#than a social commentary on a topic of the existence of people which is currently being heavily debated by the biggest nations worldwide | Explore Tumblr Posts and Blogs

061890 · 3 years

Text

Asougi and Naruhodou’s speeches and localization

A while back when the Great Ace Attorney was first released, I made a post on my DGS Twitter on some… Not great localization changes made in the first Escapade in the game's DLC. Namely, the topic of Asougi's speech.

In the Dai Gyakuten Saiban subtitles channel's translation of the DLC, Asougi's speech excerpt is this:

"Now's the time to make a stand! All you young and elderly, gentlemen and ladyfolk of the downtrodden classes!"

In Japanese: 「さあ！今こそ立ち上がれ�� 低所得者層の老若男女よ!」

While the translation uses the phrase "downtrodden classes", the original text uses 「低所得者層」 specifically, referring to low-income working class people. This is relevant due to the fact that, in the late 1800s and early 1900s, rapid modernization and changes in Japanese labor relations led to the mistreatment of the working class. The emphasis on social harmony, along with censorship and restricting the right to assembly (which would later become criminalized in 1900), made it difficult to organize labor strikes.

And yes, while this DLC episode was very much a slice-of-life thing compared to the rest of the Great Ace Attorney, the original topics of both Asougi and Naruhodou's speeches are very informative of their characters and political views; Asougi especially, which makes the changes made in the localization even more confusing.

See, at the time, rapid industrialization was done in order to bolster the military, as the government believed back then that doing so was necessary at the threat of European imperialism; however, as real-life history shows, this directly led to Japan doing irreparable damage in its own imperialist conquest.

So, for Asougi to have given a speech explicitly in support of low-income working class people was not just him being anti-capitalist, it also very much had to do with him being anti-militarist and anti-imperialist as well.

Him planning to say 「老若男女」 ("men and women of all ages") —specifically, him mentioning women of low-income in the working class— also references how labor relations for female workers in the textile industry were mostly girls from poor families that worked in wealthy households in preparation for marriage. Similarly, Asougi acknowledging workers of all ages references how at the time, Japanese labor unions were more inclusive than that of the United States', as apprentices could join regardless of age and skill level.

Kazuma Asougi is, to the surprise of few, an incredibly political person. In fact, his actions here and generally recalcitrant treatment of authority figures, parallel left-wing socialist views at the time:

"One ideological faction [of the early labor leaders] favored discussion and cooperation with management, avoided strikes and political issues, and tried to win higher wages through improved productivity. These were moderates who favored harmony between labor and capital. The other major faction favored confrontation with management, thrived on political issues, and embraced the strike weapon. These were the left-wing socialists." — The Birth of the Japanese Labor Movement by Stephen E. Marsland

Even the year wherein he gave his speech, namely, the summer of 1897 is relevant to Japan's labor movement and how Asougi's character is rooted in exploitation by Western powers. This is because in April of 1897, Takano Fusataro, a Japanese labor activist, wrote "A Summons to the Workers", calling for the workers of Japan to organize at the threat of being exploited by foreign capitalist powers. Asougi's speech even parallels some of it, but notably, advocates for confrontation now while Fusataro discouraged revolution and radicalization, instead advocating for gradual change.

From "A Summons to the Workers":

「立て職工諸君、立つて組合を組織し、以てその重大なる責務とそのの男子たる面目を保つを務めよ。」

"Stand up, you workers! Stand up and organize unions!"

Asougi's speech:

「さあ！今こそ立ち上がれ！低所得者層の老若男女よ!」

"Now's the time to make a stand! All you young and elderly, gentlemen and ladyfolk of the downtrodden classes!"

Note: Fusataro references men due to "Summons" being directed towards factory workers at the time, but Asougi's speech generally references workers of all ages due to having a different audience.

In sharp contrast, Naruhodou's speech is about filial piety:

"Let's all cherish our mothers and fathers!"

Asougi losing all support for what was considered a very gutsy and controversial speech when he made a single slip-up —that being the infamous tongue twister— where Naruhodou wins for a very simple, even boring, speech tells us a lot about how they're seen by society.

Asougi in canon is considered arrogant and annoying by multiple authority figures —namely, Auchi— because he's outspoken about current events and politics; and while being 23 years old is very much an adult by our standards, in Meiji era Japan, one couldn't vote unless they were male, over the age of 25, and paid taxes of at least 15 yen per year. This was something that mainly landowners and ex-samurai could do.

Naruhodou, on the other hand, is initially a typical Japanese young man that conforms to the status quo. He dislikes going against his parents' wishes, and as his speech shows, advocates for an idea that's the standard in Japanese society. He's also notably apolitical, as originally, when he claims he and Asougi talked about politics over lunch, Asougi corrects him stating he only ever talked about comedy theatre.

Note: While Naruhodou uses the term 「愛国」 (あいこく, lit. love of one's country, basically patriotism) when talking about he and Asougi's "debates", from literally everything we know about Asougi's political views, I seriously doubt Asougi was being patriotic when he criticizes the government as often as he does. That, and the fact that Naruhodou is already a very unreliable narrator and doesn’t even remember what actually happened.

Similarly, in the Japan-only DLC episode for Dai Gyakuten Saiban 2, he chides Naruhodou for not keeping up with current events:

Asougi: "It sounds like you haven't been reading the papers, Naruhodou."

Naruhodou: "N-No, not so much lately..."

Asougi: [...] "Defence attorneys didn't exist in our country until only recently. Our reputations are still as low as mud, being called shysters who make underhanded deals. It's stuff like this which makes us have to claw back the people's trust. You should read at least this much, Naruhodou."

Naruhodou: "Urghhh… Newspapers are too complicated…"

Now, to return to the topic of the Great Ace Attorney, Asougi in the localization instead gives this speech:

Asougi: "So arise, ladies and gentlemen, and applaud our forefathers' plight and the fight for filial piety!"

...Thus, making him losing to Naruhodou a matter of skill and verbal articulation rather than that of politics. While again, yes, the DLC episodes are very much just extra content, the fact of the localization changing this not only weakens Asougi's character due to him being a very political person, but goes directly against his character.

After all, his original speech was a call to action for laborers in a time where labor relations were based in a parent-child (oyataka and kokata) dynamic for employers and employees respectively. To have him say that when he originally challenged this authority is just plain wrong, especially when Japanese society expects one to defer to their elders and authority.

Not only that, but Asougi's motivations for traveling to London had to do with how he and his immediate family were killed or harmed because of the Professor ordeal. He makes no mention of being obligated by his family name, even when he tells Naruhodou and Susato about them, nor the idea of clearing Genshin's name of wrongdoing. After all, while Genshin supposedly being the Professor was concealed from the public, it still would have brought him and his family shame in the wider Asougi family as a result.

While the Great Ace Attorney being localized certainly brings many great things —accessibility, directors' commentary, etc.— to the Ace Attorney's audience, it has several flaws in its localization, and this speech thing is just one of them; one particularly egregious example being Megundal being made Irish in a time where they were racially discriminated against, not to mention the antisemitism in DGS1-3, but that's a post for another day.

In the meantime, I can only wonder why this change was made to a character whose story is inherently rooted in questioning authority, and speaking out regarding Japanese politics and current events at the time.

#dgs #dai gyatuken saiban #meta #the great ace attorney #tgaa #kazuma asougi #tgaa2 spoilers #tgaa spoilers #dgs2 spoilers #this one's... a long one. my god.#localization unfortunately opening the floodgates for more super not great historically insensitive choices #i'll most likely write on megundal/mcgilded next since there's also a lot of stuff to unpack there

706 notes · View notes

attemptsonherlifepdf · 3 years

Text

bojack horseman and bo burnham: the art of acting like you’re acting and the comedy of misery

at the core of bojack horseman, raphael bob-waksberg’s 2014 comedy, is a story about the relationship between performance and depression. the protagonist of this renowned tragicomedy is best described as a sympathetic villain; he is shown to clearly be in the wrong across various events of the show, and is explicitly referred to as a bad person, but the audience is granted deep access to his personal struggles, resulting in some portions of the audience finding themselves on bojack’s side. the duality of his character is complex, but can be broken down into some core components, that all stem from the impacts of stardom and performance. the standup comedy of bo burnham arguably echoes this sentiment in real time. having been a performer from a young age, burnham creates work that serves as a satirical commentary on the life of entertainers. he uses original songs to explore the reliance upon and resentment for his performative nature both onstage and within his personal life. both the comedian and the netflix show are widely understood to be thinly veiling their critiques of the entertainment industry behind a particular brand of witty and absurd humour.

both bojack and burnham’s content openly criticises their audiences and explicitly states the manufactured nature of the narrative the audience is fed. in the fifth season of bojack horseman, the show satirises itself by having bojack star in a police procedural drama, parts of which are actively written by other characters to reflect events of bojack’s life. the titular character he plays, philbert, is the epitome of selfish male angst, and an example of what bob-waksberg’s show could have been; another story about a sad and angry man whose guilt supposedly makes up for the people he has hurt. according to bojack, philbert teaches us ‘we’re all terrible, so we’re all okay’, an interpretation that is harshly disputed by diane: ‘that’s not the point of philbert, for guys to watch it and feel okay. i dont want you, or anyone else, justifying their shitty behaviour because of the show.’ this moment is a direct reaction to some of the online reception bojack horseman has received. various circles of the show’s fanbase have found themselves relating to the protagonist to the point of defending his untoward behaviour, a response not intentioned by the show’s creators. this is not the only example of bob-waksberg’s ability to make his work self-evaluative. in season six’s exposure of bojack and sarah lynn’s problematic relationship, characters question their sexual encounter from the first season. the writers use this as a way of examining their own choices, and the harmful tropes they played into when using this exploitative sexual encounter as a gag. this self-evaluative quality is what sets bojack apart as a show that assesses the performance it participates in, much like the comedy of bo burnham.

bo burnham is known for directly addressing his audience, particularly in terms of discouraging idolisation and parasocial relationships. some examples of this manifest as responses to hecklers rather than a planned bit in the show, for instance:

heckler: i love you!

bo: no you don’t

heckler: i love the IDEA of you!

bo: stop participating!

he actively addresses the issues posed by being an entertainer, and encourages the audience to understand and recognise that his onstage persona is just that: an exaggerated persona. not once does burnham claim to be fully authentic onstage, and even moments of authenticity we see in his latest special, inside, are staged. we make the assumption that having the physical setting of a stage stripped away grants us a more personal look at the entertainer’s life, but he makes it clear that even in his own home we still see the aspects he has carefully constructed rather than the full truth. arguably though, parts of the show really are authentic; in his monologue during make happy, bo deconstructs his own show in a way that is similar to bojack horseman’s later seasons, admitting that all he knows is performing and thus making a show about the more mundane and relatable aspects of life would feel ‘incredibly disingenuous.’ in his attempts to separate himself from this onstage persona he actually manages to blur the lines between what is acting and what is now part of his nature as a result of his job. this notion is echoed in bojack horseman as bojack’s attention seeking nature is attributed to his years acting in front of a camera every day.

bo suggests that the era of social media has created a space in which children’s identities mimic that of an entertainer like himself, describing the phenomenon as ‘performer and audience melded together.’ in this observation he criticises the phenomenon. bo attempts to force the audience to recognise the ways in which their lives are becoming shaped by the presence of an audience and to some extent uses his own life as a warning tale against this. he points out the way in which the ‘tortured artist trope’ means that your cries for help or roundabout attempts of addressing mature themes such as substance abuse, mental illness and trauma become part of that on stage persona and therefore become part of the joke. both bo and bojack address these topics in more discrete manners earlier in their careers, but this eventually becomes expected, and thus they are forced to explicitly detail their struggles with these topics in order to be taken seriously. even then, portions of the audience are inclined to see it as part of the persona or as something that fuels the creators creativity and thus does not need to be addressed as a legitimate issue. the emphasis on creating a character or persona promotes the commodification of mental illness: any struggle must be made into a song or a joke or a bit, must be turned into part of the act in order to have value. this actually serves to delegitimise these emotions and create a disconnect between the feeling and the person, as it becomes near impossible to exist without feeling as though you are acting. even when an artist’s cries for help become blatant, they continue to go ignored because now they serve the purpose of creating content that criticises the industry they stem from. online audiences can be seen as treating bo burnham and his insightful work as existing to demonstrate the negative effects entertaining can have, and because this insight is useful or thought-provoking to audiences, he is almost demanded to keep entertaining and creating. in response to this demand, his work becomes more meta and his messages become clearer, and the more obvious his messages, the more people he reaches. this increases audience demands and traps entertainers in a cycle fraught with internal conflict.

during bojack’s second season, bojack’s date asks him, ‘come on, do that bojack thing where you make a big deal and everyone laughs, but at the same time we relate, because you're saying the things polite society won't.’ this moment exemplifies how aspects of his genuine personality have now become a part of his persona and this is demanded of him in genuine and serious situations, undermining the validity of his emotional reactions. he immediately makes a rude comment to the waitress at the restaurant they’re in and satisfies his date by performing that character he has set himself out to be. some circles of the fan base have argued that bojack is written as a depiction of somebody with borderline personality disorder, offering a psychoanalytical lens through which to view this notion of performance. a defining symptom of borderline personality disorder is a fluctuating sense of self; having grown up on camera, being demanded to perform to others as young as six years old, bojack’s sense of self will have been primarily dictated by the need to act. whether this acting is for the sake of comedy, or as a representation of masking his mental illness, when they need to act is taken away bojack entirely loses his sense of self and relapses into his addictions: ‘i felt like a xerox of a xerox of a person.’ burnham’s depictions of depression run along a similar vein; in his new special he poses the idea that his comedy no longer serves the same personal purpose it once did for him. he questions ‘shit should I be joking at a time like this?’ and satirises the idea that arts have enough value to change or impact the current global issues that we are facing. burnham’s ‘possible ending song’ to his latest special, he asks ‘does anybody want to joke when no-one’s laughing in the background? so this is how it is.’ implicit in this question is the idea that when the audience is taken away and there is nobody to perform his pain to, he is left with his pain. instead of being able to turn his musings and thoughts into a product to sell to the public, he is forced to just think about them in isolation and actually face them, an abrupt and distressing experience.

the value of performance and art is questioned by both bojack and burnham, particularly during the later years of their respective content. burnham’s infamous song, art is dead, appears to be a direct response to the question ‘what is the worth of art?’ he posits that performing is the result of a need for attention (‘my drug’s attention, i am an addict, but i get paid to indulge in my habit’) and repeatedly jokes throughout his career that the entertainment industry receives more respect that it deserves (‘i’m the same as you, im still doing a job or a service, i’m just massively overpaid’). his revelations regarding the inherent desire for attention that runs through all entertainers is frequently satirised in bojack horseman. bojack is comically, hyperbolically attention hungry and self-obsessed, and the show has a running gag in which he uses phrases along the lines of ‘hello, why is nobody paying attention to me, the famous movie star, instead of these other boring people.’ his constant attempts to direct the focus of others towards himself result in bojack feeling like ‘everybody loves you, but nobody likes you.’ his peers buy into his act and adore the comical, exaggerated, laughable aspects of his character, but find very little room to respond to him on a genuinely personal level because of this. interestingly, bojack appears to enjoy catering to his audience and the instant gratification it produces, whereas bo burnham becomes increasingly candid about his mixed feeling towards his audience. ‘i wanna please you, but i wanna stay true to myself, i wanna give you the night out that you deserve, but i wanna say what i think and not care what you think about it.’ he admits to catering to what audiences want from him, but resents both the audience and himself in the process as it reveals to himself which parts of his character are solely for the sake of people watching him.

within bojack horseman, this concept is applicable not only to the protagonist, but to the various forms of performer demonstrated in the plot. towards the show’s end, sarah lynn asks ‘what does being authentic have to do with anything?’ to which herb kazzaz responds, ‘when i finally stopped hiding behind a facade i could be at peace.’ this highlights the fact that because entertainers are demanded to continue the facade, they do not receive the opportunity to find ‘peace.’ this sentiment is scattered throughout the show, through a musical motif, the song ‘don’t stop dancing.’ the song stems from a life lesson bojack imparted to sarah lynn at a young age, and becomes more frequently used as the show progresses and bojack’s situation worsens.

sarah lynn is also used to explore the value of entertainers; in the show’s penultimate episode, she directly compares her work as a pop icon to the charity work of herb, arguing that if she suffered in order to produce her work. it has to mean something. she lists the struggles she faced when on tour: ‘i gave my whole life...my manager leaked my nudes to get more tour dates added, my mom pointed out every carb i ate, it was hell. but it gave millions of fans a show they will never forget and that has to mean something.’ implicit in this notion is the idea that entertainment is the epitome of self-sacrifice. there is a surplus of mentally ill individuals within the industry, largely due to the nature of the industry itself, but some may argue that the cultural grip the industry has, and the vast amounts of respect and money it generates annually, gives the suffering of these prolific individuals meaning.

the juxtaposing responses entertainers feel towards their audiences manifest as two forms of desperation: the desperation to be an individual who is held accountable, and the desperation to be loved and validated. we see both bojack and bo depict how they oscillate between ‘this is all a lie’ and ‘my affection for my audience is genuine’, or between ‘do not become infatuated with me im a character’ and ‘please fucking love my character i do not know how to be loved on a personal level.’ bojack explicitly asks diane to write a slam piece on him and ‘hold him accountable’, similar to bo’s song ‘problematic’ in which the hook includes the phrase ‘isn’t anybody gonna hold me accountable?’ for his insensitive jokes as a late teenager. their self-awareness is what enables their self-evaluative qualities, but self-awareness is its own issue. bojack grapples with a narcissistic view of his own recognition of his behaviour before settling on a more nuanced, albeit depressing take. originally he makes the assumption that in recognising the negative aspects of himself, he is superior to those who behave similarly: ‘but i know im a piece of shit. that makes me better than all the pieces of shit that don’t know theyre pieces of shit.’ eventually, during his time at rehab he is forced to reconcile with the fact that self awareness does not, to put it bluntly, make you the superior asshole, it just makes you the more miserable one. the show does, however, make a point to recognise how the entertainment industry protects ‘pieces of shit’, prioritising their productive value over how much they deserve to be held accountable, demonstrated using characters like hank hippopoalus. the show itself obviously stems from the entertainment industry, as it is a form of media produced by netflix, one of the most popular streaming platforms available. bojack horseman and bo burnham represent the small corner of the industry that is reflective enough to showcase the damage it inflicts. this is powerful in terms of education and awareness, and urges audiences to question their own motives and versions of performance, but the reflection alone is not powerful enough to help the artists in question. burnham’s candid conversations surrounding his mental health continue to reveal a plethora of issues somewhat caused or sustained by the nature of his career. within bojack horseman, bojack is only able to stop hurting other characters when those characters construct a situation that forces him to face consequence, his introspection alone is not enough. while bojack ends on a message of hope, suggesting to the audience that reverting back to the status quo is not the only acceptable way for events to end, it leaves stinging lessons and social commentary with the audience regarding the unnatural and damaging narrative that performers live through. on a similar but markedly different note, bo burnham’s work and personal progression is playing out in real time, and not in a way that is as raw and genuine as it appears. each bit is planned, even the most vulnerable moments that appear unplanned and painful. his latest special is not entirely devoid of hope, but does translate to audiences as a somewhat exaggerated look around the era of social media and the development of performance, using himself as an example.

the absurdist humour that often acts as a vehicle for poignant statements or emotionally provocative questions is very specific to each media creator. bob-waksberg’s use of puns, tongue twisters and entirely ridiculous circumstances served to simultaneously characterise his points as an expected part of the show’s style of humour, similar to bojack’s emotional instability, but also to make them appear gut-punching in comparison to the humour. burnham’s work is similar in that poignant but blunt statements are often sandwiched between absurd and exaggerated jokes, making them stand out via contrast but not giving the audience too much time to dwell upon them as they are said. performance art is second nature to entertainers, and is presented a an issue that is infiltrating the general population via social media rather than solely affecting the ‘elites’. bojack horseman and bo burnham present the duality of artists simultaneously attempting to level the playing field and increase their chances of survival in the industry, and encourage audiences to know that everyone is bluffing and you’ll never have the right cards anyway.

i.k.b

735 notes · View notes

tuber-culosis · 3 years

Text

I've been reading through a lot of radfem blogs and posts lately. and gotta say, i'm leaning a lot towards radical feminism. And im definitely gender critical.

but one topic I want to talk about in particular is the criticism of Islam.

Which I feel is totally valid considering the current state of mainstream islam and Muslims.

Mainstream Islam (is what you see on all social media, seemingly practised by a lot of Muslims) IS sexist. And homophobic. There's no use denying it, neither do I think I'm a bad Muslim for not supposedly defending my own religion. You have to recognise the flaws in your own system to improve and progress.

Then arises the question why am I still Muslim then/ why do I still practise Islam? If I recognise the way it is practised is sexist and homophobic, which are things I'm against?

The difference lies in my belief that "mainstream Islam" is much different from the root of Islam.

Many (read: a LOT, not all) modern Muslims have been influenced by ultra conservative movements that want to return Islam to the way they believe was practised during the time of the Prophet (pbuh), ie; some centuries back. This is propagated by the ideas of Salafism and Wahhabism that frankly, prevent progress, reform or any sort of growth in Muslim communities.

I personally have witnessed this in my own country, India, where women are increasingly wearing the hijab and even full body covering purdahs, not talking to the opposite gender, men not looking a woman other than their wives in the eye, etc compared to when my mother was a child, when almost all Muslim women dressed in normal comfortable clothes and there were no much gender segregations. (Gender segregation still existed to a certain degree due to conservative Indian culture ofc)

This radicalisation led to the development of ultra conservative Muslims who enforce sexist, homophobic and separatist policies in the name of God.

They claim to want to return to "true Islam" but they add so many unnecessary rules and regulations you have to follow in order to be a "true Muslim" that are almost so impossible to follow I can vouch I have unconciously broken like 50 of them in one day maybe. These "laws" are derived from:

1. The hadith

2. Arab culture

3. Poor translation of the Quran to fit these radical ideals.

Explaining each of these in a little more detail,

1. A lot of practising Muslims might come at me for this one, but I feel that considering the hadith to be a holy source of guidance and believing everything in the Hadith when there are so many contradictions and logical fallacies, is foolish.

For those who have no clue what the hadith is, Islam basically has the Qur'an, which is, as we believe, a holy book revealed by God to the Prophet (pbuh), which acts as divine guidance on how to live life as a good person. It has rules, suggestions, and guidance to take desicions on a lot of everyday matters we face. It was a godsend (hehe pun fully intended) to women, who weren't even allowed to own property back then. Muslims believe that the Quran is guaranteed againt corruption by God, as revealed in one of the verses. Therefore, to a believer, it is THE book to consult, and the verses will never change, no matter how many years pass. There's actually a really interesting way the Quran is coded, so people can know if it has been tampered with or not, if anyone is interested. But the bottom line is, for a Muslim, the verses of Quran cannot be challenged. There are various INTERPRETATIONS of said verses, but the core Arabic text is the same.

Now there is a secondary source of guidance in the form of Hadith, which is literature that claims to record things the Prophet (pbuh) has said in his lifetime. The problem I find, along with other hadith critics, is that it was compiled much later after the death of the Prophet. Muslims argue that these hadiths were passed down in a proper recorded chain of transmitters that can assure the message hasn't been altered or tampered with. The problem is, that the standard used then was just how reliable was a person's memory and how trustworthy they were, and they did not actually judge the actual content of the hadith. So even if a hadith hypothetically said "Kill all the disbelievers", (which, fyi, it does NOT) and it had a reliable chain of recorders, it would be accepted as "sahih" (trustworthy) hadith, even though it clearly goes against the guidelines of the Quran, where it says there shall be no compulsion in religion (which implies you cannot just murder anyone who refuses to believe/ believes another religion). If one actually examined the content of this imaginary hadith, it would be easy to see it's tampered with by people with or without malicious intent (for eg, it might've actually been "You can kill the disbelievers ONLY if they attack you and will not leave you and your family alone") or some may not even remotely be the words of the Prophet, as he only followed the Quran.

Also, the integrity of the Hadith isn't guaranteed by God anywhere in the Quran. To know more about this, I suggest you read this link , and this one.

So yeah, I take hadith with a (large) grain of salt. So I will not be including them in my discussion obviously.

Now a lot of these hadith have been fabricated, as established, or reflect something that was applicable specifically in that time and setting, seeing that the Prophet was an ordinary man who couldn't predict the future or know about all the different cultures of the world.

So even if the headscarf was a part of Arabian attire, that doesn't mean it has to be assimilated into our cultures now. Just because prostitutes used to pluck all their eyebrows out to signify that they are prostitutes (sex work is forbidden in Islam, because of the negative impact on women and society), doesn't mean that women are not allowed to pluck their eyebrows now.

Following these hadith blindly without considering for a moment that hey, these might be outdated, seeing it isn't meant for all time periods like the Quran, and half of these contradict themselves, maybe we shouldn't consider this as an authority on rules in Islam. Personally, I don't believe anything is forbidden that is mentioned as such solely in the Hadith, and not in the Quran.

But the staunch belief in all of these Hadith leads to micromanaging of women, and literally everyone else. Few ridiculous examples include:

women can't pluck their eyebrows

men can't wear silk or gold, and they need to grow beards

music and dance is forbidden (seriously???)

the Prophet married a literal child of nine years (no do not try to justify it as "it was acceptable back then". According to the Qur'an it wasn't. Girls had to be mature enough to reject or agree to marriages and literal children can't do that. There is plenty of research to prove that Aisha (ra), his wife, was at the very least 19 or 20. Again a case of unreliable and maybe purposefully manipulated Hadith. Scholars and people who uphold the theory that Aisha was 9, and hence, child marriage is legal are pedophiles through and through)

I feel that if anything, hadith should be considered with the authority of historical commentary, giving us more context to the times, and should never be blindly trusted just because a lot of scholars say it is a "sahih" (trusted) hadith.

Also a main feature of Islam is that you don't need an extra priest (no offence to religions who have priests) or a scholar to tell you things and intervene with God for you. You have a holy book, your own common sense and humanity, and you pray to establish a connection with God. Scholars are secondary OPINIONS who can provide insight from their knowledge and research to people who want it, but by no means any authority on things, just like hadith.

2. Arab culture and society, especially back the times that radicals want to emulate, was heavily patriarchal. Islam gave women rights and protection, but they were still limited by the cultural norms of that era.

What these people actually want is to return society to Arabic culture in that time period. (Exhibit A: the abaya/purdah for women and khandoorah for men. exhibit B: sex-segregated spaces)

Back then, women were expected to be caretakers and mothers, and men were expected to be the strong masculine protector.

Enforcing said cultural norms into modern day Islam is ridiculous. Saying that women rarely left the house back then, hence women shouldn't leave their houses now is the same as saying there weren't phones back then, so I shouldn't use one now. Would you ever give up your phones? So how about we do the same to women's autonomy and freedom? Adapt to modern times like regular humans?

If women were meant to stay at home, and meant to just rear children, and never meant to be seen in public, and never meant to be seen by the opposite sex, as extremists say "is God's will", then why is none of this found in the Quran? Do you seriously believe that God, describe multiple times as All-forgiving and generous and kind, would ever persecute women to such a fate? If you do believe that, then maybe you need to re-examine in the nature of God that you believe in. Also if you tell me the "it's for their safety" gimmick, I will flip out. It has been proved multiple times that a woman's dressing has nothing whatsoever to do with why men rape.

Sure, Islam advocates for modesty in dressing, for both sexes. Both are called to not stare rudely (many Muslim men seem to forget that part of the verse, strangely), both are advised to dress in modest, comfortable, clean and practical attire. Never once is anything remotely like "YOU'LL GO TO HELL IF YOU EXPOSE YOUR ELBOW, WOMAN". But the way modern Muslims enforce the dress code (some even going to the lengths of saying women shouldn't wear BRIGHT COLOURED CLOTHES, so as to not attract attention!!! I'm looking at you, Mufti Menk), you'd think that God says something much worse than that. Infact God pulls out Uno reverse, and encourages us to dress as beautifully as we want, especially when visiting the mosque.

3. A lot of English translations of the Quran come from Saudi Arabia. A country famous for its conservative practise of Islam. While the original Arabic text cannot be changed, a lot of these translations include information in parantheses that add "rules" based on the above mentioned factors, that a casual reader or a new Muslim who doesn't know Arabic will consider to be authentic rules of the Quran, extrapolated from the verse, and not extra additions that are often derived from hadith. A very good example of this is the headcover verse, which you can see in this link.

Even all the hostility surrounding homosexual people has been derived from cultural influences and one set of verses. From around 6000 verses, just a single set passingly mention homosexuality. Don't you think that if it truly were such a great sin, God would have explicitly forbidden it? Also why would he create such a natural variation in sexuality and then forbid it? Why isn't it forbidden for animals then? Is all-loving God that cruel to create this natural and healthy attraction in them and then explicitly forbid it when straight people get to marry and live life in bliss? (Please don't say that "God also created pedophilia, and that's natural, so by this logic shouldn't we allow that too?" because pedophilia IS NOT HEALTHY, AT ALL. IT'S IS A DISORDER. Unlike homosexuality) I'm also not picking and choosing things to fit my lifestyle, as some might say, as I am straight, and the only reason I support the LGBT community because I have basic humanity?? And they're humans who deserve rights and joy and freedom and acceptance just like the rest of us.

There have been reformed translations of Quran which examine the verse without prior bias against LGBT people, and they have presented an alternate translation, that the verse condemns sexual assault, which happened to be homosexual in the particular story. Check out this link too, which explains how closely examining the words used could change the meaning from one thing to another.

What I attempted to prove in this extremely long post is that the practise of a religion isn't necessarily the reflection of its true nature.

There are progressive open-minded people who believe in Islam because it gives them hope and solace. People who believe because core beliefs of Islam aligned with their own views and simple logic.

NOT to say there aren't religious bigots who will totally use religion to manipulate people into oppressing themselves or other people. There are, there are a LOT of people like that who call themselves "scholars". And there are a lot of people who follow these extremely harmful regressive version of Islam without critically thinking about what they are following.

I've seen a post discussing the meaning of the word Islam, which means submission to God. It said that it implies total submission, without questioning what we believe.

That is an argument used by both religious extremists to further their beliefs, and by the opposite side, who say the religion is oppressive.

I wish to present a view that Islam itself tells us to think critically, to use our brains to question everything and anything we believe. And then to arrive at our own conclusions. And if you're a decent, kind human, those beliefs maybe align with Islam (not saying that if you're not Muslim, you're horrible, that is not what I meant at all). And if the opinion between people differs, there's always logic and reasoning behind every rule that is presented in the Quran. Don't believe me? Here's the verse that tells people not to blindly follow their parents' religion. And here's a list of verses about critical thinking.

The reason we (atleast reformist Muslims) submit to God is because we questioned it, we came to the conclusion that Hey! This is right. I can submit to my Creator by, who is basically the consciousness that created everything and is the source of all goodness, love and strength, because the rules mentioned here make sense and they privde a moral framework for me to base important desicions on. They feel right. And there is logic behind everything written in this.

I don't mean to present Islam as an all-perfect amazing religion everyone should believe and that I'm right, everyone else, especially those liberal atheists who criticise my religion are wrong and WILL BURN IN HELL. I consider Islam a perfect moral framework, and that's my business only. Anyone can follow what they want and it's none of my business. In fact there is no compulsion in religion at all, and people who say Muslim or go to hell are wrong imo.

What I intended was to paint a picture of reformist Muslims who are still out there, who follow the religion because they questioned it. And not the religion as this stringent rule book we all have to follow down to a t, micromanaging every aspect of our lives and living in perpetual fear of hell, but rather this basic moral guide that teaches us tact, compassion and justice, to bring us closer to God spiritually. I wanted to show that the majority isn't always reflective of what I think is the true core of Islam.

I feel that many practises in the name of Islam are highly questionable and should be criticized, but I also want people to know that the people who seemingly represent the religion, are not representative of the entire mass of believers. That sometimes the practises you might criticize might have nothing to do with the actual religion, atleast according to some of us. It was also for fellow Muslims who might be in the same place I was a few years ago, questioning everything I had learnt was part of my religion.

This is also NOT to undermine struggles of people forced to follow Islam and its seeming requirements like hijab. This is not to claim that nope, every Muslim is fine and ok, and we're all peaceful progressive people. In fact I wish to do the exact opposite, to show that people who enforce oppressive policies in the name of Islam aren't actually backed by the religion and neither should they be backed by other Muslims. I'm also not trying to say no one should criticize Islam. Criticism helps us grow. Criticism is necessary to uncover oppression and eradicate it. So by all means, criticize.

I'm so glad I found the subreddit r/progressive_Islam when I did because it helped me a lot, and opened me to other like-minded progressive Muslims, who actively hope to counter the negative effects of Salafism and conservatism that is overtaking Islam.

So yeah, I think I covered almost everything I wanted to talk about and here's a final link that pretty much just states my position on things.

PS idk why this thingy is in different colours it just seemed cooler and less boring to read

#religion #islamicpost #radfem #gender critical #muslim #progressive #change #critical thinking #sexism #feminism #feminist #allies #humanity #extremism #womenempowerment #freewomen #headcovering #mine

84 notes · View notes

shihalyfie · 3 years

Text

I’m a diehard 02 fan who does not want a reboot and never wanted a reboot, and here’s why

This is one of my few editorial-esque pieces, but this is something some friends and I have been discussing for a while, and given what’s going on right now, I feel like this needs to be said at some point.

Sometimes I feel like there’s a really massive gap between what 02 fans want (especially diehard ones) and what people think 02 fans want. I'm not saying that media should only be catering to hardcore fans, and if more casual fans of 02 or people who simply just happen to have a stake in the full franchise have their own opinions on what they wanted to see out of 02-related media, that’s perfectly fine, and they have a right to have those expectations. What I’m mainly writing this about is sentiments that talk about how Toei is apparently doing 02 a disservice or sweeping it under the bus by not rebooting it (which basically comes with an implication that giving it respect would mandate it being rebooted just because Adventure was), or talking about how doing a reboot would please 02 fans just by giving their favorite characters more rep. (Although, I suppose the simultaneous reveal of an actual 02-related movie kind of killed any grounds for claiming that the lack of a 02 reboot meant sidelining 02. You can’t really claim that they’re sidelining 02 when they’re making a whole movie, after all...)

Of course, I don’t claim to speak for every single 02 fan out there (so if you’re a 02 fan who doesn’t agree with anything I’m about to say, I apologize and hope I don’t sound presumptuous), and I highly doubt I represent the mainstream, but I felt I should input my perspective as a 02 fan who’s friends with a handful of other 02 fans, who have discussed this extensively and all have the same feelings on the topic, and why it’s kind of frustrating to keep hearing this kind of thing from people who assume that all fans of something should want to see more things that resemble them by default without any more nuance to it.

It won’t actually improve much that’s worth it

I’m going to be blunt about it: I think more people who supposedly want this 02 reboot are people who hate or dislike 02 than people who actually are fans of the series, because they’re doing this under the sentiment that “this was a bad series, so a redo would improve it.” You can especially tell because a lot of people acting like a reboot is in 02′s best interest are the same people being scathingly critical of the current Adventure: reboot right now, so you can see that this kind of mentality comes from people who clearly understand that a reboot won’t necessarily be something everyone likes all that much, and thus believe 02 is so unsalvageably bad that you couldn’t possibly make it worse. So you can probably understand why I’m not exactly patient with this kind of take.

If we are to be charitable, though -- if this sentiment comes out of a genuine feeling that 02 had missed potential that could be addressed by the reboot -- I want to ask everyone if they really believe that this theoretical reboot would be a net improvement, especially one that’s worth all the time and effort involved, and even more especially given the writing style that the current Adventure: reboot is employing. You don’t have to claim it’s a perfect series or anything to understand the sentiment that it held up enough by itself to not necessitate a whole anime series being made to do another take on it.

Something I would like to remind people who love to claim that 02 is such a despised series is that it made around 89% of Adventure’s revenue at the time it aired, and despite those who despise 02 being very vocal on the Internet, the actual mainstream tends to be very positive about it, especially in terms of anything to do with Ken (whom most reasonable people will agree had a character arc that deserves acclaim). So in other words, if you want to do a reboot, most likely you would want to do it without offending the base that likes the series already, right? (Especially since, you know, recent events have proven that upsetting the real-life 02 fanbase is actually a pretty inadvisable idea...)

Here’s the thing: Once you filter out most of the “scapegoat” reasons people tend to criticize 02, the one that’s generally the most agreed upon is how disorganized the plot gets in the second half. So this so-called ideal situation reboot would supposedly iron out all of the messy plot writing and make use of the “wasted potential” the series had -- but 02 was way more than just a narrative storyline with characters walking around in it, and when it comes to the reasons people were so drawn to it, they’re tied to the series themes about regrets and making up for the past, and about the unreasonable pressures that society places on children. That, and also the most important one, the central theme of human relationships, and the charismatic and well-developed (yes, really) characters. The so-called “messier” second half of 02 was full of payoff for a lot of what was set up in the first half in regards to its themes, and a lot of its subplots or character flairs are packed in really small nuances that are easy to miss on the first watch.

What this means is that 02 is a series that works off of a lot of delicate balances. Adventure could be “rebooted” because everything was very clear-cut and straightforward, which meant that you could change almost everything about the plot and still relatively adhere to the primary points of “kids gain self-awareness through a journey in another world”. (Like, I really hate to break it to those who put Adventure on a pedestal, but this is mainly possible because Adventure doesn’t really have much of a plot besides “defeat enemy” followed by “defeat bigger enemy”...) In the case of 02, everything regarding the story is, for better or for worse, much more deeply tied to the plot, the narrative behind the Kaiser and the traces of psychological horror laced into everything, and the second-half evolution mechanic, Jogress, has a lot to do with the developments related to the human relationships narrative. Moreover, a lot of the reasons that people call it “bad” for are deeply tied to the exact same reasons a lot of people like it -- that its takes on certain topics were heavily nuanced and unconventional, meaning it could cover ground that most media wouldn’t go anywhere near -- and so the series loses too much of its identity if those aspects are removed, even if it ostensibly seems like “streamlining” it.

So if you mess with one thing, a lot of it falls apart -- and in fact, considering the writing style that the Adventure: reboot is using right now, it’s hard to imagine that applying it to 02 would make it any better. Actually, it seems like it wouldn’t address any of the grievances anyone has with it to any substantial degree, and it’d be more likely to axe all of the stuff that were integral to 02′s identity, like the social commentary, or the heavy focus on human relationships, or the unusual sort of character nuance it employed, and...basically, we go back to the same question: is this actually worth it?

02 itself was about not having this kind of sentiment

The main reason most 02 fans get upset about the 02 characters not being included in Adventure canon-related things that should rightfully include them is that, quite simply, they’re part of the canon! In fact, most 02 fans like Adventure too, so they like the way 02 built on Adventure’s worldbuilding, and moreover they’re attached to the web of relationships between the Adventure and 02 groups -- 02′s additions to Adventure’s worldbuilding and the nature of what it established around the neighborhoods of Odaiba and Tamachi were not only added on but also deeply entangled with what was established before, so you can’t just act like none of it exists!

So this also means that once we’re talking about a completely different universe, absolutely none of this applies and there’s no expectations to adhere to any of this. The 02 quartet doesn’t exist in this universe? Cool.

Funny thing about 02: one of the biggest themes the story revolved around was “not getting caught up in the past, and moving forward with what you have instead,” so it’s probably pretty understandable that a lot of people who like 02 would be the type who wouldn’t be fond of rehashing stuff too much (and even more so it involves 02 itself), especially since being okay with 02 as a sequel likely means being okay with change in general. To make something really new out of it, you might as well...actually make something new out of it, or cover some truly new territory, instead of bothering with this whole reboot business, you know?

One thing you might notice about a lot of 02 fans is that they’re not actually all that fond of the idea of canon putting the group through more massive suffering or emotional ordeals after 02 compared to most. I mean, I think it’s pretty normal to enjoy your favorite characters going through emotional trouble, but the aversion to it often tends to be much stronger than usual, regardless of what country’s fanbase we’re talking, and even the official staff for Kizuna seems to have somewhat recognized that the 02 group is most in its element when in the context of fun and silliness. All things considered, this probably isn’t particularly surprising when you take into account the fact that “just being able to hang out with each other as casual friends at all” was considered such a blessing, and such a difficult goal to reach, that there’s a natural aversion to seeing them go through more emotional suffering again. The new trailer for the upcoming movie seems to have Daisuke in a relatively good mood (and even then, “please don’t make it too emotionally vicious for them” is a pretty common plea).

So if you want to talk about rehashing all of their old problems, seeing it all over again is just not very fun. It’s like holding Ken’s sins over his head again, even if it’s in a different universe; it just doesn’t feel right when the series itself endorsed the best possible outcome for these kids to be “to live happily and at peace with themselves, no matter what happened beforehand”. They worked so hard to get out of it, so to decide we have to do this entire rodeo again for the sake of doing it again, instead of trying something new is...well, it’s not that appealing of an idea, I have to say.

The real-life impact would be intolerable

It’s no secret that the 02 hatedom is a bit uncomfortably vocal about it, but what tends to be really frustrating about it is how many of them love to dunk on the series based on misremembering it. It’s fair that, if you don’t like a series, you probably wouldn’t want to watch it again, but as someone who’s spent a lot of years unpacking all the little details in the series and noticing that it’s much deeper than it initially seems on the surface, it’s honestly annoying to see “criticism” of the series that’s actually just dunking on it based on details that are genuinely factually incorrect (it’d be one thing if it were a question of subjectivity, but no, so many of the insults 02 often gets are based on things that legitimately did not happen in the series).

In the end, I admit that 02′s penchant for ridiculous subtlety probably worked against it a bit too much, and I’ve already covered its impact on how the series gets misread a lot. Thing is, this kind of subtlety was a thing in Adventure too, and it all leads to the unfortunate effect that a lot of people tend to forget what actually happened in Adventure if they haven’t seen it for more than a few years. With the current reboot right now, you’ll see people saying that certain characters are the same as they were in the original series, even though in most respects they’re actually the opposite -- because a lot of said people only remember them by the surface characteristics that seem to be similar.

So when you look at 02, and consider the fact that even official media -- including the official American English dub and V-Tamer -- has been a bit too prone to not handling Daisuke’s character tastefully and reducing him to traits that make him easy to dislike, you might realize that handling these characters improperly runs an extremely high risk of actually turning them into the flat, unlikeable characters that people tend to accuse them of being -- imagine Daisuke where his entire character is about fixating over Hikari and being impulsive, or Miyako being nothing but self-centered and selfish, or Iori being genuinely stoic and missing the nuances of constantly holding his emotions back. And making it worse is that this would basically solidify these negative perceptions of the characters even further -- because people, especially those inclined to hate the series, would take it as further evidence that the characters have always been like this, reflect it back on the original, and everything would really just become a miserable experience. (Those who are particularly inclined to be malicious against 02 would probably even claim a reboot to be “better than the original” no matter whatever it is, because of the belief that 02 is so incredibly terrible that literally anything would be better than it.)

It’s not my business to dictate other people’s opinions, but it’s already been a frustrating twenty years of dealing with this kind of thing, so of course I’m not going to be enthusiastic about the idea of putting up with more of it...

#digimon #digimon adventure 02

48 notes · View notes

luckycheesefoodie321 · 3 years

Text

Stop Asian Hate has been blinking in and out for a while now and someone explained that the trending page is not naturally predisposed to have a pinned number one, let alone number two so for algorithm reasons I kinda accepted that idea and moved on and continued to put forward what I felt needing put forward regardless of where SAH was trending…

18/7/21

First time since… I wanna say since August 2020 that BLM was no longer no 1 on trending… if it blinks back to no. 1 after this post then I guess I’ll accept more of the same as with SAH… but like if they’ve kept it for a year… what made it come down?

Again having them as top on trending just makes it more convenient to see current happenings and new break throughs… I’m more than confident that they will continue to trend in future… not gonna have a conniption because it isn’t trending anymore and comes in and out like the SAH tag but if they really wanted to make access to these tags more convenient outside of manually plugging them in to the search bar (which, granted isn’t difficult to do and not something Im unwilling to do but again the convenience of the past year is kinda lost)… then they should find a way to have a permanent tab on trending that enables this? I’m no coding or website design expert, but given the light modifications to user interface they continually implement, surely this is achievable… then the trending list itself need not have a breakdown when some other pertinent topic explodes and people can stop posting about the very thing I’m posting about (which I really rather avoid saturating these tags with such posts anyway so I do apologise)

I will never agree with the idea that a social media, even one as unique and bizarre as Tumblr, has no room for politics or discussions of society, and if anything tumblr is the perfect site for that. Someone mentioned they only came for fandoms and didn’t wanna see the political stuff, but almost everything I see on here is in some way subversive content conveying some sort political commentary even if it isn’t directly done so.. not to mention the sheer abundance of non-white, non-cis, non-straight users who, just by existing, subvert societal norms and so ultimately should be supportive of individuals who suffer in similar and different ways at the hands of the same indoctrinated systems that persecute them.

So having a specific portal for these tags and content to be easily accessible to any one and everyone without encumbering the trending system would be nice. Just holding Tumblr accountable for the expectations they’ve built and the community it contains I suppose? Make it permanent like we all should want it to be. It’s been a year.

Again apologies for the rant.

EDIT:

Yeah I thought so…

#BLM #stop asian hate #sorry if this sounds preachy #might consider deleting if this takes up unnecessary space or is resolved

35 notes · View notes

moiraineswife · 4 years

Text

Jasnah - The Facade Meta

Today we’re going to discuss the stormlight of my life, your life, your cat’s life: Jasnah Kholin. Topics of discussion include (but will likely not be limited to): the face she wears, the effect her childhood and what we know if it has had on her, madness, her mother, her perceived invincibility, and whatever else strikes me as relevant in the midst of this chaotic clusterfuck of yelling tarted up as character analysis.

Now. To business:

Let us begin at the beginning (of what we know) and talk about Jasnah’s childhood illness, and what this has done to her in terms of her relationship with her mother, her outlook on life, and her perception of, well, perception…

“It’s your daughter,” Dalinar guessed. “Her lunacy.”

“Jasnah is fine, and recovering. It’s not that.” (OB, 49, Born Unto Light)

Peppered through Dalinar’s flashbacks in Oathbringer are small hints at the dark side of Jasnah’s childhood. We’ve had hints before that Jasnah’s life has not always been...entirely typical for a princess.

Her existence as a radiant was a hint itself, as it's implied most of them are ‘broken’ in some way.

The others are more obvious: Kaladin’s depression, Shallan’s PTSD, anxiety, and DID, Dalinar’s repressed memories, and alcoholism etc,etc.

With Jasnah, you know it has to be there, but it’s harder to see. To use Shallan’s metaphor, she’s like a cracked vase, but the cracked side has been turned to the wall, so the outside world sees only smooth perfection.

This flashback comment is the most obvious indication at what caused Jasnah to break. A fairly shocking one for a reader as 'Jasnah' and 'lunacy' seem to match as well as chasmfiends and tea parties.

It also provides some rather awful context for this segment a few chapters earlier:

“Something stirred deep within her. Glimmers of memory from a dark room, screaming her voice ragged. A childhood illness nobody else seemed to remember, for all it had done to her.

“It had taught her that people she loved could still hurt her.” (O, 47, So Much Is Lost)

We know, given Shallan’s research into Taln at the behest of the Ghostbloods, that the current treatment for madness involves confining the person in darkness.

It seems like far too much of a coincidence that Jasnah, diagnosed with lunacy, would have memories of screaming herself hoarse in a dark room that could somehow be unconnected to this.

Based on my shoddy maths, she was around 11 or 12 at this point, which is marked by many, especially Navani, as a turning point in her life. There was a profound change in how she acted with those around her following this.

“She wouldn’t let me be a mother to her, Dalinar,” Navani said, staring into the distance. “Do you know that? It was almost like . . . like once Jasnah climbed into adolescence, she no longer needed a mother. I would try to get close to her, and there was this coldness, like even being near me reminded her that she had once been a child. What happened to my little girl, so full of questions?” (WoR, 67, Spit and Bile)

It seems like too much of a coincidence, again, to assume that Jasnah’s childhood illness and her confinement had nothing to do with her reluctance to allow Navani to mother her any more.

Jasnah herself reflects that her imprisonment, for lack of a better word, taught her that people she loved could still hurt her. It seems very likely that this refers to Navani and Gavilar, as they would have allowed this treatment to continue. It’s also likely the reason for the change in their relationship afterwards.

Navani's presence didn't remind her she had been a child; it reminded her of what had been done to her.

Navani’s little girl was branded insane and locked away in a dark room with her parents' consent. This removed her ability to trust in Navani to mother and protect her. She kept her distance, she kept herself aloof and removed from everyone, and that’s something that hasn’t changed over twenty years later.

She takes no wards, an expected thing for a woman of her rank. She's unmarried, well past the age she should be. She has no friends, the closest she has are both "pen pals" she communicates with via spanreed.

Jasnah, of all the characters in Stormlight, is the one least emotionally connected. She clearly loves her family, and is devoted to them...But again it's from a distance.

She works in the shadows with assassins to protect them. She studies the end of the world a world away from everyone she loves.

When we see her in Kharbranth for the first time with Shallan, she’s alone.

The servants she uses seem to belong to the Palaneum. She travels alone, she researches and works and bears her burdens alone.

The sole exception is Ivory and she doesn't really have a choice with him BUT to have him with her.

I am NOT suggesting that Jasnah doesn’t actually care about her family/Shallan - we see repeatedly that she absolutely does.

Poignantly, the first thing Renarin’s visions predict that turns out to be false is the lack of love that Jasnah has - they claim she will choose logic and kill her cousin, but she chooses to save him instead.

It’s clear that Jasnah cares very deeply...but she also deliberately distances herself, both physically and emotionally, from other people.

(continued below)

Jasnah is so independent that it’s almost a flaw. She’s an interesting opposite to Kaladin, in this regard.

Kaladin defines himself so much by those around him, his family, his men, those under his care and protection, that that almost becomes a flaw in him. He destroys himself to protect them, and every failure wrecks him.

Jasnah keeps everyone away. She operates alone, in secret, and she clearly struggles to let people get close to her.

The reasons for this are twofold, I feel.

The first one is assassins: Jasnah has been ‘killed’ by one such assassination attempt, has survived another, who made multiple attempts on her life in the form of Kabsal, and has almost certainly experienced more beyond that.

Her casual expectation that Kabsal is trying to use Shallan to get close to her, likely, though she doesn’t say it, to kill her - which turns out to be true.

She knows firsthand how easy it is for someone with enough money and influence to place spies and assassins into a setting- she does it herself all the time. And it resulted in the death of her father.

In a lot of ways, she’s as paranoid about assassination as Elhokar is - she just expresses it in a far more subtle/rational way. Where Elhokar rants and panics, Jasnah blocks up air vents and rejects rooms in the 90000 foot, lost for centuries, tower with balconies because they're a security flaw.

The second reason for her emotional isolation, I believe, is what caused her initial withdrawal from Navani.

Being believed mad, locked in a dark room, screaming for help and being ignored, and knowing that your parents, the people whom you went to with questions and looked to for safety and protection are at least partially responsible, all at the age of eleven is...fairly damaging.

Jasnah hides the effects of her trauma far better than Kaladin or Shallan. This is probably partially because she’s older and has been dealing with it for longer.

By this point, her trauma reactions (which went, by her own admission, unaddressed by her family after what happened, which is traumatising in itself), have melded in with her personality/are brushed off as simply Jasnah being Jasnah.

“I know what people say of me. I should hope that I am not as harsh as some say, though a woman could have far worse than a reputation for sternness. It can serve one well.” (TWoK, 8, Nearer the Flame).

As a matter of fact, we know full well that Jasnah ISN’T as harsh or stern as she’s claimed to be. Shallan repeatedly affirms to Kabsal, and to a reader, that Jasnah is not what she expected - a stern, harsh mistress. She also notes that Jasnah believes herself to be one - likely due to everyone else perceiving her that way.

I think the perception of Jasnah is one that she’s cultivated deliberately - a stern, aloof, even harsh person. Not one anyone would want to be close to. Also not someone anyone would associate with weakness, or needing to be cared for or protected.

More than assassins, I think Jasnah fears people who love her with good intentions, and the ability to assert those good intentions upon her, because it's "for her own good".

When she was a child it led to her imprisonment, something which still triggers traumatic flashbacks over ten years later. She fears having people she loves hurt her. And so she keeps them away, and cultivates for herself a presence that doesn’t need to be cared for, that almost doesn’t need or want to be loved, so that can never happen again.

She rejects, most notably and strongly, her mother, and any implication of a husband. This has led to speculation about her sexuality - maybe she’s gay - though it seems fairly acceptable in Alethkar for a person to be gay (they don’t even have to fill out social reassignment forms!). I

It might be more frowned upon in noble society, due to the expectation of forming political marriages, and while I don’t necessarily doubt it (give me queer Jasnah, Brandon, I beg of you, I’m a starving lesbian and I need this) the only commentary we have from Jasnah on the subject sems to suggest a different, sadder, motive:

Jasnah relaxed visibly. “Yes, well, it did seem a workable solution. I had wondered, however, if you’d be offended.”

“Why on the winds would I be offended?”

“Because of the restriction of freedom implicit in a marriage,” Jasnah said. “And if not that, because the offer was made without consulting you.

[...]

“It doesn’t bother you at all?” Jasnah said. “The idea of being beholden to another, particularly a man?”

“It’s not like I’m being sold into slavery,” Shallan said with a laugh.

“No. I suppose not.” Jasnah shook herself, her poise returning.

(WoR, 1, Santhid).

This is the only time, after an entire book of content in which Jasnah, amongst other things: Soulcasts three men into oblivion, is almost assassinated repeatedly, is betrayed by the first person she’s taken in and trusted in a long time, and is researching the literal end of the world, that Shallan notes Jasnah looking nervous/uncomfortable in discussing anything.

And it’s about marriage.

Jasnah views marriage as being a ‘restriction of freedom’ and finds it distasteful because it encompasses the idea ‘of being beholden to another’.

Anything that even implicitly binds her to another or puts them in her power is something she wants nothing to do with. And, legally, if she were ever to be accused of lunacy again, the two people most likely to have the authority to make a decision on her treatment/send her back to the ardents would be either a parent, or a husband.

The first she’s distanced herself from in pretty much every way since the first event, and the second she’s refused to entertain for years, to the point that high society whispers that she must be gay.

I also think she's uncomfortable because she sees what she did here - setting up a betrothal, which she views as a restriction of freedom - for Shallan, without consulting her, as the same thing that was done to her as a child.

A restriction of freedom for Shallan’s own good. The same justification that was used to imprison her. It's obviously not the same, but Jasnah views marriage as a kind of imprisonment. So in her mind it is.

Jasnah also has huge trust issues. She just covers them with what appears to be personality traits - of being independent, and aloof - but that’s largely just a cover for her own insecurities, and her fear of ever having her freedoms restricted again.

This idea also gives a little bit more of a twist (or dramatic gut punch, thanks Brandon), to her advice to Shallan about perception and power:

“Power is an illusion of perception.”

Shallan frowned.

“Don’t mistake me,” Jasnah continued. “Some kinds of power are real—power to command armies, power to Soulcast. These come into play far less often than you would think. On an individual basis, in most interactions, this thing we call power—authority—exists only as it is perceived.

“You say I have wealth. This is true, but you have also seen that I do not often use it. You say I have authority as the sister of a king. I do. And yet, the men of this ship would treat me exactly the same way if I were a beggar who had convinced them I was the sister to a king. In that case, my authority is not a real thing. It is mere vapors—an illusion. I can create that illusion for them, as can you.” (WoR, 1, Santhid)

Jasnah is talking here with Shallan about being more confident, assertive, and being able to have people do what you want (Something Navani later notes Jasnah is very good at doing).

But I think Jasnah uses this same idea - the power of perception, as a defence mechanism against her trauma, a way to protect herself.

We dismiss her isolation as aloofness. We dismiss her lack of emotional reaction as a cornerstone of the "strong female character" trope. But I think it's deeper than that. Because Jasnah isn't ACTUALLY like that deep down. It's a perception she works very hard to achieve.

Jasnah uses logic in a similar way to how Shallan uses art and drawing, or how Kaladin uses training with the spear. It’s a distraction, a grounding technique, something she can calm herself with. It’s an anchor and a crutch all at the same time.

Jasnah is logical to a fault, to the point that it makes others see her as a monster lacking empathy. I don’t think, at any point in the last few books, we’ve seen Jasnah genuinely distressed/angry/displaying emotion to the point she’d be considered out of control.

Almost all the other POV characters have had moments of weakness/breakdowns/extremely poignant emotional displays. But not Jasnah. All we ever see from Jasnah is the controlled, cultivated perception that she wants us to see. Something which I think is rooted in her trauma.

Logic is the antithesis of lunacy. Rational thought is the direct counter to madness. If the whole world sees Jasnah as logical, utterly in control of herself, if that is the perception she has everyone believe at all times then she can’t be accused of madness again.

Madness, at least in Jasnah’s mind, is an outburst of excessive, uncontrolled emotion. It is the opposite of logic. It’s acting impulsively, without thought, based purely on emotions. Ivory supports this idea:

“Ivory, you think all humans are unstable.”

“Not you,” he said, lifting his chin. “You are like a spren. You think by facts. You change not on simple whims. You are as you are.”

She gave him a flat stare.

“Mostly,” he added. “Mostly. But it is, Jasnah. Compared to other humans, you are practically a stone!” (O, 39, Notes)

Even Ivory, who has been closer to Jasnah in recent years than anyone we know of in the series so far, characterises her this way.

She rejects this idea, telling Ivory that:

“You call me logical,” Jasnah whispered. “It’s untrue, as I let my passions rule me as much as many.” (O, 39, Notes) I think this is true, she does let her passions rule her, but she doesn’t let anyone, even Ivory, see that from her.

That's deliberate. She deliberately makes herself out to be this logic-driven robot, with no feeling or passion.

To the world, Jasnah Kholin is the consummate scholar, the eternally logical thinker, untouched by empathy or feeling. This is how she wants them to think of her.

We know that it’s not true. We know that Jasnah is driven by emotions - her guilt at feeling like she failed Gavilar, her fear for what’s coming for the world, her love for her family, her true passion for scholarship and knowledge.

This is particularly notable when set against a character who exemplifies the opposite in so many ways: Kaladin.

“Yes. The answer is obvious. We need to find the Heralds.”

Kaladin nodded in agreement.

“Then,” Jasnah added, “we need to kill them.”

“What?” Kaladin demanded. “Woman, are you insane?”

“The Stormfather laid it out,” Jasnah said, unperturbed. “The Heralds made a pact. When they died, their souls traveled to Damnation and trapped the spirits of the Voidbringers, preventing them from returning.”

“Yeah. Then the Heralds were tortured until they broke.”

“The Stormfather said their pact was weakened, but did not say it was destroyed,” Jasnah said. “I suggest that we at least see if one of them is willing to return to Damnation. Perhaps they can still prevent the spirits of the enemy from being reborn. It’s either that, or we completely exterminate the parshmen so that the enemy has no hosts.” She met Kaladin’s eyes. “In the face of such an atrocity, I would consider the sacrifice of one or more Heralds to be a small price.”

“Storms!” Kaladin said, standing up straight. “Have you no sympathy?”

“I have plenty, bridgeman. Fortunately, I temper it with logic.” (O, 39, Notes)

Ah, the old ‘punt the Heralds back to Damnation to buy us time’ argument. Lovely.

Jasnah and Kaladin are at two different ends of the sympathy-logic spectrum and it was kind of inevitable they’d clash. But I think it makes Jasnah’s assertions more...Stark and shocking, when she pitches them to Kaladin.

What she suggests IS logical. And it’s actually the same sort of logic that led the Heralds themselves to abandon Taln to Damnation in the first place: “better that one man should suffer than ten.”

It’s a cold, harsh, brutal logic, and it’s very typical of how Jasnah likes to present herself when she’s speaking to others.

The killing of the footpads in Kharbranth is another prime example - it’s all cold, dissected logic when she reasons through it with Shallan afterwards. (Though I imagine if we saw Jasnah’s POV of it in the moment, it would be very different than what she presents).

Because what I find most interesting about the Heralds argument is that we get Jasnah, just Jasnah, away from anyone who has to view her performance of perception, reflecting on the situation. And her internal thoughts/her private reactions are very different from those she displays in public.

“These words trouble you,” he said, stepping up to her again and resting his jet-black fingers on the paper. “Why? You have read many troubling things.”

[...]

Something stirred deep within her. Glimmers of memory from a dark room, screaming her voice ragged. A childhood illness nobody else seemed to remember, for all it had done to her.

It had taught her that people she loved could still hurt her.

“Have you ever wondered how it would feel to lose your sanity, Ivory?”

Ivory nodded. “I have wondered this. How could I not? Considering what the ancient fathers are.”

“You call me logical,” Jasnah whispered. “It’s untrue, as I let my passions rule me as much as many. In my times of peace, however, my mind has always been the one thing I could rely upon.”

Except once.

She shook her head, picking up the paper again. “I fear losing that, Ivory. It terrifies me. How would it have felt, to be these Heralds? To suffer your mind slowly becoming untrustworthy? Are they too far gone to know? Or are there lucid moments, where they strain and sort through memories … trying frantically to decide which are reliable and which are fabrications…”

She shivered. (O, 39, Notes).

In an ironic (fuck you Brandon) twist: I think Jasnah knows EXACTLY what she’s suggesting they do to the Heralds. She’s also probably the person in that room who has the most experience with/has contemplated most what they would be condemning them to, and who therefore empathises with them the most.

It’s STRONGLY implied in this passage that Jasnah has experienced some sort of hallucinations in the past. Possibly this is connected to some kind of neurodivergence. I think this more likely than the alternative - that she was seeing into Shadesmar, because I believe that her imprisonment was what caused her to ‘break’ and enabled her to form her spren bond in the first place. But it’s possible.

Regardless of what’s happened in the past, now, Jasnah’s mind is her sanctuary. If she only ever knows one thing it’s her own mind. She’s a rationalist. She puts her faith in things that she can know intuitively, via logic, like maths - things that exist independently of god, that cannot be doubted. Their truth is tied to their very existence. All that's required to know it is to know her own mind and reason. Losing that is quite literally the worst thing she can think of.

And honestly? Taln’s story probably really fucks with her. Because what he went through is what she went through, too, as a child.

Taln was dismissed as a madman, because no one believed what he said, even though it was true. Truth doesn’t matter; not when it comes to being perceived mad. Nor does being right. Taln was telling the truth. Taln was right. Taln was a goddamn Herald. And they still decided he was mad and locked him away in a dark room, alone, the same way they did to her.

Jasnah knows what that feels like. Jasnah empathises with Taln and the other Heralds more than probably anyone else. But she speaks of condemning these people to that fate, to the greatest hell she can think of, calmly, and rationally. But that’s absolutely not what she really feels/thinks. There is...Such a stark difference, when you really sit and think about it, in the Jasnah that she lets everyone see, and the Jasnah that exists only behind closed doors.

She could see Jasnah’s face, hand against her temple, staring at the pages spread before her. Jasnah’s eyes were haunted, her expression haggard.

This was not the Jasnah that Shallan was accustomed to seeing. The confidence had been overwhelmed by exhaustion, the poise replaced by worry. Jasnah started to write something, but stopped after just a few words. She set down the pen, closing her eyes and massaging her temples. A few dizzy-looking spren, like jets of dust rising into the air, appeared around Jasnah’s head. Exhaustionspren.

Shallan pulled back, suddenly feeling as if she’d intruded upon an intimate moment. Jasnah with her defenses down. (WoR, 6, Terrible Destruction).

The text itself characterises Jasnah’s mask as a defence. A defence against being known, a defence against being seen as anything other than perfectly logical. Having this mask so firmly and so constantly in place is a lot of work. It’s almost a compulsion for her at this point - the refusal to let anyone else in, the strict adherence to logic, regardless of her own feelings or how it makes others see her. Better to be emotionless and in control, utterly, unquestionably sane and rational, than to ever go back to being considered mad.

This, ironically, isn't rational behaviour. It's a trauma response. I'm stating this, the idea that being emotionless/always rational prevents anyone viewing her as insane again (though, again ironically, this is exactly what Kaladin accuses her of being (OUCH)). But I think these are facts in Jasnah's mind? It's her coping mechanism. It's a really bad one. But that's what it is.

As an interesting side note - I think the only time we ever see Jasnah draw emotion spren is when she’s on her own (or assumes she’s on her own, as in this passage, or too exhausted to keep them away entirely - like the single fearspren she draws later in this chapter).

This feels notable because every other character who features in the books, even minor side characters, draws emotion spren of one sort or another at some point in the text.

Jasnah, for all that she’s on screen, draws very little. This may be a function of her ability to tap into Shadesmar, to keep them away, remove any trace of emotion spren from spawning around her. That or she just has such a tight hold on her emotions that she doesn’t draw them.

Either way, I think it’s (another) sign that her behaviour isn’t entirely natural. Spren are everywhere on Roshar, you draw them when you feel a powerful emotion - that’s a natural day-to-day occurrence there.

Unless you’re Jasnah.

Maybe that’s straying a little too far into the realms of what’s reasonable, but I do still think that Jasnah’s output, especially when it contrasts, often very strongly, with her internal feelings, is a coping mechanism/a response to the trauma she endured as a child.

Madness is a fairly strong theme in Stormlight, a few of the characters discuss it/experience it. Syl asks Kaladin fairly directly what it is:

“What is madness?” she asked, sitting with one leg up against her chest, vaporous skirt flickering around her calves and vanishing into mist.

“It’s when men don’t think right,” Kaladin said, glad for the conversation to distract him.

“Men never seem to think right.”

“Madness is worse than normal,” Kaladin said with a smile. “It really just depends on the people around you. How different are you from them? The person that stands out is mad, I guess.” *(TWOK)

Dalinar’s TWOK arc deals very strongly with madness and the ability to trust your own mind. Taln is, as has been noted, locked away for being mad. Several of the Heralds and the Fused are described as mad after what they've been put through. It's something I expect to be explored further as the series progresses.

Jasnah, I think, is the character who tries so hard never to seem that way. Never to be unhinged, or unbalanced, or affected by what's happened to her. But of course we know that she is.

I think, though, that it’s easy to write off Jasnah's trauma. The other characters all have flaws that are very obvious/things that make them obviously ‘broken’ in terms of their spren bond and the oaths they need to speak.

Kaladin suffers from depression, and from crippling guilt, and taking on too much responsibility. But also with his anger, and his hatred towards those who have wronged him, and how that can push him to blame them/avoid responsibility for what’s happened to him. Basically, his inability to let go or move forwards.

Shallan has the opposite problem, and an inability to look back/face the past. She repressed memories of trauma, and wove lies over them to protect herself, which she had to overcome to progress.

Dalinar had his alcoholism, and prior to that, his ‘addiction’ (which I think is absolutely how it’s written/the parallels are pretty obvious) to The Thrill. He had to accept responsibility, and guilt, and grief, and pain. He had to acknowledge that he had been a bad person, who was not worthy of Evi, but also that he’s capable of change, and improving himself, and becoming a better man.

Their trauma responses are loud, and obvious, and messy. They're aware of them, a reader is aware of them, the other characters are aware of them. "They stand out" if you like.

Jasnah does everything she can to ensure the effects of her trauma never stand out. To the point that other characters fairly consistently characterise Jasnah as perfect/an ideal woman.

I’m NOT saying that the text ACTUALLY presents Jasnah as being perfect/without any flaws (that’s...that’s kinda the point of this entire meta) but the characters gloss over these things/her flaws are perceived as good things?

She’s seen as so aloof, so unflappable, so commanding, and in control. She’s highly intelligent, she’s beautiful, she’s a cunning tactician and politician. Shallan claims that she’s almost always right, which Renarin backs up. Dalinar trusts and respects her, and wants her back at the war camps to aid them. She’s a highly revered scholar, respected, and brilliant. She is, in a way, almost beyond human, let alone being flawed or broken like the rest of them.

Jasnah grimaced at the thought. Shallan was always surprised to see visible emotion from her. Emotion was something relatable, something human—and Shallan’s mental image of Jasnah Kholin was of someone almost divine. (WoR, 1, Santhid).

Shallan reflects that seeing her as divine is a weird way to consider a heretic, and we’re kind of led along into that thread. But it’s also very...Othering?

It’s a “positive” kind of othering: she’s divine/superhuman, that’s great! Only it’s...It’s not? It’s so easy to see Jasnah as beyond human, and that makes us forget what she’s endured, and ignore the walls she’s put up and the profound effect that it’s had on her. And the fact that this is not healthy at all.

It's so unhealthy to be put on a pedestal this way. And it's unhealthy to cultivate a persona that makes the only response to you one that sees you as beyond human/without typical human reactions and emotions?

Shallan can be a bit whimsical and can romanticise/idealise people, but even Navani, another deeply scholarly, rational, and logical thinker, categorises Jasnah in a similar way.

She’s dismissive of the idea that Jasnah can have died. Even when others (like Adolin) start getting worried about the ship’s delay, Navani is sure that Jasnah is fine.

Part of this is, I assume, due to the fact that Jasnah is a radiant and, as the Diagram predicts, they survive when they should have been killed - so Navani has had this idea reinforced with empirical evidence over the years, which is noted in the text.

However, when Shallan first brings her the news of Jasnah’s death she refuses to believe it. Even after Shallan tells Navani she watched Jasnah stabbed through the heart, Navani still refers to her as being ‘unconscious’ (which...is actually correct, in this instance) but that is besides my point: regardless of reason or logic, people presume that Jasnah is beyond such mortal, trivial, human things like death:

‘Though Jasnah had been away for some time, her loss was unexpected. I, like many, assumed her to be immortal.’

If she’s beyond death, she’s certainly beyond something like trauma, or being broken, or damaged.

“You’re still human,” Shallan said, reaching across, putting her hand on Navani’s knee. “We can’t all be emotionless chunks of rock like Jasnah.”

Navani smiled. “She sometimes had the empathy of a corpse, didn’t she?”

“Comes from being too brilliant,” Shallan said. “You grow accustomed to everyone else being something of an idiot, trying to keep up with you.”

[...]

How surreal it was to imagine Jasnah as a child being held by a mother. (Wor, 77, Trust).

More ‘othering’, less positive than the divine, but it clearly categorises Jasnah as something other than human, and in this case, it fixates on her lack of (perceived) emotion.

Jasnah has so defined herself by her lack of emotional response to things that even those closest to her -her ward and her mother - view her as emotionless, like a rock, a corpse, dead. Ivory also says this in a previous quote “you are like spren” / “you are practically a stone.” Jasnah is categorised as strong, invulnerable to emotion, beyond human, something other.

Though Jasnah, as she herself admits, makes decisions based on emotion.

For all that she says about pursuing the footpads in Kharbranth as purely an act of logic/civic duty, I think you can sense the emotion in that moment.

“Besides, men like those…” There was something in her voice, an edge Shallan had never heard before.

What was done to you? Shallan wondered with horror. And who did it? (TWOK, 36, The Lesson)

Shallan can sense it. This is the point where Jasnah’s mask is at its most strong. She defends, calmly and rationally, what she had done. But I think at this point Shallan, and the reader, gets the sense that when Jasnah is her MOST logical and composed, she’s also her most vulnerable and emotional.

She does the same thing in the scene with Kaldin discussing the fates of the Heralds - yet we actually see later, not just through Shallan, the emotions, and the turmoil, and the direct, traumatic flashbacks Jasnah is experiencing in that moment. All covered up with logic and reason.

I think what Brandon is doing with Jasnah is really clever. Because I think media has conditioned us to accept these cold, aloof characters.

Characters who have become hardened to the world, and numbed by their experiences with violence and trauma. So we accept these things more readily as personality traits/a symptom of modern media.

I think especially with female characters. The "strong female character" who isn't allowed to cry lest she be called hysterical, who can't react to trauma or she's weak, who can't have an outburst of emotion or she's mad.

With Jasnah, I think Brandon is continuing to show how trauma expresses itself differently in different people. And I think, once explored more directly, Jasnah will become a condemnation of the easy acceptance/idealisation of these kinds of traits. What she’s doing is not okay. It’s not healthy. It’s as self-destructive as what Shallan, or Kaladin, or Dalinar was doing, we've just been conditioned to accept and even praise it.

Jasnah has so much pressure piled upon her to be perfect. She’s made an illusion so believable even those closest to her can’t see through it. She comes across as divine, as something other than human, as emotionless, and absolute. She’s become a constant in the world of those around her. She’s a law of nature more than a person - like a spren.

Except she’s not.

She’s human.

And she’s broken.

And she’s suffering a trauma that makes her afraid to be even a little bit human - because then they might think her mad again, and she’ll lose everything, and she can’t handle that.

I’m FASCINATED to see Jasnah’s interactions (if we get any on-screen) with Taln and Ash. It will probably give a big insight into her character, her relation to madness/her past illness, and I think it will bring out an interesting side of her, which I’m curious to see.

But I'm also really interested to see how Brandon explores the idea of the "ideal traumatised woman' and how that's absolutely bullshit and completely unhealthy.

Jasnah is, on the surface, everything men demand from a "strong female character". She's been exposed to trauma but she doesn't "let it define her" (ie she doesn't seemingly react to it at all). She's beautiful, and she's intelligent, she's a (literal) Queen, she's a fighter/skilled warrior, she's never "overly-emotional" - she reacts to trauma exactly as she's "supposed" to - as defined by men, she's the epitome of a stereotypical "strong female character".

Except there are obvious flaws in that ideal. The first one being: she does not exist for men. Fairly obviously. She point blank refuses a husband.

Also: it's been implied, as per this meta, that this is NOT an ideal anyone should aim for. It's actually very unhealthy and self-destructive and I really, REALLY hope that when Brandon finally digs into Jasnah that this is something he explores.

Jasnah is not perfect. She is not unbreakable, and invincible, and beyond emotion. And she shouldn't be. She shouldn't be idealised.

She's a person. A human being. And she should be able to express herself and process her trauma in a healthy way that allows her to heal and grow. She shouldn't be forced into anyone's ideal of who or what she should be.

I'm just...Really really excited for Jasnah's arc and what Brandon can say through her and the harmful tropes regarding women's trauma he can explore and god...can I just have the next six stormlight books now please?

#Jasnah Kholin #brandon sanderson #the stormlight archive #the way of kings #words of radiance #oathbringer #shallan davar #kaladin stormblessed #dalinar kholin #navani kholin #wheee everyone gets mentioned #i hope this makes some kind of sense??#like it does to me but who tf knows how it comes across to y'all #i considered cutting this up into smaller chunks #but that's just not true to the taryn experience #you get an avalanche of content or radio silence for 3 months #i cannot do a balance #jasnah just fascinates me so much #and in terms of meta/character analysis she's distinctly lacking and it bugs me #i want to do a parallels meta with jasnah and kal too bc i think that would be Interesting #and i think Kal's flaws would be cool to dig into via the lens of Jasnah's perspective/contrast #but we shall see #stormlight meta #my meta #taryn writes meta #taryn writes #text post tag #long post #some day someone on roshar will get therapy and deal with their trauma in a healthy way #today is not that day

404 notes · View notes

lilydalexf · 4 years

Photo

Old School X is a project interviewing X-Files fanfic authors who were posting fic during the original run of the show. New interviews are posted every Tuesday.

Interview with Syntax6

Syntax6 has 17 stories at Gossamer, but you should visit her website for the complete collection of her fics and to see the cover art that comes with many of the stories (and to find her pro writing!). She's written some of the most beloved casefiles in the fandom. I've recced literally all of them here before. Twice. Big thanks to Syntax6 for doing this interview.

Does it surprise you that people are still interested in reading your X-Files fanfics and others that were posted during the original run of the show (1993-2002)?

I’m delighted but not surprised because I’ve written and read fanfic for shows even older than XF. Also, I joined the XF fandom relatively late, at the end of 1999, so there were already hundreds of “classic” fics out there, stories that were theoretically superseded or dated by canon developments that came after them, but which nonetheless remained compelling in their own right. That is the beauty of fanfic: it is inspired by its original creators but not bound by them. It’s a world of “what if” and each story gets to run in a new direction, irrespective of the canon and all the other stories spinning off in their own universes. In this way, fanfic becomes almost timeless.

What do you think of when you think about your X-Files fandom experience? What did you take away from it? What did you take away from your experience with X-Files fic or with the fandom in general?

(I feel these are similar, at least for me, so I will combine them here.)

First and foremost, I found friends. There was a table full of XF fanfic writers at my wedding. Bugs was my maid of honor. I still talk to someone from XF fandom pretty much every day. Lysandra, Maybe Amanda, Michelle Kiefer, bugs…these are just some of the people who’ve been part of my life for half my existence now. Sometimes I get to have dinner with Audrey Roget or Anjou or MCA. Deb Wells and Sarah Ellen Parsons are part of my pro fic beta team. I have a similar list from the Hunter fandom, terrific people who have enriched my life in numerous ways and I am honored to count as friends.

Second, I learned a lot about writing during my years in XF fandom. I grew up there. Part of this growth experience was simply due to practice. I wrote about 1.2 million words of XF fanfic, which is the equivalent of 15 novels. I made mistakes and learned from them. But another essential part of learning is absorbing different kinds of well-told tales, and XF had these in spades. Some stories were funny. Others were lyrical. Some were short pieces with nary a word wasted while others were sprawling epics that took you on an adventure. The neat thing about XF is that it has space for many different kinds of stories, from hard-core sci-fi to historical romance. You can watch other authors executing these varied pieces and learn from them. You can form critique groups and ask for betas and get direct feedback on how to improve. It’s collaborative and fun, and this can’t be underestimated, generally supportive. The underlying shared love of the original product means that everyone comes into your work predisposed to enjoy it. I am grateful for all the encouragement and the critiques I received over my years in fandom.

Finally, I think a valuable lesson for writers that you can find in fandom, but not in your local author critique group, is how to handle yourself when your work goes public. Not everyone is going to like your work and they will make sure you know it. Some people will like it maybe too much, to the point where they cross boundaries. Learning to disengage yourself from public reaction to your work is a difficult but crucial aspect of being a writer. You control the story. You can’t control reaction to it. It’s frustrating at first, perhaps, but in the end, it’s freeing.

Social media didn't really exist during the show's original run. How were you most involved with the X-Files online (atxc, message board, email mailing list, etc.)?

I participated in ATXC, the Haven message boards, and the Scullyfic mailing list/news group. For a number of years, I also ran a fic discussion group with bugs called The Why Incision.

What got you involved with X-Files fanfic?

I started reading XF fanfic before I began watching the show. I had watched one season two episode (Soft Light) and then seen bits and pieces of a few others from season four. I’d seen Fight the Future. Basically, I’d seen enough to know which one was Mulder and which one was Scully, and which one believed in aliens. An acquaintance linked me to a rec site for XF fanfic (Gertie’s, maybe?) so that I could see how fic was formatted for the web. I clicked a fic, I think it was one by Lydia Bower dealing with Scully’s cancer arc, and basically did not stop reading. Soon I was printing off 300K of fic to take home with me each night. I could not believe the level of talent in the fandom, and that there were so many excellent writers just giving away their works for free. I wanted to play in this sandbox, too, so I started renting the VHS tapes to catch up on old episodes (see, I am An Old). After a few months, I began writing my own stuff.

What was it that got you hooked on the X-Files as a show?

I had to be dragged kicking and screaming to The X-Files. I’m not a sci-fi person by nature. I think my main objection is that, when done poorly, it feels lazy to me. Who did the thing? A ghost! Maybe an alien? I guess we’ll never know. You can always just shrug and play some spooky music and the “truth will always be out there…” somewhere beyond the story in front of you. You never have to commit to any kind of truth because you can invent some magical power or new kind of alien to change the story. I think, by the bitter end, the XF had devolved into this kind of storytelling. The mytharc made no kind of sense even in its own universe. But for years the XF achieved the best aspects of sci-fi storytelling—narrative flexibility and an apotheosis of our current fears dressed up as a super entertaining yarn.

What eventually sold me on the XF as a show is all of the smart storytelling and the sheer amount of ideas contained within its run. At its best, it’s a brilliant show. You have mediations on good versus evil, the role of government in a free society, is there a God, are we alone in the universe, and what are the elements that make us who we are? If Mulder and Morris Fletcher switch bodies, how do we know it’s really “them”? The tonal shifts from week to week were clever and engaging. For Vince Gilligan, truth was always found in fellow human beings. For Darin Morgan, humans were the biggest monster of all. The show was big enough to contain both these premises, and indeed, was stronger for it. The deep questions, the character quirks, the unsolved mysteries and all that went unsaid in the Mulder-Scully relationship left so much room for fanfic writers to do their own work. As such, the fandom attracted and continues to attract both dabbling writers and those who are serious craftspeople. People who like the mystery and those who like the sci-fi angle. Scientists and true believers. Like the show, it’s big enough for all.

What is your relationship like now to X-Files fandom?

I look at it like an old friend I catch up with once in a while. We’ve been close for so long that there’s no awkwardness—we just get each other! I love seeing people post screen shots and commentary, and I think it’s wonderful that so many writers are still inventing new adventures for Mulder and Scully. That is how the characters live on, and indeed how any of us lives on, through the stories that others tell about us.

Were you involved with any fandoms after the X-Files? If so, what was it like compared to X-Files?

I ran the Hunter fandom for about five years, mostly because when I poked my head back in, I found the person in change was a bully who’d shut down everything due to her own waning interest. A person would try to start a topic for discussion, and she’d say, “We’ve already covered that.” Well, yes, in a 30-year-old show, there’s not a lot of new ground…

Most other shows, Hunter included, have smaller fandoms and thus don’t attract the depth of fan talent. I don’t just mean fanfic writers. I mean those who do visual art, fan vids, critiques, etc. The XF fandom has all these in droves, which makes it a rare and special place. But all fandoms have the particular joy of geeking out over favorite scenes and reveling in the meeting of shared minds. It will always look odd to those not contained within it, which brings me to the part of modern fandom I find somewhat uncomfortable…the creators are often in fan-space.

In Hunter, the female lead joins fan groups and participates. This is more common now in the age of social media, where writers, producers, actors, etc., are on the same platforms as the rest of us. Fan and creator interaction used to be highly circumscribed: fans wrote letters and maybe received a signed headshot in return. There were cons where show runners gave panels and took questions from the audience. You could stand in line to meet your favorite star. Now, you can @ your favorite star on Twitter, message her on Facebook or follow him on Instagram. In some ways, this is so fun! In other ways, it blurs in the lines in ways that make me uncomfortable. I think it’s rude, for example, if a fan were to go on a star’s social media and post fanfic there or say, “I thought the episode you wrote was terrible.” But what if it’s fan space and the actor is sitting right there, watching you? Is it rude to post fanfic in front of her, especially if she says it makes her uncomfortable? Is it mean to tell a writer his episode sucked right to his face?

Do you ever still watch The X-Files or think about Mulder and Scully?

I own the first seven seasons on DVD and will pull them out from time to time to rewatch old faves. I’ve shown a few episodes over the spring and summer to my ten-year-old daughter, and it’s been fun to see the series through her eyes. We’ve mostly opted for the comedic episodes because there’s enough going on in the real world to give her nightmares. Her favorite so far is Je Souhaite.

Do you ever still read X-Files fic? Fic in another fandom?

I don’t have much bandwidth to read fanfic these days. My job as a mystery/thriller author means I have to keep up with the market so I do most of my reading there right now. I also beta read for some pro-fic friends and betaing a novel will keep you busy.

Do you have any favorite X-Files fanfic stories or authors?

I read so much back in the day that this answer could go on for pages. Alas, it also hasn’t changed much over the past fifteen years because I haven’t read much since then. But, as we’re talking Golden Oldies today, here are a bunch:

All the Mulders, by Alloway I find this short story both hilarious and haunting. Scully embraces her power in the upside down post-apocalyptic world.

Strangers and the Strange Dead, by Kipler Taut prose and an intriguing 3rd party POV make this story a winner, and that’s before the kicker of an ending, which presaged 1013’s.

Cellphone, by Marasmus Talk about your killer twists! Also one of the cleverest titles coming or going.

Arizona Highways, by Fialka I think this is one of the best-crafted stories to come out of the XF. It’s majestic in scope, full of complex literary structure and theme, and yet the plot moves like a runaway freight train. Both the Mulder and Scully characterizations are handled with tender care.

So, We Kissed, by Alelou What I love about this one is how it grounds Mulder and Scully in the ordinary. Mulder’s terrible secret doesn’t involve a UFO or some CSM-conspiracy. Scully goes to therapy that actually looks like therapy. I guess what I’m saying is that I utterly believe this version of M & S in addition to just enjoying reading about them.

Sore Luck at the Luxor, by Anubis Hot, funny, atmospheric. What’s not to love?

Black Hole Season, by Penumbra Nobody does wordsmithing like Penumbra. I use her in arguments with professional writers when they try to tell me that adverbs and adjectives MUST GO. Just gorgeous, sly, insightful prose.

The Dreaming Sea, by Revely This one reads like a fairytale in all the best ways. Revely creates such loving, beautiful worlds for M & S to live in, and I wish they could stay there always.

Malus Genius, by Plausible Deniability and MaybeAmanda Funny and fun, with great original characters, a sly casefile and some clear-eyed musings on the perils of getting older. This one resonates more and more the older I get. ;)

Riding the Whirlpool, by Pufferdeux I look this one up periodically to prove to people that it exists. Scully gets off on a washing machine while Mulder helps. Yet it’s in character? And kinda works? This one has to be read to be believed.

Bone of Contention (part 1, part 2), by Michelle Kiefer and Kel People used to tell me all the time that casefiles are super easy to write while the poetic vignette is hard. Well, I can’t say which is harder but there much fewer well-done casefiles in the fandom than there are poetic vignettes. This is one of the great ones.

Antidote, by Rachel Howard A fic that manages to be both hot and cold as it imagines Mulder and Scully trying to stay alive in the frosty wilderness while a deadly virus is on the loose. This is an ooooold fic that holds up impressively well given everything that followed it!

Falling Down in Four Acts, by Anubis Anubis was actually a bunch of different writers sharing a single author name. This particular one paints an angry, vivid world for Our Heroes and their compatriots. There is no happy ending here, but I read this once and it stayed with me forever.

The Opposite of Impulse, by Maria Nicole A sweet slice of life on a sunny day. When I imagine a gentler universe for Mulder and Scully, this is the kind of place I’d put them.

What is your favorite of your own fics, X-Files and/or otherwise?

Bait and Switch is probably the most sophisticated and tightly plotted. It was late in my fanfic “career” and so it shows the benefits to all that learning. My favorite varies a lot, but I’ll say Universal Invariants because that one was nothing but fun.

Do you think you'll ever write another X-Files story? Or dust off and post an oldie that for whatever reason never made it online?

I never say never! I don’t have any oldies sitting around, though. Everything I wrote, I posted.

Do you still write fic now? Or other creative work?

I write casefiles…er, I mean mysteries, under my own name now, Joanna Schaffhausen. My main series with Reed and Ellery consists of a male-female crime solving team, so I get a little bit of my XF kick that way. Their first book, The Vanishing Season, started its life as an XF fanfic back in the day. I had to rewrite it from the ground up to get it published, but if you know both stories, you can spot the similarities.

Where do you get ideas for stories?

The answer any writer will tell you is “everywhere.” Ideas are cheap and they’re all around us—on the news, on the subway, in conversations with friends, from Twitter memes, on a walk through the woods. My mysteries are often rooted in true crime, often more than one of them.

Each idea is like a strand of colored thread, and you have to braid them together into a coherent story. This is the tricky part, determining which threads belong in which story. If the ideas enhance one another or if they just create an ugly tangent.

Mostly, though, stories begin by asking “what if?” What if Scully’s boyfriend Ethan had never been cut from the pilot? What if Scully had moved to Utah after Fight the Future? What if the Lone Gunmen financed their toys by writing a successful comic book starring a thinly veiled Mulder and Scully?

Growing up, I had a sweet old lady for a neighbor. Her name was Doris and she gave me coffee ice cream while we watched Wheel of Fortune together. Every time there was a snow storm, the snow melted in her backyard in a such way that suggested she had numerous bodies buried out there. How’s that for a “what if?”

What's the story behind your pen name?

I’ve had a few of them and honestly can’t tell you where they came from, it’s been so long ago. The “6” part of syntax6 is because I joke that 6 is my lucky number. In eighth grade, my algebra teacher would go around the room in order, asking each student their answer to the previous night’s homework problems. I realized quickly that I didn’t have to do all the problems, just the fifteenth one because my desk was 15th on her list. This worked well until the day she decided to call on kids in random order. When she got to me and asked me the answer to the problem I had not done, I just invented something on the spot. “Uh…six?”

Her: “You mean 0.6, don’t you?”

Me, nodding vigorously: “YES, I DO.”

Her: “Very good. Moving on…”

Do your friends and family know about your fic and, if so, what have been their reactions?

My close friends and family have always known, and reactions have varied from mild befuddlement to enthusiastic support. My father voted in the Spookies one year, and you can believe he read the nominated stories before casting his vote. I think the most common reaction was: Why are you doing this for free? Why aren’t you trying to be a paid writer?

Well, having done both now, I can tell you that each kind of writing brings its own rewards. Fanfic is freeing because there is no pressure to make money from it. You can take risks and try new things and not have to worry if it fits into your business plan.

(Posted by Lilydale on September 15, 2020)

#new post #old school x #xfiles fanfic #xf fanfic #xf fanfic author interviews #syntax6

165 notes · View notes

todomitoukei · 4 years

Note

what's your biggest gripe w bnha? and what kind of plot/character changes would you make if you had that kind of power? (this sounds like a question you get for an interview or an essay im sorry 😭😭 im genuinely curious though because you're very big brain and have interesting thoughts)

Did you hear that, mom?? This person says I’m big brain; suck on that!! Thank you so much, I’m glad you find my thoughts interesting!

Anyway, I would take a completely different approach to the story. Focus less on the heroes and more on the villains (than the story does), and most importantly focus more on the correlation between the hero system and the existence of villains.

Bnha oftentimes feels all over the place in terms of genre and what it wants to focus on. Just compare the first season to the current manga arc. The first season felt more like it was going to be a very light-hearted, slice of life type of story that would just focus on this kid who tries to become a hero. But at some point, it turned into a whole social commentary on injustice and discrimination, as well as touching on other really heavy topics.

While where the story is at right now is much more to my liking than the first season is, it can just drive a lot of people away from it, too, and is partially also the reason why there is such a divide in the fandom - either you like the light-hearted hero aspect of it and then you end up not even paying much attention to the story when it focuses on the villains and you don’t want to see people in the fandom talk about the deeper aspects of the story, or you are more into the heavier stuff and either have to wait a long time until the story gets to that point or just get turned away early on and then never get to the interesting part.

That is not to say that having those two sides is inherently bad; it’s nice when deeper stories also have their light-hearted moments, but it just kind of jumps from one side to the other all the time instead of just focusing on the actual points it tries to make.

I probably would’ve just made the class a whole lot smaller. This story has far too many characters because it doesn’t just focus on the students; it focuses on the students, the Pro Heroes, and the villains, which then leads to the issue of the majority of these characters being absolutely irrelevant most of the time. The class could just be half the size and that would’ve been just as fine and would allow for the remaining students to be fleshed out more and get more screentime than they do.

Personally, I’d prefer Shouto as the protagonist, but Deku could actually be a good, interesting protagonist if Horikoshi wrote him better, which isn’t difficult considering Deku is technically the perfect protagonist for this story. He is someone who has grown up experiencing that injustice of a quirk-based society, the problem is that as soon as he got his quirk, he suddenly seemed to have forgotten all about that. And that is actually fine if it only lasted for a while, but he still hasn’t realized that. He could be a really great character if he just started questioning things earlier. That doesn’t mean he has to give up on heroes and try and start a revolution right away, but maybe have him actually point out how messed up it is that Endeavor is one of the top heroes, when he’s the type of person heroes would usually help arrest.

Fewer side stories! Season four was so annoying in terms of how manga arcs were spread across the episodes. The Gentle arc was far too long, which then led to the Pro Hero arc only partially being in the season; the remaining parts then having to be continued in season five - not to forget that they chose such a boring, anti-climatic cliffhanger?! I kind of understand the purpose of the Gentle arc but it could and should have been way shorter.

Overall, just give more screentime to the villains - the League of Villains, that is. The story could be better executed if Horikoshi actually bothered to focus on the injustice caused by the hero system, but it’s often not obvious enough when the major focus continues to be on the heroes, with the villains only being focused on every once in a while (more and more as the story goes on, but that built up is just really slow). Not to mention how Horikoshi himself treats the heroes vs. how he treats the villains, which incidentally basically parallels how they are treated within the story.

To sum it up, I think if there were fewer background characters and side stories that aren’t relevant to the plot it would allow for a more balanced story by giving more screentime to the villains and their backstories because this constant over-shadowing makes it unclear whether Horikoshi actually wants to have the story deal with these topics or not.

There are many things in the story that are just inconsistent or straight up contradict something else within the story, so if Horikoshi could write this story a little clearer and get to the point a bit better instead of having this weird back and forth it would be a far better story and one that could be told in fewer pages, considering if we take the current arc some kind of big turning point in the story, then it took roughly 300 chapters to get there. That in itself wouldn’t be too bad if the flaws of the hero system were more consistently focused on before. So better pacing would be nice (and stop throwing every possible reveal at us for no reason); he doesn’t have to drag out how the heroes constantly get away with everything over and over again - we get it! But how are those flaws of the hero system going to change, that’s what I would like to find out, hence the story would benefit from showing those darker sides more.

In short - I would change a lot of things, but the main idea is to cut out the more unnecessary parts and then shift the focus a bit more to have a more balanced story overall that is clearer on the point it’s trying to make.

#there's probably a lot more #but that's the gist of it #bnha #ask #Anonymous

50 notes · View notes

sumukhcomedy · 4 years

Text

How To Cancel “Cancel Culture”

In his speech at Mount Rushmore, President Donald Trump attacked “cancel culture.” It had been one thing to see this phrase constantly brought up on social media but now we were seeing the leader of the free world bring it up on the anniversary of the country’s independence. I have no idea where the term “cancel culture” came from and it doesn’t even matter anymore anyway as it has become yet another term that has been molded into its own strange definition by whomever may use it. In a general sense, “cancel culture” appears to now be pared down to the erasing of something because it’s offended someone.

The problem to “cancel culture” is that it’s become a broad term to represent many complicated, in-depth concepts. I’m going to put what’s been labeled as “cancel culture” into 3 separate groups (there probably could be more but, for the sake of this essay, I’ll keep it to 3).

1. Legitimately disturbing or criminal acts that were done by individuals

2. Correcting a wrongful history for the betterment of society and our nation

3. Revisionism in an effort to address uncomfortable topics

The first, “Legitimately disturbing or criminal acts that were done by individuals” is seen most prominently in entertainment and politics. As a comedian, I’m going to look at the most recent claims against Chris D’Elia and then subsequent backlash towards the “boys club” mentality that exists in stand-up comedy that led old videos of Joe Rogan, Joey Diaz, Theo Von, Brendan Schaub, and others to surface on Twitter. Diaz is a good example of where “cancel culture” goes wrong but it’s where it’s also not well-defined. Almost immediately after the disturbing commentary of Diaz drew widespread attention on Twitter, numerous women in comedy defended him and discussed how he helped them. Diaz has always had a unique and honest sense of humor. He addressed on his podcast that he’s talked about the mistakes he’s made in the past and getting better. It is the crux of his act and his brand of humor. But, on his podcast, he then goes off into talking about “cancel culture.” These situations are always framed under the notion that it’s an attempt to get the comedian “cancelled.” The reality is that all it’s doing is to open up a more intelligent discussion on why this behavior is occurring, holding responsibility for it, and ensuring that a culture that has long existed within stand-up comedy and treats women as less doesn’t continue. In D’Elia’s case, the accusations against him were criminal. They didn’t come out of nowhere. They came from one woman opening herself up on the Internet and then other women connecting with that and revealing that they had also been victimized by this man. This is not some sort of conspiracy to end D’Elia’s career. It’s women opening up that a high-profile man is a predator and ensuring that he does not continue this behavior and hurt others with his position. For D’Elia, he needs to address it and hold responsibility for it and, for now, he only appears to be showing the usual behavior from high-profile men which is to deny the accusations without any further discussion. From this point, there isn’t really a “cancellation” that is even happening. Look at Louis C.K. The story came out and still C.K. has a career and there are people that wish to watch him and do business with him. His career didn’t end up being over even though his apology was terrible and he hasn’t particularly shown any sense of remorse or compassion. Sure, he doesn’t have a TV show or movies anymore. But he also isn’t a destitute hermit. He’s still existent and earning money in this capitalist, patriarchal structure of entertainment.

The second, “Correcting a wrongful history for the betterment of society and our nation,” is seen currently with the removal of statues, which was the major reason behind Trump bringing up “cancel culture.” This is about properly addressing the negative and detrimental history of our country. A statue is a form of honor. This is why if anyone receives a statue, they express a great deal of gratitude for it. No one really learns anything from a statue because, unless all the history you want to learn is on a small plaque in front of the statue, there is not much to be gained from something placed in a public place as opposed to a museum or a book in a library. The statue is there for one reason: to glorify the individual and what they represent in history. What does the Confederacy represent in history? A group defeated in the Civil War and whose flag now stands as a piece of racism more than anything else. What does Christopher Columbus represent in history? More of a violent raider than a peaceful explorer. This is a history that you wish to glorify with a statue? This is a history that you want to have where you live? There is no need for this type of history and glorification in public places. That’s like saying you’d rather have a statue of Donald Sterling outside of Staples Center in L.A. rather than Magic Johnson. And this history isn’t going to go away. Pick up a book, watch a documentary, and really learn about it. That’s more history and nuance than any statue can provide, and it can do it without turning villains into heroes.

The third, “Revisionism in an effort to address uncomfortable topics” is where the people angry at “cancel culture” get their most energy from. It’s again most seen in Hollywood because Hollywood, for as liberal as it may seem, is still as backwards and uncomfortable with race and history as conservative America can be. This is best seen as of late with production companies and streaming services beginning to remove episodes of shows because they may touch on race in an uncomfortable way. A good example was Hulu’s decision to remove an episode of The Golden Girls, “Mixed Blessings,” in which Blanche and Rose appear in “blackface.” The episode occurred in 1988. Even though they are wearing mud masks and not specifically blackface, is it uncomfortable to see that as a source of humor in 2020? Definitely. But, the point of the episode is about Dorothy’s son entering into an interracial marriage. It’s about Dorothy coming to grips with that and the age difference between the two of them as well. Hollywood doesn’t seem to be capable of telling the difference between a piece of art that comments on our society’s racism as opposed to a piece of art that is flat out racist. Nor does it seem to factor when the art was created. Sure, I don’t like that The Golden Girls writers and producers made such a decision in 1988. But it was 1988. The episode still addressed important issues in 1988 and did so with the best intent. This is highly different than, for example, D.W. Griffith’s The Birth of a Nation, which was as racist in 1915 as it is today or Leni Riefenstahl’s Triumph of the Will in 1935. You may laud them for what they did for film but you must teach that they were racist propaganda. They were not well-meaning films at all and they, in fact, contributed to a deadly history. There is no purpose to banning this art. But it’s important to provide better education, better understanding of intent, and better knowledge of history when it comes to viewing this art. Blackface is terrible and has no place in 2020, but in order for it to have no place, people have to understand its history, the manner in which it was used, and the reasons why it is bad. The reality is that few people of color are asking for this third type of “cancel culture.” It’s more so coming from well-meaning white people who do not know how to properly handle race.

“Cancel culture” has become a simple term tossed out by individuals who simply do not want to address their own behavior, responsibility, or history. They would rather say to themselves that they are right than to challenge themselves that they could be wrong, that our society could be better, and that they could progress. All of these situations of “cancel culture” get labeled by the opposition as being “You’re too sensitive!” as opposed to “Let’s have an intellectual discussion to make this better.” It continues to be passed off as some sort of offense or political correctness issue when it’s just an effort to address one’s potential role in a bigger issue in society (whether that’s racism, misogyny, sexual assault, etc.)

“Cancel culture” is just an easy phrase. It’s an easy card to play to avoid dealing with one’s own behavior, speech, history, and art. Strangely enough, it’s a term that’s dismissive when it’s defending itself out of a fear of being dismissed.

122 notes · View notes

metellastella · 4 years

Text

Pinned Post Primer

This is my Pinned Post to explain what I post where.

I often post doodle dumps and lineart that you ARE free to use! Just make sure you look on the post’s commentary to double check. Credit is appreciated.

I also like coloring other peoples’ lineart, if you have some you’re not motivated to finish, but want to see it done.

TLDNR Version (read first regardless):

This is my main. Eco-friendly stuff mostly, original art, ATLA, and I am entering a new era of fanart within a slew of other fandoms so let me get that sorted.

(mostly animation, but some Steam games and medical dramas will be included hopefully as well)

Currently I am way into Moon Girl and Devil Dinosaur, hoping Kipo or Dogs in Space somehow get the attention they deserve, which despite the utterly silly sounding names, have hints of much larger societal themes, and are quite solid and awesome.

Dungeon Meshi: I’ve literally never bought a print manga before despite having dabbled in anime a little, but this one has convinced me.

Undertale sideblogs: add ‘ask-anachro-’ to the front of your favorite characters, and at least one should show up. I do half the main cast.

Instagram: The IG of my same name hosts pet portrait paintings

Instagram (metellastella_fandom) fanart for Pokemon, ATLA, Undertale, etc.

UPDATE: IG has locked me out of that account due to some technical difficulty, and in true corrupt corporation fashion they won’t respond to Support emails. So, now that one’s been torpedoed. They’ve essentially made it an ‘archive’ now. Guess for future posting I’m going to have to fallback on metellastella_fantasy

Deviantart: MUCH more content

AO3: ATLA, MMHOPH, TMNT, and small quantities of The Dragon Prince (which has people from ATLA) FFN: Less content, because I haven’t gotten around to it. WHY would you nix the beta reader function, FFN?? WWHHYY? Does anyone want to start a community hive of beta readers somewhere ‘cause that’d be swell.

Ao3 community, Discord, BlueSky, Mastodon, literally don’t care where.

If you know of a place that exists, PLZ SHARE.

More-detailed ‘Long I WILL Read’ Version under the cut:

I have poems about practically any subject you’d care to name. I frequently share these as Google Docs, and may eventually record for Spoken Word for Soundcloud and/or YT. I also have some essays/rants and I’m not sure what blog platform I want to use. Any suggestions?

I am working on a couple of novels, which I also have samples for in Google Docs.

Will not crosspost within IG accounts or Tumblr sideblogs if I can absolutely help it, so feel free to follow more than one with the expectation you will not see the same thing twice. Will occasionally add something I think of later from a differently focused account, though.

On my main Tumblr, I post a blend of general social justice, mixed with environmental justice and sustainability, and wildlife and cute and/or interesting animals, and also Avatar the Last Airbender. I have a sideblog that is dedicated primarily to ATLA reblogs but also a sprinkling of other fandoms that come up and some discussion on others’ headcanons and my own story. (Next tagging project is probably going to be #Metella Metas) A couple of half-dressed up drawings to go along with my ATLA fic have their own posts. Hashtag: #WMTE

My other main fandom is Undertale, and I have several ask blogs where the characters get into general shenanigans and also speak on topics they’re interested in, and fun facts. Oh and I also do voices and songs for a lot of them on Soundcloud, which I will crosspost links to for your listening pleasure on Tumblr.

The reason I don’t post Pokemon art to Tumblr on any blogs is because it would take a whole lot of work to transfer the mountains worth of fanart I’ve already done to here. (I’ve already got more to transfer from my first DA account, before they enabled username changes). Also, I am not as deep into the character and worldbuilding aspects of the Pokemon franchise. On Tumblr, I try to focus on fandoms I write for, since it enables text better and people actually evaluate it (unlike my witty Artists’ Comments on DA I spent years submitting, and adding cute emoticons to, which I’m not sure anyone actually reads) so as for my being visually inspired, I decided to keep to platforms that are focused on images.

The reasons why DA hosts a lot more of my content than IG is (a) I’ve been on there a whole lot longer and (b) I have a heck of a time trying to fit some art and comics to the limited image scale on IG. On Deviantart and the specific Instagram ‘sideblog’ (@metellastella_fandom), Pokemon art ranges from semi-realistic to super cartoony.

For @metellastella_fantasy, the critters are also posted on DA and it’s much easier to download my lineart than from IG (in fact I’m not sure it’s possible at all there??)

I have some other sideblogs, but I’d rather not mention them here, because I’m self-conscious about conflict. (when on a more front-facing ‘public’ platform ofc- anybody who knows me knows I can rip into a good debate 1-on-1) If we’re already friends and I’ve talked to you some, and you’re curious about the sideblogs, you can PM me.

If you’re interested in a snapshot of me as a person, go here: https://metellastella.tumblr.com/post/636149436159000576/its-weird-i-know-irl-and-url-people-act

#atla #pokemon #undertale #tmnt #mmhoph #instagram #deviantart #artist #writer #singer #songwriter #poetry #Metella's Poetry #Molly's Poetry fantasy

26 notes · View notes

wrongfullythinking · 4 years

Text

Twitter and the “Public Forum”

There is a very large looming legal question about whether or not social media sites, such as Twitter, are “Public Forums.” Most would agree that they are not... at least... not yet. But the question is... should they be?

First, a look into why it matters.

In a public forum, all First Amendment protections apply. So you can say any number of very objectionable things (https://scholar.google.com/scholar_case?case=12634874511090553174) and be protected. In a private forum, this is not so. I can kick you out of my house for wearing an Abercrombie shirt, and you have no Free Speech/Expression reason to contest my staggeringly good decision-making.

Second, the public forum cannot be policed for any content that may be stated. This is why if you go to reserve time at a public park, you don’t have to tell the Parks and Rec department what your event is for. Just things like how many people, how long the event will last, etc. This is well-established and well-backed by many years of precedent.

Finally, there is the very serious matter of personal liability. In certain circumstances, officials can be held personally liable if their policies deliberately and knowingly infringe upon Bill of Rights protections (most often First Amendment protections). This means that you could literally sue for the property and assets of a person. (Also, this is why those of us who own either physical property [like a house] or intellectual property [like a book] buy “Umbrella Coverage” from insurances... I recommend State Farm, but that’s totally irrelevant and I’m not getting any kickbacks for that shill =P.)

But hang on... so if the government owns a billboard and rents it out to whomever can pay, can I rent it and post a naked lady?

You could try, and you might win! What you can’t do is post something obscene. And yes, whether or not a naked person is obscene is staggeringly controversial. There’s a 3-part test from the Burger court, a host of vague terms like “average person” and “contemporary community standards,” and “lacks serious artistic/literary/political/scientific value.” And then there are protections for children, a whole separate piece, as well as child pornography, which is always classified as obscene... except when it is not, like in the cases of naked cherubs in church windows. So, confused yet? We’re off topic, but I make this point to explain that even in public forums, where First Amendment rights are fiercely protected, there are still outstanding issues of content censorship.

So, is Twitter / Facebook / Tumblr a public forum?

At this point, the answer is no. They are privately controlled by companies, not owned by the feds or states or local municipalities, and thus can make almost any policy they want. The idea here is that the free market dictates the life or death of these platforms... and that idea tends to hold true! Tumblr itself is a good case-in-point, because it has lost millions of dollars in value due to bad leadership decisions, and at least partially because of censorship. There are countless examples of others... I remember when Yahoo! was the primary search engine of the internet and Xanga was the biggest blogging platform. While you can still Yahoo, I’m not sure there are more than a few hundred people on Xanga, if it still exists in any useful format. So, since places like this are subject to the free market, and thus can die... they should be allowed to make all the good or bad decisions they want about their content. Or at least, that is how the theory runs.

But really... ARE they subject to the market? Now we’re getting into the really interesting territory. If Facebook shut down tomorrow, would it be a problem? Maybe, but life would continue. But if Google shut down tomorrow? Well, millions of schoolchildren are in GoogleClassrooms right now, so that would certainly be a problem. It would at least cause massive disruption... and Facebook shutting down would cause some disruption. Likewise, Twitter controls so much speech that instead of publishing headlines from Newspapers, newspapers publish headlines from Twitter! The 14-year-old looks at that line like “well, duh” and the 44-year old reads that line like “wow, we’ve come a long way,” and the 84-year-old reads that line with just a sad headshake.

So, now we’ve joined one of the most controversial points of the last 20 years... the Fannie Mae “Too Big to Fail” problem. Basically, a set of banks and big mortgage companies (Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac) made a bunch of bad decisions in about 1995 - 2008. [As an aside, whether or not Fannie Mae {technically, the “Federal National Mortgage Association”} is actually a company comes up as an issue... it originated as a government program, but is today a publicly-traded company and has been since the late 60s, though it was delisted from NYSE and is only traded off-exchange]. And the government had to step in. You can read all about that issue at another time, the bottom line is that actually Fannie Mae has paid back more than it borrowed, but there was a ballooning of the debt ceiling by over 800 billion. Some people care about the national debt, some don’t, and again, not the subject of this commentary. The point is that it set a very odd precedent, whereas a company could make extremely bad decisions and then the burden would be placed on the taxpayers to fix their decision, because the company itself was a part of so many people’s lives. Would social media fall under this guidance? Unlikely, and I think we would all run from state-sponsored social media... but hey, what do I know.

So... get to the point. Should they be public forums, or not?

My two cents always comes down against censorship, especially censorship by entities that don’t have my best interests at heart... so basically, everybody else. I think that it is so easy to self-censor the internet at the personal end (for example, by installing filters and blocking services for objectionable content), that companies should not be unilaterally making these decisions, especially if those companies want to be venues for mass public communication.

Let’s go with another example... let’s say you wanted to call up your buddy and have a nice long phonesex session. Good for you. Or just chat with them about the latest Dr. Doe video (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QXgT8WXaPUY), because enthusiasm is important. Would you be okay with Verizon telling a robot to monitor your call, and then automatically hang up if you said “penis” too much? Or “Trump”? Or “Black Lives Matter?” What about “Nazi,” “Rohypnol,” “Mary Jane,” “negritos” [I’ve got your back, Mr. Cavani], “snowbunny,” or “Insane Clown Posse”? I think most people would be upset about any of those, and they would rightfully tell Verizon that they will find another provider. So Verizon doesn’t do that, although it could. But Twitter does do that. And the availability of another Twitter is in question. Will something succeed Twitter? Absolutely. But right now, Twitter is under no market pressure, so it is succeeding at taking off its platform any number of conversations that it probably should not be policing.

There’s also a social-justice side of this. So, let’s say that we all decide Twitter is a bad platform and move to something else. And that something else costs us 10$ a month. I wouldn’t notice this fee. Others would. So that’s an access issue. Or, let’s say that some people start migrating to a new platform, and they only tell their friends about it. That’s okay, right? Absolutely... but imagine that college student who is trapped at home in a pandemic right now who cannot get any viewpoints outside of what her parents approved of, and previously used Twitter to explore and challenge her upbringing. If she doesn’t get an invite to the new platform, is she just lost?

And that brings up the Pandemic. Many, many common public forums have been shut down due to the pandemic. This alone has caused serious controversy (see: BLM protests on crowded streets where state governors participated, while those same governors implemented executive orders enforcing 6-foot distancing in churches and stores), so the argument for Twitter censorship “but you have many other public forums!” is tough to substantiate during the COVID-era. And this is a HUGE problem. Historically, taking away public forums is always an early move of totalitarian regimes. Taking away rights to assembly and speech follows soon after. We’re now in Phase 2 there... and our governors keep assuring us it is temporary... while at the same time, encouraging Twitter to take off any viewpoints they don’t like, under the guise of “false or misleading information.” Soon, they start moving into the schools, and that leads to...

SCIENCE!!!

So, to talk about what rigorous debate means, we need to understand a bit about Science. And specifically, the philosophy of science, what scientific discourse looks like, and why review and critique are parts of the scientific process.

Point 1: “Scientific consensus” is hogwash. Yes, we all agree that the Earth orbits the Sun, and the Sun itself moves, but beyond that, there isn’t much scientific consensus. If you see an article that starts with the phrase “Expert say,” you can go ahead and close your browser window right there. The rest is bull****.

Point 2: The limits of science are boundless. Any specific scientific paper is, by necessity and the peer review process, very strictly bounded. “Whether or not a vaccine is efficient” is an entirely different paper than one titled “Whether or not 80-year-olds with lung cancer should get the vaccine,” and both of those are different than “How the US should achieve herd immunity, and if it is even possible for COVID-19 before significant mutations cause current immunizations to be ineffective,” and all three of those are different from “Do we need to vaccinate our cats from COVID in order to reach herd immunity?”

Point 3: There is no “finalized” science. The answers are never finished. What is “cutting edge” science today is out-of-date tomorrow, barbaric and backwards by the end of the year, and grounds for an abuse lawsuit by the end of the decade. The best examples of this are from Psych treatments.

Point 4: I get very worried when anybody starts to censor scientific content... especially those without any qualifications. Okay, so this one is a personal sentence (note the “I”), but I’m going to go ahead and guess that Twitter robots and interns flagging posts don’t have any idea the difference between sensitivity and specificity, the background as to why the FDA has never approved an mRNA vaccine previously, the difference between statistical and clinical significance, and how to read a limitations section. The people who are qualified to do so are peer reviewers... and in the case where those fail (which happens!), the rest of the writer’s peers. And we do that. Anything published is open to critique, which leads to the final point, that...

Point 5: Critique and Review are THE MOST IMPORTANT PARTS of scientific publishing. If a piece is published without review, it is called an “opinion” and not science. Even more worrisome than the censoring of unpopular papers is the censoring of the opinions of scientists on the papers of their peers. Should someone publish a paper where I believe they overstretched their claims, it is a HUGE part of my job to call that out. For an agency like Twitter to be able to say “you don’t have the right to say that they overstated their claim, because expressing a concern about a vaccine is against our Terms of Use” is a very big problem for science.

The flipside is that you get into the part where now a company can, through its policy, dictate what science gets done. For example, lets say I wanted to examine an unpopular question... and I’m a social scientist, so there are plenty of those, but say I wanted to do something semi-controversial but apolitical. I’ll say my research question is “How do the happiness of those in committed multi-year polyamorous relationships compare to the happiness of people in similar economic and social situations but in closed marriages where additional intimate partnerships would be viewed as grounds for relationship termination?” There are plenty of ways I could conduct this study and I’ll spare you my methodological musings, but safe to say there are platforms who would not want me to publish my results. And that’s fine.

But let’s say that I did publish my results, and a commenter took to Twitter. And their response was “I read your paper, and I see your conclusion that those in committed multi-year polyamorous relationships score no differently on a happiness scale than those in the closed marriages. However, I disagree with your use of this scale, because it was tested on populations of retirees, and most of the people in your sample are in their late 20s or early 30s.”

That is an EXCELLENT and VALID critique. And let’s say that Twitter was heavily into the social justice and had a policy that said “you can’t say negative things about polyamory.” And they deleted this person’s comment. Now, Twitter has interfered with the scientific process. That comment IS PART of the dialogue and that dialogue is part of Science. Yes, there are other places that those comments could be made, and not be censored... but we should not be encouraging that censorship ANYWHERE. And Twitter has vastly overstepped the line on this point. Random Twitter employees have no business removing professional critiques about a study, even if there are other platforms for those critiques.

Other Thoughts

1) Generally, you can’t prohibit meetings in a public forum based on prior behavior. Thus, “X group was violent in the past” is not a reason to prohibit X group from accessing a public forum for speech. So there’s no saying “Proud Boys were violent once, so no Proud Boys on Twitter” if it were to be declared a public forum.

2) I’m really not aware of any large precedents for taking a private company and declaring it a public forum. That may seem redundant (obviously, if there was precedent, this wouldn’t be such a hot-button issue), but it bears specific mention.

#twitter #public forum #legal #science

6 notes · View notes

wordsnstuff · 6 years

Text

Guide To Political World Building

This is also available on wordsnstuffblog.com!

– This is a subject that I see brought up a lot in book reviews by readers, but not very often when it comes to the writing community. I decided to search the internet and my own experience for as many tips and as much advice as I could find to put in one place for you all. I also addressed a lot questions (in fact, more than usual because I know this is a weak point for most fiction authors) in the common struggles section. I hope this is useful to those of you who have a lot of trouble finding help on this. It should help me as well because I’m in the middle of tackling it for my own series. Happy writing!

Patreon || Ko-Fi || Masterlists || Work In Progress || Studyblr || Studygram

Know What Details Are Important

Not all aspects of a political system in a fictional universe are important to the story-telling, especially when the story is more character or plot driven, rather than driven by the world building. It’s important to deliver relevant information to your reader in pieces, and at a pace that enhances their understanding of events and meaning rather than their knowledge of trivial details.

Know Your Demographic & Your Genre

For certain genres and age-demographics, your world building in the area of political systems and implications should be matured or simplified. The majority of your readership should be able to understand what’s going on, and the way you makes sure of that is know who you’re writing the story for. Certain genres also require a lot less complicated detail in political world building. For instance, YA romance should have less political world building than, say, adult fantasy. Sure, maybe in the case of writing a YA romance, there could require some, but definitely not as in-depth as that of the latter.

Choose A Model to Alter

If you’re going to do it, especially as a beginner, you need to pick some form of inspiration or something similar to what you’re going for. There are so many governmental systems out there that already exist, and if you should research plenty of them and them mix and match, add and subtract, and twist until you have something that serves your story.

Think of The Implications of Details

Every detail that you make prominent in the reader’s mind should be thought out in terms of the implications. Ask yourself how this affects different groups of people, how it’s evolved over time, what it means for the system as a whole, etc. This will make your story more three-dimensional in the reader’s mind.

Find Issues in Power Distribution

Most government tension (throughout history, at least) has come from inequality in the distribution of power. Whether it be between races, classes, branches of government, figures in politics, or groups of people with different opinions, or all of the above combined, most issues stem from the struggle for power, control, and influence over others. Explore this and find new ways to think of how this could be interpreted from your story.

Think of Culture’s Impact on Politics

Culture has a major hand in how politics works. A society’s values, religious majorities and minorities, gender roles, environment, what an average citizen looks like, how citizens are expected to look, act, use their time, etc. These things all impact political situation and how it changes over time with culture, so explore this heavily.

Common Struggles

-- The common struggles section of my “guide to__” posts are general questions sent in by readers on the topic at hand. If you have a question that has not been addressed thus far, you’ll probably find the answer in this section. As always, you’re welcome to send other questions to my inbox if you don’t find the answer in this post. --

~ How do I illustrate the evolution of a society’s politics?... I would choose a few major events and make the causation behind them more prominent than the actual events themselves. History repeats itself, and that’s very important in political foreshadowing and often how a society deals with political situations.

~ How do I write conversations about my world’s politics?... It depends on the tone of these conversations. The way casual conversations about politics are written can tell the reader a lot about your world’s political climate, and can be a very useful device. Heated conversations can be useful in showing different passionate sides of a political issue in your world. I would say, write them carefully and with intention.

~ How do I make the reader invested/interested in the world’s politics?... Show the reader why they should care, make them relate to it, and then make them relate your story to their reality. You have to use literary devices as well. Show, don’t tell works really well here. Don’t show the main character reflecting that the conflicts at the war front are bad. Show the war front. Show the severity. Make them feel the heavy emotions of the people. Show them the real stakes of the political decisions being dealt with in the story.

~ How do I create believable racial tensions?... Again, just mirror reality. Understand why racial tensions exist and mirror that in your story’s context. Racial tension is majorly caused by fear, prejudice, and response to the “other side”. It’s often a long, ongoing battle because it’s rooted in the way people are raised and the constant environment around them. Racism is taught, so show it’s bigger, more outstanding moments, as well as its less prominent ones. No political issue arises exclusively from large, explosive moments. It’s made up of a few big ones, notable ones, and then the many, millions of little contributing moments and factors.

~ How do I write reasonable opposition groups?... You’re the author, so you have the unique opportunity of setting the reader up to see the reasoning behind both or all sides. You can show the evidence and logic behind each one, and make the reader understand why each side believes what they believe, and the personal engagement that leads each side to fight so hard.

~ How do I connect a caste system to political tension?... Political tension within caste systems are commonly caused by people’s natural desire for power and control, which leads to dissatisfaction in cases of being on the less fortunate side of inequality. Caste systems are also typically a pyramid, which means there’s more of the underdogs. These things combine to create political storms because on one side you have few people and lots of power that add up to just a bit more than a lot of people with less power individually, but more when pooled.

~ How to I create a corrupt government without too many clichés?... The most cliché thing about typical corrupt governments is the one-dimensional evil figures that lead to corruption. Very few authors explore what leads a human who’s only job is to protect the people to turn against them. Explore their motivations and their personal struggle and justifications and you’ll have a more interesting and impactful corrupt government.

~ How do I illustrate a positive government that doesn’t come off as suspicious?... Work hard on perfecting tone, be very careful with what could be interpreted as foreshadowing, and show genuine goodness in not only the government’s words and actions, but actual results. Show your government talking the talk, and then walking the walk.

~ How do I set up the climax of a political issue?... Show the slow burn, and then the inciting events that set off the inevitable explosion. You need to establish to the reader that something is going to happen no matter what, but make the actual consequence and its place in time a surprise.

~ How do I develop a governmental system from the ground up for the sake of the plot itself?... As I said in a previous point, use a model or several to take inspiration from. In the case of world building being the centre of your story, build your world and your plot together so they complement one another.

Other Resources From My Blog That Help With This:

How To Write A Good Plot Twist

How To Foreshadow

Commentary On Social Issues In Writing

Tackling Subplots

How To Perfect The Tone In A Piece Of Writing

Tips On Writing About Mental Illness

A Guide To Tension & Suspense In Your Writing

Writing Good Villains

Tips On Writing Intense Scenes

Finding & Fixing Plot Holes

Resources For Crime, Mystery, & Thriller Writers

Resources For Writing Science Fiction

Resources For Writing Dystopian/Apocalypse

Resources For Writing Period Pieces: High Middle Ages & Renaissance

Resources For Writing Period Pieces: 1600s

Resources For Writing Period Pieces: 1700s

Resources For Writing Period Pieces: 1800s

Resources For Writing Period Pieces: 1900-1939

Resources For Writing Period Pieces: 1940-1969

Resources For Writing Period Pieces: 1970-1999

Useful Writing Resources

Useful Writing Resources II

Resources For Writing Sketchy Topics

Resources For Worldbuilding

Resources For Plot Development

Resources For Creating Characters

Mimicking Diversity In Science Fiction/Fantasy

Writing About Another Era

On Making Scenes/Characters Unpredictable

Info-dumping

Writing About Uncomfortable Topics

Support Wordsnstuff!

FIND MORE ON WORDSNSTUFFBLOG.COM

If you enjoy my blog and wish for it to continue being updated frequently and for me to continue putting my energy toward answering your questions, please consider Buying Me A Coffee, or pledging your support on Patreon.

Request Resources, Tips, Playlists, or Prompt Lists

Instagram // Twitter //Facebook //#wordsnstuff

FAQ //monthly writing challenges // Masterlist

MY CURRENT WORK IN PROGRESS (Check it out, it’s pretty cool. At least I think it is.)

Studyblr || Studygram

Check out my YouTube Channel!

4K notes · View notes

timeclonemike · 4 years

Text

Write Who You Know

Inclement weather forced me offline earlier today, and while that made it impossible to write (among other things) it did allow for some reflection on my many, many writing projects. Specifically, why some of them are proceeding while others are stuck fast. The result was enlightening, though perhaps not encouraging:

The stories that are making no progress are all stories where I don’t actually understand the characters I’m trying to write, in any way. Because my writing style is so character driven, this is a GINORMOUS PROBLEM.

Birthright was intended to be a deconstruction / reconstruction of Harry Potter. It takes the idea of a secret society / civilization of magical people living isolated from industrialized non-magical humanity and shows how that would actually work, and how it would fall apart. I had high hopes for it, but I just could not get into the headspace of the protagonist that I had created for the setting; he’s gay, he’s adopted, his parents are loving and supportive... the only thing he and I have in common are a love of books, and that’s not enough for me to work with.

Mirror, Mirror was already collapsing under its lack of effective characterization, so much that I wanted to totally revamp it into a reverse isekai with a fantasy adventurer transported to our world to fight its monsters (cops and capitalism). The original character was a college drop out working at Dollar General thrust into the adventure of a lifetime; all outside my frame of reference. Flipping the script leaves me with a fantasy character in our modern world, and while a sorcerer / rogue multiclass burning cops alive is cathartic to write, there’s no narrative meat to sink my teeth into, so it didn’t go anywhere either.

The Bad Guys is the same problem multiplied by five. Each of the newly minted supervillains comes from a walk of life I only have a limited understanding of; Dr. Axiom and Hazmat are Physics / Engineering Majors (I majored in Mass Communications), Digital Chameleon is an actor and social engineer (I can’t even get Dollar General to hire me let alone talk my way inside a huge company to steal important documents), Gentleman Caller is a proper gentleman concerned with dress and decorum and honor (nobody could accuse me of that with a straight face) and Memento Morrie is from the Big Apple (I’m from the middle of nowhere, for better or worse) so taken all together I put together a team of characters I have NO IDEA HOW TO PORTRAY.

Consequently, these three projects are being put on indefinite hiatus, until such time as I can re-engineer the characters to something easier for me to work with. There’s a few ideas that come to mind but for now, I think it’s better that I focus my attention and effort on the stories that aren’t fighting me:

Like Clockwork is basically, after a few plot rewrites and adjustments, a novelization of an RPG campaign in a bespoke fantasy steampunk setting. The characters draw heavily from fantasy conventions, but the motivations and key personality traits of each member of the party are essentially mine: Alice’s love of steam powered technology, Dr. Spatchcock’s disgust at the medical establishment’s treatment of mental illness, Sylvia’s rebellion against her family’s restrictions, and Edgar’s desire to connect with the memory of his late grandfather. Even the antagonist’s motivation, outrage at being betrayed by people he thought he could trust, is mine. The only problems are those of narrative clarity and pacing, which will be solved in the fullness of time.

The Last Machine is a post apocalyptic story, and that already gives me considerable leeway in depicting the apocalypse; all post-apocalyptic fiction is a commentary on existing society at the time it was written anyway. More importantly, the protagonist is dealing with the same “who am I and why am I here and what the hell am I doing” existential fuckery that hounds my every waking hour, so that’s a solid foundation right there. The protagonist’s friends were already loosely based on some impulse or emotion I found relatable; kind of wish I’d been able to do that with The Bad Guys, honestly.

The Gamble is also a post apocalyptic story, one that allows me to explore a different flavor of the apocalypse. The two main characters, Eric and Lyla, are written based on my floundering for purpose after graduating from college and not being able to find a regular job, and my sense of I-can’t-believe-I-have-to-babysit-this-grown-ass-man that comes from working for my dad on the farm, respectively. The Gamble is the second part of a trilogy, and the final part, The Signal, is a “humans through alien eyes” perspective shift, which gives me more leeway in narration. Both of those stories are proceeding, if slower than I like.

After some reflection, I have deduced that my fanfic is still ongoing, it’s just that the stress and strain from the pre- and post-election politics has fucked up my focus. Frisk is one of those characters that is very easy to project on (arguably by design) and that by itself makes the characters easy to write. The small town setting is also very familiar. The Frostpunk and Deltarune fics not so much, although they are not abandoned, just stagnant. We’ll see if I can get some updates out before 2021.

My non fiction work doesn’t fall into this same characterization bottleneck, so any delays are a result of research into the appropriate topics. The Post Apocalyptic Civilization Kit is currently waiting on some detailed analyses of disaster relief / response efforts and how well they worked, and after that there will be other blanks I need to fill in, but that’s all part of the process. Same with So They Called You Mad, my facetious how-to guide on becoming a Mad Scientist, and The Super Villain’s Starter Guide, which is the same thing as applied to becoming a criminal mastermind. (The overlap between the two means progress or delays with one book also carries over to the other.)

#writing #mike's mind #write who you know

3 notes · View notes

gle21ahsgov · 4 years

Text

Media Assessment of Issue

Articles

Objective Article: “Trump and 2020 Democrats brand themselves criminal justice reformers” (https://www.reuters.com/article/idUSKBN1ZQ14K)

Liberal Biased: “ Trump’s criminal justice policy, explained” (https://www.vox.com/2020-presidential-election/21418911/donald-trump-crime-criminal-justice-policy-record)

Conservative Biased: “Trump Urges Us to Reflect on Prisoners and Redemption” (https://www.nationalreview.com/2018/04/president-trump-second-chance-month-redemption-for-prisoners/)

SACAP Analysis

a) Reuters Article

Subject:

Hunnicutt and Bernstein describe how President Trump has helped reform criminal justice and present the Democratic candidates’ views on how they would address the issue.

Author(s):

Trevor Hunnicutt ~> reporter at Reuters

Mostly writes about investment news and some politics

Pomona College alumni; offered him journalism internship opportunities

Sharon Bernstein ~> reporter at Reuters

Generally writes about California policies and politics

Former reporter/editor for the Los Angeles Times (liberal-leaning)

Even though Bernstein wrote for a liberal leaning source in the past, this does not majorly influence the more objective news source and articles she must publish now. Overall, both authors seem credible, so the article should provide pretty accurate information.

Context:

Reuters ~> known for accuracy and impartiality (est. 165 years ago)

One BILLION readers worldwide every day (through broadcasts, television, newspaper, etc.)

Article published on January 27, 2020

Since the article is from Reuters, the article SHOULD present both the liberal and conservative views of the topic fairly, and the news should still be relevant because it was published pretty recently.

Audience:

Largest international news provider

Reaches 115 countries in 16 different languages

Reuters must deliver relatively unbiased news because there are millions of active readers. It has an established reputation and readers.

Perspective: Objective.

Trump ~ First Step Act (reducing prison sentences especially for drug use, more rehab programs, second chance out in the world thru good behavior)

criticized for not managing local police

Biden ~ wants to eliminate prison sentences for drug use entirely

Wants to eliminate private prisons and cash bail

Change so youth cannot receive same charges as adults

Warren ~> increase availability of social services to take care of youth

Wants to rely on counselors and teachers to help reform youth rather than police and prison sentences

Buttigieg ~> wants to invest $100 million into support services for youth instead of youth prisons

I agree with all perspectives considering youth incarceration reform. Both Democrats or Republicans seem to have similar thoughts of eliminating prison sentences related to drug use and changing to support services and rehab programs to help support youth rather than simply throwing them in jail.

b) Vox Article

Subject:

In his “explanation” of Trump’s policies, Lopez emphasizes on the failures in Trump’s “tough on crime” policy and clearly diminishes Trump’s role in the First Step Act, mentioning it as an “outlier” to his regular policies. By doing so, Lopez paints President Trump in a bad light, influencing readers against his policies.

Author(s):

German Lopez ~> Senior Correspondent for Vox

Mostly writes about criminal justice and public health

Univ. of Cincinnati alumni; degree in journalism

Wrote for City Beat Cincinnati (somewhat liberal newspaper)

He lives in Washington D.C. with his husband

Lopez is accustomed to writing more liberal articles, with his background in Cincinnati and now writing for Vox. As a result, the article is filled with liberal bias, undermining Trump’s beliefs and policies under the guise of “explanation.”

Context:

Vox ~> only established 6 years ago

Very liberally-biased

September 11, 2020

Vox has only existed for a mere 6 years compared to Reuters 165. As a result, it does not have an established reputation as a news source, so its articles ends up skewing left rather than remaining strongly unbiased. This gives Lopez the chance to attack and undermine Trump’s policies in his article. However, it is published recently so the information is relevant.

Audience:

More liberal audience

38% of audience age 18 to 34 (making $100K+)

Since the audience is also more liberal, they are more willing to accept liberally-biased articles, which allows Lopez to write (and Vox to publish) a more subjective piece.

Perspective: Liberally biased.

Trump’s failures in the “tough on crime” policy

Supposedly wants harsher punishment for crimes (esp. drug-related)

Author calls the First Step Act an outlier and considers it more of Congress’s doing than Trump’s

Lack of control over police brutality and mass incarceration issues

Ends investigations into police misconduct

Support for capital punishment

According to author ~> Trump is simply doing whatever he can to get reelected

Hence ~> law and order tweets and tough on crime

I kind of disagree because the author completely undermines what Trump HAS done to reduce prison sentences, especially in relation to drug crimes. Apart from the First Step Act, Lopez does not really present the conservative side at all; he only criticizes the issues in Trump’s policies.

c) National Review Article

Subject:

Robinson first discusses facts related to issues regarding imprisonment, including the number of people in prison and the economic burden of keeping people in prison. Then, Robinson discusses Trump’s belief of BOTH holding people accountable and still giving people second chances or opportunities, especially for young people.

Author(s):

Gerard Robinson ~> Executive director for Center for Advancing Opportunities (CAO)

former Secretary of Education for Virginia

former Florida Education Commissioner

former President of the Black Alliance for Educational Options

Education, criminal justice, economics, and legislation expert

Republican

Robinson does not seem like normal reporter for National Review. This piece is likely a one-time article that he published, but he is rounded in all areas from education to criminal justice to help create education opportunities for fellow black children. He is Republican so it makes sense that he published his article on National Review, a conservative leaning source, and in his article, he praises Trump’s efforts in reforming criminal justice, for youth and adults.

Context:

National Review ~> established 65 years ago

conservative editorial magazine (news and commentaries)

Published on April 18, 2018

National Review articles tends to skew to the right, so the magazine allows Robinson to approve of Republican President Trump’s policies rather than attacking them in his article. Although the article was published two years ago, it should still be pretty relevant since change in politics happens quite slowly.

Audience:

Since the National Review is a conservative magazine, its readers also tend to be more conservative, so they support the policies and bias that they read from this magazine and article.

Perspective: Conservatively biased.

April 2018 ~ Second Chance Month

Trump wants to reform prisons to give inmates a second chance

“Affording those who have been held accountable for their crimes an opportunity to become contributing members of society is a critical element of criminal justice that can reduce our crime rates and prison populations.”

Offering apprenticeship programs and prison education programs

Second Chance Pell Grant

I support Trump’s idea of accountability and opportunity. We do want people to learn from their mistakes and crimes, but that does not mean staying in prison forever. Not only is it expensive, but to me at least, that isn’t what I would consider as a “second chance.” So I believe in the apprenticeship programs and support services so high school and college kids can truly get that second chance out in the world; they still have the opportunity to learn and grow.

Similarities/Differences Between Articles

In the Reuters article, the different perspectives regarding criminal justice (and youth) were clearly presented with minimal to no commentary. As a liberal leaning news source, the Vox article attacks Trump’s current ideas such as “tough on crime” and his lack of federal action against police brutality while ignoring/undermining his legal actions like the First Step Act. The National Review article addresses the same “tough on crime” policy in a different light—Americans must be held accountable for their actions BUT through the First Step Act and apprenticeship programs and the Second Chance Pell Grant for youth, they still get a second chance at LIFE rather than wasting away in prison.

My Perspective

Without considering his moral character, I do believe that President Trump has done some useful things for this country. I feel a little more inclined to believe in his policies because he is already president and he is ACTIVELY working to help resolve said issues in criminal justice and getting youth out of prison and the support they need. Since the Democrats are only words and promises right now, I think I should wait to see how they will ACTUALLY handle the issue when they become president.

5 notes · View notes