist on his relationship with Peter, and you’ve got a pretty interesting version of Captain Hook.

[keire-ke]

Three Body Problem/Dark Forest

I’ve only read the first two so far, and overall I really enjoyed both (with some caveats)! I have it on good authority the third one goes off the rails, but I’ll report back on this one :P Thus far they were very enjoyable as sci-fi epics, TBP takes place in more-or-less now, DF spans centuries, the worldbuilding is great, the ideas it has are very cool and the prose is so good.

That said, they are immensely frustrating, too, in very particular ways (least among which is “wow, this was definitely written by a man”). TBP not so much, that’s just great, but the follow-up...

I’m putting it behind a cut, because spoilers (if you’re thinking of reading the books, avoid spoilers, the spiral they take you on is Something Else)

My particular point of frustration is in how these books are broadly speaking about the relationship between the collective and the individual, how one feeds into and affects the other, but the individuals are... Well, they have names, definitely, and also occupations. It’s less of a problem in TBP, which is very straightforward with the cause and effect, but in DF it rolls out into a whole sprawling... something.

Okay, so book one, Ye Wenjie is so disillusioned with humanity after living through the Chinese revolution and watching her father’s murder that she asks the aliens to come over and destroy it. Cool. There’s a whole organization dedicated to helping the aliens out, which she leads, but she has second thoughts after things start happening, all that.

In DF we get the very explicit consequences of the “humanity over humans” in the form of the history of the Great Ravine(? - not sure how it’s translated in English), and how that lead to a nigh-perfect society based on individual rights, whose only real problem was that they were too trusting and hopeful, to the point that older characters refer to them as children. Also cool. Yes, sometimes bright-eyed optimism will not save the day, which doesn’t make callous pessimism right. Humanity didn’t get to its darkest hour by being too lovey-dovey (though mistakes were made and hubris didn’t help). In the end the only future is one of cooperation and mutual respect.

So, the day is saved by a guy who only really wants to reunite with his family. Again, so far so cool. Humanity is made of humans, who may think of humanity in the abstract, but they are also creatures of the here and now and that’s what civilisation is and should be about. For better or for worse.

The problem is, the guy’s family is a cardboard cutout not only in the meta sense of having hardly any lines and existing mainly between scenes, oh no. That would be... disappointing, but also par the course for, hell, most of literature. No, instead the family starts when Luo imagines a perfect woman, who becomes real to him, to the point he has self-induced hallucinations about her being in the car and having conversations with him, and later uses the societal powers granted to him to get the police (his chief bodyguard with whom he has a reasonably compelling actual friendship) to find him a girl matching that exact description. Who is then lured in to his house under the pretense of working for him. Within a year or so they marry and have a child.

And then the epilogue concludes that humanity has problems with the Dark Forest metaphor because love is so important in human culture (it’s not as egregious as in Interstellar, don’t worry, it actually comes off quite well). Which...

But wouldn’t it be much stronger if they were both actual characters? If they met the normal way, if they fought and made up and had human interactions that weren’t limited to Luo thinking how perfectly in line with his fantasies his mail-order-imagination bride turned out?

That’s not even mentioning that the core tenant of the Dark Forest theory is the complete impossibility of communication between alien civilisations, when the whole entire series is predicated on perfect communication being not only possible, but pivotal from the point of first contact, but that doesn’t actually affect the plot all that much.

[yourturntofnaf]

my thoughts on the talebert files that nobody asked for

ok so... I'm terrified of the effect this will have on the fnaf community. obviously, nothing from this should be used as evidence pieces in theories. we have the official freddy files (along with media such as the encyclopedia) and even the officially released ones have inaccuracies that make them debatable for theorizing. so obviously, nothing from a completely scrapped book should be used for theorizing. and, this is all if it is not just a hoax. at the time of writing this, there's no public comment from Scott, just the alleged emails put in the doc. so keep in mind that this may all be a hoax on top of what I previously mentioned.

for the purpose of this, I'm just dissecting my thoughts on it and what I think it could have meant. I think it's fun to read through and see what the intended canon was at one point and if any of it lines up with the current product or theories. please, do not take any of this as me trying to confirm or debunk a theory.

with that out of the way, ramble under the cut....

the most memorable thing from this has got to be the william speech.

this william characterization is the epitome of "where is your rage?!"

this version of events comes in contact with a few common fan theories and debates: death order, will/puppet stuff, and willcare

in the order of events that this was written off of, the bite victim would be the first victim (note for this section: the cassidy tucker discussed in this seems to be a version of charlie). because "cassidy", aka the charlie we have in our canon, follows the order of events of william losing a child before henry. while this does lead to william targeting henry's child, it doesn't follow the commonly speculated reasoning of revenge.

"...perhaps that tucker girl. she shines too much of a bright smile, she is a container for love that will soon burst. I will repurpose her."

my interpretation of this is an application of this williams understanding of humanity. he sees the existence of a happy, bright being as otherwise useless if not applied by someone with more adept girls. he needs something to give the gift of life. from here, I could see two different visions for this:

he needs something that is a spirit to complete this goal OR he is looking for something with a good heart to pass on this gift. I feel it is far more plausible he simply needs something that has already passed on, and sees this cassidy/charlie girl as being someone complacent who he thinks would do what he needs from her.

interestingly, this creates a new perspective on the topic of who stuffed the children. if the goal of this speech was followed through, it sounds like the puppet would be the one that literally places the children in the suits, but under some sort of direction from william. the specific usage of "giving the gift of life" obviously calls back to the infamous give gifts, give life minigame.

for the idea of willcare (the general opinion that william cared about his family and specifically the death of the crying child), this william wouldn't align with that theory. the crying child's death doesn't seem the affect his emotional effect, and it doesn't spark the rage that's always been there. instead, it leaves him feeling ridiculed. this speaks to this William's egoism and selfishness. he seemed to feel no love for his child, the thing his death brings him is embarrassment and more questioning over life. when looking at what he's left behind, it's from the perspective of how that plays into life, death, and the rules of science. he doesn't seem to see it as the life of a person, but just life for what it is.

if this characterization was canon, I feel it puts an interesting spin on the idea of putting the crying child back together. under this version, it seems like william is far more invested in solving the puzzle of what morality means over any human connection.

as mentioned in the note about cassidy and charlie, the version of henry in this book is a man named emmet tucker, making the tuckers of this book a prototype of the emilys. emmet is a bit different than our henry and seems to be more forceful. the best descriptor of his character is this letter:

this relationship between henry and william is different than the fnaf media we have. in most canon examples, henry and william seem to be business partners, where this reads as emmet/henry being a fazbear employee under william who is being greatly taken advantage of for his talents from the beginning. I would take this as something changed in the game canon, this doesn't sound like an "old friend" as described in the fnaf 6 ending.

this also stuck out to me, a list of suspects for the MCI:

it gives us ages of (almost) all of the listed men as of 1985. we get a few drops of this book's lore here in terms of these major characters. william was apparently diagnosed with schizophrenia because of his sighting of the shadow animatronics. we know these are real, meaning this is a misdiagnosis. this book's phone guy, steve (interesting how his first name made it to the movie), allegedly has a gambling addiction that makes the author question his involvement over the idea he... wanted the insurance payoff from killing these kids so he could gamble it? this book has it OUT for phone guy, let me tell you. the description for mikes suspicion is hidden and he's been cleared as innocent for an unknown reason. he was convicted of manslaughter following the bite, and is confirmed to be the fnaf 1 protag. tucker is listed as the creator of the mediocre melodies who was angry when his line of animatronics wouldn't be used.

throughout this book, steve is an interesting figure. the writer, talebert, seems convinced he is the one responsible for the MCI. perhaps this plays off of the OG theory of phone guy being william?

in what's released, to my understanding as someone who hasn't read the frights books yet, dr talebert is a character throughout the stichwraith plotline. to my understanding, the characterization is very different. notably, talebert is being paid by fazbear entertainment. talebert at multiple points seems to be retroactively changing things as he goes, big or small. he says emmett has anger issues as evidenced by an outburst at afton over the decomition of the MM. in reality, going off the previously posted letter, it moreso seems like his anger resulted from being bossed around by william and not receiving financial compensation. a miscellaneous citation on page 10 of the document shows talebert changing the location of cassidys death from fredbears to freddys, changing the point in time she would have died. there are a lot of interesting quirks to talebert that I can't get into all of them, but I wouldn't consider him a reliable narrator.

there's a lot in these files that I'll probably keep talking about at some point. please, please look at them for yourself. keep in mind this is all scrapped at best, and fabricated at worst. lots of love!

link to read for yourself:

[aspd-culture]

Do you have books/movies recommendation that represents aspd well fiction or nonfiction?

Hhhhh I was waiting for this question to come one day. The answer is lowkey v v disappointing.

Because... no, not really. I've got like three, two of which do what I consider a fairly good job, and one that rides the fence of being a lil "oh great, the ASPD character likes blood and guts and death".

Sorry this is so long-winded tldr Ender's Game (book only), House, MD if you can handle some not ok 2000's comedy, and Wednesday if you never get into the fandom.

In order of, in my opinion, best to least best (they're all still p good):

I tried to make these spoiler free but it's hard while explaining good vs bad rep. I would recommend going into Ender's Game blind without reading what I wrote about it and coming back to this post after. I would read the warning attached to the other two.

Ender's Game by Orson Scott Card (The book not the movie, oh my gosh, not the movie) - Peak ASPD right here. When I was a kid with ASPD, this is the only book I ever related to and I randomly picked it bc it was the third name on the mandatory summer reading list and 3 is my OCD's favorite number. It rarely lets me down, and in this case, brought me a seriously well-done look at ASPD done, possibly entirely without meaning to. Orson Scott Card, as far as I'm aware, set out to write a book about trauma and the way that different types of trauma shapes the mind in early childhood, and preschool aged children engaging in active military training is... woof. It's a lot when something that you relate to so much is a depiction of a war-era dystopia. There are definitely parts that still push the stigma, and a lot of what makes Ender "good" is the sympathy and compassion and "purity" he shows, so be ready for that. That said, this also shows how a kid can still fit the definition of a loving, innocent child even while actively engaging in violence. It's a bit preachy with its message, but it is a damn good book. I will openly admit I have never gotten around to reading the sequels purely bc they were not in my school libraries. I wonder if Libby has them... *takes mental note*. There are also questions about if Ender's siblings possibly have cluster b disorders themselves. I have seen theories that both Peter and Valentine have NPD, and a more controversial theory that Valentine has NPD while Peter has BPD and the book just happens to focus on demonizing him (as a character to make a point about him and Valentine, not because of the disorder) so it doesn't emphasize the non-splitting behavior. Just, do yourself a favor and don't read into psych articles about Ender's Game. They make a big deal out of Ender being a good character because he is "saved" by his empathy and just... idk the book is written from his POV and I don't see much empathy there. I see compassion. I see cognitive empathy. I do not see affective empathy besides with a couple Exceptions.

House, MD - the profile pic is for a reason. More than House, MD is a show about doctors or medicine, it is a show about House's struggle with his mental health. We watch him slowly get through the process of recognizing, adapting to, and working on his symptoms throughout the show. It honestly helped me before I even realized I had ASPD to improve my relationships with people by learning from his mistakes.

House is (minor spoiler) canonically diagnosed with "Antisocial traits" around season 6 I believe, but he experiences them the entire time. He is written as a character who I believe was supposed to have ASPD. If not, he is one of the most accurate accidents turned canon I have ever seen. That said, this show does not shy away from the negative aspects of ASPD. Many people say horrible things about House throughout the series, many of them he does not bother to argue with or deny. It is... really emotional for me sometimes to see how they speak to and about him and how he handles that. It's really good, but does have one very triggering episode about a "true sociopath" and House's struggles with relating to her also around Season 5 or 6. It's one I wouldn't skip if you're watching this for ASPD reasons, but House *does* try and separate himself from a "true sociopath" so be ready for some stigma. Also please note that this show is from around 2004. Lots of flip phones, ha ha ha, but also lots of excess stigma on things, somewhat homophobic and transphobic jokes, etc. Although, it is worth noting that it is a symptom of House's ASPD to make these jokes - he expects that they know he is not serious because of his tone and doesn't, due to lack of empathy, understand that these jokes are hurtful even when people know you don't believe what you're joking about to be true. He builds his team around making sure they can handle that part of him, which is a pretty decent thing to do, in my opinion, even though the right thing to do would be to change the behavior. But yeah, shitty early 2000's humor incoming with this show. I still 100% feel it is worth the watch, but I am white and thus have the privilege of feeling comfortable while watching it. Black people especially may be really (understandably) unable to feel comfortable watching this because the person that House worries is most similar to him and thus most threatening to his position is Foreman, who is a Black man, and thus many of House's "it's ok because he knows I don't believe it" jokes are targetting Foreman and many times they are racist jokes. He in no way solely targets Foreman, but that is there and it is extremely frequent. When you meet people named Taub and Thirteen, Jewish and fellow LGBT people will join the club in being potentially seriously uncomfortable with these jokes. I could handle watching it, ymmv.

The third and somewhat problematic lil sister, Wednesday (2022) - Hear me out, it is so good, imo, but I cannot interact with the fandom on this one and it loses serious points because of that. The reason that I can't? The entire fandom has decided that Wednesday Addams, a long-time rare ASPD coded girl, is autistic and "through the lens of Tim Burton" vs acknowledging that she is ASPD coded. Everything that can be an autistic trait, many have cherry-picked as proof she is autistic, and they openly choose to ignore a major step in diagnosis, making sure that the symptoms are not better described elsewhere. I will concede she may be autistic (although tbh I don't think so bc of her serious lack of stimming, - and no the SINGLE DANCE SCENE AT A SCHOOL DANCE doesn't count - lack of meltdowns, and affinity for sitting perfectly still don't read autistic imo), but she has ASPD. A literal therapist talks to her about "the source of (her) antisocial traits" and because she is a child, that is the closest thing to a diagnosis of ASPD she can be given. The girl is loudly ASPD coded just like the character Wednesday Addams always has been.

Further, there is a point to be made about the ASPD coded character being given her own show for it to turn out to be a m*rder mystery as well as her obsession with everything dark, broody, bloody, and macabre. Admittedly, in The Addams Family, that's everyone in her family not just the ASPD coded one but in Wednesday, she is the only character who likes those things so it's a bit ick in that regard. Still, I relate a lot to her and always have and people used to try n bully me in school by calling me Wednesday but my mom showed me it and said I reminded her of Wednesday as a compliment when I was little and I always took it as one after that even when I knew they meant it in a mean way.

Unfortunately, ASPD, unlike many disorders, is not underrepresented in media. It is overrepresented in the worst ways possible. Every other book or movie I can find is full of stereotypes, mean-spirited commentary, and m*rder. There might be something to be said about a character from It's Always Sunny, but that show is a major trigger for me so I haven't been able to watch it to tell, and Lisa from Girl, Interrupted (book or movie) is just... painfully bad but well-loved rep. Like, I love her, but holy crap girlfriend, how did you manage to add stigma in a book and movie about destigmatizing mental health?

The fact that even counting bad but well-loved representation I can still count all of it on one hand sucks, and if anyone has more I am begging you to share in replies.

[wantonwinnie]

I just read The Jedi Path by Daniel Wallace (2016 edition as part of the Secrets of the Galaxy box set, which are all in-universe guidebooks in the Legends continuity). It's not often that a Star Wars book leaves me with a terrible taste in my mouth and was generally not enjoyable, but that's how bad this one was (worst one Ive read so far, unfortunately). This is very ranty, so sorry in advance (and contains spoilers). I've read The Rebel Files, which I really enjoyed. I love the Jedi and was excited to read this book, which makes this one so much more disappointing. I'd give it a 5/10, which is honestly generous.

I'll get the few good things out of the way. It's chalked full of lore from legends about the Jedi (the book was originally published in 2010 and rereleased later). It covers many eras. I like learning details about the different lightsaber forms. The illustrations are nice, if not a little same-y.

However, the content is generally awful and sounds like fanon, even to the legends continuity. I'm not a legends buff but there's a part near the end where one of the in-universe writers disputes misconceptions people have about the Jedi, one of which is that they are kidnappers. The writer's response is that the Jedi can't be kidnappers because they have a legal right to take custody of any force-sensitive child, and part of their duty as a Seer is to take those children. If this was actually a part of the legends continuity, that's a terrible practice to attach to the Jedi, but I suspect this was fanon even in 2010.

Another tidbit is when the book straight up says the "Gray Jedi" are a not only a real in-universe term but a direct threat to Jedi progress. The provided definition of Gray Jedi is just someone who disagrees with the council and is not like the other girlies, and Obi-Wan's annotation says some Jedi considered Qui-Gon to be gray. Also completely fanon as far as I know- the gray jedi was a misinterpretation of a cosmetic option in KOTOR ("gray jedi robes", i.e., the color gray).

There are other wonky bits too. A part of the traditional Jedi trials is the Trial of the Flesh, in which padawans suffer immense pain to test their will. Even though it was relaxed in later eras, I think this is an odd lore at best for Jedi. It doesn't comport at all to teaching compassion or peace. Surely Jedi will face physical pain in active duty, and a religion's practices are going to change over time. But it seems a bit too removed from fundamental principles that it breaks the immersion.

There are also the Jedi Shadows, who straight up try to assassinate Sith lords. I think long ago during times of great conflict it is a bit more believable- but the way it's written makes it seem like they're still around. The Jedi writer also basically says the Shadows are willing to bend their morals to do what needs to be done in ways that other Jedi would find distasteful, which, yeah! Duh! What the fuck!

The general tone of the writing is way off. It comes off as a bit too self-righteous and indignant. The content itself is in that direction too. This entire book almost seems written with preconceived fanon notions in mind. This is why some of Legends is so bad- I like creative freedom for authors, but not to write things that break all immersion or make people have mixed feelings about the Jedi. It's one thing to show the Jedi evolving over time as circumstances or theories shift. But it's another to say "yeah, we take kids, so what?" and other things that just totally break down the intent of the wider story.

I haven't even gotten to the annotations, which honestly degraded the experience, not enhanced it. Most of the weird lore was closer to the end of the book, so I was having a meh time with the main content. But the annotations were at best, only somewhat interesting, and more often they were not worthwhile or downright antithetical to the characters writing them.

Here are a couple examples. When the book discusses the Jedi Code, Qui-Gon basically says that attachment = compassion and this part of the code is thus incorrect. This is not Qui-Gon's character at all from the movies. At least from what I remember, Qui-Gon wasn't questioning the fundamental precepts of Jedi thought about being too attached/obsessive. Also, at one point, Obi-Wan suggests in an annotation he doesn't like spending time with animals. Maybe this is earlier in this life, but it's strange to see this coming from Obi-Wan, who clearly loves animals in TCW and did in ROTS. I know they're extrapolating from his line in TPM about Jar Jar being a pathetic life form or whatever, but it seems counter to his broader character. At best, if this is actually reflective of his legends version, that version sucks! I like that he likes animals! Seems like the book would rather reference a line than actually focus on what the characters would say.

This problem is present with the general approach to annotations, which is that they went for using well-known characters instead of those who could actually make comments that add depth to the story. The annotators are Yoda, Thame Cerulian (Dooku's master), Dooku, Qui-Gon, Obi-Wan, Anakin, Ahsoka, Sidious, and Luke. The best you can say is that they wanted a wide variety of perspectives, but even that is poorly executed. Yoda and Luke's annotations are probably the best just because they cover different points in time, and Luke talks some about how he can apply past teachings to the new academy. But Thame, Qui-Gon, and Ahsoka have very little interesting to say other than to insult non-attachment, make a few references, and Ahsoka chiding Anakin. (Aside: why does Ahsoka even have this book? Half of her comments are "who cares, we are fighting a war!" Which, yeah, you wouldn't be reading this while fighting a war when you would be reading up on tactics, strategies, reports, and training). Dooku constantly complains that the Jedi tolerate inferiority, and Anakin complains about attachment, not using certain powers, etc. Ahsoka, Dooku, and Anakin's comments are all definitely on-brand, but they're more annoying than anything. Of course Sidious' comments are all just "haha Jedi suck, they died". In-character but not interesting or fun to read.

I'm sorry but I came to this book to read Jedi perspectives on Jedi teachings, not Sidious, Dooku, and Anakin. The latter two were Jedi, sure, but they clearly did not subscribe to the Jedi fundamentals even at the time. Obi-Wan, Qui-Gon, and Ahsoka had little interesting to say- no depth of understanding. I loved The Rebel Files from 2017, partially because the annotations were limited to fewer characters and added much more depth to the content. This book, perhaps a product of its time, did not, and actively went against the characters. In all, I'm really sad this book did what it did. It advances false narratives about the Jedi for people to point to. I wouldn't blame fans who only read this book to be like "The Jedi do good things but they also take kids! They kinda suck!" because that's how this book is written. What the fuck.

[checkoutmybookshelf]

Sometimes We Get Together With Friends and Play Catch-Up

Ok, so I didn't actually go through the all-too-common Greek and Roman mythology phase that lots of pre-teen kids and a startling number of future history majors do. I got caught in fairy tales and dragons, so I absolutely missed the Percy Jackson books as they were coming out. I just wasn't interested. Then I had a classmate in Continental Literature in undergrad and every sentence out of her mouth for that entire 16-week semester was "Well AHKSHUALLY, in Percy Jackson..." and at that point I you couldn't have gotten me to read those books at gunpoint.

A dear friend of mine also missed the Percy Jackson books, so we decided to read it together. Y'all...I have THOUGHTS. Let's talk Percy Jackson and the Olympians: The Lightning Thief.

SPOILER WARNING. I will spoil this book, so if you haven't finished this almost 15-year-old children's book and care about spoilers, catch us on the flip side.

Ok, so first and foremost: I can absolutely see why these books are beloved. If you were a Greek mythology enthusiast between ages 9 and 13, I can absolutely see why you'd inhale this book. It's also quite well-written, even at the sentence level, which is not always the case with middle grade books, where plot can occasionally overtake writing style.

The characters and plot were also on point, with a lovely balance of plot action to development. Grover and Annabeth had great development and the tension to friendship balance with Percy was excellent.

I also absolutely love Sally going "yes, let's turn my dickhead, abusive husband into stone and then make fucking BANK selling him as a statue to the 'super-ugly neorealism' enthusiasts." That was just GOOD.

I would also like to give this book major kudos for pulling off "everyman: for kids!" really well, in contrast to lots of chosen one and super special genius/jock/[insert category that only a limited number of kids can relate to here]. I think this would have spoken to so many more kids than other titles that were floating around in the early 2000s, and that is so, so important for kids' self-esteem and self-worth. I am never not grateful for books that made kids in a really challenging point in their lives feel seen and understood and perhaps even brave or strong or full of potential that they had the power to tap into.

So all that said, I think overall The Lightning Thief is a net positive for the world, and Rick Riordan has been a hella net positive for publishing and children's literature.

I do also have a pretty key issue with this book, and the issue is also just baffling to me. Rick Riordan rather famously said that

Percy was his way of telling his son, "Learning differences don't mean there's anything wrong with you. In fact, it is a mark of being very special indeed.” It was a message he says Haley “had no problem believing.” Seeing himself in fiction “empowered him,” Riordan adds. Since The Lightning Thief debuted in 2005, the story’s reach has moved well beyond Riordan’s child, the author’s work now sold in 37 countries. No matter where they live, Riordan notes, “It can be really empowering for kids to know that they are seen and understood. They may behave or process information differently in a classroom setting, but that doesn't mean they are flawed.”

Which is awesome and kids with neurodivergence and "learning differences" should feel seen and supported. This is great, I have no beef with this.

What I DO take issue with in this book is the truly baffling prejudice against physical disability and the reiteration of some genuinely harmful disability tropes, including a variation on disability drag.

Even in 2005, using "crippled" to describe people with physical disabilities was absolutely uncool, yet "crippled" is the terminology that is used throughout the book. Robert McRuer wouldn't publish his seminal Crip Theory: Cultural Signs of Queerness and Disability until 2006, so it wouldn't be realistic to expect Riordan to use "cripped" instead, but literally ANYTHING ELSE than crippled would be nice, because that word sets my teeth on edge. In this vein, we also get Annabeth leaning into the pervasive idea that disability and beauty cannot exist together, and the book does not check her or correct her, suggesting a tacit agreement. Here's Annabeth's contribution to disparaging physical disability:

There was literally no reason to connect what is implied to be an orthopedic disability with handsomeness or a lack thereof. The two have basically nothing to do with each other unless we're leaning into the moralizing about how disability is a visible sign of moral ugliness. That is an old, OLD disability trope, and we hate to see it because it moralizes bullshit beauty aesthetics and suggests that if you are physically disabled, you cannot be beautiful. Like, I cannot imagine being a physically disabled kid and reading this in a book and not being just absolutely crushed. Like...a pretty girl in a book has just said that she (and in a kid's mind, the leap to "and any other pretty girl" is less a leap and more the logical next step) will never find you handsome. That would be devastating.

Ok, so strictly speaking, "disability drag" is a term that describes the Hollywood predilection for casting abled actors to play disabled characters. That's not strictly what is happening in this book, but it's an easier shorthand than "character is faking a disability for [reasons]." The fact that Grover and Chiron are faking physical disabilities to "pass" for mortals is genuinely harmful.

PEOPLE IN THE REAL WORLD RIGHT NOW THINK THIS IS WHAT DISABLED PEOPLE IN THE REAL WORLD DO. AND THOSE ASSHOLES MAKES LAWS AND POLICIES THAT MAKE IT HARDER FOR DISABLED PEOPLE TO ACCESS EVERYTHING FROM EDUCATION TO MEDICAL CARE. Perpetuating the idea that disabled people are actually faking their disabilities to deceive others or game social systems does real harm. It also can lead physically disabled kids to wonder if they might actually be faking (and holy tits, do not make kids self-gaslight, that is so damaging) and/or push past their physical limits and HARM THEMSELVES to prove something to abled adults or peers, and disabled kids do not owe ANYONE proof.

Honestly, the way that Grover and Chiron were faking physical disabilities ruined the reading experience for me. Especially since Percy himself is over here at the beginning of the book calling Grover out for faking a disability because he walks awkwardly but can run faster than most kids. Like...this is just bullshit and harmful. Even though it is "explained" by the fact that Grover is a satyr, the fact that the book doesn't call Percy out for making the worst possible assumptions about a classmate's body isn't something you want kids thinking is acceptable. And I don't think that going "oh, he's a satyr" does anything to show that assuming that your classmates are lying about their physical disabilities or differences is KIND OF SHITTY.

It genuinely baffles me that Riordan has completely split the mind from the body in this book and made having ADHD and dyslexia a sign that you're a hero while simultaneously shaming physical disability. I literally cannot comprehend how this split makes logical sense. I am CONFUSED.

The friend I read this book with and I will be watching the new Percy Jackson series, so I'm curious to see how Disney is going to address this absolute contradiction that is inherently baked into the book.

[sniperjade]

10 Books to get to know me

Rules: 10 (non-ancient) books for people to get to know you better, or that you just really like.

Thank you to @bluesundaycake for the tag.

So I'm going to start with what the hell is this non-ancient business? I am going to take that at face value and not mention The Odyssey because that is an actually ancient book. I know the rules are just trying to say not an old book but I am old so everyone will just have to deal.

Distress - Greg Egan

This is my favourite book. It was written in 1995 and I have to mention that because it was so groundbreaking for its time. This was the first time that I had ever read a story where someone who was Agender was a character. Akili is the main love interest in the story and will forever hold a special place in my heart.

Essentially the book is about a strange mental disease that is spreading throughout the globe. At the same time the physics world is all excited because Violet Mosala is developing a new Theory of Everything. The story follows the life of Andrew Worth who is science journalist covering the theory.

The reason I love this so much is because the main moral of the story is that no one can know what anyone else is thinking. You can stereotype as much as you like but you can never truly know. It's why I always try to give people the benefit of the doubt.

Enders Game Series - Orson Scott Card

Yes. You're going to get a lot of science fiction on this list. Just deal with it.

What's not to love? It's dark. The morals are so grey. What would you do to save humanity? What is a bit of casual Xenocide between friends. The characters are brilliant and nuanced (Bean is my favourit). The story makes you question how horrible of a person you are. Brilliant.

There's way to much plot to summarise but here is the brief. Aliens attacked earth. The government created super intelligent children and trained them for war to beat the aliens. These are their stories.

The Lightbringer Series - Brent Weeks

There's a couple of reasons why this is one of my favourites but I will start with the plot. It really is just one of those child presents with phenomenal powers, learns to use them and eventually ends up saving the day. Here's where it's different.

The world building. This magic system is one of the most interesting and creative ones I have come across. It's based off colour and light and is just so well thought out that it makes me... Hang on I have a gif for this.

Secondly the freaking Gavin twist! If you've read the series you know what I'm talking about. I won't do any spoilers but just know there is a twist and it changes everything.

Silverthorn & A Darkness at Sethanon - Raymond E Feist

What can I say about this one. You may be surprised that it's not Magician and that I didn't say the whole series but these two go together and are so mean so much more to me than the rest. Why? It's Prince Arutha's story. Prince Arutha is such a second child and I just vibe with that. His brother is handsome and charismatic and everyone loves him but Arutha is smart and canny and not as well liked but he is also fair and kind and honestly I could just go on about him forever. The story is gripping and heartbreaking and brilliant.

Wool, Shift & Dust - Hugh Howey

This is post apocalyptic conspiracy gold. The human race consists only of what is left living inside giant bunkers in the ground that they call silos. The atmosphere outside is so toxic that no one can go outside. The series starts with an execution. You see they don't have the resources to have long term prisoners so if anyone does something that deserves long term incarceration they are executed. How are they executed? I'm so glad you asked. They are sent outside. They are sent outside with some cleaning supplies and are asked to clean the windows of the silo because they are always filthy as no one can go outside to clean them.

Anyway the political plotline is good, the conspiracy is better and the main character is a tough as nails BAMF called Juliette.

Beauty - Sheri S Tepper

Trigger warning: Rape/Non-Con

No one mixes fantasy and science fiction quite like Tepper and she does it best in this book. It is like a love letter to the fairytale genre. One of the best parts is picking out which tale each character represents. It has time travel, fairies, love, trauma and everything in between. It follows the story of Beauty as she tries to escape a curse to be with her one true love and instead gets lost in time, space and between worlds.

Dark Rise - C.S. Pacat

The first magical realism of the list. I didn't know this when I started reading it but the whole crux of this story is that Pacat was trying to write the worst set up for a relationship that she could imagine and oh boy did she. You will not see it coming but it is so so good.

Anyway the plot is this. Will is your typical chosen one working to stop the rise of an evil Dark Lord with the help of a few people including Violet his crush. It has references to the crusades and the lost magic of the old world and a unique secret order. Here's the thing. Nothing is what you think and the twists in this book are freaking amazing.

If you've read it hit up my DMs because I cannot talk about it enough and I am dying to read book two (coming out Dec 2023).

I've also read her Captive Prince series which I also enjoyed and was almost included in this list.

The Hunger Games Series - Suzanne Collins

We all know this one. If you don't what rock have you been hiding under. I do love tragedy.

That said I know not as many people have read "A Ballard of Songbirds and Snakes" but please do. Everyone keeps asking me how can I get past Coriolis Snow being the main character? If you haven't guessed by now I love villian origin stories and this is a bloody good one.

Does it excuse who he is and what he does? No but that's part of why it's good. How can we not get behind a spectacular fall from grace. Just read it.

The Wayfarer Series - Becky Chambers

I can't believe I almost forgot this one! Becky Chambers is here writing freaking cutting edge romance. The first book ends in one of the most heartbreaking tragedies I have ever read. Her universe and world building is so creative and different that nothing quite matches it.

Essentially in this universe humans have no home planet. Earth was destroyed hundreds of years ago so we are the immigrants and the minority in the galaxy as we have no home of our own.

Each book is stand alone but I would recommend reading them all as they are that good. Each explores a different set of characters and stories with some overlap so you do get the occasional callbacks to previous books. These are full of characters trying to get by while compromising and appreciating their differences.

Truckers, Diggers and Wings - Terry Pratchett

I had to mention something by Terry Pratchett and I choose this one because it was the first. Soul Music was a close second but this one has such a special place in my heart. It is the story of the nome Masklin who grew up in a hole. A literal hole. It follows his story as he learns that the world is much bigger than he grew up to believe.

I don't know if you know this but I grew up in a small country town halfway up the coast of Western Australia. This book speaks to me because it resonates so much with my personal story because I did grow up and find out the world was much bigger than I had ever realised.

Ok I'm done. That took forever. I may have lost count.

Tagging @dont-stop-her-now @artemisdraws14 @mistresslynndramione @bookloverdream-blessedindeed @efinna @goodnight-fraublucher @bluestringpudding @princessma1foy

[anthroparis]

can you go more in depth on why you hated the barbie movie, i thought it was mid but i somewhat enjoyed it. mostly because i took an edible before going. also i love your blog for how angsty and opinionated you are

I would love to! and thank you, I try not to be so edgy (I used to be worse) but I am very opinionated and as my hero ron swanson said, if you believe in something, you sign your name to it.

Intro

"Hollywood is unoriginal and they love money" -ralph sepe, j.r.

thesis: my problem is more that it's probably one of the most soulless and offensive takes on feminism I have seen in my life, and people keep dragging its rotting corpse around on parade like it's accomplished literally anything.

like. come on.

actual movie parts

speaking on technical terms, I really fucking hated the pacing. so many random, useless points were brought up and then never developed. it's like gerwig didn't know what she wanted to say so she just said everything and never developed any of it. there were so many characters, plots and subplots, and conflicts in the movie and none had a good setup or payoff. like so much happened to the point where it feels like nothing happened at all. I'm not even quite sure what the point was? what were they even trying to say? women are powerful? it's okay to be a girl? aging is okay? like oh my god. I'm not saying you can't have a ton of themes, I'm saying that if you don't know how to make them work together and flesh them out enough, it's going to DESTROY your pacing. it was like watching fucking love on a leash with how many things started and ended right after one another.

okay those are my film school dropout gripes. now onto why this movie completely failed as a feminist story:

the feminism

it was a big-budget, star-packed movie made in hollywood

it's fucking barbie

"barbie was made to make women hate men" "barbie was made to empower women" BARBIE WAS MADE FOR MONEY. IF THE PRODUCERS DIDN'T THINK IT WAS GOING TO MAKE A PROFIT, THEY WOULDN'T HAVE MADE IT. IT WAS MADE TO SELL TICKETS. IT WAS MADE TO MAKE COMMERCIALS FOR. IT WAS MADE TO ADVERTISE MERCHANDISE.

it is actually literally not revolutionary at ALL to put money in a producer's pocket and more fast fashion in a landfill. stop pretending like it's feminism. it's not. it's capitalism that is preying on a demographic. congrats, you just fell victim to advertising!

okay now that that's said:

this is the kind of movie I imagine liberal parents would show their small children to introduce them to feminist theory. I saw someone on instagram saying that you shouldn't take your kids to this because it contains "themes that they might not understand" like fucking what? what themes? there was absolutely 0 nuance at all in that movie. nothing was symbolic or thematic, they literally just TOLD YOU WHAT WAS HAPPENING.

this is like if they made a picture book about feminism into a movie. I'm sorry but throwing around terms and buzzwords means literally nothing to me.

you want to write a powerful movie about defying gender roles, misogyny, and wanting to just exist without the weight of expectations? then write a fucking movie about a person. Whip It (2009) is an excellent example of a feminist movie that outsells barbie in every written regard, because it's not hamfisting these terms to fumble around a slightly progressive point, it's telling a story about a humanized, sympathetic character who is struggling with her own relationship to femininity. like I'm sorry, but there is nothing relatable about barbies. I am not flawlessly beautiful, I am not effortlessly successful. most women aren't.

which brings me to my next point: this movie is overly obsessed with the idea of being a woman rather than being a person who happens to be a woman.

I want to see movies about people. just people. not defined by their genders. exhibiting a wide range of traits, interests, experiences, feelings, memories. I don't want to see barbie's steps into ""real womanhood"" being going to a fucking gyno, because women are not defined by our pussies. believe it or not!

I strongly, STRONGLY disliked the really heavy-handed terfy messages in this movie. I understand that most people would not notice them but I do. I see that shit.

here I'll give you one: barbies who are not enlightened by their knowledge of their "womanhood" are brainwashed by the kens. WHAT THE FUCK WAS THAT. I'm reaching here but the whole brainwashing bit is a super fucking terfy talking point about women who like men. I've heard it a lot as someone who engages in kink.

I'll give you another one: universal girlhood. to "free" the brainwashed barbies, the enlightened ones have to tell them about these things that "every women experiences!"

I remember watching this bit and not relating to a SINGLE thing that was listed. not ONE thing. I am a cis woman. but because I am gnc and was raised to be gnc, I could not relate to these experiences. I do not worry about gaining weight. I am not self-conscious of my stretch marks, and never have been. I am not afraid of being mean or loud when it's necessary.

again I identify as cis. I'm just gnc. I have constantly struggled with feelings of not being a girl in the right way. I imagine lots of other people feel the same thing. this constantly snivelly "well you have to fit THIS criteria to be a girl" nonsense is so fucking harmful to me, to trans women, to other girls who don't feel like they fit within traditional gender norms or struggle with feeling like they're not doing femininity right.

barbie gives us an incredibly narrow, specific window into femininity, and yes, actually, it does reinforce gender norms. there's not really anything revolutionary about being conventionally attractive, smart, and successful.

that's where I really struggle with this movie. it represents a very tiny, limited piece of womanhood and then packages and sends it off as the full picture. it's exclusionary. it's narrow-minded. it's incomplete. things just happen. things just happen!

nothing about this representation of womanhood felt organic to me. it literally felt like it was written by some guy. it had "heyyy queen I saw your tweet about how men are trash and I just wanted to let you know that I agree. although I myself am a man, (i know, ugh)" written all over it.

they were so close. SO close with that part where normal barbie feels like she's less valuable as a woman for not being successful. I like that point a lot, and would've liked to see a movie that focused around that instead. but it's just not not true. she's gorgeous. she's intelligent. she understands politics. she's confident. she has friends. measuring women's success through numbers is literally corporate feminism. it's bullshit.

I would like to see movies about women who are people. women who are flawed, not in the palatable, socially-acceptable way. not in a cute, fashionable way. I want gross girls, I want loud, mean girls, I want girls who exist for themselves. I want girls who are just getting by. I want girls who are impassioned, I want girls who scream and are messy and violent.

because these things are not gendered. let's stop acting like they are.

I am so fucking tired of corporate feminism. of this idea that feminism needs to be palatable to be taken seriously. that women are not naturally aggressive, or loud, or mean. that we are defined by our genitals.

nothing or worth or significance happened in that movie. the arguments about it are stupid

outro

"It just exists. It exists so they can make commercials for it. So that you can pay money to see it. Films aren't made just to exist"

-ralph sepe jr.

[missameliep]

Safe - Chapter 4: Hope is a weird thing

Book: Wake the Dead

Characters: Troy Hassan; Brynn and Malia Jones.

Rating: M (see notes bellow)

Word count: 1.6k

Summary: Troy Hassan reminisces about his childhood, life at the Tower and hopeful days, when he was gifted friendship and love.

Notes:

English is not my first language;

Troy Hassan and Brynn belong to Pixelberry;

Pre-WTD events;

I threw canon through the window, I had written this part already when I read the last chapter and I'm actively ignoring how Troy and MC met and keeping my version because it fits the plot and the relationship better;

Just like the book, the entire series is rated M because of triggering subjects: throughout there are mentions of death, trauma and violence compliant to canon; readers discretion advised.

The sisters who were rescued by the scouts’ team were finally cleared and joined the other kids at the collective room. Brynn and Malia were their names. At bedtime, they huddled in the upper berth assigned for the eldest of them. They were ten and five years old, and wary of loud noises like him. Many kids at the Tower were not. Why would they be? They were brought to the colony before the outbreak, their eyes never contemplated what happened to the outside world or the face of a real zombie. They fear zombies in theory as much as they fear dragons, and Troy is almost sure the latter are not real.

Malia, the younger sister, didn’t speak for days and quietly followed her sister like a shadow.

“Trauma”, a doctor said one morning scribbling down on some paper when all the orphaned children were queued and examined.

Troy didn’t know what trauma meant and assumed it was a disease common in this New World, considering how many times the word flies from the doctors’ mouths.

Late at night, after most kids were fast asleep, whisperings were heard coming from the berth across from his. Malia spoke in the lowest tone possible to her older sister.

Sisters always speak to each other, don’t they?

It appears so.

Troy listened to them, Brynn’s voice morphed into a calm and affectionate tone lulling her little sister.

He wished he had a sister too. Or a brother.

Brynn smiled when Troy got closer to her sister one morning after breakfast and handed an improvised doll made from a piece of cloth and rubbish discarded by the scavengers. It was the best he could do with the material found and his limited manual abilities. In fact, it was hideous. He thought about throwing it away and almost dropped the idea entirely half-way from the door to the place the two girls were sitting together.

But perhaps they could laugh about it? Laughing is good.

“It’s a doll,” he said holding the hideous thing in front of the little girl’s face. “For you.”

Malia stared at it in awe and thanked him not with words – it would take a few more attempts until she finally spoke to him –, but with her eyes and a wide smile.

They would be friends; he knew that ever since.

And Troy was right.

They became inseparable.

So far, their friendship outlasted that excuse of a doll she carried around.

The Jones’ sisters quickly became Troy’s favorite people.

In fact, they became sort of his family.

Unlike Troy, Brynn is quiet and far too no-nonsense for a ten-year-old. Seldom one would see a smile and any happiness transpire, making her warm brown skin glow – he’s one of the few who had the privilege. Some older kids say she is one of the prettiest girls in the colony, but she prefers to ignore that sort of attention. Most of the time, she keeps to herself. Miss Little Goody Two-Shoes. Discreet. Resourceful. Loyal. Tough. The toughest person to have around. She will do anything for Malia; and so much more than Troy deserves to keep him out of trouble.

Troy became Brynn’s little brother. Sort of. She'd never admit it out loud.

Even when he and Malia started getting into too much trouble, despite her sister’s warnings, Brynn did not turn her back on him. Often, he would be in the receiving end of Brynn’s glares and scolds, but he doesn’t mind if she is hard on him, because it means she cares. She wants to protect Malia, and he gets that. If he had a sister or a brother, he would do that too.

Troy is two weeks older than Malia, but she’s taller, better at hide-and-seek and, despite the physical resemblance, she's nothing like her sister Brynn. Malia is her own person. Clever. Effortlessly funny. Whenever she’s around, you’ll laugh until your tummy aches. Kindhearted. Despite repeating she does it for personal gain, she loves drawing the residents of the colony. Their gratitude makes her emotional and he knows how many sheets of the little notebook she carries around were spent on perfectioning the portrait of Mrs. Gonzales and her son Willie, who got bitten by a drone on his first mission as a scout. Malia didn’t charge for it and her eyes glistened with tears afterwards, which she fiercely denied and tried to divert the subject with a game of tag.

Once she found her tongue, Malia could speak almost as much as Troy. She’s a big mouth, that’s for sure, and never knows when to shut up no matter how many times she gets into trouble. So full of opinions. He loves it about her, how she always speaks her mind and always keeps her head up. Unlike him. In fact, he loves many things about her, even the annoying things she does or how awful her musical taste is.

Malia doesn’t remember much from the Old World; she doesn’t remember her dads, the two old retrievers her sister misses deeply or their house. Therefore, her world is Brynn and Brynn alone.

As time went by, however, it seems that it expanded to include Troy, which made him happy – as much as a boy living the end of the world could be.

From the stories he heard, the Tower used to be some sort of secret military facility, and in the first months after the outbreak most who lived there were the military and their families, many of which arrived right before the outbreak reached the US. The years changed this and everything else. There was twice as many people living there now, but many more could be welcomed considering all the empty bunks and rooms.

Troy was nine years old when a group of adults arrived at the Tower. They came from some colony at the West looking for shelter after the rainy season.

Amongst the new arrivals was tall and scrawny looking Mr. Lee, with his unkempt beard, quiet voice, and even quieter laugh. The man was in his early forties and used to be some kind of teacher at a big school or something, but now it seemed he was the one who needed to be taught – at least about the ways of the New World and the Tower.

Some people said he went a little crazy after the death of his spouse; others said he was a subversive, whatever that meant.

Troy thought he was the coolest adult around.

Mr. Lee wanted to teach kids about art and music, like it was his mission in life. He loved movies, old Hollywood and told them about musicals. The idea of people singing instead of talking was ridiculous, therefore Troy became obsessed with it and might have started pretending to be the protagonist of his own musical just because… He would sing about everything and nothing at all, and Malia eagerly mimicked this habit simply to annoy the hell out of people, especially Brynn. Good times!

Like most good things, it didn’t last...

With a religious fervor, Mr. Lee proclaimed the beauties of the Old World none of which kids like Troy had seen, and insisted that kids should be taught about it – music, art, history… In one of the assemblies, he shared his ideas. Half the presents booed and used stronger words to shut him up; there was no time to lose with Old World nonsense. The other half remained strangely silent. Later, Troy learned what they feared.

Soon, there were no more assemblies, fewer debates, and plenty new rules.

Why would anyone need the meetings when Marcus Blackstock was such a competent leader? Adults often said this kind of thing to each other and to the kids.

After that evening, Troy cannot remember the last time he saw Mr. Lee. Officially, it was said he had chosen to leave, there were rumours that he was banished… Some were sad for a while, others grateful to have a mouth less to feed, specially one from a troublemaker.  Soon he was forgotten, like so many were over the years.

It was not the strangest thing that nobody ever questioned – at least in public – the Tower’s teaching methods: kids learning to fight and survive, the bare minimum of math, writing and reading to be resourceful workers. No one wants you to bring the wrong supplies or drink bleach and miss your shift.

Obedience was taught at school – a lesson lost on him and Malia.

Discipline and punishment go hand in hand in the Tower.

Vigilance increased and the same surveillance cameras pointed at the outside world were installed in the hallways too. Just another toll for Blackstock’s protection.

If you’re following the rules, you need not to worry, right? Who needed privacy or any of those Old World’s fancy schmancy anyways? People need order and protection, they said.

Around that time were implemented new rules and the first orders to destroy every reminiscence from the Old World that was not catalogued as weapon, amno, food, medicine, fuel, or other useful resources in the descriptive list afixed at the supply room Troy started helping when he was eleven.

It was a shame, really.

Troy often looked through the discarded items, searching amidst shredded pictures and ripped albums for something that could have belonged to his family. He did that for years, even after Mr. Deniz told him the scavenger teams never went that far and even if they did, the houses they lived would have probably been looted by now.

But hope is a weird thing, isn’t it?

Watching the rare home-made videos that were smuggled into the Tower, usually mistaken by porn, became something he looked forward to, even if it wasn’t his family. Despite the bad lighting, unflattering angles and people speaking over one another, it was one of those few chances to have a real glimpse at what life used to be like, how people sang at birthday parties or cheered silly things like a little kid who would not fall on their butt.

Going through this stuff made him feel like that dude with the fedora and whip recovering artifacts from ancient times... even though this stuff was from just a few decades ago, plenty of them were as mysterious and unfamiliar as if they were from like Ancient Egypt or something. And did he crave that knowledge? Abso-fucking-lutely!