#that DOES contain some incredibly complex and nuanced books

[trans-cuchulainn]

"YA books only have simple politics and never grapple with complex issues with any nuance" have you considered you just haven't read good YA and you should probably stop making demonstrably inaccurate generalisations about an entire fucking age category based on three books you saw recc'd on tiktok

[yurimother]

LGBTQ Manga Review - Still Sick Vol. 2

Still Sick Vol. 1 was a highlight for me last year. I immediate fell in love with the complex characters and storytelling and, based on the first volume, I believe that Akashi has created one of the best shakaijin Yuri (Yuri works featuring romance between adult women, often in the workplace) out there. The series took a very typical office romance story and infused it with several unique elements, like a very meta understanding and portrayal of Yuri and Yurijin. On top of all that, Akashi demonstrated an apparent willingness to tell emotionally varied and impactful stories with subtlety, a trait often missing from more ham-handed Yuri melodramas. We, as an audience, could grow in our understanding of the characters, their backgrounds, and their neuroticism rather than have it all apparent for us. The second volume has done little but confirm to me that my initial reactions were right on the money. With Still Sick Vol. 2, Akashi delivers a stunning continuation to one of last year's best releases.

Still Sick Vol. 2 takes up directly where the first book left off, with Maekawa suddenly and somewhat cruelly kissing her friends and coworker Shimizu. The kiss was initially intended as a joke; however, it further confuses Shimizu as she struggles to comprehend her own sexuality and wishes to support Maekawa's efforts to reignite her former career in manga. Her conflicted feelings come to a head when, in a comfortable moment, she suddenly and accidentally reveals that she likes Maekawa. The following regret and discomfort are alarming human and relatable, as Akashi really captures the essence of a flustered lesbian. This confession acts as the catalyst for the dramatic transformation both characters begin to undergo as the story continues.

As in the first book, Maekawa is an irresistibly capricious and complex character. She acts exceptionally clingy around Shimizu in some moments, but in others, pushes her away. One of the best aspects of her character is that, just like the first book, each of her actions is not outright explained, nor are they random, but rather the appropriate reactions based on her somewhat twisted sense of self and the world. The more one reads into it, the more her varied, occasionally upsetting acts appear like those of a woman struggling to figure out what she wants out of life and out of her relationship with Shimizu. Early in the story, she and the reader have an epiphany that she wants to be loved. Still, throughout the story, her actions hammer home how alien and disconcerting the topic affection, romantic or otherwise, is for her.

One of the central conflicts revolves around Maekawa's manga, or rather, her writing the manga. Just as the first volume dived into the meta of the Yuri genre and its fanbase, this book details some of the struggles creators to feel when working on a project. For example, Maekawa makes multiple references to the balance artists, especially those working with publishers, must maintain between their inspiration and desires and their audience’s interests. She shows frustration with her work and sufferers from bouts of self-doubt and sadness when she hits blocks. It is all very realistic, and the reader gets a sense of the nuanced difficulties professional artists face.

The two plotlines, Maekawa's struggle to complete her manga and Shimizu navigating her feelings for her, are well integrated and support each other. If either element were absent, the other would have to be utterly changed, showing Akashi's storytelling ability. Shimizu's apparent greatest desire is to be there for Maekawa and support her work as a mangaka. However, through this support and want to be present, Shimizu has many of her more vulnerable moments, seeking to inspire her friend, which eventually leads to her confessing her feelings. On Maekawa's part, her work affects her character first and relationship second, the opposite of Shimizu, making for a nice contrast and more development for the often-flighty woman. The realization she has early in the story creates a conflict within her, expressed through her work and relation with Shimizu.

There is a constant push and pull between Shimizu and Maekawa, with each character taking it in turns to accept or reject the other. On Shimizu's part, this dynamic looks like her being there for Maekawa and enthusiastically supporting her artwork or avoiding her and using work as an excuse to back off. Maekawa, however, true to her character, is much more extreme in her actions, acting overly affectionate to Shimizu at times and openly hostile in others. The oscillating relationship continues as they both come to terms with their feelings, both romantically and around Maekawa's manga.

Akashi excels at justifying the varying actions of their characters while maintaining a sense of discovery and suspense for the reader. Only through deep and thoughtful readings can we hope to understand every action, but all the clues are there, making for an excellent repeat read and keeping the book in the audience's minds long after they put it down. However, sometimes, even having uncovered the reasons behind them, Maekawa can seem overly cruel and dramatic. It does not detract much from the overall work, but a few chapters hold a teetering balance just above falling into melodrama.

There is not much to say about the artwork that I did not mention in my review of the first volume. The character designs remain solid and consistent. However, the annoying lack of detail is even more apparent than in the first book. Panels often have a dull, empty feeling or fail to communicate the powerful writing's emotional tone. They are not bad, as previously said, they are consistent and keep the reader engrossed, but it is aggressively average.

One aspect of the art I will praise is its lack of service. Akashi treats their character and story with respect, and there is not even so much as a cleavage shot anywhere. The few moments which could contain sexual content, like when Maekawa embraces Shimizu and approaches for a kiss, are used much more for tension than service. It is perhaps the one area where the art begins to excel. The framing and expressions are all very carefully chosen to maintain the proper tone and avoid exploiting the characters. The best example of this is easily the onsen. At the height of their reluctant animosity at a company trip, Maekawa and Shimizu have to navigate being naked at the onsen together. The moment contains no sexual content but is excellently presented as an awkward experience to enhance tension, followed by some light comedy that brings the two women closer together.

Still Sick continues to amaze in its second volume. The tensions and stakes are much higher now, and the dramatic yet grounded relationship will enthrall readers as it develops. The Yuri romance integrates beautifully with a wonderful and incredibly meta plot about creating manga and all the turmoil the come with both. Akashi crafts a sophisticated and mature story that never lets up with twists and steadily progresses forward at a satisfying rate. This series is easily one the best shakaijin works out there and deserves hefty praise and enthusiastic investment from all its readers.

Ratings: Story – 10 Characters – 9 Art – 5 LGBTQ – 7 Sexual Content – 0 Final – 8

Purchase a copy of Still Sick Vol. 2 digitally or in print - https://amzn.to/2ZrErgn

Purchasing manga legally helps support artists and publishers

Review copy provided by Tokyopop

Support Yuri and LGBTQ news and review on the YuriMother Patreon

[alixofagnia]

OpheThorn III: Back to Rambling

The Memory of Babel…Wow.

If nothing else, this book GOES. We’re dropped onto Babel just as lost, bewildered, and determined as Ophelia to get to the bottom of this ark. Boy, was it worth the wait! Babel is exquisitely written and, incredible as it sounds, even more treacherous than the Pole. The backbone Ophelia shows in this book is awesome! I love that she’s taken the measure of her worth—all the things she’s been through and survived in the previous novels—and come out resilient As Fuck. This book is definitely a penultimate novel. Dazzling as it is, much of it feels like groundwork being laid for the finale.

OpheThorn is less nuanced and ambiguous in Babel. While I feel there’s less to analyze, I do really love this pairing and I like writing about their dynamic. So, I’m just going to put my thoughts down and see what comes up!

[There will be spoilers]

[All fanart images credited to @patricialyfoung​]

Intro

One of the things that drew me into The Mirror Visitor series is the relationship between Ophelia and Thorn. Theirs is not a traditional love story at all; in fact, it avoids clichés and instead plays about with two romantic tropes: enemies to lovers and marriage of convenience. The series spins these tropes anew by offering subtle signs of attraction (discussed here) and giving both characters antisocial tendencies, as well as—in Thorn’s case—possible ASD traits (discussed here).

When we left these two in Clairdelune, Thorn had just put his feelings on the table. Before she could give her response, however, they were separated under upsetting, even traumatic circumstances. Years later, we meet Ophelia again…

Ophelia

…and, oh dear, she is in a sorry state indeed. We find her disastrously operating a waffle stand during a kooky Animist festival for, of all things, clocks. Just what the girl pining for Thorn needs, right? All is not well with Ophelia. As Aunt Rosaline points out,

“No, you’re not fine. You don’t go out anymore, you eat any old thing, you sleep at any old time. You haven’t even been back to the museum.” [19]

Although her mother, sister, and to an extent Aunt Rosaline all believe Ophelia is wasting away, shutting herself in her room, she’s actually been quite busy. She’s been studying and developing working hypotheses about God and the Other: where they are, there she’ll find Thorn. She’s convinced of it. Working from obscure clues dropped in Clairdelune, Ophelia settles on Babel as the ark most likely to yield some answers, and when the chance to travel there appears, she wastes no time at all.

She. Is. Going.

Thorn

In Babel, Thorn has made a name for himself as Sir Henry, rising to become a Lord of LUX, the gatekeepers of Babel who serve a similar function to that of the Doyennes on Anima. He is commanding, magnetic, and aloof as ever. It is unsurprising to find that he has been playing close to the fire again. But the stress and tension of his investigative life on Babel is certainly heightened in a way that it wasn’t at the Pole. 

We also learn that his nickname in Babel is the Automaton due to his unceasing energy. Thorn, thus, has dealt with the separation by predictably burying himself in work.

The Reunion

To Ophelia’s disappointment, the reunion with Thorn does not go quite as she had envisioned, and that’s because she hadn’t really envisioned past the goal of finding him [203]. Ophelia is very much a character who takes things one at a time as she’s confronted by them. When Thorn seems less than pleased to see her, she must consider all these Troublesome Feelings and why his underwhelming reaction upsets her.

The thing is Ophelia is waiting for Thorn to take the lead. But he already did, and she didn’t follow—at least, not in a way that he could understand. As previously discussed, Thorn does not function well with non-verbal cues. He needs to be explicitly told how someone else feels, or how he is making someone else feel, in order to know when to adjust his behavior. That can be quite flustering, especially for someone like Ophelia who struggles to vocalize her feelings exactly as they are.

“Is that it?” Ophelia murmured. “You have nothing more to say to me?”

 “I have, actually,” Thorn muttered, not stopping all his connecting. […] “And you?” he finally asked, in turn. “You have nothing more to say to me?” [263]

She doesn’t. Thorn coldly dismisses her and continues to keep her at arm’s length, especially when he gives her a second chance to confess her feelings and she still refuses to take it. 

Ophelia has social anxiety. She’s not exactly shy, she just gets tongue-tied and befuddled sometimes. It’s part of her make-up, but it doesn’t just happen around Thorn—there are plenty of instances where she has trouble expressing herself to those she cares about, such as Ambrose and Blaise in this novel, or Fox in Clairdelune. She even struggles to express basic gratitude toward Aunt Rosaline in Promise. Unlike them, Thorn challenges her to uncomfortable levels. Her feelings for him are complex and utterly foreign; she has no idea what to do about them. 

Unfortunately, Thorn is fresh out of fucks to give over her see-saw act. He’s well-past this stage of confusion and cowardice she’s experiencing because he’s been in love with Ophelia since Promise (“I’m starting to get used to you”) and dealt with the ramifications of that in Clairdelune (“I don’t give a damn whether people find me suspect, as long as I am not so in your eyes.”). 

Thorn does nothing half-heartedly. In no uncertain terms, he left her with the bluntest of blunt confessions (“By the way, I love you.”), which was a milestone in his emotional growth. It is clear that he does not love frivolously or casually in the way of his foil, Archibald, so for him, nothing has changed in three years. Likely, he thinks this should be obvious to Ophelia, and it probably should be at this point. He’s done all he can, after all, what more can she want? From his perspective, it’s Ophelia’s turn to make a move, not his.

Ophelia, though, functions differently. She has always needed verbal reinforcement and reassurance. That need has been heightened by their long separation. Essentially, they’re out of touch with one another and, in Ophelia’s case, she’s completely out of touch with herself, which is why when prompted by Thorn she doesn’t provide an answer, even though there could be only one reason for her going to Babel. Things finally come to a head when Thorn loses all patience and replaces her as his assistant. Ophelia is pissed.

“You weren’t available. Waiting for you would have slowed me down in my research.”

“Slowed you down? For your information, I was also doing research of my own. It might interest you to learn…”

“Of your own, that’s precisely the problem,” he interrupted her. “I advised you never to leave your division, and you were supposed to warn me if you discovered anything new. Nothing has changed, you still always make your decisions alone.”

“I wanted to help you,” Ophelia hissed, through gritted teeth.

“I don’t want any of your finer feelings. I need efficiency. If you don’t mind, I now have a flight to take.”

Ophelia’s blood ignited in her every vein. “You’re an egoist.” She had wanted to anger Thorn, and she knew, by the way he had frozen on the spot, that she had succeeded. All the shadows of the night suddenly seemed to  have been drawn to the center of his face. He threw Ophelia a look so hard, she reeled from its impact.

“I am demanding, a killjoy, obsessive, antisocial, and crippled,” he intoned, in a forbidding voice. “You can put all the defects in the world on me, but I will not permit you to call me an egoist. If you prefer to do things your way, go ahead, but don’t waste my time anymore. Our collaboration is over.” [305]

OMG, this is harsh. But it’s the kick in the ass Ophelia needs. Since taking up a secret identity as Eulalia and aspiring to become a Forerunner (essentially a scholar and a scribe), she’s already been confronted by the fact that she’s not as good a researcher as she’s prided herself on. Now, she’s being confronted by the suggestion that she’s not a very good partner, either. It leaves her feeling “drier than dust.” [321]

I think it’s interesting how Thorn’s dialogue here has a double meaning. He’s talking about their partnership as an investigative team, of course. But it just as easily applies to their personal relationship. He can’t keep waiting around for Ophelia to make up her mind. He’s got a God to hunt down, an Other to face. Having to wonder about where he stands with Ophelia is getting to be too much. By once again haranguing off on her own, Ophelia has made it plain to him that she prefers to do things without him. In his eyes, she’s pushing him away.

Eventually, she is able to see this perspective and she is ashamed to realize how badly she’s held Thorn to a double standard. He gave of himself through words and gestures as far as he was able, while she gave him nothing in return. Finally, FINALLY, Ophelia fully expresses her love for Thorn and, as he once did, asks him to forgive her shortcomings. It’s a very sweet scene, I must say.  

Now, to go back for a moment, what’s really gutting about Ophelia calling Thorn an egoist is this:

“God said he would keep his eyes on you,” he muttered, in a choked voice. “Right in front of me. I make a lamentable husband, but I permit no one, particularly him, to persecute my wife. It’s impossible for me to tear you away from God, but I can tear him away from you. If a book exists that contains God’s secret, and allows his invulnerability to be punctured, I will find it.” [392]

For context, Ophelia had admonished Thorn for his dogged pursuit of this quest, expressing outrage that he should be doing this for a world that’s done nothing for him. At one time, yes, Thorn may have been acting in the interest of the world. Then, he met Ophelia (who is too curious for her own good) and he met God. God threatened her, and Thorn is not a man who could allow such a thing to go unpunished, no matter the consequence. Ever since they met—through every consideration, every move in this impossible investigation and despite each rejection from her—he’s been acting out of love for Ophelia. 

As Thorn said, he is not an egoist.

The Blind Spot

After their “egoist” argument, Ophelia feels instant regret and tries to stop Thorn from walking away. She doesn’t succeed, however, because she is struck by his claws. At first, she believes he may have done this on purpose, the thought of which really scares her because it indicates that Thorn is absolutely done with her.

Later, after she finally makes her confession, we all learn that, in fact, Thorn has lost a bit of control over his family power. He has no idea that he used his claws on Ophelia. I’m a little bit unsure what caused this vulnerability—I don’t really follow the given reason, so I’m wondering if Thorn doesn’t quite know himself why this has come to be.

My theory is more euphemistic. Ophelia had reached out to touch his turned back and the gesture badly startled him. He overreacts then overcorrects, and they both take a memorable tumble. Thorn explains:

“Never again accost me from behind my back or from any of my blind spots. Don’t do any movement that I can’t see coming in advance, or then warn me out loud.” [389]

He further explains that he can retain control as long as his claws don’t perceive her as a threat and asks her not to be absent-minded with him. I think it’s entirely plausible that his control over his Dragon power has weakened due to his deep emotion regarding Ophelia. I also feel that this speaks closely to their recent conflict as well as Thorn’s coding as autistic. It’s like Thorn is saying, “No more hide and seek. No more games. Tell me straight, or not at all.”

Ophelia knows how deep his passions run. She once held his dice and thought she might die under the weight and intensity of his emotions. Perhaps it is her Animism that has wrought this change in him. Perhaps it is simply her existence. Either way, she can no longer afford to be careless when it comes to Thorn’s feelings. In the final chapter, Ophelia and Thorn have a true heart to heart, reaffirming their partnership. But Thorn has something to add.

“No half-measures,” he interrupted her. “I’m not and do not wish to be your friend.” [445]

What he leaves unspoken is that he wants to be her husband, in every version of the role: Partner. Protector. Lover. Now that Ophelia has given him an answer, Thorn is comfortable leading them forward and it is the role of lover that he specifically has in mind. Considering this is probably the first time he’s ever propositioned a woman for sex, he is understandably quite awkward. Ophelia quickly realizes that she’s added to his inner turmoil by repressing her own sexuality around him and inadvertently making him feel less than attractive. She also understands that she, too, wants to be his wife in every version of that role: Partner. Protector. Lover. What follows is a really beautiful expression of honest acceptance and true value.

Desire

My dudes, our girl is constantly at risk of exploding (or maybe imploding?) with desire in this book. It’s consuming her, emptying her, and driving every atom of her being. Look at this!

Ophelia had received no news from Thorn after his escape. Not a single telegram, not a single letter. She could keep telling herself that he couldn’t run the risk of making contact, that he was a man wanted by the law, perhaps by God himself, but it was eating her up inside. [22]

Whenever she crossed a man who was a bit taller than average, she couldn’t stop herself from looking back as she passed, with a frantic pounding in her chest. [83]

Ophelia would have recognized his voice out of a thousand. The resonance of a double bass, solemn and sullen, that echoed through her inner emptiness, shook her to the core, welled up to her throat, choked her. [240]

She waited until her heartbeat, taxed by the run, had returned to normal. But it didn’t happen. Her entire flesh seemed to be pulsating to a single chaotic rhythm. This evening, she would see Thorn again. [249]

She wanted to be with Thorn right there, right now. She’d wanted that every second of every minute of every hour, for almost three years. [249]

Although she knew the temperature of this place was strictly maintained at minus eight degrees, Ophelia felt as if it were fifteen degrees warmer. Never in her life had she cared about appearances, and yet she ran a nervous hand through her hair to tidy it up. [253]

She suddenly realized that there wasn’t much she would have refused him, had he but asked. [278]

Instead, he disinfected his hands for a second time, as if they really were repulsive. They weren’t in Ophelia’s eyes. From a distance, she took in the network of veins under the skin, the long, curved fingers, the bone that          rose up on each wrist, and suddenly, she felt something like pain in the pit of her stomach. She hadn’t the slightest idea what was happening to her, but looking at those hands made her want to scream. [283]

She felt it again, even more violently, this urgent call from deep inside her. [446]

Ophelia is so horny and I’m so here for it!

Closing Thoughts

Do I think Ophelia’s internal conflict over Thorn is drawn out? Yes. 

Do I think it’s contrived? No.

I think it falls in line with Ophelia’s characterization and I think Thorn’s frosty reaction to her presence in Babel falls in line with his characterization. These characters aren’t perfect: Ophelia is quirky and endearing, but that doesn’t make her immune to cowardice; Thorn is highly skilled and competent but is deficient socially and sometimes emotionally. I can’t emphasize enough how well Christelle Dabos knows her characters and allows them to be who they are rather than force them to make weird changes to fill plot holes.  

We can’t forget, either, the fact that they have been completely cut off from one another for years. Yes, we might think in that time Ophelia could have done more to sort out her feelings. But as we’ve seen, she just doesn’t focus on more than what she can handle at a time. She always thinks in terms of breaking a problem down into steps. The first step was following up on those clues from Claridelune. The second step was finding Thorn. The last step was dealing with herself. 

Their relationship here, which has progressed in a way that felt natural and believable, is the most straightforward it has ever been. That made writing about them this time around kind of hard, actually, because it’s all plainly there in the text. For me, I think the notable takeaway is being able to mark just how far these two characters have come in their individual and mutual journeys. Now and together, they can tackle the gargantuan, perilous task ahead. It might all end on a bittersweet note. But for this couple…that seems about right, and I can’t wait to read the conclusion.

Thank you so much for reading these long posts and leaving such kind feedback! I’m glad that you, too, enjoy Ophelia, Thorn, and this magical series. 

[wonderfulworldofmichaelford]

Psycho Analysis is a series that looks at villains across various media in the hopes of coming to something of a consensus on the overall quality of the character. Are they performed well? Do they enrich the narrative? Are their motives fleshed out? Are they voiced by Tim Curry and thus a sex icon? 

There are a lot of important questions that I look into, but ultimately, Psycho Analysis boils down to asking one simple little question: How bad can a character be?

Thankfully, there’s one villain who decided to answer that question for me... in song form.

Psycho Analysis: The Once-ler

(WARNING! This analysis contains SPOILERS!)

Yeah, I’m finally talking about everyone’s favorite greedy bastard who, back in some of the darkest days of Tumblr history, ended up being the premier sexyman on the website. People were thirsting over this twiggy weirdo, acting as if he were God’s gift to women and shipping him with alternate versions of himself. Much like the movie he’s from, he is now incredibly hard to take seriously.

But hey, speaking of alternate versions of himself, I’m going to be covering him from the original book and the animated short film as well. Might as well just knock it all out of the park at once, right? Now let’s see how ba-a-a-ad this guy can be.

Motivation/Goals: The Once-ler is all about biggering. He’s making thneeds (things that everyone needs) and he is gonna stop at nothing to craft these things. Not even the power of the Lorax, Danny DeVito or otherwise, is going to stay his hand from getting that sweet, soft Truffula fluff to make his wares. This is ultimately a little unrealistic, at least for the Illumination version; if Danny DeVito asked me not to do something, I’d listen, no questions asked.

Performance: In the animated special, Bob Holt does double duty, as he is portraying both Once-ler and the title character. It works really well for what they’re going for, and the double casting is interesting because it highlights the ultimate role of the Lorax as the Once-ler’s conscience given form.

In the film, Ed Helms portrays the Once-ler, and he’s fine. He’s certainly better casting than Audrey, but that’s not particularly saying much considering that’s a non-singing Taylor Swift (when Cats is able to utilize Taylor Swift better than your musical, you know there’s trouble). I don’t know, Ed Helms is fun and all, but I’m just not sure his take on the Once-ler is all too compelling overall.

Final Fate: In the original book and the special, the Once-ler wins… but even he realizes it’s a terrible, pointless victory, and all he has achieved is ruin, his family leaving him, his business ultimately collapsing, and the environment permanently damaged. He’s left as a miserable, jaded hermit, broken by the bleak consequences his greedy actions have sown upon the world and only able to tell his story and pass on the last Truffula seed in the hopes that maybe, maybe someday the trees can regrow and the Lorax will return. The Illumination version follows this but then tacks on a happy ending  where the Lorax and Once-ler reunite because as we know ambiguity and bittersweet endings cannot exist in children’s films.

Best Scene: Obviously it’s the scene where he shakes his ass to seduce Jack Frost, in one of the greatest gay romances ever put to film.

Joking aside, it is undoubtedly his villain song. It has become such a meme, but real talk? “How Bad Can I Be” slaps. This is a really good song, probably too good for the movie but you know what, I’ll take it.

Best Quote: HOW BA-A-A-AD CAN I BE? Yes, I’m using a line from his villain song. Sue me.

Final Thoughts & Score: What can one really say about the movie version of the Once-ler that hasn’t already been run into the ground? Well, how about… He’s not too bad, honestly? Like, yes, he has next to nothing to do with his book counterpart and they really go way too far into trying to make a capitalist pig sympathetic… but the animated special from the 70s did that too. I think the Once-ler honestly works better when there is a dash of complexity to him and he isn’t just a simple-minded Captain Planet villain.

Of course, the issue here is that the 70s version took a simpler approach, kind of less is more. The 70s Once-ler brings up some valid points to the Lorax about his work, and the Lorax can’t help but agree that there’s no easy answer while also stressing that the environmental devastation is still really, really bad. It works, it feels complex, and it arguably helps the ultimate point that we need to protect the environment better than even the book did (and I love the book, don’t get me wrong, but its take on the Once-ler is a bit too simple for its own good; it almost runs into the Femme Fatale problem by being a bit too much of a strawman). The movie version has a bit too much going on, especially with his family. His family are much more blatantly evil, greedy, and manipulative, but they’re relegated to the background for much of the film and don’t effect things all that much. The whole narrative would have been infinitely stronger if they were the greater scope villains behind Once-ler and were who needed to be defeated and maybe taught a lesson, but instead they are ignored in favor of someone I’ll address very shortly.

All of this leaves movie Once-ler feeling extremely disjointed, but not irredeemably so. As I said before, his villain song is unironically awesome, and as lame as it is compared to the more haunting, contemplative ending of the book and the special, I’m not so much of a curmudgeon that I didn’t at least smile when he finally reconciled with the Lorax. Ultimately though, him being memed to death really didn’t help his case, but it means I’m not giving the movie version anything less than a 3/10. He might in fact be the best “so bad it’s good” villain ever, or at least up there. He’s just so undeniably enjoyable even if the narrative isn’t making him as complex as it thinks it is. The animated special version gets a 9/10, the book version is a 7/10, and the Once-ler’s family gets a 5/10 for being an interesting concept they sadly do little with, which will now be elaborated on as I follow up on the foreshadowing from the last paragraph...

Psycho Analysis: Aloysius O’Hare

Remember how I said the Once-ler’s family gets ignored in favor of someone else? Here he is, Aloysius O’Hare, one of the absolute lamest villains ever put to screen.

Motivation/Goals: He’s greedy. That’s it. I’m not kidding. He’s just a cartoonish caricature of a rich person, which still makes him a realistic portayal but also makes him boring as sin compared to the wacky dude with a big musical number about how bad he can be.

Performance: Rob Riggle does a decent job, but there’s really not much for him to work with here. This character is a cardboard cutout who exists to be as cartoonishly greedy and evil as possible with no nuance so the kids know who to root against and so that Once-ler doesn’t look bad in comparison.

Final Fate: Look, he’s a blatantly evil corporate villain in a kid’s movie about the environment. Of course he gets defeated and everyone turns on him. What’s especially funny though is that, on the brink of learning his lesson, he rejects any form of redemption and just goes whole hog on being a villain.

Best Scene: I will absolutely give him this: in the face of his ultimate defeat, after having the virtues of trees sung to him and the entire town turning on him, he for a moment contemplates turning over a new leaf… and then absolutely rejects the thought and instead decides being evil is just too much fun, at which point he tries to get everyone back on his side by seeing a funny little song about death while wavedashing. If more shitty villains did this, I don’t think there would be shitty villains.

Best Quote: LET IT DIE, LET IT DIE, LET IT SHRIVEL UP AND DIE! Yes I’m quoting a song again.

Final Thoughts & Score: Look, I’m not gonna mine words here: O’Hare sucks. Big time. He is a prime example of why The Lorax failed as an adaptation. In a story that is dealing with a moral grayness with no easy answers, O’Hare is just a big, blatant target, a dark shade of black in terms of black-and-white morality. He’s like a reject Captain Planet villain with Edna Mode’s haircut.

The movie would have been infinitely better if, instead of him, the Once-ler’s family were in control of the town, and they needed to learn the lesson about saving the trees instead of simply vanishing from the story. They were shown to be overbearing, manipulative, and greedy, and they had a much more personal connection with Once-ler being, you know, his actual family. The fact they abandon him and never really get any sort of comeuppance despite being perhaps the most evil people in the move, egging on Once-ler and taking full advantage of him, makes O’Hare all the more egregious, because there could have been some strong thematic elements that would have tied the film together and made it come off as much less preachy and more nuanced.

But we don’t live in a world where that happened, we live in a world where we got O’Hare. Aside from some genuine hilarity from him at the end, O’Hare really adds very little to the film. I gotta give him a 2/10, but I will say he’s a lot closer to a 3 than he is to a 1; there’s no denying his absolute rejection of learning a moral is absolutely hilarious. I love when villains do that. It’s just a shame those funny moments are wrapped up in something monumentally unimpressive.

[richincolor]

*As is usual with our discussions, there may be a few spoilers ahead, so beware.*

We all were incredibly excited to read Angeline Boulley's FIREKEEPER'S DAUGHTER when we first heard about it, so we decided to make it our second group discussion book for the year. Come join us!

As a biracial, unenrolled tribal member and the product of a scandal, eighteen-year-old Daunis Fontaine has never quite fit in, both in her hometown and on the nearby Ojibwe reservation. Daunis dreams of studying medicine, but when her family is struck by tragedy, she puts her future on hold to care for her fragile mother.

The only bright spot is meeting Jamie, the charming new recruit on her brother Levi’s hockey team. Yet even as Daunis falls for Jamie, certain details don’t add up and she senses the dashing hockey star is hiding something. Everything comes to light when Daunis witnesses a shocking murder, thrusting her into the heart of a criminal investigation.

Reluctantly, Daunis agrees to go undercover, but secretly pursues her own investigation, tracking down the criminals with her knowledge of chemistry and traditional medicine. But the deceptions—and deaths—keep piling up and soon the threat strikes too close to home.

Now, Daunis must learn what it means to be a strong Anishinaabe kwe (Ojibwe woman) and how far she'll go to protect her community, even if it tears apart the only world she’s ever known.

[Note: While we will not go into any great detail in this discussion, Firekeeper’s Daughter contains murder, suicide, kidnapping, sexual assault, addiction and drug use, racism, colorism, and death of parents/family members.

You can read an excerpt of the book here!]

Audrey: To get us started--let’s talk about this gorgeous cover! The cover art was created by Moses Lunham and designed by Rich Deas. The first thing I noticed when I got my copy of the book was that the two faces at the top had different skin tones. According to this interview, author Angeline Boulley says that “the different shades of the faces symbolizes Daunis claiming her biracial identity,” which is a major part of the book.

Jessica: The cover is so beautiful. It’s next to me on my desk right now and I can’t stop looking at it. Love how the cover ties into the themes of the book.

K. Imani: This cover is absolutely beautiful! I love the design of the faces looking like a butterfly as well as the bird and bear (I think) and the fire. There are so many subtle images in this cover that you can almost find something new each time. And the colors are so stunning. Like you Audrey, I noticed the faces had different skin tones which I found interesting and made me wonder what was going to happen in the book. Knowing the faces symbolize Daunis’s biracial identity now is powerful and really brings home the meaning of the book.

Crystal: I agree that the cover is gorgeous. In addition to the aspects of her physical appearance and physical identity, Daunis’ cultural identity is also displayed within the illustrations with bears representing her clan. In addition there are the birds like the one that guides her and the sun is in the background too which is from the story of the original Fire Keeper’s Daughter. The faces forming a butterfly is also just brilliant for a coming-of-age story. There’s so much to see. Each time I notice more.

Audrey: Daunis, our heroine, is on the older end of the YA protagonist spectrum at 18. She’s dealing with a lot of upheaval in her life, and things only get more complicated in short order. Something I really liked about Daunis was how often she thought about and evaluated what her responsibilities were--to her family, to her friends, to her community, and to herself. These sometimes complementary, sometimes competing, responsibilities strongly influenced her decisions.

Jessica: You mention the complementary and sometimes competing responsibilities -- that’s exactly it. I loved how her thought process was explored throughout the book in such a thorough and complex way. The way Daunis balances and reconciles the interests of her community with what the FBI wants from her and her quest for justice is laid out really clearly. Sometimes, narratives can tend toward simplistic, binary summations of the issues people, especially from marginalized communities, face -- but that’s just not the case, and Daunis really highlights that. To be honest, I was a little nervous at the introduction of law enforcement and the FBI, given the racism and oppression baked into these institutions, but the way Daunis navigates her interactions with them, plus the way other members of the community tell the truth about these institutions, really played out in such a nuanced way. (I really, really hope that the Netflix adaptation keeps these nuances and hard truths in the show, but I suspect that won’t be the case, unfortunately.)

K. Imani: I enjoyed that Daunis was 18 and on the cusp of adulthood. So many YA novels focus on the character’s high school life but a lot does happen and teens do grow and change a lot in that year after high school. Many have left home for college (that was me) or working full time and they are learning how to navigate a life that was not completely so structured. In addition to having to deal with changing friendships as people move away or just become busy. It’s a unique time and I loved that we got to spend time with Daunis as she was going through this change. She was learning how to become an adult in one of the most stressful ways possible, and sometimes I felt she was a little too idealistic, but I’m glad that she kept her truth throughout and was focused on helping her community in addition to helping the FBI. Her perspective helped keep the investigation grounded in what mattered which wouldn’t have happened if she wasn’t involved.

Crystal: Daunis balances a lot of responsibilities and really tries to follow what she’s learned from elders. She considers how her actions may affect all of her relatives within her family, clan, community, and beyond. Boulley embedded a lot of elder wisdom within Daunis’ inner dialogue such as thinking about the seventh generation when making decisions.

Audrey: One of the things that I really appreciated about Firekeeper’s Daughter was the depth of the setting and the characters in it. While Boulley says that Daunis’s tribe is fictionalized in the author note, it’s clear how much care and thought Boulley put into creating Daunis’s community. It’s filled with people who have complex histories (both within and between Native and non-Native groups), with differing opinions and prejudices and goals.

Jessica: This really highlights how important it is to have stories where cultures and communities aren’t portrayed as a monolith. It’s not just the right thing to do, it makes for a better and more accurate story. I read Firekeeper’s Daughter and watched the TV show Rutherford Falls back to back, which really drove home the power of depicting a community with nuance. (Also, sidebar: Highly recommend checking out Rutherford Falls, which does this really well.)

K. Imani: One of my favorite aspects of Firekeeper’s Daughter were the elders in Daunis’s tribe and how we got to hear many of their individual stories which showed the complexity of real life. I loved that Daunis listened to her elders, really took in their stories and learned from them. Her interactions with the elders greatly contributed to her growing sense of self and her desire to help her community. And this is where this novel being truly #ownvoices shines because of Boulley’s connection to her community that she took great care in making sure Daunis’s tribe felt real and authentic as well as culturally accurate. It was not full of stereotypes but filled with real people who had real lives and real stories. I was drawn into Daunis’s community and really cared about the people that made Daunis who she is and becomes.

Crystal: Like Jessica says, there is a lot of nuance here. When you have a wide variety of characters who are not simply good or bad, the story has more power and is definitely more believable. The people in our everyday lives are also complex and have a story if only we take the time to listen. This is what Daunis excels at with elders and others around her. She is paying attention and trying to connect with people. There is a lot of love throughout the book of many different types. The love is beautiful and yet also has some ugliness too in the betrayals. It’s not picture perfect and that makes it so much more real.

Audrey: Boulley tackles a lot of difficult topics in Firekeeper’s Daughter, especially ones that can hit hard on a community level. Much of the plot focuses on drug use and addiction, of course, but violence against Native women also has a significant impact on what happens in the book and affects multiple characters, including Daunis.

Crystal: Daunis and the other women are examples of the many, many, women who have been harmed in the past and the present. That’s not the whole story though. As Daunis is learning, there are many ways of being brave. Throughout the story, we see many women being strong and brave though at initial glance their actions may not seem to be either of those things. There is bravery in speaking out, but sometimes bravery requires something else. These women have done what they needed to do to survive or help their loved ones survive.

Audrey: Firekeeper’s Daughter has a complicated ending, and it left me thinking about two things. The first was how proud I was of Daunis and her character growth. There were a couple of times where she came across as very Not Like Other Girls (particularly with the hockey players’ girlfriends), but that changed over the course of the book. The second was grief at how many people and institutions failed Daunis and her community, both within and without. Just as one example, even though Daunis is a confidential informant for the FBI, the FBI doesn’t come out of this story as a Good Guy.

K. Imani: I was torn by the ending too. I so wanted justice for Daunis and Lily and for others who were murdered, but on the other hand life doesn’t always have a happy ending and I recognize that Boulley gave us that horribly realistic ending because the fight for missing and murdered Indigenous women continues and the fight for justice for Indigenous peoples. It was a heartbreaking reminder of a very real issue. On the other hand, I was so proud of Daunis as well. She was able to achieve her goals of helping out the FBI while staying true to herself and her community. She grew so much as a character and really found her place in her world.

Crystal: The ending gave me much to think about too. Daunis grew a lot as she worked through this complicated puzzle in her community. She learned much about herself and some of the assumptions folks have about others. I also really, really wanted justice, but unfortunately, would be unlikely in real life with our current justice system. I also found Jamie’s growth to be interesting. He is truly struggling with his own identity as an adopted child with Cherokee roots, but no Cherokee teachings or culture to turn to. I don’t know if a sequel or companion book is planned, but I would be interested in seeing more of their journeys whether their paths cross again or not.

Jessica: Audrey, thanks so much for leading this discussion! Now I have a question for you all -- what YA books by/about BIPOC are you reading right now?

For AAPI month, I’m rereading Turtle Under Ice by Juleah del Rosario. After that, I’m planning on reading The Ones We're Meant to Find by Joan He, Apple: Skin to the Core by Eric Gansworth, and Witches Steeped in Gold by Ciannon Smart! Yes, my TBR pile is excellent. :P

Audrey: Next up on my list are The Theft of Sunlight by Intisar Khanani, Forest of Stolen Girls by June Hur, and Simone Breaks All the Rules by Debbie Rigaud. I feel like that’s a pretty good mix of genres and authors right there!

K. Imani: Since I’m needing some inspiration for my vampire manuscript, I’m re-reading and new reading some vampire novels. Currently I am reading Fledgling by Octavia Butler then up next is Renee Ahdieh’s series The Beautiful and the sequel The Damned.

Crystal: I just re-read Saints & Misfits and then dove into the sequel Misfit in Love. S.K. Ali is an author that I really enjoy and I am loving it so far. Next up is American Betiya by Anuradha D. Rajurkar along with Love & Other Natural Disasters by Misa Sugiura. I also think my TBR is pretty stellar.

If you've had the chance to read FIREKEEPER'S DAUGHTER, please join in the discussion below! We'd love to hear what you think.

[nikibogwater]

Was sick today and watched one of my absolute favorite comfort films to distract myself. And now, an editorial for you all:

Reasons Tangled is one of the best animated Disney movies (in no particular order):

It is very focused and story/character-driven. There are no wasted scenes or useless characters who are clearly only there to sell merch. And no, I don’t want to hear that Pascal was useless, he was literally Rapunzel’s only source of genuine, selfless love before Flynn stumbled into her life, and he spends the entire movie just making sure she’s safe and happy. Also even if he was useless, at least he’s quiet.

Nothing irritating or cringey, like fart jokes, whiney voices, or meme references.

That being said, holy flip, this movie is hilarious. It uses slapstick comedy in such an effective way, along with punchy dialogue, witty one-liners, and unexpected visual gags. But at no point does the comedy ever overstay its welcome.

The story is very self-contained and intimate--it’s only interested in the fate of its two main characters, and it doesn’t try to convince you that there’s anything more at stake than their personal wellbeing. It is also a very smart re-telling of a classic fairy tale with some much needed updates to the story that don’t detract from the original vibe or appeal of said fairy tale. 

It takes a good hard look at the nature of manipulation and abuse, and doesn’t shy away from showing just how subtle those things can be--which is not something you usually get from a “kids’ movie.” 

Rapunzel is not a superpowered Mary Sue who gets everything done by herself. She’s smart and goal-oriented, but is not ashamed to ask for (or demand, as is the case with Flynn) help when she knows she needs it. She is timid and naïve, but also kindhearted and sweet. She improves the lives of everyone she comes into contact with simply by being polite and accepting of others’ flaws. So no, she’s not a girl-power fantasy heroine, she’s a relatable and realistic young woman, and I personally like that a lot better.

Flynn Rider/Eugene Fitzherbert isn’t a stereotypical Disney Prince. He has depth and complexity, a muddled sense of morality that comes from being exposed to the cruelty and unfairness of the world from far too young an age. BUT HE IS NOT A FATALISTIC CYNIC WHO TRIES TO FORCE HIS BAD EXPERIENCES ON RAPUNZEL, IN SPITE OF THE FACT THAT SHE IS AN EASY TARGET FOR THAT KIND OF THING. Once they become friends, he’s even eager to show her the nicer parts of the world, and does his best to make sure she has the happy birthday she deserves. 

Also on the subject of Eugene, even though he initially has no interest in helping Rapunzel achieve her dream, he is still respectful towards her and protects her when the situation becomes genuinely dangerous. Yes, he’s a self-centered prat at the start of the movie, and absolutely tries to manipulate her into letting him out of the bargain, but he’s not a heartless monster, and at no point does he ever entertain the thought of actually threatening or harming her in order to get the crown back. 

One more thing on Eugene: him rediscovering the self he left in his childhood through Rapunzel’s enthusiasm and kindheartedness is a good arc, and it makes him falling in love with her even more believable. 

Eugunzel is one of the best examples of a healthy couple in any Disney movie. There’s no imbalanced power dynamic between them, they are very much a team from very early on, working together as equals. And once they realize how much they truly care for each other, they are both willing to sacrifice anything and everything to keep the other safe. Tangled doesn’t give you that “Oh, love is a flittery feeling in your stomach, it’s the starry eyes and romantic gestures, it’s a feeling” nonsense. Tangled straight-up says “Yo. True love means you’re willing to put yourself and your desires aside in order to help the other person--and I don’t just mean accepting minor inconveniences, I mean actually dying to protect them, if necessary. Love ain’t for pansies, y’all.” 

Unlike other movies (cough! Frozen! cough!), which just had to spell everything out for us in easy-to-remember one-liners that summed up all the major messages in the movie, Tangled never shoves its themes down your throat. It’s most concerned with telling a good story first and foremost, and everything else is woven in there with subtlety and nuance.

The film doesn’t shy away from the fact that the world is messy. It’s not the dark, soul-sucking void that Gothel tried to tell Rapunzel it was, but it’s still unfair and sometimes cruel. But you can always find good, even in the most unexpected places, and that’s why you can’t close yourself off to experiencing the outside world and its inhabitants, even those you might initially write off as “bad.”

This movie is flipping gorgeous, alright? Like, if I had the choice to visit any world from any Disney movie, I would pick Corona, hands-down. Every environment is so beautifully crafted, with intricate, artistic detail. The Lantern Scene is one of my absolute favorite animated sequences from any movie. And the character expressions are so real and evocative, it makes you feel those emotions right down to your bones. 

The voice acting is incredible, and it is the standard to which I’ve held all voice acting ever since I first saw this movie. And no, Mandy Moore isn’t just “another celebrity voice” here. Her voice is actually perfect for Rapunzel because it captures that sweet, youthful enthusiasm that is the core of her character. 

The music is good, idk what y’all are talking about. No, there’s no Broadway power ballads or anything, but it serves the movie well. Also Tangled was more interested in being a good story than having a soundtrack that would be touted and overshared so much and blared in so many grocery stores and waiting rooms that eventually people would become embittered towards it.

And finally, this is not an objective reason why the movie is good, but I had to include it: Tangled is one of the most influential movies in my life. I first saw it when I was 13 years old, and it has shaped my creative style and taste in media more than any other film or book. If you read any of my fanfics, I can easily point out some small element of it that connects back to this movie. If you look at any of my doodles, they are very heavily inspired by the lush colors and expressive faces that defined Tangled. 

TL;DR: Tangled is good, and I want more people to understand that, and not dismiss it as “just another Disney Princess movie.” 

[trainsinanime]

Counterhottake: Saying „actually Wanda is the villain in Wandavision“ is not the interesting deep intellectual analysis some of you think it is. (This will contain spoilers)

The show actually outright admits that Wanda’s actions are bad. People tell it to each other; people tell it to Wanda, people tell it to Vision, Vision tells it to Wanda, even Wanda herself realises it around the midpoint of the story, but can’t bring herself to end it. But the show is not about that; it is trying to be more nuanced, to go past the old „is this good or bad?“ to „why is she doing that? What drove her to this really bad place, and how can she leave it again?“

That is more nuance than usual for Marvel fare, though in the grand scheme of things, not exactly that much nuance. It’s like mid-range Star Trek TNG nuance. But still, to make sure no pop culture critic is left behind, the show adds not one, not two, but three whole characters whose main job is to say, „actually, it’s nuanced“, with Monica, Darcy and Jimmy.

The show is about grief, about grief leading you to unhealthy places, and about grief causing you to hurt others. And it keeps explicitly saying so.

To be fair, some of the critics seem to have realised this, after this has been hammered in for nine episodes. Good job! But then they come up with clever counter-arguments, like: „Wanda should have apologised to the people of Westview“

Yeah, wouldn’t have hurt. Narratively speaking, though, does it matter? Imagine the scene right after she dissolves the Hex, when all the people are looking at her with fear and anger. Now imagine she’d have mumbled „I’m sorry“ a few times. It would have made no difference. Wanda does feel regret, and she expresses it through her actions, by dismantling her illusion and, you know, her entire family. You know, the characters who actually matter.

Alternatively, we get „Wanda should have been punished“. After all, her lashing out is so huge, you’d almost think it was a comic book level exaggeration, right? And we totally need to take this seriously and literally, don’t we?

This is just another attempt to go „must… force… Wanda… in… clear… superhero… or… supervillain… bin“. That’s not insightful, that’s reductive. Punishing Wanda wouldn’t fix anything, it would undermine the whole show.

See, the show has a clear central theme, and because this is the MCU, it explicitly spells it out:

„What is Meme, if not GIF persevering?“

Or something like that anyway. It’s about how grief can make you do horrible things, and stopping to do that. Wanda needs to learn that retreating into her fantasy world to deal with her grief causes actual harm. And she does. In the course of that, she arguably causes herself more grief, when she dissolves her family, but this time she is kind of okay with it.

Putting her in prison would tell her that people who grieve wrong deserve to be punished. Personally, I prefer the message the show gives instead, where it tells us that people who grieve deserve compassion instead.

There’s also some more in-universe arguments against punishment: For one, Wanda doesn’t need time to realise what she’s done is wrong, she already knows that; and even if she were in prison, we all know she could break out whenever she wanted, which would coincidentally happen to be right at the start of the next TV show or movie that needed her.

Maybe it would have satisfied some incredibly literal watchers if in the post-credit scene, Jimmy had issued Wanda a $500 fine and impounded her Scarlet Sedan, but would that have really been a better show?

Well, yes, obviously it would have been.

To clarify, I’m not saying that the people who say „actually Wanda is a villain“ are wrong, I’m saying that they’re boring and that they miss all of what made the show actually interesting, once all the gimmicks are stripped away.

Now, if you want to be more interesting, there are definitely debates to be had about how the show handles its themes. For example, there is definitely an issue where Wanda never actually learns how to deal with her grief in good ways; she just learns that what she’s doing hurts people, and so she… basically stops.

And while I keep saying that Wandavision is more complex than „good vs. bad“, it is still not actually that complex a story at heart. In fact, it seems like a very literal example of what Craig Mazin (writer of Chernobyl) outlines in his „How to Write a Movie“ podcast episode (there’s only a transcript available). Actually, if you compare Wandavision with the examples in that post, you can make a good argument that Wandavision has about the same complexity, similar theme and almost the same structure as Finding Nemo.

And that is fine. Or maybe it isn’t, that’s for you to decide. But if you just ignore that, then your hot takes will lukewarm at best.

[aion-rsa]

From Bridgerton to Sanditon—Putting Island Queen in a Period Drama Context

https://ift.tt/3dpMXo9

This article contains book spoilers for Island Queen and a trigger warning for racism and sexual assault.

Caribbean history is often ignored in US discussions of the era, despite myself and many other Americans having ancestry from this part of the world. Jane Austen’s Mansfield Park has extended references to Caribbean slavery but many adaptations sidestep these implications or briefly address them before moving back to the white main characters. In addition, the focus is often on male leaders of rebellions such as Toussaint L’Overture leading the Haitian rebellion, or on women with island ancestry such as Dido Elizabeth from the movie Belle living in England. All are written by white novelists and screenwriters who miss cultural nuances and are unaware of subconscious bias. Island Queen, Vanessa Riley’s latest foray into Black historical fiction reveals a hidden figure of Caribbean history. Dorothy Kirwan was born into slavery in Montserrat, but secured her own freedom by becoming an astute businesswoman. 

Riley’s novel takes readers on a complex but emotionally fufilling journey which brings up serious historical questions on slavery, class, gender, and business ethics during the late 18th and early 19th centuries. Riley’s novel is the answer for fans who feel recent historical dramas prioritize varying levels of whitewashing or escapism over featuring real Black history. 

Kirwan’s story has incredible relevance today as many look to understand the enduring legacies of British colonialism and the slave trade in the late 18th and early 19th Century. Her diary does not exist but Riley assembled birth records and other primary sources to trace her life. This is in contrast to sources such as the anonymously published novel The Woman Of Colour which historians are still looking to corroborate authorship and connections to real Caribbean figures.   Kirwan at times the mirror image of the fictionalized story of July from The Long Song, but there are also flash points of difference along class and timeframe context. July was born roughly 50 years later than Kirwan in Jamaica.  In addition, Dorothy’s life journey takes the reader from Montserrat to Demerara (off the coast of modern day Guyana), Grenada, and Dominica. Most importantly, Riley is an Caribbean-American writer while Andrea Levy wrote The Long Song for Black British readers. 

Dorothy’s in-character first person narration is the glue that holds the story together through frequent flashbacks to her childhood and young adulthood to her life in 1824 as a grandmother. The main theme of self-determination in a world where rich white men decide the rules everyone must play keeps the reader engaged even when it is not clear where the plot is heading. In the present plot, Dorothy has returned to London after many years away to petition colonial leaders to retain hard-won rights for Black and biracial women in Demerara. These unequal laws threaten Dorothy’s children and grandchildren and could even take away the freedom and inheritance she has spent her whole life to build. 

Bridgerton’s critics will find solace in Island Queen. Those who wanted the Black aristocracy of Haiti and other Caribbean islands featured in the series will find this history at the center. Kirwan navigates a world with inherent inequality, despite how much she has achieved in property ownership and savings. When she interacts with British and colonial elites, they never treat her as if she has power over them. The racial caste system in existence influences all of her interactions. After a breakup, she takes up an offer from Prince William (Queen Victoria’s uncle who died with no legitimate heirs) to travel with him on his ship. In Dorothy’s story, he provides a temporary emotional distraction but also a recognition that she would never fit into the British elite because of her skin color and island background. Unlike Queen Charlotte in Bridgerton, the real prejudices of the era held Dorothy back from ascending completely into the highest levels of royal society. Riley’s narrative, especially, ignores what could have been and shows readers the truth. 

These rich white men who placed artificial limits on Dorothy were also the source for young Alexander Hamilton’s childhood poverty. However, his solution as featured in the opening song of Hamilton was to leave the islands to pursue his education in America. This was an option steeped in male and to an extent white privilege as women at this point in history were not allowed to attend college. In addition, American society had already enacted severe restrictions in the rights of free people of color. Hamilton also was an orphan. Dorothy’s parents and her children kept her rooted to the Caribbean. 

The road to Dorothy acquiring a thriving business and heirs was lengthy and arduous, and Riley does not sugar coat the dynamics at play in her life. Kirwan’s mother was a slave and her father owned a plantation. The more percentage of white ancestry you have in your blood, the more freedom and rights you have. In her teenage years, Dorothy’s white half-brother Nicholas rapes her and she ends up giving birth to a daughter. Dorothy is forced to run away with a trusted friend to another island and has to leave her daughter behind. This is the beginning of many sacrifices she makes in order to protect her family. 

Although many readers may object to Riley portraying incest and sexual assault, the historical research makes this clear that this was the reality for women in slave societies. Dorothy’s narration is carefully crafted to show not only the trauma of the event, but her processing the trauma. For Dorothy, healing comes in the form of survival. The objective isn’t exploitation or the male gaze, but to illuminate ignored history and the intersection of race and gender in sexual power dynamics. Dorothy has to repeatedly establish consent and trust in a world where her partners can and will refuse to agree to those terms. The debate over rape culture in historical fiction revolves around characters that are fictional facing fictionalized situations, especially in the TV adaptations of Outlander and Bridgerton. Additionally, Outlander has sidestepped any serious contemplation of exploitation dynamics in slave societies despite plots featuring 8th Century Jamaica and North Carolina.  It is difficult to apply this same critique to Riley’s novel as her intention is historical recreation and reconstruction of Kirwan’s life story. 

Riley’s explanation and contextualization of race and gender dynamics is something many viewers wanted the first season of British historical drama Sanditon to address, past the show alluding to Georgiana’s ancestry and £100,000 inheritance. In fact, Riley explains in the Author’s Note that the journey to finding Dorothy Kirwan began with figuring out who the real Miss Lambe could have been over a decade ago. For Georgiana to have that kind of wealth, she would have had to have a white male ancestor willing and able to use the law to secure her freedom. Sidney’s connection to Georgiana as her legal ward isn’t clear, representing a missed opportunity that erodes the story’s worldbuilding. Dorothy’s explanation of social rankings and her own background means it is highly likely Georgiana is the product of a relationship between a white planter and an enslaved or indentured woman. Georgiana isn’t the only example of an fictional heir from the islands around this time period. Rhoda Swartz from Vanity Fair has Black and Jewish ancestry along with thousands of pounds. Island Queen has the space and interest to completely center the story of women like Georgiana and Rhoda position from the perspective of a Black writer and historian. 

Dorothy also reveals through her life experiences that interracial relationships with unequal power dynamics were often one of the only ways enslaved Black and biracial women could gain their freedom. In stark contrast to America during the late 18th Century, interracial relationships were never officially outlawed, but it was very rare for white men to officially marry women of color. More often, these women were mistresses and concubines, and any children from these relationships legally belonged to the father. Any relationship an enslaved woman undertook carried the risk of losing her children, with her past often used as a weapon of misogynoir, or simultaneous racist and sexist discrimination.  

One plot line unites Island Queen and The Long Song: both July and Dorothy lose a daughter to their white slave holding father who wanted to raise them in England. This trauma drives July to poverty while Dorothy had to wrestle the trauma alongside her mission to to fight to secure manumission papers for her children and also to develop a source of income that cannot be controlled by the men in her life. 

Read more

TV

How The Long Song Spotlights Ignored Black Caribbean History

By Amanda-Rae Prescott

Books

How Bridgerton Season 2 Can Improve On Season 1

By Amanda-Rae Prescott

At one point, she engages in survival sex work, then finds work as a housekeeper. Eventually, she is able to start her own housekeeping and domestic worker agency. She was well aware that some of her employees would choose to have relations with their bosses, but she made sure that she was not seen as a brothel owner for legal reasons. This is in stark contrast to some of the characters from Harlots on Hulu where brothel ownership or their sex worker status was an open secret.This is another area where Black women would suffer worse consequences for perceived immorality in society compared to white women. In fact, rumors of sex work follow her  Dorothy doesn’t intefere if her housekeepers decide to engage in sex work but she insists on mutual consent.  Riley does not apply any modern notions of slut-shaming or anti-sex-worker rhetoric. The reader understands that options for women’s employment outside of domestic service in these island colonies were severely limited. 

Dorothy’s narrative exposes both vulnerability in her relationships with her children and her significant others and also in her resolve to maintain her status. Far too often, Black women in historical fiction are reduced to tropes such as the “strong Black woman” that are not realistic to historical or modern readers. Or even worse, authors who completely erase the presence of Black women in the late Georgian and Regency Era by only featuring white women. 

The challenge in reading Island Queen for those uninitiated in Caribbean history of this era is to separate our modern historical knowledge from the reality Dorothy faces. Although Riley’s narrative does not make excuses for her questionable decisions, the narration makes clear that Dortothy is navigating a racist, sexist and classist society. Part of Dorothy’s later wealth comes from owning slaves. This was not a decision based on wanting to inflict cruelty, but due to the power dynamics in colonial society which punished those who refused to participate in the slave trade. Dorothy opposes slavery but also realize that open rebellion will cost her life or the lives of those around her. She is not isolated from the violence of slave rebellions and of the consequences of suppression. Riley in the Author’s Note says Kirwan freed all of her slaves in 1833 when slavery in Demerara was officially outlawed.

Dorothy’s narrative may have the background makings of a tragedy, but Riley reveals that her life was ultimately a success. Kirwan built her business and eventually reunited most members of her family. She even saw her children marry successfully and met several of her grandchildren. None of her children lived in poverty and she prevented all of them from working as slaves. While some may wish her various relationships could have created a permanent happy ever after, the real satisfaction comes from seeing Kirwan preserve her legacy for the next generation. Real Black historical stories such as Kirwan’s are incredibly rare in US and UK media as wholly fictional composite characters dominate existing period dramas and historical fiction novels. Island Queen, if enough people read it, could become a TV or movie adaptation that would give viewers the real truths of late 18th Century/Regency Era Caribbean history. The genre is overdue for a biography adaptation led by Black writers without the white gaze. 

cnx.cmd.push(function() { cnx({ playerId: "106e33c0-3911-473c-b599-b1426db57530", }).render("0270c398a82f44f49c23c16122516796"); });

Island Queen will be available in bookstores July 6th. You can order the book here.

The post From Bridgerton to Sanditon—Putting Island Queen in a Period Drama Context appeared first on Den of Geek.

from Den of Geek https://ift.tt/3drNnu3

[mostlysignssomeportents]

#8yrsago David Byrne's How Music Works

Former Talking Heads frontman and all-round happy mutant David Byrne has written several good books, but his latest, How Music Works, is unquestionably the best of the very good bunch, possibly the book he was born to write. I could made good case for calling this How Art Works or even How Everything Works.

Though there is plenty of autobiographical material How Music Works that will delight avid fans (like me) -- inside dope on the creative, commercial and personal pressures that led to each of Byrne's projects -- this isn't merely the story of how Byrne made it, or what he does to turn out such great and varied art. Rather, this is an insightful, thorough, and convincing account of the way that creativity, culture, biology and economics interact to prefigure, constrain and uplift art. It's a compelling story about the way that art comes out of technology, and as such, it's widely applicable beyond music.

Byrne lived through an important transition in the music industry: having gotten his start in the analog recording world, he skilfully managed a transition to an artist in the digital era (though not always a digital artist). As such, he has real gut-feel for the things that technology gives to artists and the things that technology takes away. He's like the kids who got their Apple ][+s in 1979, and keenly remember the time before computers were available to kids at all, the time when they were the exclusive domain of obsessive geeks, and the point at which they became widely exciting, and finally, ubiquitous -- a breadth of experience that offers visceral perspective.

There were so many times in this book when I felt like Byrne's observations extended beyond music and dance and into other forms of digital creativity. For example, when Byrne recounted his first experiments with cellular automata exercise for dance choreography, from his collaboration with Noemie Lafrance:

1. Improvise moving to the music and come up with an eight-count phrase (in dance, a phrase is a short series of moves that can be repeated).

2. When you find a phrase you like, loop (repeat) it.

3. When you see someone else with a stronger phrase, copy it.

4. When everyone is doing the same phrase, the exercise is over.

It was like watching evolution on fast-forward, or an emergent lifeform coming into being. At first the room was chaos, writhing bodies everywhere. At first the room was chaos, writhing bodies everywhere. Then one could see that folks had chosen their phrases, and almost immediately one could see a pocket of dancers who had all adopted the same phrase. The copying had already begun, albeit in just one area. This pocket of copying began to expand, to go viral, while yet another one now emerged on the other side of the room. One clump grew faster than the other, and within four minutes the whole room was filled with dancers moving in perfect unison. Unbelievable! It only took four minutes for this evolutionary process to kick in, and for the "strongest" (unfortunate word, maybe) to dominate.

I remembered the first time I programmed an evolutionary algorithm and watched its complexity emerging from simple rules, and the catch in my throat as I realized that I was watching something like life being built up from simple, inert rules.

The book is shot through with historical examples and arguments about the nature of music, from Plato up to contemporary neuroscience, and here, too, many of the discussions are microcosms for contemporary technical/philosophical debates. There's a passage about how music is felt and experienced that contains the phrase, "music isn't merely absorbed above the neck," which is spookily similar to the debates about replicating human consciousness in computers, and the idea that our identity doesn't reside exclusively above the brainstem.

The same is true of Byrne's account of how music has not "progressed" from a "primitive" state -- rather, it adapted itself to different technological realities. Big cathedrals demand music that accommodates a lot of reverb; village campfire music has completely different needs. Reading this, I was excited by the parallels to discussions of whether we live in an era of technological "progress" or merely technological "change" -- is there a pinnacle we're climbing, or simply a bunch of stuff followed by a bunch of other stuff? Our overwhelming narrative of progress feels like hubris to me, at least a lot of the time. Some things are "better" (more energy efficient, more space-efficient, faster, more effective), but there are plenty of things that are held up as "better" that, to me, are simply different. Often very good, but in no way a higher rung on some notional ladder toward perfection.

When Byrne's history comes to the rise of popular recorded music, he describes a familiar dilemma: recording artists were asked to produce music that could work when performed live and when listened to in the listener's private playback environment -- not so different from the problems faced by games developers today who struggle to make games that will work on a wide variety of screens. In a later section, he describes the solution that was arrived at in the 1970s, a solution that reminds me a lot of the current world of content management systems like WordPress and Blogger, which attempt to separate "meaning" from "form" for text, storing them separately and combining them with little code-libraries called "decorators":

[Deconstruct and isolate] sums up the philosophy of a lot of music recording back in the late seventies. The goal was to get as pristine a sound as possible... Studios were often padded with sound-absorbent materials so that there was almost no reverberation. The sonic character of the space was sucked out, because it wasn't considered to be part of the music. Without this ambiance, it was explained, the sound would be more malleable after the recording had been made. Dead, characterless sound was held up as the ideal, and often still is. In this philosophy, the naturally occurring echo and reverb that normally added a little warmth to performances would be removed and then added back in when the recording was being mixed...

Recording a performance with a band and singer all playing together at the same time in the same room was by this time becoming a rarity. An incredible array of options opened up as a result, but some organic interplay between the musicians disappeared, and the sound of music changed. Some musicians who played well in live situations couldn't adapt to the fashion for each player to be isolated. They couldn't hear their bandmates and, as a result, often didn't play very well.

Changing the technology used in art changes the art, for good and ill. Blog-writing has a lot going for it -- spontaneity, velocity, vernacular informality, but often lacks the reflective distance that longer-form works bring. Byrne has similar observations about music and software:

What you hear [in contemporary music] is the shift in music structure that computer-aided composition has encouraged. Though software is promoted as being an unbiased toold that helps us do anything we want, all software has inherent biases that make working one way easier than another. With the Microsoft presentation software PowerPoint, for example, you have to simplify your presentations so much that the subtle nuances in the subject being discussed often get edited out. These nuances are not forbidden, they're not blocked, but including them tends to make for a less successful presentation. Likewise, that which is easy to bullet-point and simply visualize works better. That doesn't mean it actually is better; it means working is certain ways is simply easier than working in others...

An obvious example is quantizing. Since the mid-nineties, most popular music recorded on computers has had tempos and rhythms that have been quantized. That means that the tempo never varies, not even a little bit, the the rhythmic parts tend toward metronomic perfection. In the past, the tempo of recordings would always vary slightly, imperceptibly speeding up or maybe slowing down a little, or a drum fill might hesitate in order to signal the beginning of a new section. You'd feel a slight push and pull, a tug and then a release, as ensembles of whatever type responded to one another and lurched, ever so slightly, ahead of and behind an imaginary metronomic beat. No more. Now almost all pop recordings are played to a strict tempo, which makes these compositions fit more easily into the confines of editing and recording software. An eight-bar section recorded on a "grid" of this type is exactly twice as long as a four-bar section, and every eight-bar section is always exactly the same length. This makes for a nice visual array on the computer screen, and facilitates easy editing, arranging, and repairing as well. Music has come to accommodate software, and I have to admit a lot has been gained as a result.

Byrne is well aware of the parallels between music technology and other kinds of technology. No history of the recording business would be complete without a note about the format wars fought between Edison and his competitors like RCA, who made incompatible, anti-competitive playback formats. Byrne explicitly links this to modern format-wars, citing MS Office, Kindles, iPads and Pro Tools. (His final word on the format wars rings true for other media as well: "Throughout the history of recorded music, we have tended to value convenience over quality every time. Edison cylinders didn't really sound as good as live performers, but you could carry them around and play them whenever you wanted.")

Likewise, debates over technological change (pooh-poohing the "triviality" of social media or the ephemeral character of blogs) are played out in Byrne's history of music panics, which start in ancient Greece, and play out in situations like the disco wars, which prefigured the modern fight over sampling:

The most threatening thing to rockers in the era of disco was that the music was gay, black and "manufactured" on machines, made out of bits of other peoples' recordings.

Like mixtapes. I'd argue that other than race and sex, [the fact that disco was "manufactured" on machines, made out of bits of other peoples' recordings] was the most threatening aspect. To rock purists, this new music messed with the idea of authorship. If music was now accepted as a kind of property, then this hodgepodge version that disregarded ownership and seemed to belong to and originate with so many people (and machines) called into question a whole social and economic framework.

But as Byrne reminds us, new technology can liberate new art forms. Digital formats and distribution have given us music that is only a few bars long, and compositions that are intended to play for 1,000 years. The MP3 shows us that 3.5 minutes isn't an "ideal" length for a song (merely the ideal length for a song that's meant to be sold on a 45RPM single), just as YouTube showed us that there are plenty of video stories that want to be two minutes long, rather than shoehorned into 22 minute sitcoms, 48 minute dramas, or 90 minute feature films.

And Byrne's own journey has led him to be skeptical of the all-rights-reserved model, from rules over photography and video in his shows:

The thing we were supposed to be fighting against was actually something we should be encouraging. They were getting the word out, and it wasn't costing me anything. I began to announce at the beginning of the shows that photography was welcome, but I suggested to please only post shots and videos where we look good.

To a very good account of the power relationships reflected in ascribing authorship (and ownership, and copyright) to melody, but not to rhythms and grooves and textures, though these are just as important to the music's aesthetic effect.

Byrne doesn't focus exclusively on recording, distribution and playback technology. He is also a keen theorist of the musical implications of architecture, and presents a case-study of the legendary CBGB's and its layout, showing how these led to its center in the 1970s New York music scene that gave us the Ramones, Talking Heads, Television, and many other varied acts. Here, Byrne channels Jane Jacobs in a section that is nothing short of brilliant in its analysis of how small changes (sometimes on the scale of inches) make all the difference to the kind of art that takes place in a building.

There's a long section on the mechanics of the recording business as it stands today, with some speculation about where its headed, and included in this is a fabulous and weird section on some of Byrne's own creative process. Here he describes how he collaborated with Brian Eno on Everything That Happens Will Happen Today:

The unwritten rule in remote collaborations is, for me, "Leave the other person's stuff alone as much as you possibly can." You work with what you're given, and don't try to imagine it as something other than what it is. Accepting that half the creative decision-making has already been done has the effect of bypassing a lot of endless branching -- not to mention waffling and worrying.

And here's a mind-bending look into his lyrics-writing method:

...I begin by improvising a melody over the music. I do this by singing nonsense syllables, but with weirdly inappropriate passion, given that I'm not saying anything. Once I have a wordless melody and a vocal arrangement my my collaborators (if there are any) and I like, I'll begin to transcribe that gibberish as if it were real words.

I'll listen carefully to the meaningless vowels and consonants on the recording, and I'll try to understand what that guy (me), emoting so forcefully by inscrutably, is actually saying. It's like a forensic exercise. I'll follow the sound of the nonsense syllables as closely as possible. If a melodic phrase of gibberish ends on a high ooh sound, then I'll transcribe that, and in selecting the actual words, I'll try to try to choose one that ends in that syllable, or as close to it as I can get. So the transcription process often ends up with a page of real words, still fairly random, that sounds just like the gibberish.

I do that because the difference between an ooh and an aah, and a "b" and a "th" sound is, I assume, integral to the emotion that the story wants to express. I want to stay true to that unconscious, inarticulate intention. Admittedly, that content has no narrative, or might make no literal sense yet, but it's in there -- I can hear it. I can feel it. My job at this stage is to find words that acknowledge and adhere to the sonic and emotional qualities rather than to ignore and possibly destroy them.

Part of what makes words work in a song is how they sound to the ear and feel on the tongue. If they feel right physiologically, if the tongue of the singer and the mirror neurons of the listener resonate with the delicious appropriateness of the words coming out, then that will inevitably trump literal sense, although literal sense doesn't hurt.

Naturally, this leads into a great discussion of the neuroscience of music itself -- why our brains like certain sounds and rhythms.

How Music Works gave me insight into parts of my life as diverse as my email style to how I write fiction to how I parent my daughter (it was a relief to read Byrne's discussion of how parenting changed him as an artist). I've been a David Byrne fan since I was 13 and I got a copy of Stop Making Sense. He's never disappointed me, but with How Music Works, Byrne has blown through my expectations, producing a book that I'll be thinking of and referring to for years to come.

Byrne's touring the book now, and as his tour intersects with my own book tours, I'll be interviewing him live on stage in Toronto on September 19th, at the Harbourfront International Festival of Authors.

How Music Works

https://boingboing.net/2012/09/12/david-byrnes-how-music-w.html

[ohakosubs]

Haruka, Nostalgia (はるか、ノスタルジー), 1993 dir. Nobuhiko Obayashi

status: complete download here

**translation notes: (contains spoilers)**

・The name of Shinsuke Ayase’s publisher, Lil’ Bunko, references the term bunko 文庫, short for bunkobon 文庫本, which are A6-sized softcover books - the most common format for novels. A lot of publishing companies in Japan use the word bunko at the end of their name.

・The term lolicon may not need explaining for many viewers of this film, but as I chose to translate it as a proper noun rather than directly translate it, I feel the need to provide a small explanation as it is quite central to the film’s plot. Lolicon is short for “Lolita complex”, and is used to refer to someone (usually male) that has a fetish for young (read: underage) girls. 

・Some context is needed for the way the name Yoko Miyoshi is introduced and the influence it has on the story. The kanji for “Yoko Miyoshi” is 三好遥子, which can be broken down thus: 三-> the number 3, 好-> ‘like’ or ‘favorable’, 遥-> ‘distant’ or ‘far away’, as in the Japanese verb haruka, 子-> child.  Haruka’s name is thus taken from the first half of “Yoko”, the kanji that when used on its own can be pronounced “Haruka”. Haruka plus the kanji for “child”, 遥子, can be interpreted as meaning “a distant/far away child”. I have attempted to include as much of this information in the subtitles as possible.

・nishin ニシン (鰊) is Pacific herring, and nishin-don is a local delicacy in Otaru. In reference to the dish, I have chosen to use nishin-don as a proper noun, but when Haruka tells the story of the herring that disappeared from the ocean, for clarity’s sake I chose to use ‘herring’ instead of nishin. 

・A small aspect that gets lost in translation is the term Haruka uses to describe young girls as ‘passionate’ during her impassioned speech about Ayase’s behavior. She uses the term mune ga atsui 胸が熱い, which literally translates to “a hot chest/breast” - meaning that when someone gets worked up about something (mostly in a positive way), they feel a hotness in their chest. This coincides nicely with the ‘physical’ nature of her speech.

・Haruka mentions that the school song she sings is from her high school, Otaru Shiomidai, but in actual fact it is the real school song from Otaru Choryo High School (though the melody may not be identical). The school Haruka and Ayase visit together is not Shiomidai either - though Ayase mentions that he went to the same school as Haruka - it is Ishiyama Middle School.

・A note about the lines of dialogue in German: As verified by a native German speaker, Noboru’s German pronunciation is incredibly hard to decipher, and the lines seem to have been directly translated from Japanese by a non-native, riddled with incorrect grammar and strange vocabulary. As the most important parts of these lines are the Japanese sentences Noboru says after them, I have refrained from transcribing them for the subtitles; however a native German acquaintance was kind enough to help out with attempting to decipher them, so here is a bonus cheat sheet for the German dialogue: 1. 0:06:05 “Alles hat seine Zeit.” -> “Everything has its time.” 2. 0:39:16 "Der Mench ist, was er isst." -> “Man is what he eats.” 3. 0:40:44 "Mit der Habgier wird der Entfremdete immer eifersüchtig." -> “With greed, the alienated person is always jealous." 4. 0:43:45 “Kein Mädchen findet dich selb besser schön.” -> “No girl thinks herself more beautiful.” 5. 0:43:56 (also 1:00:09) "Wissen ist das Traurigste auf der Erde." -> “To know is the saddest thing on Earth.” 6. 0:46:10 "(Ich hätte) es leichter als (Mädchen)." -> “I think I had it easier as a girl.” (best guess) 7. 1:29:42 “Die (echte) liebe (verdreht) sich erst auf.” (?) -> “Real love twists first.” (who knows...) 8. 2:00:57 “Sie (endet?) über Fragen.” -> “She ends with questions.” ? 9. 2:25:17 “Alles hat seine Zeit. Nur endet sie nicht. Sie hilft nicht zu machen.” -> “Everything has its time. It just doesn’t end. It doesn’t help you to do/make it.”

・There are times when Ayase refers to Haruka as simply “Haruka”, and other times he adds “-chan” on to the end of her name. As many viewers may already be aware, “-chan” is an affectionate suffix often used for girls of a lower age than oneself, or somebody the speaker feels particularly friendly towards. Haruka’s comment about Ayase using “-chan” doesn’t carry as much meaning in English as it does in Japanese. Similarly, at one point Haruka remarks that Ayase has started using the personal pronoun ore 俺 instead of boku 僕 (or watashi 私 in his narrations, which is more reminiscent of the language used in a first-person novel). Ore is widely considered to be much more masculine than boku, so the subtitles reflect that nuance.

・The koto is a traditional Japanese stringed instrument, one of the most common sounds in Japanese music. It is often referenced to as a symbol of old-style Japanese romanticism, largely thanks to its presence in literature such as The Tale of Genji.

・Toward the end of the movie, Haruka muses to Hiroshi, “What is Haruka, I wonder?” The Japanese used for this line is ima no Haruka wa, ittai nan-nan deshou? 今のはるかは一体何なんでしょう？ which directly translates to “What exactly is the Haruka of now/the present, I wonder?”. The line is meant to reflect several different things at once: Haruka’s confusion as to who she is, her role in Ayase’s story, and where she lines up with the criss-crossing of her (or Ayase’s) past and present. It is difficult to include all of those nuances, but I was intrigued by the way she used “what” instead of “who”, so I felt like “What is Haruka?” was a more concise way to reflect that line in English.

[staygoldenlightning]

An exciting new review experience in three parts! It’s gonna be a long one!

It was only a matter of time until I addressed this elephant in the room: I’m a little bit obsessed with To All the Boys I’ve Loved Before — both the Jenny Han novel and the Netflix original movie. And I’m pretty sure I’m not the only one. To All the Boys is the story of Korean-American, high school junior Lara Jean, whose personal love letters to each of the five boys she’s loved are accidentally sent out, all while she’s dealing with the challenges of her older sister leaving for college (and leaving behind an ex boyfriend that Lara Jean has always had an eye for). In an act of mutual damage control, Lara Jean and her former crush Peter Kavinsky enact probably the best (and definitely my favorite) rom-com cliche of all time: they pretend to be a couple.

I received a copy of the book (the first in a trilogy I haven’t read the rest of yet, NO SPOILERS) as a Christmas gift last year, and I read it back around February or March. Now that the Netflix film has taken Twitter the world quite literally by storm, I figured it was time I launched my thoughts right out into the eye of it. So without further ado, here’s everything I have to say about To All the Boys I’ve Loved Before, presented in three parts.

To All the Boys I’ve Loved Before: The Movie

When I’m out of town for the night, Matt has a ritual where he gets a pizza or some snacks and watches a movie I wouldn’t like with the cat. Last week, on a night when Matt was going to be out late and my cat and I were home alone, I decided to do the exact same thing myself (except now I’m pretty sure that he would actually enjoy this movie too). Actually, there are a lot of reasons why this movie is good for EVERYONE, even us “grown ups.” I was feeling a little down on that particular day, and I needed something lighthearted and a little bit indulgent to get my mind off of it, so I put on To All the Boys, because even though I knew I wanted to watch it, I’d been putting it off, in a way.

While some nights since its premier I just didn’t have the time to sit and watch a whole movie, hype scares me away from things. Not in a hipster sense of “If too many people like it, then it must not be good,” but I fear the bandwagon effect. I don’t want to like it just because other people do and I want to fit in. But I have nothing against liking something popular if I actually connect with it. With this movie, I was actually expecting it to be a little cliche, a little cheesy, and a little silly, but in all actuality, it’s just the best rom-com I’ve seen in a really long time. Seriously.

The casting, the characterization, and the pacing all impressed me in their own ways, but what actually stood out to me about the movie was the cinematography and the storytelling choices. I’m not pretending to know anything about movies, but this could have easily been a movie that focused on the plot to give the people what they want: ROMANCE. While that’s still the main focus, the creative direction of the movie really surprised me with the handling of all the side conflicts circling around the main arc. Visually, it was way more interesting than you’d expect from a rom-com: the shots are interesting, and a little bit conceptual, and all meant to capture Lara Jean’s state of mind, not just what she’s doing or what she looks like.

I also give the movie huge props for something a lot of teen movies weirdly fail at, which is writing dialogue that actually sounds the way teens talk. There was no awkward slang, no overly-rehearsed sounding monologues, and even Kitty sounds appropriately mature for her age without going overboard. Even with it’s modern inclusion of social media, To All the Boys actually nailed it in the dialogue department.

I’ve only got one real bone to pick with the writing overall, and that’s the scene in the first act of the movie that, in my opinion, pretty obviously gives away the twist at the end. I read the book; I knew what happened already. But for someone that didn’t, I think they showed their hand too early. (Notice how I’m speaking in generalities to avoid spoilers). The reveal wasn’t explicitly stated, but I think it was too heavily implied. What Kitty says on the couch is enough. If there was a way that the dramatic irony of us knowing the secret that Lara Jean doesn’t could have enhanced the movie, I would have been all for it, but I don’t think they pulled that off. But this is still a small enough gripe not to ruin the movie for me.

And one more thing: the movie didn’t treat really any character as merely an expendable plot device. Lara Jean is and incredibly well-developed protagonist who I came to love almost immediately (how couldn’t I when she daydreams in regency-era period dress?). But the important thing is that we never stop learning about her; not all the information is dumped into exposition, we have to earn our full understanding piece by piece. While I did feel that Gen was reduced a little bit to the “mean girl” stereotype, we do eventually find out why she acts the way she does, and it’s actually a game changer, if only subtly. (Actually, it’s my opinion that the movie needed more Chris, too.)

This is also part of what makes Peter K. such a great character in his own right, not just as “the love interest.” What’s refreshing about Peter is that he’s a softer form of masculine lead that we don’t see too often, but the kicker is that he’s not afraid to show it from the very start (and to be honest, I didn’t get this as strongly from Book Peter). No “tough guy” layers to dig through—his heart’s pretty much on his sleeve, even though he’s still the cool guy all at the same time. Plus, Noah Centineo is a dreamboat (we were all thinking it). I’m telling you, he’s going to be the Chad Michael Murray of his time.

This is unfair and their outfits match.

While of course there wasn’t time for book-length dives into every character, even Lara Jean herself, the characters were portrayed in a way that encourages the audience to make a connection.

https://twitter.com/ivyjune12/status/1037885481302847488

I’m a firm believer that a movie is not a book. Obvious, but what I mean is that a movie doesn’t just have to be a direct retelling of the book in exact detail. In my opinion, if that’s all a movie does, it was unnecessary. I did all that in my head already. What I think makes a great movie adaptation is that it has to have something to say, some interpretation of the characters, plot, and themes, while still capturing the overall idea and spirit of the book from whence it came. I understand the cuts that were made for the sake of real-estate (though I’m hoping a certain deleted kiss surfaces in the sequel I’m praying for). What they did was tailor down the story to make it more self-contained, more refined, and more to the point so that it fit the medium and told they story it needed to tell while really letting us live inside Lara Jean’s head for a while.

But also, how much do you think Subway paid for that product placement?

To All the Boys I’ve Loved Before: The Book

You’ll have to excuse my copy of the book, for it has the leftover residue of a “soon to be a major motion picture” sticker that didn’t quite come off all the way. Switching gears, To All the Boys I’ve Loved Before by Jenny Han is just about everything you want in a YA read: a quirky, relatable (and diverse!) main character, a pseudo-love triangle with ~nuance~, and a family secret or two threatening to fracture some relationships when it erupts. I’d known about the book for a few years (thanks, Tumblr), and I made pretty short work of it once I actually had a copy in my hands. The romance arcs made it a page turner in a lot of ways, with the way they criss-crossed and changed shape and came to a heated point.

That being said, I found the book itself a little slow in places in terms of pacing. It’s on the longer end of the YA spectrum, and while I can’t say I ever lost interest, I got a twinge every now and then when I finished a chapter without learning anything new, per se.

My other issue had much ado about Margot, Lara Jean’s older sister, who, despite not being present for the majority of the story, never truly leaves us. I completely understand why Lara Jean thinks of Margot often: she misses her sister, is distressed about keeping the secret, and worries that she’s not ready to fill Margot’s shoes as a caretaker. But in the book, Lara Jean is so preoccupied with Margot that I have to admit that there were moments I was sick of hearing about her.

What I loved most about the books was that Lara Jean’s romance was surrounded by several subplots dealing with friends, family, responsibility, family, and growing up. While a movie only has so much time before it loses us to sleep or boredom, a book can go on, night after night, expanding the main character’s world that we’re lucky enough to be living in. In the book, we get to see a lot more of what Lara Jean’s mom, and her Korean culture, means to her. We also get to see a lot more of how her family has grown from the past until now, and how they’ve all taken on changes before and after Margot’s departure. And maybe the thing I was the most heartbroken about was the letter in Margot’s desk and all the implications it held. Lara Jean wasn’t the only one with a secret, and I love the complexity it added to the sisters’ relationship.

https://twitter.com/ivyjune12/status/1037856493410897920

If you’re wondering about that Tweet, I was quickly disappointed and then overcame it.

Moving on, I’d be so interested to see what more movies would do with the material we have, because there’s a choice to be made at this point: do they go back and pick up the conflicts they didn’t have time for the first time around, or do they move on to whatever new ideas are hidden inside books 2-3? No matter what happens, sequel or not, the movie has actually really nudged me towards picking up the rest of the series—something I wasn’t totally convinced (Peter Convince-sky? No, but A for effort) I’d do before.

2 Outfits Inspired by Lara Jean Covey

I saved this little bonus section for last, mostly just to amuse myself. It was impossible not to notice how amazing Lara Jean’s style was in the movie; every outfit was a SENSATION and I haven’t stopped thinking about a single one. So, for giggles, I dug around in my closet and came up with the two closest Lara Jean outfits I own.

https://twitter.com/gicatam/status/1035720646196510720

1. Skirts and Stripes

A tried and true Lara Jean combo, a button front skirt paired with a cute (often striped) top can be found during a few scenes in the movie, but I would say I came closest to the airport outfit. While my color scheme is off, the spirit is there: I even braided my hair as much as possible. Fun fact: I am a cartoon character who owns this shirt in two different colors, and these boots are old enough that I can ~almost~ call them vintage (not really).

2. The Pink Power Suit

All right, it’s not a suit, but the soft pink blazer paired with skinny black jeans and a black choker was almost certainly a confidence move for the first ride in Peter’s Jeep. I don’t wear this pink blazer enough, and I wasn’t sure if I’d love it with this outfit because it’s more of a salmon than a blush (I want to introduce my best friend Squidward to everybody in town wearing a salmon suit).  Actually, this combo worked out surprisingly well, minus the fact that I’m wearing a literal shoe string as a choker.

Actually, I’ve left the house wearing it like that before, and I love it. Fight me.

^This is the best image I could find of this outfit and I’m bummed about it. 

Lara Jean’s style is the perfect combination of vintage revival and current trends, which is really everything I want to be in my life. I’m already making my list of things I need to add to my own closet: a yellow beret, a lot more bomber jackets, a gorgeous red ballgown. Maybe by the end of autumn, I’ll have the full collection. From now on, every time I go shopping, I’m doing so with the motto: “What would Lara Jean wear?”

If you made it to the end of this post, I salute you. Know of any other books/movies with outfits I should try and copy?

To All the Boys I’ve Loved Before: Movie, Book, and 2 Lara Jean Outfits An exciting new review experience in three parts! It's gonna be a long one! It was only a matter of time until I addressed this elephant in the room: I'm a little bit obsessed with…

[bakechochin]

The Book Ramblings of June

In place of book reviews, I will be writing these ‘book ramblings’. A lot of the texts I’ve been reading (or plan to read) in recent times are well-known classics, meaning I can’t really write book reviews as I’m used to. I’m reading books that either have already been read by everyone else (and so any attempt to give novel or insightful criticisms would be a tad pointless), or are so convoluted and odd that they defy being analysed as I would do a simpler text. These ramblings are pretty unorganised and hardly anything revolutionary, but I felt the need to write something review-related this year. I’ll upload a rambling compiling all my read books on a monthly basis.

The Man Who Was Thursday - GK Chesterton I bought the Penguin English Library edition of this book mainly because of a tweet that I saw slagging off the cover, saying that the sticks of dynamite in the cover pattern looked like tampons and that 'this could have been avoided if only one woman had looked at the cover’; this irritated me a lot because I know for a fact that the cover was in fact designed by a woman (Coralie Bickford-Smith, to be precise, an artist whose similar works I am also a good fan of), and I wanted to own this edition simply so that I could prove to myself and others that this is the case. However, whilst the cover of this book is indeed very pretty, the texts published in the Penguin English Library collection do not possess the handy introductory chapter at the beginning that the Penguin Classics include, and thus with no frame of reference, I was at something of a loss to describe this book. It is certainly an interesting read insofar as it seemingly refuses to stay as one genre for the whole book. The blurb describes it as a ‘strange and haunting novel’, and at the beginning, this is very appropriate; it depicts a sensationalist image of villainous anarchists and zealous unhinged detectives that is incredibly compelling, and I hold that the character descriptions of the members of the Council of Days (as introduced in chapter five) make for some of the best writing that I’ve ever had the pleasure of reading. By fuck is Chesterton great at characterising these dudes. The blurb describes the novel as a spy thriller, and all seemed to be going well on this front, with a melodramatic but consistent tone maintained for around the first half of the book, with some great twists scattered here and there for good measure. But then things start getting a tad daft, and I’m going to spoil a bit of the plot here because you need to understand how off the rails this shit gets. The adventure grows to involve much of the main cast of antagonists being revealed to be policemen in increasingly convoluted disguises, ridiculously overblown chases in different countries with the stakes being continuously raised in the stupidest and funniest ways, and the main antagonist, built up as a grand unknowable titan of crime and anarchy, escapes the protagonist by leaping over a balcony ‘like an orang-utan’, riding away on a rampaging elephant that he broke out of the zoo, and finally evading capture by flying away on a stolen hot air balloon. Now don’t get me wrong, I’m a big fan of this sort of shit as a general rule, but by fuck does it seem incongruous in a novel such as this, that is so clever and so beautifully written and, whilst containing its few bits of sensational ridiculousness (as an overt parody of the genre or its tropes), generally quite a serious read. Similarly to The Heat’s On, if this book had just kept on the rails or channelled its madness into chaos that stayed within the genre’s boundaries, instead of just throwing its hands up into the air and screaming, ‘fuck it, put in an elephant chase scene!’, I’d have enjoyed it a lot more. As it is, it reminds me of the overblown nonsense of the 007 stories - this is a novel for dads, I reckon. After finishing this book I then found Beaumont’s introduction to the text, which describes the text as ‘antirealist’, and cites Chesterton’s description of ‘great works which mix up abstractions fit for an epic with fooleries not fit for a pantomime’. As a concept, I can fully get behind this - the juxtaposition of heroics and farcical nonsense puts me in mind of high burlesque, and I’ve always been fully against realism because fuck that noise. But you can’t stick with the idea of this book being wholly antirealist if it takes place in a world recognisable as our own and then suddenly changes to be ludicrous and laughable; that’s just inconsistent, and indeed mildly vexing when I was fully engrossed in the sensational spy thriller. Furthermore, attempting to justify this book’s content by saying that it is reminiscent of a ‘nightmare’ is a bullshit defence, because a) the word ‘nightmare’ could simply be used in reference to this book’s negative depiction of a world in which anarchists triumph in their nasty villainy, and b) it’s difficult to keep the idea of this book’s world supposedly being a dream forefront in one’s mind when it, as mentioned above, represents a view (albeit a sensational one) of reality, with dream nonsense hardly being a part of it at all. That is, of course, until the very end, when the book gives up all pretence of being a spy novel and instead wallows in metaphor and overt Christian imagery before ending abruptly. The ending is bullshit and I don't like it.

Dead Souls - Nikolai Gogol I’ve often cited Gogol as one of my favourite authors, but for the longest time I stayed clear of this book, somewhat daunted by whether what I loved about Gogol’s short stories would translate well to a novel form. This is a different beast to his short stories, but no less interesting to talk about, and indeed possessing many of the short story’s positive attributes, for all of the excellent writing, characterisation, and understanding of the fun nuances of society abounds here as it does in his shorter works. Apparently Gogol was attempting to recreate the structure and overall vibe of The Odyssey and other such Homeric epics in prose form, and although the overall setting and storyline does not reflect the grand awe-inspiring epics of the past, I’ll be buggered if the story’s writing and tone doesn’t somehow achieve it. This is not, despite what some critics have said, due to Gogol’s tendency to ramble on about unrelated digressions (a device apparently comparable to Homeric epics), or at least it didn’t stick out to me as such when I read it - that’s just kind of what Gogol does. No, it’s the writing and tone, as mentioned above, that seems to ape the Homeric tone, in such a way that you wouldn’t notice its explicit presence until after you’d been informed of it, and yet when you are aware of the Homeric influence you see it everywhere clear as day; I’d call it an ineffable concept but that’s just me trying to cover up for the fact that I can’t find the words, because I’m bad at writing these things. But I digress. Gogol’s excellent means of conveying character voices shines as always in this text, but I can’t feel like I’m missing the extent of it because I’m reading it in English. The introduction by Robert A Maguire describes Gogol’s extensive research into ‘all the prosaic rubbish of life, all the rags’, and makes efforts to incorporate such minor details as regional slang, official jargon, outdated terminology, etc. into his characters’ voices, but I fear that I’m missing some of the nuances of these techniques by my lack of knowledge in these fields or that some of the subtleties in language don’t translate as well as they ought to. Of course there are some characters which exemplify Gogol’s skill at diverse voices, such as some of the peasant muzhiks and one of my favourite characters Nozdryov (who draws from a wide array of sources for his dialogue with hilarious results), but there are some instances in which the character voices seem somewhat interchangeable, especially considering how a lot of individual personality is often subsumed by the necessity of upholding social decorum, and thus there are many characters who only speak in refined socially acceptable manners. The characters themselves are all bloody great, be they individual grotesque landowners or incredibly detailed and often brilliantly satirical descriptions of wider groups or demographics. Whilst the writing remains as excellent as ever, the characters in the second part of the book lack the grotesque simplicity of those in the first part - indeed, efforts are made by Gogol to give them complex fleshed-out characterisation - and subsequently these new characters are nowhere near as memorable as the fantastic personifications of negative traits that we got in the first part. Yeah, I forgot to mention, this book is technically made up of two parts, the first part highlighting the problems of society and the second part intended to delve into the resolution of some of these issues; of course, the second part does not exist in its entirety, because Gogol was a great fan of melodramatically burning his manuscripts, but it’s not a major issue because what does survive of the full text is amazing enough on its own (specifically the entirety of part one). Plus, I’ve delved into my thoughts of authors trying to ‘change the world’ through their works (in that I think that it’s a fool’s notion and only really serves to exemplify the author’s delusion), so I’m content with this text only portraying the detrimental aspects of society, as opposed to trying to fix them. I am quite fond of the narrator in this book. Similarly to his short stories, Gogol employs a narrative voice that exists almost as a character in of itself, and I don’t just mean that in the sense of ‘it’s got a lot of personality’. The narrative voice apologises for the story’s content and makes changes in an attempt to preserve decorum, it makes excuses for the story’s characters (especially the protagonist Chichikov), it often reveals information at the same rate as the characters within the setting discover things and have epiphanies, and it even establishes itself as a character with a physical voice as it only chooses to speak of Chichikov’s past when Chichikov himself is asleep, and apologises all the while lest he somehow slight the man. Bringing up this also gives me an opportunity to briefly mention the 2006 BBC radio adaptation for this, which establishes the narrator as a physical character in all scenes to humourous effect (and what’s more gave me yet more reason to love Mark Heap, who makes for a fucking excellent Chichikov). But I digress. Part two of the novel, as mentioned above, does not possess the same sort of wonderfully grotesque characters as part one, and considering that this is a novel defined mainly by its characters, this is somewhat problematic. The plot of part two is perhaps vaguely interesting, even though it seems to shunt the titular focus of dead souls to the side somewhat, but all in all I found it difficult to be too invested in this new story due to its lack of compelling characters. In addition, the Homeric epic tone of part one is somewhat absent, and without a distinctive narrative voice, the narrative suffers. I feel bad shitting on part two, since it was everyone else shitting on part two that catalysed Gogol to burn the manuscript (again) and possibly starve himself to death. Honestly, the first part is bloody amazing, so just read that and then be satisfied with the knowledge that your opinion of the book overall has not been tarnished by the shoddy second part. Sorry Gogol.

Complete Short Fiction - Oscar Wilde I’ve been vaguely aware of Wilde’s short fiction for a while now, having read a selection of his fairy tales and ‘Lord Arthur Savile’s Crime’ (a favourite of mine) for uni, so I decided to give his complete collection a shot. The Penguin Classics edition of his short fiction is separated into his different published collections, but can generally be categorised as either fairy tales or miscellaneous short stories. I’ve studied a shit load of fairy tale authors/compilers (Basile, Straparola, Perrault, the Brothers Grimm, Andersen, Wilde and whoever compiles the radical Russian fairy tales), and Wilde is certainly my favourite of the bunch. The specific blend of Wilde-esque traits incorporated into the fairy tale format make up my favourite fairy tales of any author - this is by no means all of Wilde’s fairy tales, but I’ll get into that. My favourite fairy tales of Wilde take place in a world vaguely recognisable as our own, or at least existing as an exaggerated facsimile of our own society, not just because the urban setting reminds me of Hoffmann’s ‘The Golden Pot’, but because such a setting allows for some heavy-handed but undeniably hilarious social commentary and satire. Such satire works especially well when juxtaposing the romanticised world of the fairy tale with the grimmer reality of Wilde’s society - the two tales that commence the collection, ‘The Happy Prince’ and ’The Nightingale and the Rose’, exemplify this excellently. Whilst I liked the satire attainable by setting the fairy tale in an urban society environment, similar levels of hilarity are obtained via Wilde’s satirical look at certain character archetypes (the titular character in ‘The Remarkable Rocket’ being my favourite example). The fairy tales obviously possess their morals and their teachings (though I was a fan of how this is subverted slightly by some characters actively avoiding, misinterpreting or arguing with the story’s moral), but the tropes that we’d expect to see in fairy tales - the morals from Perrault, the recurring overt ties to Christianity from Andersen, etc. - are not why I like Wilde’s fairy tales so much. The tales in the collection titled A House of Pomegranates are undeniably excellently written, and what’s more include some fantastic settings inspired by the Victorian obsession with the Orient that allow for phenomenal and evocative descriptive writing (the likes of which is not seen in any other of Wilde’s fairy tales), but they fail to capture my preferred positive attributes that the aforementioned tales possess. I cheekily skipped 'The Portrait of Mr W H' because I’d heard from a mate who had also read it that it was a long and dull read, and thus refrained from checking it out lest it tarnish my idealised view of Wilde. I’m sure I’ll live with myself knowing that I haven’t read Wilde’s entire body of works. Indeed, who gives half a toss about that when we’ve still got to talk about the last remaining collection contained within this publication: ‘Lord Arthur Savile’s Crime and Other Stories’, which is not made up of fairy tales but other ‘popular’ genres of writing. Taken at face value, the stories’ content of murder, ghosts, and mystery slot in nicely alongside the fairy tales, in that they can all be considered, at face value, writings intended to appeal to the low-brow interests of the masses. They are, of course, more than that, possessing some great subversions of genre tropes and Wilde’s typical social satire, which all comes together to make the short stories (in particular ‘Lord Arthur Savile’s Crime’ and ‘The Canterville Ghost’) hilarious and very enjoyable reads. The fact that these stories are written with the primary intentions of entertaining, rather than revolutionising the written form or making one think about grand philosophical themes, means that I can’t really offer anything about the stories other than that they’re fucking good and that you should go and read them.

Shit I read this month that I couldn’t be arsed to write about: A Short History of Drunkenness by Mark Forsyth (which I started back in December(?) last year, forgot about until now, and love immensely), and ‘The Penal Colony’ by Kafka (it was much more enjoyable than the other works by Kafka that I’ve read, but that isn’t really saying much).

[rangercommand]

COMIC REVIEW - Mighty Morphin Power Rangers Issue 50

On Wednesday, June 24th, Mighty Morphin Power Rangers Issue 50 will be released from Boom Studios.

The MIGHTY MORPHIN POWER RANGERS & the OMEGA RANGERS – along with surprise new allies – versus The Anointed in the conclusion to NECESSARY EVIL!? Everything has been leading to the shocking return of a fan-favorite character so big that we needed a LAST PAGE GATEFOLD to contain it!? But what does it mean now that [SPOILER] is back?

Host Eric (@trekkieb47) had a chance to read the issue in advance and shares his review:

“Spanning a year, 12 issues of Go Go Power Rangers, and 11 issues of Mighty Morphin’ Power Rangers, Necessary Evil has outpaced the other comic arcs. This arc has covered so much ground, from Tommy gaining the White Ranger powers, the Power Transfer, a new team of Omega Rangers, an abundance of new villains and subplots… Necessary Evil has widened the scope of the Power Rangers universe.

A necessary evil is the lesser evil when faced with two difficult choices because the alternative choice, or not doing anything, could lead to worse outcomes. What is the “Necessary Evil” in this arc? You can view it from many points.

Jason has to decide between leaving his friends to become an Omega Ranger by lying to them or ignoring his fate and letting the universe tear itself apart.

Tommy goes from being completely powerless to becoming the leader of the Power Rangers. He is inexperienced in this new role and has to learn fast or the Power Rangers and Earth could be destroyed.

Kiya wants to give all of the Empowered and Anointed a chance to be free of the oppressors that want to capture and seclude them. In her eyes, the Power Rangers are harboring a time bomb, Tommy could become Lord Drakkon. A possible future that can circle back and cause the whole Shattered Grid cycle to start again.

And that’s just the big three players in this story. Writers Ryan Parrott and Sina Grace have woven a complex narrative, juggling an impressive amount of characters. For MMPR 50, Parrott not only delivers a hell of an ending but sets up potential stories for years to come.

Artist Daniele di Nicuolo and colorist Walter Baiamonte brought their A+++ game to this issue. We have said so much about their work in the past, but we can’t stop praising them. Personally, I will be following their careers long after Power Rangers. The next artist for MMPR will have some large shoes to fill!

Issue 50 ties in threads from all of the previous arcs in the series, nothing was left off the table and every issue leading up to this point is significant. For the ending to have a great impact, I definitely suggest taking this weekend to reread the entire arc. Let these plots be fresh in your mind when tackling this issue! After a two-month pandemic break, the ending has been hyped (we won’t spoil it here), but the possibilities for drama, confrontation, and great storytelling are wide open going forward.

Over the years, Power Rangers has opened up a vast multiverse beyond the tv show. The comics series has only furthered that, exploring new stories in the framework of the show while expanding the lore. Whatever the next arc deals with, the stakes and consequences seem greater than Shattered Grid. I honestly hope the comics continue for a long time. They have added an incredible amount of depth and nuance to the Mighty Morphin’ Power Rangers characters and lore.

And that is truly Morphenominal.”

#gallery-1 { margin: auto; } #gallery-1 .gallery-item { float: left; margin-top: 10px; text-align: center; width: 25%; } #gallery-1 img { border: 2px solid #cfcfcf; } #gallery-1 .gallery-caption { margin-left: 0; } /* see gallery_shortcode() in wp-includes/media.php */

LOS ANGELES, CA (June 18, 2020) – BOOM! Studios, under license by Hasbro, Inc. (NASDAQ: HAS), today revealed a first look at MIGHTY MORPHIN POWER RANGERS #50 by the all star team of acclaimed writer Ryan Parrott (Mighty Morphin Power Rangers/Teenage Mutant Ninja Turtles), artist Daniele di Nicuolo (Mighty Morphin Power Rangers), colorist Walter Baiamonte (Mighty Morphin Power Rangers), and letterer Ed Dukeshire (Angel), the shocking final chapter in the epic Power Rangers event, Necessary Evil, arriving in June 2020.

MIGHTY MORPHIN POWER RANGERS #50 features a connecting main cover and variant cover by Jamal Campbell (Naomi), a collectible Trading Card variant cover by Kris Anka (Runaways), an exclusive Story Variant cover written by Ryan Parrott and illustrated by Dan Mora (Buffy the Vampire Slayer), as well as a special foil variant of the connecting cover art by Jamal Campbell.

Currently, Power Rangers is celebrating 27 continuous years on the air, making it one of the longest running kids’ live-action series in television history with nearly 900 episodes aired to date. Created by Haim Saban and launched in 1993 with Mighty Morphin Power Rangers, the franchise continues with the 27th season, “Power Rangers Beast Morphers” currently airing on Saturdays at 8 a.m. (ET/PT) on Nickelodeon in the U.S.

Print copies of MIGHTY MORPHIN POWER RANGERS #50 will be available on June 24, 2020 exclusively at local comic book shops (use comicshoplocator.com to find the nearest one), or at the BOOM! Studios webstore. Digital copies can be purchased from content providers like comiXology, iBooks, Google Play, and Madefire. Softcover collections of MIGHTY MORPHIN POWER RANGERS,  and other Power Rangers releases from BOOM! Studios are available now, everywhere books are sold.

For continuing news on the MIGHTY MORPHIN POWER RANGERS series and more from BOOM! Studios, stay tuned to boom-studios.com and follow @boomstudios on Twitter.

For more on Power Rangers, please visit www.powerrangers.com and follow Power Rangers on YouTube, Facebook, Twitter and Instagram.

COMIC REVIEW – Mighty Morphin Power Rangers Issue 50 was originally published on Ranger Command Power Hour

[increaseprofitonline2017-blog]

Strategies and Profits: A Pocket Guide to Successfull Marketing

Strategies and Profits: A Pocket Guide to Successfull Marketing

buy now $19.99 [ad_1] Many marketers are clueless about how their actions in their work, affects the business in its entirety. This book will provide you, regardless of your marketing role in the wing of the business, whether you are marketing manager within a large organization or an entrepreneur, with tips and tricks on how to market your products with the aim of growing your business into a profitable empire. Marketing seems so simple, but many professions in this field fall short and lose out on customers because of their lack of knowledge of the market. All they seem to rely on is the budget that they have in order to promote a brand or a product. Their approach lacks finesse. Marketing professionals take part in creative brainstorming sessions and think about taglines and images that might work, that relate to the products that they are trying to sell. Then, on a whim, they decide to implement the marketing strategy, spend a lot of money, in the hopes that what that the strategy works. There is a big problem with this approach, since there is no assurance that this strategy can work and there is no way of assessing what part of the strategy worked, and what part didn’t work. They haven’t really deconstructed it to the point that they require to. Learning these techniques and approaches that are provided in this book, for you as a marketing manager or if you have any marketing position in your company, will assist the business to grow and develop, and avoid spending money aimlessly. Historically, the area of Marketing was introduced to enhance the profitability of brands and products. However, there was very little access to data, and therefore it was very hard to learn what worked and what didn’t, and therefore resulted in the lack of data that could be used to replicate successful marketing campaigns. Therefore, most companies marketed their products the best way they knew how, or guessed their way through the dark, and hoped that their plan could work. The lucky few went on to build empires but the majority lost their businesses. In the last two decades or so, the world has evolved in such a way that it is incredibly easy to test things out and to learn from mistakes. In this book, we are going to develop and test out a framework, which essentially takes into account this evolution that has allowed for efficient decisions to be made and marketing strategies to be cost-effective. This marketing framework, which are essentially tips, tricks and techniques, are scalable. It does not matter if you have a billion-dollar budget or you have a hundred-dollar budget, the same concept still applies. So, if you learn that concept, even if you just want to create a small farmers market business for yourself or you just want to see if an idea that you have might work, this framework applies across the board. That is the beauty of this framework and in extension, this book. I am not saying that “word-for-word” this book is applicable to all types of businesses at the same level. Of course, there are some nuances depending on the size of your business, because the structure of larger businesses equal contain complexity, especially when it relates to Marketing. But this book answers the right questions irregardless of your marketing budget and the size of your business. [ad_2] buy now

buy now Source URL: https://www.increaseprofitonline.com/2018/05/30/strategies-and-profits-a-pocket-guide-to-successfull-marketing/

[trifeca]

Rodney Mullen --- Body Issues: Switching The Regular (2012)

No need to introduce Rodney: The early-Bones-Brigade-hero-cum-Almost-mastermind invented most tricks skateboarders have been doing for the last quarter of a century – including flat-ground ollies and kickflips –, he’s been a skate business millionaire for more than a decade, and he’s just getting started on his most recent missions: to enter the world of academia and to redistribute the flesh over his body in a perfectly symmetrical way so he can finally overcome the notion of “switch” which has been dominating the skate world for two decades now. Meet the only true mad scientist of skateboarding.

 Rodney, do you still skate mostly at night?

 I do. But my days, they vary a lot. The truth is that it’s embarrassingly little, in some way, because in the summer time, in the last months, I have spent maybe five days home, and so it’s just packing bags and going, and mostly that’s because of three or four different kinds of activities I’m doing – between Bones Brigade, the screenings, between stuff with Almost, and then Globe, and then I developed some bonds with a kind of academic crowd. I spoke at the TEDx thing, so it’s just that crowd, and I just start connecting – I get invitations sometimes to go elsewhere. So I’ve been doing a good deal of that, applying myself to that, and nurturing those relationships.

 Wow. I know you studied Math, but tell me some more about those academic connections.

 Well, I don’t know if you’re familiar with that TED stuff, I didn’t know it very well, but it’s kind of a big thing. They franchise it around the world to different universities, and it’s called TEDx, and it’s basically Technology, Entertainment, Design, and so they have various people, all kinds between scientists, design people, all kinds of people… computer people, astro guys and biological guys, all these guys get up and they speak, and they try to integrate different specialties. Me, I feel like I don’t have a specialty in anything.

 Come on.

 I can skate, yes, and so over the time I keep getting more and more bonds with some of these people. The last one was from O’Reilly Books, and Tim O’Reilly, he invited a crowd like that, a couple hundred people. You go up there, and then you speak about whatever the subject is – in fact, they have a giant grid on the wall. I think it was between 45 minutes to an hour for each, and you could choose around eight different ones, and then you could go meet with anyone, like, “Hey, let’s talk,” and then you write it up on the board, or you just go to others, and you integrate with them, and then you leave after three days, and they’ll tell you, “Hey, half of you aren’t coming back because we have to keep the flow – don’t take it personal.” Things like that. And so what does it mean? I don’t really know. It’s just getting disparate people from disparate fields together and broadening…

 So it doesn’t have any set goal or agenda?

 Not necessarily. It’s there just to see what you come up with. Lately that’s been something for me…

 Sounds quite inspiring.

 It’s so unbelievably inspiring because I feel like a little kid: it’s really humbling, but at the same time I do see how the subculture of skateboarding and having some scientific background, or at least enough of that and a computer background, and then also just running a business and getting around, those things, how they just add up, and if I can communicate the good things about our community to theirs… I see they’re quite interested, especially in terms of innovation. That’s in particular what some of them really want to study, for example the one who brought me into it, she is on a White House advisory board for innovation within the nation – so I’m just so privileged. It’s funny.

 Does all this change your perspective on skateboarding?

 Oh yeah, it changes my view on a lot of things. And it solidifies my view on some things.

 Does it, really?

 Yeah, not in totality of course. I think I’d be close-minded if that were the case – and I’m sure I am a little bit close-minded. I do look at skateboarding with a broader perspective, and to be able to communicate what makes it so special to people who would never take a second look at it, that’s such a huge thing for me. That’s such an honor, and so the more I look at it, and I abstract and put it in formulae in terms of what I see in other fields, then I can say, “Wow, skateboarding is so special.” More so, of course, than I know it at just the fundamental level of doing it.

 Is it as infinitely interesting to you on a theoretical level as it is on that fundamental almost no-brains level, as in “my feet feel the catch and land”?

 Nothing can replace that. It talks to who you are as a person, me at least. And so, no, nothing is actually that interesting, compared to that, to me.

 Nothing – in the world?

 Not in a centering way. I mean I have my faith, and I have my wife and relationships with friends – but those are separate; those are relationships.

 As opposed to activities?

 That’s right, and they aren’t subcultures of which you could be part of. No, I would think nothing is… because skateboarding itself is a blur of that: doing it connects you with the community. You can’t quite separate it completely.

 And more generally speaking: How, well, “theoretical” are you these days, in terms of structuring your life and finding new things to do?

 Less than I used to. Because all the theory and philosophy… you just gotta feel.

 Is it easy for you to find that balance between mind and gut feeling?

 Of course. Well, sometimes when you chase it around philosophically so much you actually you’re actually changing the whole… you know, quantum stuff, Heisenberg.

 Uncertainty.

 Yeah, you enter the system and once you’ve done that it’s no longer the same.

 What kind of math did you study, by the way?

 In biomedical engineering, in you can go through one of the four basic departments, and I was going through chemical because it seemed the most applicable – although electrical would be much more applicable probably, today. Mathematics was the joy I had, and I loved the pure physics; engineering was not nearly as fun because it’s just cranking through all these iterations of problem solving; there’s not philosophical richness to it. Applied mathematics is more what I liked to do, for understanding gravitation and general theory, that’s finding the Tensor Calculus, and then when I wanted to understand quantum implications after going through this big branch; then you have to go to finite-dimensional vector spaces on the Hilbert spaces, and then on into some group theory – and group theory itself has a lot of applications to how I think about tricks. It’s a phenomenally powerful and poetic kind of mathematics, and that’s the stuff that I learned.

 Wow. Go on please. What about that link between tricks and mathematics?

 Oh, just because there are all kinds of symmetries, left-right symmetries, and you know, that’s how it’s often used: You look at a crystal, and there’s all kinds of symmetries, nothing as obvious as left and right, right? So there’s all kinds that they have and they formulate, so you can start saying: if this is a symmetry with this, then knock it out and crunch it into irreducible, small and more simplistic terms: you cut out all the extra crap. And you look at the fundamental symmetries of what makes things work, and tricks are like that: There’s very much all the symmetries that we have over your different joints – it’s incredibly complex how your ankle will bend and your knee will bend, and it’s incredible because of how it’s interconnected in our system, and then how the board works… there are so many subtleties. Think about anything like a hardflip, that’s obvious; it’s kind of against the grain, that’s what makes it hard, whereas heelflip shoves, or 360 flips vs. lazers, those are with the grain vs. against the grain. And you can keep breaking these into component form; that matches extremely well with group theory – does that make sense?

 I guess. That’s a vast field though.

 Yeah, you don’t put it on paper, but if you read the stuff and absorb it and feel it, and then you go skate, it’s just a new lens through which you see things. What is a world-view? A world-view is just a lens, it’s not contained like in a box, of what you see, it’s just a lens, how you see everything. Likewise, if you just use different lenses, sometimes it will clear the field and make things much more obvious.

 Sure. Do you think you’re the only one who sees it that way, or do you think someone like Danny Way has a healthy dose of physical and mathematical calculations going on before he actually jumps over one of his huge ramps?

 I guess, though you have to feel it; that’s something else, through these guys, this more academic crowd, one of the other things that I did is they’re trying to harness what they call flow. I have to do that since I go back, and this is a guy who writes for Forbes magazine, and it’s interesting how this is working out: So he interviewed Danny Way as well, and I met him at some kind of nerd fest, you know? He’s saying just that if we can harness the zone or whatever, that semi-hypnotic, highly concentrated state of mind that allows you to do things without thinking, because all of the processing is there; you aren’t thinking, but you stand back away from it, because by the time you think about it you lose it and you’ll screw up, and so how do you get into that mode and look at things in the same light? And when you asked me are there people that do that, and do you think Danny does that – yeah, of course because he has generated a feel for all of the guys that can put this stuff into equations and get hard numbers for it, that actually are there to make sure that he doesn’t get killed.

 Yeah.

 But in the end, Danny will know and feel the nuance of those numbers in a way that they can…

 … never know, no.

 And so when you bridge those two, between feeling and doing, the numbers are crunching on the analytic side, it is a very rare person that has the combinations, and so that’s one of the reasons why I’ve been asked to be part of this group. There are other guys, they’ll study Olympiads, but what you bring up is profound and certainly a lot of people are working on it now.

 Are you willing to dedicate even more time to this?

 Maybe, yeah, yeah, I meet a lot of incredible, and you know, my wife calls me Forest Gump because it’s like my skating is ping-pong: for whatever reason I can do it. But other than that I’m just kind of retarded; I just go from one to the next, my mind just kind of works that way, and it doesn’t work that way. So, the truth is: I never feel qualified to be in a room with them; at the same time I know that I do have capacities… even doing this interview or having some kind of fame, that has given me something, being in front of an audience, that’s also a skill set that’s not so common among professors, you know? And so, the combination of those, to be able to communicate is something that skateboarding has prepared me for, I guess, that maybe they don’t have. And if I keep learning from them, maybe I’ll be a better person, maybe I can contribute to something greater. Right now, I don’t know, I’m just feeling it out. I’m just going with the flow.

 Sounds good. Speaking of the flow – and the zone: Can you go to that place, whenever you want to?

 I think anyone who… well, my father, he was the squadron leader for the group that dropped the atomic bomb; and so he had a very high level. In order to drop that thing, they don’t just give that to anyone. And that’s very much his mindset… what he did he really didn’t talk about that much, I mean this is old Korean War days, after Hiroshima and Nagasaki we were flying that thing around.

 Yeah.

 And he was up there with the button. For them, they gave them, I guess, to some degree considerable study in hypnosis; and my dad’s not a touchy-feely guy. At all. But he had a deep respect for it, which made me think his training must have had a lot of it. So, basically when he saw me practice late at night when I was just a kid, he would wake up, and he would see me in the distance. We had a lit barn, it was like 100 meters, no less than that, more like 70 meters from the house. So he could see me walking around in circles and skating. And he just goes, “Rodney, you’ve gotten really good at self-hypnosis by what you do.” I guess in a way that could answer your question, that if you do something well and long enough, you don’t even know what you’re doing; you’re just doing it, but if someone from the outside looks he’d go, oh it’s obvious, that’s what he’s doing. I don’t know.

 Does entering that zone, doing tricks, feel the same every day?

 No, it’s hard to say because I’ve come so far; it’s… well, I’m not the same person I used to be, and so you get a deeper kind of zen thing going, but at the same time I’m sure it’s basically the same as any other kid out there. I know one thing, that when I’m filming something super-hard, it’s a really escalated place you go, and that doesn’t just come naturally. I mean, it does come naturally, but not “just” come naturally. That’s definitely a distinct state of mind that I have a taste for, but you don’t just go into that.

 Are you filming right now?

 No, I haven’t filmed… my body, my bones fused together, my femur; there was a lot of scar tissue that pulled it up so tightly that the bones started to grind together. They thought that it was going to grind the head off, so the body has a natural mechanism for that, so it solidified and it welded it together, so it no longer worked as a ball and socket, it was more like a stick-shift. And that was about six years ago, five years ago, and… it took about a year and a half. I just stopped. It took me about a year and a half until I finally broke, it was like breaking your own bone: First you have to break all the scar tissue, which is a horrible thing; I did it in the wheel well of my car because I’m not strong enough; turned my body upside down and pulled against the frame until it would break – so you vomit, and you do all kinds of things. But I did it and that changed something in me. I just disappeared because I didn’t want anyone to know. I can say it now because it’s over, but I didn’t want anyone to know that that was it for me, that it was done, and so I just stopped filming. And I just didn’t want to walk with a cane. And I had a good amount of pain all the time, you know? I couldn’t walk. I didn’t run, for about one and a half years I couldn’t run more than 20 feet. So that’s what I went through, and when I got through that, and I finally broke it one night – I remember it was a cold night, and I fell on my hand because I was still caught up in my car, hanging upside down when it broke –; if you’ve ever broken a bone you know that feeling when you get kind of high from nausea. You don’t feel bad, you feel actually warm and high. I just had tears and snot on my hand, funny, but it broke, and I did it. And as I started to do that I could skate again, like: well, and I realized, “You know what? I feel like I’m polishing a turd right now.” My skating… whatever I do, what am I going to do, flip out? Another primo? Who cares. And you start looking at your skating, like, who cares? I couldn’t watch myself skate for years. Because you just look at it and you go, who cares? It gave me what it gave me, but is it really that special? No.

 It is that special.

 Thank you, but at that time, that’s not how you look at it when you go through that. And then I realized what I was doing, it opened my eyes to something that I might be able to do. It made me understand something about skating that I would have never known: how the flesh kind of works like a wet-suit. We’re flesh and bones, and the nature of stance – why there is such a thing as “switch” –, is because your body, like anything, and skating is a kind of gyrating motion, and so like anything, gyrating with layers of clothes, you get sort of bound up, and I think that any skater who’s good enough, if his body could sit in exactly the same position either way, then he would – why wouldn’t you? But you can’t, because of that process how the flesh redistributes itself over the bones; it twists. The nature of the pull of the muscles, it just naturally does it. I see little kids that have been skating a while and they’ll do a switch manual, and it’s very much a fakie nosewheelie – it’s not a manual in the other direction, you know what I mean? You don’t have the same leverage, you’re pushing it away from you, and so I thought: okay, if I can use the same process with my car and fire hydrants, the things I used to break, then maybe I can redistribute my flesh over the bones so that I don’t even have a stance, because I can put the muscles back where they started before I skated. And if that’s the case I’ll have same leverages, and then I can do a bunch of switch tricks that still people haven’t done switch because the leverages are too freaky, you know? Your margin for error is just too small. Except for Paul Rodriguez and some of these guys, they’re so good – I don’t know – but still you can see! You know when it’s switch.

 Sure.

 And who’s better than that guy, you know? And so I’m thinking if I can use this really medieval form of cheating, so that I actually don’t have a stance and do these things, then that would be a contribution – and that’s fun for me because that’s new.

 Yeah, but how does it actually look like?

 It’s a horrible process. You have to gouge things into you, and then once it sticks in there, you just keep rotating it and rotating, and do it bit by bit – ring around the rosey, for years. Maybe sometimes six hours a day. It’s horrible. And then you skate a little bit, and then you do more, and you skate a little bit, and you do more. That’s what I’ve been doing for a long time. And like I say: now I can run like the wind; I’m not going to need a cane, and if I can never do this, that’s fine, because I’ll be good, and skateboarding is giving me more than ever. And I’d rather not be filmed and just skate, as retarded as I am, it doesn’t matter. It doesn’t matter how bad I am – I still have that feel. But I work so hard, so hard, and I dream of it, and if I can do it – everything else is working. If I can do that, and even if it’s just a handful of tricks: 10 tricks that really show something, then I’m going to run like the wind.

[gyrlversion]

10 Pictures That Will Redefine Your Expectations Of Gender

Soraya Zaman

“Caden is a beautiful and spiritual soul. He has an amazing calm way about him that shouldn’t be mistaken for shyness.”

Soraya Zaman is an Australian-born photographer whose work often highlights concepts surrounding gender and sexuality. As a queer nonbinary person who identifies with the pronouns they/them, Zaman’s work carries an added vitality and a deeply personal connection to their subjects and their subject’s stories.

Zaman’s new book, American Boys, is a collection of portraits capturing a state of flux — not just in terms of gender, but in lifestyle, location, and mentality. Zaman spoke with BuzzFeed News about their journey to produce this book and the importance of visibility among the gender nonbinary community today.

Soraya Zaman

“Aodhán identifies as a trans man and also as ‘Two Spirit’ within the Native American culture and comes from the Cherokee. He taught me that before colonization, there were no labels for gender-nonconforming indigenous people.”

How would you describe your book American Boys?

American Boys is a portrait series of 29 transmasculine individuals from big cities to small towns across the USA captured at distinct stages of their transition. Each series is accompanied by first-person accounts from conversations we had together.

These images show a glimpse into everyone’s life at a specific moment in time. Capturing their personality, their honesty, beauty, vulnerability, strength, and so on. They are affirmative images of everyone, and it is work that informs and expands upon understandings of gender identity outside of the binary and is real and validating.

American Boys looks to challenge people’s own perceptions of traditional binary gender roles.

Where did the portrait series begin for you, and when did you feel it was complete?

This project began back in the summer of 2016. At the time, I was looking to explore expressions of transmasculinity, as it was something personal to me and my own feelings and journey of gender identity. It didn’t take me long to realize that honoring and sharing stories, and validating and centering everyone I met and photographed in an affirmative way, was really important, especially in the now-changing political climate. There isn’t a lot of transmasculine representation in the media, and I wanted to create something that took these important narratives out of online spaces and put them into something more permanent.

Honestly, I don’t think this series is complete! The transmasculine community is rich, diverse, and deep — 29 people cannot adequately represent any community. There is definitely more to say and share, and I’m looking to do a second book.

Soraya Zaman

“Chella is an artist, writer, storyteller, and role model to many in the trans, nonbinary, and queer community. He’s also deaf, but in no way does this slow Chella down.”

How did you meet your subjects?

I discovered everyone in this project through Instagram. I mostly sorted out people who were using their online platform to express what was happening in their lives in an interesting way. To me, they were natural storytellers with a willingness to share for good or bad. That resonated with me.

I reached out over DM to see if they were interested. It was also important for me to feature transmasculine lives all over the country and to not just represent people who live in New York and LA and other places typically thought of as queer hubs. There is an extra level of bravery required to live and exist as a trans person in smaller towns where community and safety can be harder to find.

How important do you believe nonbinary representation is in the media?

For so long, we’ve all just been fed the same cisgender, heteronormative view of the world. When I was a kid, there was nothing in the media that reflected back to me how I see myself. The binary gender roles that have been constructed by the Western world confine us in a way that doesn’t leave any room for nuance or complexity. These rigid binary ideologies of what is expected are dangerous, oppressive, and toxic to trans and nonbinary people.

Soraya Zaman

“Lazarus laughed with me about having basically been every letter in ‘LGBTQ’ and now just wants to be identified as a unicorn.”

We are asked to fit into a box that ultimately can never contain our multitudes. It’s really only recently that we have begun to see queer, trans, and nonbinary people represented in a way that doesn’t feel tokenistic. So this work is personal to me because it forms part of the current conversation on expanding gender expectations and is contributing in a positive way. It allows people to be seen and feel proud of who they are, something that was missing for me in my youth.

What do you hope people will take away from these images?

The project is an intentional call to the nostalgic, internalized idea of American boyhood and the notion that masculinity belongs exclusively to cis men.

I hope that it helps people unpack the belief that gender identity must align with one’s sex assigned at birth and move away from these restrictive categories of gender. It’s also about an affirmative centering of transmasculine identity. I hope that people take the time to not only look at the images but also read the personal accounts. If people can’t “see” themselves in any of the images, then perhaps they can find a shared experience in some of the stories.

I want people to know that they are not alone in their journey. We are all in this together forging unique identities and the best possible lives for ourselves all across the country and globe, and there is power in that. Hopefully it helps move us all closer to a culture that welcomes, validates, and provides safety for all identities.

Soraya Zaman

“Russel is kind and sweet. He has a gentle way about him, although he told me that he hasn’t always been this way. Feeling dysphoria used to make him an emotional wreck, angry at the world, and he would get triggered by small things and lash out. There was a point though where he just kind of found more peace and got focused on bringing in positive things and how far he’s come, rather than thinking about how he maybe wasn’t where he wanted to be yet.”

Soraya Zaman

“Rufio! What an amazing bundle of body-building-bear–like brilliance! Rufio is so full of life and spirit. He’s also a staunch feminist, especially with his experience of white male privilege that came with passing.”

Soraya Zaman

“Elijah is a kind and compassionate quiet achiever. He grew up in South Texas in a Christian Baptist family. When he finally came out to his mother, she knew that their family might attack him with scripture claiming that being transgender is against God’s will. So they both studied the Bible and found verses to debunk what they might throw at him.”

Soraya Zaman

“When I met Justin, he was at a number of beginnings. He was beginning his life after top surgery, which he had one week earlier, and was about to start college. Justin was excited to leave his school days behind where he lived under the radar, quiet, and kept to himself, which really isn’t Justin at all. He’s actually very funny and well-spoken, self-confident, and embracing leadership roles both as a member of the Quaker community and at the LGBTQ center in Richmond, where he established a trans people of color group.”

Soraya Zaman

“Emmett is a transgender Mormon and a self-proclaimed rebel in his own way. Emmett has had to reconcile his faith in the Lord with his gender identity, and the road has not been easy.”

Soraya Zaman

“When I hung out with Jaimie, who btw is an incredible musician, he spoke to me about his experience with back-handed compliments. People saying to him, ‘Wow, you’re so hot…for a trans guy! Even I’d have sex with you!’ — like he should be especially honored these people find him attractive.”

To pick up your copy of American Boys, visit daylightbooks.org.

Click here for more photo stories from BuzzFeed News.

The post 10 Pictures That Will Redefine Your Expectations Of Gender appeared first on Gyrlversion.

from WordPress http://www.gyrlversion.net/10-pictures-that-will-redefine-your-expectations-of-gender/