#the dichotomy of birth and death

[jg-macleod]

i'm 4 years late but Death Stranding rips

[liesmyth]

did john decide which of his friends would be the necromancer and which would be the cavs when he brought them back from the dead, or was that random?

I wish we knew for sure! John's friends ending up 50/50 adepts vs. non-necromancers is obviously one of TM's premises and was done for doylistic reasons first and foremost, but I don't think we have enough elements to conclusively interpret it as intentional in-universe.

Putting aside any kind of authorial intentions, this is what we know:

» The rate of necromancers as part of the population hovers around 30%. John's core group being 50% adepts is way off from that, and could point to manipulation, but also we're working with a very small sample size. Think about how it's very possible to get head five times in a row when flipping coins; probabilities are much less accurate on a smaller scale. I don't believe it's out of the realm of possibilities that a group of 10 people had exactly 5 necromancers in it.

» Harrow's birth. The Reverend Parents made sure she would be a necromancer by manipulating the embryo with thanergy. It's clearly not a known practice among the Houses at large, and John calls it "a sort of Resurrection" — implying that he could be able to do the same with thalergy. However, this doesn't confirm that he actually DID.

In the same conversation, John says, "This was all different before we discovered the scientific principles," which I think is also worth noting. The fact that he understands NOW how you could get an embryo to grow into a necromancer doesn't mean that he had that knowledge at the time of the Resurrection. It also doesn't mean that the same identical process would apply to making formerly-dead-people into necromancers as they got brought back to life.

It could very well be that necromancy was a generalised side-effect of the Resurrection that affected some people more than others; or it could be that John DID do something different when bringing back some people that conferred them necromantic aptitude. Even if it's the latter, I don't think we can take for granted that 1) it was intentional and 2) he fully knew what the side effects would be.

» Ulysses and Titania. Counterpoint! It's also worth noting that John's "test cases" turned out to be one (1) adept and one (1) non-adept. Like I said above, this could still be a random bi-product of the Resurrection... but given Ulysses and Titania's whole everything, their dichotomy reeks of control group. They are a big point in favour of the "John did it on purpose" column.

Still: I still don't think we can tell for sure that John knew from the moment of Resurrection that he was giving some people death powers, and how that'd turn out in the long run. Like I said above, he could have done something different when resurrecting Ulysses vs. Titania, but it doesn't mean that he knew what would happen.

(Obviously, this argument only makes sense if we assume that Ulysses and Titania were among the very first batch of resurrected. I personally think they were, but obviously it's not confirmed)

» The inner circle. From NtN

I could only trust the inner circle. My scientists, my engineer, my detective, my lawyer, my artist, my nun, my hedge fund manager. My diehards. The ones keeping the lights on.

Putting aside the fact that Lyctors exist the way they are because Tamsyn needed them to exist, and looking at the Canaan House necro/cav pairings from John's point of view: why not give ALL his friends magical powers? That's something I struggle to wrap my head around, for about half a dozen different reasons.

Mind, I don't think John picking and choosing who gets to be a necromancer is that far-fetched, but from a #character point I find it less likely than the alternative (he didn't do it on purpose but turned it to his own advantage). IF it turns out to be canon, I'd be really curious about what the watsonian reasoning for it, beyond "this needed to happen."

Most meta posts I've seen that take for granted John picked and chose his future necromancers ascribe him a level of foresight, knowledge, and long-term planning that I simply don't think he'd have had at the time (not to mention the mental lucidity). To quote HtN John again, "[he] had never been God" before. I truly think he was winging it at least 60% of the time.

[posallys]

no but your metas on poseidon/percy's power triggered a galaxy brain take. Like, Hades and Zeus, from what I remember from r*ck's books, are more controlled, *restrained* (still jerks), but Poseidon has MONSTER children! And though Hades is feared for being the god of the DEAD and Zeus respected for being THE authority, only Poseidon is connected to chaos and destruction. He's the immediate danger. Maybe he is most like Chaos. And that's where Percy's powers come from; that's half of his nature.

oh I CANNOT think about this right now i really cannot i have so much stuff to do BUT IM JUST SAYING there is a REASON poseidon was king long before the stories of zeus ever emerged and there is something SO mental about the dichotomy of the ocean in every single culture; it is peace it is destruction. it is love it is hate. it is birth it is death. CRAZY

[our-lord-satanas]

SKÖLL AND HATI

WHO ARE THEY?

Sköll and Hati, also known as Skól and Hati, are both twin brothers who are wolves in Norse mythology. They are the offspring of the goddess Skadi, who birthed them in vengeance after the murder of her first husband. Sköll and Hati are often depicted as a pair of opposite forces, representing the dichotomy between day and night, light and darkness, and life and death. It is said that if the wolves succeed in catching the sun and the moon, Ragnarok, or the end of the world, will begin.

Hati is the chaser of the moon and is described as being dark and having a flaming tail. Sköll is the chaser of the sun and is described as being bright red in color. The two wolves are said to catch up with their targets once Ragnarok has begun, and bring about the end of the world. In this way, they serve as the symbols of the forces of night and day, light and darkness, life and death.

BASIC INFO:

Appearances: they are said to be massive giant wolves. Sköll is described as all white with yellow glowing eyes, while Hati is described as being black with glowing red eyes. They are often depicted as having sharp fangs and claws and massive jaws filled with hungry teeth. They are said to stalk the sun and moon and to be destined to devour them, thus ushering in the end of the world.

Personalities: Sköll and Hati are often portrayed as having bleak and ominous personalities. They are associated with a gloomy atmosphere and a sense of dread, and they are often depicted as having a ruthless and insatiable hunger. They are forces of chaos and destruction, so they don't often exhibit typical traits like empathy, compassion, or kindness. Instead, they are often portray as being cold and uncaring, with little regard for anything but their own purposes and desires. This could manifest as being sadistic or cruel, being motivated by a desire to tear down and destroy.

Symbols: sun and moon, night and day, twins, wolves, and eclipse

Gods of: the Sun and Moon, chaos, and destruction

Culture: Norse

Plants and trees: rose, lavender, rosemary, honeysuckle, frankincense, myrrh, pine, and mugwort and wolfsbane

Crystals: black tourmaline, obsidian, moonstone, sunstone, silver, gold, amethyst, and rose quartz

Animals: wolves, ravens, and dogs

Incense: pine, frankincense, dragons blood, rose, lavender, myrrh, pine, and mugwort, and patchouli

Colours: red, black, gold, white, grey, and silver

Tarots: Three of Swords, The Moon, and The Sun

Planets: Sun, Moon, Uranus, and Saturn

Days: Sunday, Monday, Saturday, Summer Solstice, full moon, Sköllfest, and Hati-Mas

Parents: Fenrir and Angrboða

Siblings: none except themselves

Partners: none known

Children: none known

MISC:

• Dogs: each associated with dogs in Norse mythology. Hati is referred to as a black dog, while Sköll is depicted as a white dog.

• Sun and moon: Sköll and Hati are the hunters of the sun and moon, respectively. So they are associated with the sun and moon as a part of the natural cycle of day and night.

• Stars: also associated with the star Fenrir because they are said to consume the sun and moon during Ragnarök,

• Wolves: represent strength and unity, as they are known to hunt together in packs. This reflects their connection to the opposite forces of the sun and the moon, and their role as warriors and guardians.

• Hunger and destruction: Sköll and Hati are associated with hunger and destruction, as they chase down the sun and moon to consume them. They are often depicted as being hungry and ravenous, and as representing the hunger and destruction of the universe.

• Siblings: often seen as siblings with a bond of brotherhood and a deep love and loyalty for each other.

• Winter and dark: Sköll and Hati are also associated with the winter season and the dark, as they are often pictured chasing after the sun and moon, which are symbols of light and warmth.

• Night and day: both chase the sun and the moon, respectively, creating a cycle of night and day, representing their roles as destroyers of light.

• Sky and earth: they both represent oppositional forces, being the sky and the earth. this contrast reflects their roles in preserving the balance of the universe and contributing to the cycle of life and destruction.

FACTS ABOUT SKÖLL AND HATI:

• Names: the two wolves are named Sköll and Hati, meaning "deceiver" and "hater" respectively.

• Roles: Sköll and Hati are known for pursuing the sun and moon, and eventually consuming them during Ragnarok.

• Origins: the two wolves Sköll and Hati are born from the giant wolf Fenrir and a giantess named Angrboða.

• Features: Sköll and Hati are said to be the largest of wolves, with teeth the size of swords and bodies that were large enough to fill the sky.

• Relationship: Sköll and Hati are brothers, or are at least closely related.

• Personality: the two wolves are often depicted as ravenous and hungry, with insatiable appetites.

• Connection to Fenrir: they are associated with the wolf Fenrir in Norse mythology, but have a different role and purpose.

• Relationship with the sun and moon: Sköll and Hati are believed to represent the destructive power of darkness and the coming of the night, representing the sun's struggle to survive against the onslaught of night.

HOW TO WORSHIP SKÖLL AND HATI:

• Offerings: making offerings of food, drink, and other items that are significant or have special meaning to you.

• Prayer and meditation: offering prayers, chants, or meditations with the intention of connecting with and honoring Sköll and Hati.

• Rituals: performing rituals, spells, or magic aimed at connecting with their energy or calling upon their presence.

• Research: learning more about their mythology, history, and associated symbols so you can better understand and appreciate them.

• Music and creativity: creating music, poetry, art, and other forms of creativity inspired by and dedicated to Sköll and Hati.

• Learning and self-discovery: seeking knowledge and wisdom through studies and exploration of their mythology, history, and associated symbols.

• Fellowship: joining with others who share a similar devotion or appreciation for Sköll and Hati, discussing beliefs and practices associated with the two wolf Gods.

HOW TO PRAY TO SKÖLL AND HATI:

To begin, you can address Sköll and Hati by name and say something like:

"Great Sköll and Hati, twin wolves of the Underworld, I come to you with reverence and devotion. I pray for your guidance and protection, and I offer this [offering] as a token of my faith and dedication to you."

"Sköll and Hati, I end this prayer with love and admiration for your strength and wisdom. Thank you for your guidance and protection, and may your light shine upon my path."

WHAT ARE SIGNS THAT SKÖLL AND HATI WANT ME TO WORK WITH THEM?

If your request to work with Sköll and Hati has been accepted, here are some signs that you can look for:

• Sudden urge to learn more about them.

• Dreams or visions of the twin wolves or imagery associated with wolves.

• Sudden synchronicities related to the twin wolves.

• Physical sensations of a change in temperature or presence.

• Strange sounds like clinking, howling, or barking.

• Intense feelings of inspiration or creative urge.

• Sudden feelings of connection or interest in them: may feel suddenly find yourself feeling a profound sense of connection or interest in the two wolf Gods. It could be a feeling of being drawn to their energy or imagery, or an unexpected urge to explore their mythology or rituals.

• Coincidences or synchronicities: you may begin to notice unusual signs or patterns in connection with Sköll and Hati, such as seeing their symbols in unexpected places or hearing their names brought up in conversation.

If your requests to work with Sköll and Hati have not been accepted, you may see the following signs:

• Sudden feelings of discomfort or unease after the prayer or ritual.

• Unexpected feelings of doubt or uncertainty about the wolf gods or your desire to work with them.

• A lack of synchronicities or unusual signs related to Sköll and Hati.

• A sense of lack of connection or distance to their imagery or mythology.

• A lack of energy or inspiration related to them.

OFFERINGS:

• Fire.

• Sun or Moon water.

• Incense: frankincense, rose, lavender, myrrh, pine, and mugwort.

• Candles

• Blood

• Food and drinks: meat, fruit, milk, booze (beer, wine, and mead), bread, crackers, biscuits, baked goods, and blood oranges

• Flowers

• Leaves

• Bones

DEVOTIONAL ACTS FOR SKÖLL AND HATI:

• Prayer: offer prayers and affirmations to connect with and honour the twin wolves.

• Meditation: dedicate some time to meditating and seeking guidance and wisdom from Sköll and Hati's presence.

• Offerings: make offerings of food, drinks, and other sacred items in honor of the twin wolves.

• Rituals: perform rituals and spells to honor the twin wolves or to seek their guidance.

• Creativity and self-expression: express your devotion to the twin wolves through creative means, such as drawing/painting images.

• Feasts: creating feast or banquet-style meals and offerings are another popular way to honor and worship the twin wolves. These feasts can involve cooking and preparing a special meal, setting the table with symbols and items that represent the wolf gods, and offering prayers and worship during the meal.

• Research and exploration: spend time learning more about their mythology, symbolism, and associated rituals and practices.

• Fellowship: connect with others who share a devotion or appreciation of the twin wolves, discuss beliefs and rituals, and seek guidance and support from the community.

• Self-reflection and awareness: take some time to reflect on your own thoughts and feelings in connection with the twin wolves. Reflect on your relationships with them and how you can further strengthen the devotion.

IS IT SAFE TO EAT OR DRINK AN OFFERING I GIVE TO THEM?

It is generally not recommended to eat or drink something that has been offered to the twin wolves. Offerings are usually meant as a way to show devotion and respect, not as something that should be consumed. It is possible that some people might consider eating or drinking offerings as a way to connect with the energy or presence of the twin wolves, but it is not a practice that is generally recommended or considered safe.

[blautitlewave]

As days pass and the violence continues to mount, I see more and more pro-Palestine people trip willfully or accidentally into actual anti-Semitism. I’ve seen people say that Jews are tools or agents of Satan, or that they are, ‘by their nature, ‘evil’.

Let’s calm down for a sec. The Israeli people have been raised since birth to view themselves as exceptional, unique, and hated ‘for no reason’ by Palestine and surrounding Arab countries, just as America has indoctrinated us to believe we are exceptional and unique and hated for how cool we are, and that’s why 9/11 happened and the Iraq War happened — ‘they hate us for our freedom’. It’s the exact same deal, except Israel has the emotional leverage of a historical genocide to fall upon as primary justification for their continued belligerence disguised as self-defense. Israelis are purposefully kept separate from Palestinians so as to maximize the Othering of the latter. You can’t empathize with who you can’t see suffering. You can’t develop compassion for people you are told will kill or hurt you as soon as they see you.

Israelis that have swallowed Israeli propaganda, and Zionists (non-Israeli Jews and non-Jews the world over) that have done the same have been brainwashed into believing the same old Us vs Them dichotomy that has divided so many groups since time immemorial. It is just as much human nature to be violently intolerant of the Other as it is to be cooperative, social, and empathetic with fellow human beings. It is so very easy to absorb and accept that some people simply want to hurt you, because there ARE people in this world that simply want to hurt you for no other reason than your existence. But Palestinians do not wish for the eradication of Jewish people. If they did then there would be no Palestinian Jews, right? But there are.

Zionists, especially Jewish Zionists, are not some uniquely heartless or depraved people. What they are allowing to happen in the name of Zionism is evil. They are not blindly applauding the deaths of Palestinians because they are Jews. You see non-Jewish Zionists doing the exact same thing, but apparently only Jews are ‘tools of Satan’ for this. Again, it’s falling back on old anti-semitic rhetoric. It’s lazy and dangerous and undermines the cause. No matter how frustrating it is to talk to a Zionist, don’t give up and fall back on anti-semitic ideas because it’s simply easier and less stressful for you to perceive a person as somehow a boogeyman rather than a complex individual with a set of experiences, ideas, history, memories, and indoctrination that has culminated into a frustrating and obtuse individual.

[beesmygod]

bea what would u say bloodborne is About. like its themes and stuff

bloodborne is about the exact same thing every single fromsoft game is about, but with a different coat of paint: the player character enters a world teetering on the edge of collapse as a result of the residents interfering with the natural cycle of life and death, light and dark. supernatural attempts to prolong the inevitable darkness (in bloodborne they are specifically avoiding death and inconsequentiality), causes stagnation and rot. this rot spreads and becomes more and more pervasive the longer the cycle is halted. for there to be light, there must also be dark.

specific to bloodborne, there are some themes that differentiate it from the souls games and sekiro: the blood users want to escape the cycle of life and death, but the insight adherents are trying to escape their waning significance by re-birthing themselves into something more significant than humanity, as if its something they can outpace.

now, beyond that, the game is a collection of trichotomies and dichotomies presented to the player for them to extrapolate their own opinions from: is it better to live as a mindless beast and serve your own needs until you rot down to the bones, or to live in service to others in hopes of divine recognition as you are slowly consumed? essentially: reign in hell, or serve in heaven?

thats the most important one. the others are like human/fauna/flora or fire/bolt/cosmos. the terrestrial vs the extraterrestrial. there's like a bazillion factions working against each other, most of which don't even have names.

the choir vs the school of mensis, both of which originated from the healing church

queen yharnam vs queen annalise vs the executioners

the school of byrgenwerth vs the healing church, science vs faith

and so on and so forth.

[theslowesthnery]

magpie-come-east:

Fandom Having the dichotomy of Morgott=good and Mohg = bad does such a. Disservice to both characters. Morgott is noble but he’s also cruel and angry. He hurts himself and all the world by clinging to the corpse of the Order. Mohg is ‘villainous’ but he’s just as traumatized. He didn’t wake up one day and choose to kidnap his half brother for kicks. It is frustrating

yeah, people have such simplistic, black-and-white views of these characters that i just hrhrhhjfgg it gets me so frustrated. like people just collectively decided that morgott is Good™ and therefore only has good qualities and can do no wrong and has never done any wrong, while mohg is Bad™ and therefore only has bad qualities and is completely incapable of anything good. meanwhile morgott hates his own omen-ness so much that he's wasting his life to uphold an oppressive religious order that hates him and would rather see him dead and that has done nothing but mistreat both him and his brother from their births, and people think that's noble and good?? he's not doing "the right thing" any more than mohg is, he's not some based gigachad, nor is he a poor uwu baby, he's a pathetic, traumatized, self-hating old man. and personally that's what i like about him, that's what makes him interesting! so yes, i completely agree, these "morgott = 100% good, mohg = 100% bad" interpretations are as much a disservice to morgott as to mohg.

(also, people automatically think that mohg is the one who is to blame for his and morgott's probably bad relationship, when morgott's hatred of omens is so bad that it probably affected how he treated mohg as well? and that mohg is probably the one who left morgott and the golden order and he's bad and traitorous for that, when he was never under any obligation to defend the order that mistreated him so badly in the first place?)

(and also also, that people are unwilling to think of any other resolution to the mohg problem besides his death. despite all the compassion and understanding that morgott gets because of his trauma, none of that is afforded to mohg - in fact, in mohg's case his trauma is clearly seen as just an excuse and not the actual reason for why he is the way he is and does the things he does, no, that's just because he was born Teh Evilz - and the only thing to be done is to put him down. he can't be helped, he can't be healed, he can't be given a second chance, no, he just needs to be killed)

[santoschristos]

Cosmic Paradox

Before the universe came into being, there was only the unified field of pure potentiality (the Source) that had existed in the undivided state of eternal bliss and wholeness. Infinite awareness is non-conceptual awareness without differentiation or reference points; it knows itself completely and fully within itself.

In this non-localized field of oneness it has not been defined yet. There was no such thing as growth, individuated experiences or distinctions (no 1s and 0s, up and down, gain and loss, before and after, space and time, I and other, male and female, left brain and right brain, pleasure and pain, white and black, growth and entropy, and so forth). Formlessness (nothingness) is not an experience; it is prior to birth and death, division and form. Duality is the construct of consciousness that gives life meaning, something to work and strive for (a sense of purpose).

It is through the dichotomy of division: a perceived thought splitting into two or more thought-forms that the uniqueness of all life occurs (both need to exist). Without this subject and object split being drawn forth from it’s own potential energies, there can be no contrasting experiences (the illusion of space-time, limitation and separation).

Life is a cosmic paradox; it uses a part of itself to understand itself. The one, universal intelligence desiring to know and experience itself through creation (a giant, self-learning hologram) by the process of fragmentation. The godly principle needs a bit of struggle to give each individual aspect of itself the means of being challenged in some way for the sense of purpose and expansion. The excitement to create and participate in its imagined playhouse of unfolding, endless possibilities and clever arrangements of complex thought-patterns (through the vehicles of limited perceptions and points of view) is what keeps creation going.

L-etting

I-nfinite

F-orms

E-xpress

--Anon I mus (Spiritually Anonymous)

Cosmic Paradox--Mahaboka/Myself

[indefinitelyimmeasurable]

Finally figured each of the Devine Warriors births for my rewrite!

Irene

Irene is the Earth itself, the first and last thing to exist before Death.

So she's always been, but her physical manifestation emerged from the core of the planet.

The place she emerged from is Starlight. It's why it's a circle :)

Also, pre-human form, she looked like something akin to a biblically accurate angel.

Shad

I'm going to rename him, but I don't know what his new name is gonna be yet.

Shad is both Death and Life, he is the dichotomy between impermanence and eternity.

He, like Irene has always existed.

His domain is the afterlife, all of them. (The Nether, that weird one at the end of s6 of my street)

His physical form was a gift from Irene, so they match in a way.

The rest of the Divine aren't primordial.

Menphia

She was born a god.

She is fury and justice and purity by fire.

She is the third oldest of the Divine and was born a few days after Irene's emergence due to the volcanic activity she caused.

So she was born in a volcano!

She is also the third closest to mortals after Irene and Esmund. She is the indomitable human spirit.

Enki

He is an Eldrich Beast, born from the planet's empty core after Irene emerged.

He was born bare. No identity, no knowledge, no awareness.

He is one of the most human-like Divine, characterised by his greed and thirst for knowledge.

His more human form (which isn't really all that human) is because he can shapeshift, though he always has that uncanny quality.

Kul'Zak

Kul'Zak is first and foremost a traveler, a nomad.

How he was born doesn't really matter.

He wasn't born in this world and he has explored many, many other worlds.

This wasn't the first and won't be the last world he explores.

Esmund

He was born a human and is the youngest Divine Warrior.

He ascended to "godhood" through sheer force of will to protect his people as the first lord of O'Khasis.

He still had a mortal body, though his mind did ascend.

His Divine form was also created by Irene, which is why he's so loyal to her, even if it might be idealisation that's driving his loyalty.

[namandabu]

Dharma Listening

One of the most important lessons I have learned from my experience of the Jodo Shinshu tradition is how to listen to the Dharma. I am utterly incapable of doing it properly, however. Still, when I have gleaned insight from it, it is because I could, for even a moment, truly hear what the words of the Dharma are saying.

When we read books, we are not just reading words off a page. We are conceptualizing the meanings of those words in their context on the page through our own lens. We never just read a book. We derive meaning from it by bringing our own biases to the reading.

This isn't always a bad thing. In fact, many creative authors rely on this to subvert the reader, creating an amazing story by tricking us into believing one meaning while communicating another. Authors also grapple with this problem of bringing our biases, and they become skilled at writing according to their audiences in order to facilitate a change of mind in the reader. Such twists and turns are what make reading, as well as other forms of media, fun and intellectually stimulating.

Authors who teach the Dharma must grapple with the same tendencies. And it is often difficult for new readers (like myself) to fully internalize what the author is saying because we either don't understand or don't *want* to understand what they are saying. There have been many times when I read a piece about Buddhism and simply ignored or discarded a line that doesn't suit my sensibilities. An example from Rennyo: "The mind/that even once/relies on Amida: that mind/is in accord/with the true Dharma."

This verse is from Rennyo Shonin's letters (Letter 4, Fascicle 4). It is truly a mind-boggling statement. The idea that such high attainment (being in accord with the true Dharma) is so easy (relying on Amida for a single moment) is hard to believe on its own. Yet it is at the core of Jodo Shinshu: With the one thought-moment of reliance, we are immediately saved by Amida from birth and death and are certain to be reborn in the Pure Land. So why is it so hard to believe?

When I read that line initially, I thought of...laziness. I thought of how such a view is lazy. Surely, this is a teaching for people who do not want to put in the work necessary for enlightenment, I thought to myself. And when I read it now, those thoughts still come up! However, they are also accompanied by a small joy that I have not experienced before. Even though my mind tries to scream and cry to drown the words out, I still "hear" them.

These thoughts come from a mindset that I brought to the text when reading it. In my life, people who don't want to work have been called lazy time and time again. I myself have done this, and I have also been called lazy myself. Growing up, this dichotomy of "lazy" versus "determined" was drilled into me from the cultural norm known as the "protestant work ethic." This is the attachment of value to hard work, especially concerning one's job. American folklore is filled with examples of this, from John Henry and Paul Bunyan to the myth of the self-made millionaire or billionaire in the modern day. But this is antithetical to what Rennyo is saying here, as well as other Jodo Shinshu writers going all the way back to Shinran.

Hearing these lines now, I must confess that I still struggle with this conflicting set of views. But I know that they are true. After all, the goal of a Buddha is to make others like themself: free from attachment and affliction and able to act with perfect wisdom and compassion. The best way to do that is to make a path that is so easy that anyone, regardless of capacity, could complete it. Hence, Amida realized the name and forged his vows to create this easy path.

In my mind, I'm immediately skeptical of shortcuts. And while the Jodo Shinshu path is still difficult in some ways, it is certainly easier. But here, the Buddha is saying, "Come on! I made this shortcut for you! Trust me, and you'll reach the other shore!" And I have to blame only myself and my preconceived biases for being hesitant.

Listening to the Dharma as someone new to Buddhism requires us to put aside our own views as best we can and open our minds to a new way of thinking about the world. Even if we disagree with what it is saying, we will only get the message if we can listen with an open mind. If we project our ideas onto the Dharma, we will just be reading a copy of our own thoughts. It is difficult, however, to put one's ideas aside and listen to something new with an open mind. After all, if detaching from our erroneous views were easy, then there would be no need for the many paths of Buddhism. Therefore, We should be thankful for authors who speak on the Dharma in ways that are designed to bring us to a new mode of thought from our current condition or in a way that is so plain and direct that misinterpretation becomes nearly impossible. I have found that many Jodo Shinshu figures, like Rennyo, Yuien-bo, and Shinran, fall within the latter category. As a result of reading them repeatedly, the walls of my own views are broken down by their straightforward words, which are easy to understand and digest. I cannot help but come to understand them, even when I am at the same time entrenched in my own views. This example is just one concept in Jodo Shinshu that is difficult to internalize, but I am happy to say that, little by little, I'm starting to get it.

[jonnywaistcoat]

On this most Star Wars of days, I feel compelled to disgorge my Jedi Thoughts, which have been building inside of me for a couple of years now, ever since I rewatched the whole series.

Now, all this is, I believe, explicitly anti-canonical. From what I understand, the history of the Jedi is pretty thoroughly explored and explained in various bits of current canon, and none of it looks like this, but this is my an extrapolation based on back-engineering what is presented in the core films, which I find very compelling. So:

THE FORCE: First up, my idea of the force. I personally see it as a flow of energy, constantly in motion. A river made up from billions interconnected currents of change and destiny. This flow is about both life and death, pain and joy, and too much of one without the other will cause the flow to stagnate. It has no actual moral core, and resists both the shackles of an oppressive dystopia, but also the crystalline stillness of a utopia. It is strongest in places like Endor or Tatooine, where life is hard and somewhat lawless, and is, in many ways, an anarchistic force that resists rigid order.

LIGHT SIDE/DARK SIDE: I see the light/dark side dichotomy as one that rests on how one uses the force. The light side is about moving with the force, following and channelling its flow, while the dark side is about harnessing it and making the force bend to your will. While there is technically nothing inherently evil about the dark side, violently making the very essence of life bend to your will is addictive, and obviously makes you far more comfortable with doing similar things to people. The light side is also more subtle, as in my interpretation of the Jedi mind trick, for instance, it is about guiding the force in someone towards a conclusion that they were already considering. The force choke, however, is always going to be dark side (even though it's actually no more harmful than chopping someone with a lightsaber) because the force is never naturally going to harm someone directly, so you are always wrenching it into a shape you want it.

EARLY JEDI: So, I don't see the force as having a conscious will, but it has a shape and a direction, and part of that is creating people to regulate itself. To deal with blockages or stagnation, and keep the force flowing. Like a massive magic pipe system instinctively birthing its own plumbers. This is what the early Jedi were. They almost certainly had basically no formal idea of their purpose, but would be guided by visions and the flow of the force, trusting that their path would lead them where they needed to be and surrendering themselves to it. I imagine a proto-Jedi as a vagabond figure of both hope and terror. If your planet is under a brutal fascist regime, one might turn up and fight their leader to the death, but a continent might burn in the process and they would do nothing to help rebuild in the ensuing chaos that followed. The flow of the Force, of life and death, was restored, and they were drifting onwards.

ATTACHMENTS: Now, a key part of fully surrendering yourself to the Force as the early Jedi would do is accepting death, including your own and that of those you care for. When the force moves towards your end you can have no hesitation in accepting it. Because of this, early Jedi avoided attachments as a natural extension of their actions and philosophy. A leaf cannot blow in the wind if it is still attached to the branch. Unfortunately in the later, more formal, Jedi order, this became codified into a forceable rejection of any feelings at all, as well as a contradiction, since you were meant to be part of the galactic community as (let’s be real) space cops, but also have no connection to it.

PADAWANS: One of the things about the Jedi order of the Republic that strikes me as a real holdover from the old ways is the padawan system. The one-on-one apprenticeship doesn't make much sense with the centralised temple and training school, but it makes absolute sense as part of the drifter Jedi way. You blow with the force, and when it guides a force-sensitive youth in your path, you take them with you. They leave their family (likely dead because the force be like that) and travel with you, learning the ways of a Jedi and eventually setting out on their own. Maybe when you die. And the cycle continues.

THE JEDI ORDER: Now, if you've been following my logic thus far, you can probably immediately see the original sin of the Jedi order that has an official role within the Galactic Republic. Not only do they ally themselves with a bureaucratic mega-government, but they begin to calcify and become static and stagnant. By the time of the prequels, they are actively gathering all the force-sensitive children in the galaxy to them as a matter of course. Now the rich, flowing tapestry of the force is all being deliberately directed through a single temple on Coruscant. The Jedi, who once worked to maintain the flow of the force and destroy what blocked it, have now become the biggest blockage there has ever been. And eventually the force does the only thing it can - it destroys them.

QUI-GON JINN: To my mind, Qui-Gon Jinn is the one Jedi from the Republic Era that is closest to the old ways. In fact, given that the council sees him as something of a radical, we might extrapolate he is one of the last proponents of it as a proper school of thought within the order. Watch how he interacts with people on Tatooine - he rarely pushes anything, always gently pressing to find out what direction the force wants him to go (I can't buy the hyperdrive? Ok, so what instead? Something to do with the boy? A pod race? Alright then.) Dude is constantly "Yes, and"ing the eternal flow of life energy. I guess my point is that he, like all the old Jedi, is basically an RPG PROTAGONIST!

Boom! That's my secret thesis! That the old Jedi operated like a fucking Fallout PC: constantly exploring dialogue trees and their locations, looking for the critical path the force (writer) has laid out for them. The force is, conveniently, also the flow of narrative.

Anyway, those are my thoughts on the force and the old Jedi. Thanks for reading this whole damn essay. I just really needed to get them out of my head.

BONUS THOUGHTS - DJ: Hey, remember Benicio Del Toro's character in The Last Jedi? I bet you didn't know his name was actually "DJ". Anyway, he is to my mind the closest we ever see to what an old Jedi might have looked like, which makes absolute sense in the Empire, where a powerful force sensitive might have grown up with no training or knowledge of what they were - just an instinctive sense of things working out when they "go with the flow". He wanders breezily through the world, always turning up at just the right time, holding no allegiance to anything or anyone, betraying his new friends when it seemed necessary in such a way that it (accidentally) leads to the resolution of several major storylines.

"They blow you up today, you blow them up tomorrow." (Finn) "You're wrong." "Maybe."

To me, this is such astounding force energy. I firmly believe DJ to be the most powerful Jedi that ever wasn't.

[gleamingtempest]

Teruko Tawaki & Charles Cuevas - Narrative Foil Trait Compilation #2

How does this series work?

This is my narrative foil disection series for Danganronpa Despair Time based on my post Danganronpa: Depsair Time foils theory. The presented theory is that the CH1 recap shows off all narrative foils in DR:DT based on how the pairings in said recap video are paired. This series will go through all 8(?) of these foil pairings and disect the dichotomy present in them in a more in depth manner. I will do this primarily by comparing and contrasting Backstory, Motive, Flaws & Character Arc. (Credit to Barbieronpa for that compliation of concepts.) All of these posts will contain heavy spoilers and will be updated as the series goes on and more information on the characters is presented. If you are interested in the those updates please return to each of these posts after the end of an episode batch. This will only look at presented content within the series;outside of the foil theory itself it will not take into account theories & speculation.

Backstory

Teruko: -> Abandoned by family at birth (Orphan) -> Has an older brother who she can't remember the face of -> Older brother was kind -> Has had terrible luck for her whole life. Tragedy follows her everywhere. Teruko considers this fate. -> Teruko at some point made a connection with a girl who she can't remember the name of - Mai Akasaki. -> Has seen a dead body. -> Has a giant scar on back from some unknown incident. Charles: -> Grew up with parents. Quiet wealthy. (Can barely function without service.) -> Has an older brother who he forgot completely due to some traumatic event. Nothing is known about him. (In series.) -> Has some trauma relating to blood he did not know about until recently. -> Has a bad scar on right arm from a dog attack. Compare/Contrast: -> Both have an older brother which was in some way signficant to them that they struggle to remember for some reason. -> Teruko has suffered her whole life due to poverty while Charles has always been very well off and taken care of.

Personality

Teruko: -> Teruko is pragmatic and task-oriented. -> Teruko is not actively malicious -> Teruko often resigns herself to fate without fighting back. -> Teruko prefers to do things on her own. Charles: -> Charles is pragmatic and task-oriented. -> Charles is actively bitter towards others when he's frustrated with something. -> Charles refuses to view anything through any lens other than 'logic'. -> Charles prefers to do things on his own.

Motive

Teruko: -> Teruko is motivated by her lifelong span of terrible luck which has never stopped plaguing her. -> Uncountable incidents of traumatic abuse, bodily harm and betrayal are what her past is filled with. -> Teruko believes that it is her fate to always have bad luck and that no matter how hard she tries she can't escape the cycle. Charles: -> Charles has had a life of being pitied by others which has resulted in him disliking the feeling of being pampered or looked down upon. -> Charles did not know until very recently that the reason he was being pitied was due to the traumatic death of his older brother, Eliiot Cuevas. -> Charles believes that 'fate' and 'bad' luck are excuses to stop trying. -> Charles seems to be motivated by his desire to do things on his own or to not be pitied;this means that he view everything through a practical or literal lens. Compare/Contrast: -> Teruko has had to fend for herself without the help of others while Teruko has always been over-tended to by others. -> Teruko passively accepts that her fate is to have bad-luck while Charles actively fights against things he doesn't like through practical means.

Flaws

Teruko: -> Teruko pushes others away before they can get close because she is afraid to be betrayed. -> Teruko passively accepts that things will be the way they are without working to change her perspective or the reality of her situation. -> Teruko dismisses her own feelings and personhood in favor of pragmatism because she believes it is the most efficient way for her to avoid heartbreak. Charles: -> Charles resents and looks down upon others because he believes they are trying to pity him. -> Charles is at times actively cruel and apathetic towards the lives of others. -> Charles is dismissive of emotions and feelings because he predicates logic as more signficant. Compare/Contrast: -> Both have trouble connecting with others and have abrasive tendecies that push them away. -> Both rely too heavily on logic while dismissing the human emotion part of the equation.

Narrative Arc

Teruko: -> Teruko was pushed to open to others by Xander in spite of being hesitant. -> Teruko grew to enjoy friendship and connecting with her other classmates after being pushed further by Whit and Eden to open up. -> Teruko was betrayed by Xander, discared by most of her other classmates and betrayed again by Min;She now believes that the only way for her to avoid heartbreak in the future is to completely isolate herself and turn away from others. Charles: -> Charles was pushed away from others after being teased by Whit for things that were not in her control. -> Charles was re-traumatized by Xander's murder plan which forced him to rely on Whit for support in the trial. -> After being shown earnest kindness from Whit Charles began to realize that he needed to trust others to some degree in order to survive;'It's the practical thing to do'. Compare/Contrast: -> Both were pushed to open up by another and pushed to close themselves off by another, though in opposite orders. -> Their trajectory came primarily as a result of them re-experiencing trauma they had been trying to move past. -> Currently one is working to trust others while the other is actively working to push them away.

[sophie-st-2002]

Roundtable 3: All That Jazz (1979) directed by Bob Fosse

Question 1: What are the social aspects within the film’s narrative that align with the film’s songs?

The narrative of “All That Jazz” explores the dark side of entertainment. In the opening number, “On Broadway”, the audience is introduced to the allure of show business while being shown the grueling audition process.

The upbeat R&B song, performed by George Benson and popularized by The Drifters in 1963, complements the energized dancers and fast moving tryout. The lyrics of the song express longing and escapism, with the narrator dreaming of making it big on Broadway. However, beneath the glittering lights and promising opportunities lies a darker reality. The director, Joe Gideon, uses his artistic prowess and influence over the production to lead casting decisions based on who he wants to sleep with rather than talent.

He begins a sexual relationship with one of the dancers he chooses from the sequence, Veronica, and in a future scene he essentially breaks her down to tears in order to get the performance he wants out of her. To bring it back to “On Broadway”, the tension between the glamorous facade and the seedy underbelly of show business reflects another tension in the film which is a broader dichotomy in the entertainment world, where personal ambition often beats out artistic and personal integrity.

The scene between Veronica and Joe.

Another social aspect explored within the film’s narrative through song is the cyclical nature of life and art in “Everything Old is New Again”. The song was originally by Peter Allen in his 1974 album “Continental American”. As Joe grapples with his morality and attempts to reinvent himself creatively, the song serves as an important reminder of the cycle of birth, death, and rebirth, suggesting that trends and fashions often repeat over time. During the 1970s a large number of traditional values were being challenged and individuals sought to redefine themselves in the ever-changing and evolving world. Joe is able to find comfort and define himself with the comfort of the cyclical nature of art and life.

Question 2: How do the historiographies of previously recorded songs inform audience relationships with the musical’s narrative and performers?

The use of previously recorded songs in “All That Jazz” seeks to add layers of meaning to a specific audience familiar with their original contexts, an audience of Broadway and the style of bygone eras. For example, “Some of These Days”, a song associated with vaudeville performer Sophie Tucker, is used in a scene where Joe faces his mortality. Audiences familiar with Tucker’s career may interpret the song as a nod to the past, invoking a sense of nostalgia and paying homage to the rich history of stage productions and entertainment that predate Joe Gideon’s era which is inspired by Bob Fosse’s life.

Sophie Tucker

Similarly, “Bye Bye Love” originally by The Everly Brothers is used in a scene where Joe grapples with the dissolution of his relationships. The lyrics of the song become more significant in this context, reflecting Joe’s sense of loss and longing.

Question 3: What musical genre/style drives the film’s score, and how does the genre/style (re)define the film as a musical?

The music of “All That Jazz” encompasses a wide range of musical genres and styles including, jazz, pop, classic R&B, and traditional Broadway music. The eclectic mix reflect the diverse taste and influences of its director, Bob Fosse. By mixing the different genres, the film defies categorization and helps to redefine the musical genre. 

Bob Fosse in a situation similar to one we see Joe in many times during the film.

Unlike some jukebox musicals which adhere to a singular style or formula the film embraces experimentation and innovation. The film uses non-linear storytelling, surreal imagery, and unconventional musical numbers to challenge audience expectations. It doesn't feel like what one might think of as a musical, it feels more like a prolonged fever dream of a performance.

The Angel of Death that Joe converses with and performs for throughout the film in surreal scenes.

[lilith-91]

Many people wonder whether Ahsoka ever told Rex what happened to Anakin...

Probably no.

I hope he never found out, as I feel there have to be some people from Anakin's life that continue to believe he was killed in the purge, and the secret of Vader's identity a bit less known. At least until after the events of Bloodline novel. It's very impactful to see when people learn the truth (Obi-Wan, Luke, Leia, Ahsoka) but I think its just as interesting a concept for people like Rex to talk about the great Jedi without that taint. It contributes to the dichotomy of Anakin/Vader.

We as the audience know Anakin's destiny and therefore hold an innate bias towards the character and his motives but Rex... Rex only know the hero Anakin was and not the villian he became. From the perspective of a born soldier intimate with warfare and death from before birth Anakin was truly an avatar of justice and peace... To Rex and others Anakin was an hero, the greatest Jedi of the Republic and a friend.

The old man has been through a lot and sometimes it's best to just let happy memories stay happy.

Still, i'm 100% sure that Rex would have still loved Anakin like Obi Wan and Ahsoka :) He will never hate him.

[religion-is-a-mental-illness]

By: Robert F. Graboyes

Published: Jan 28, 2024

On this, the 79th anniversary of the liberation of Auschwitz, the Holocaust Remembrance industry stands as a colossal failure. Holocaust Remembrance Day, it turns out, successfully transfixed eyes on the rear-view mirror and diverted attention from the dangers 10 feet in front of us. And, truth be told, the rear-view mirror is growing a bit foggy, as well. Less than a century ago, the leading intellectuals of Germany—the most highly educated nation on earth—initiated, participated in, or acquiesced to mass murder on a previously unimaginable scale. And only weeks ago, intellectuals in America, Europe, and elsewhere waxed lyrical over the rape, torture, mutilation, murder, beheading, and kidnapping of innocent Jews. 

An important parallel underlies both historical episodes. Both Hitler and Hamas were the cancerous outgrowths of respectable and sometimes altruistic intellectual movements that saw individuals as nothing more than avatars of demographic groups, defined by immutable characteristics. At my own Substack, Bastiat’s Window, I’ve written of this in “The Briar and the Rose,” “Intellectual Tyrants Beget True Believers,” and “Zola, Weiss, and J'Accuse...! 2023.”

A century ago, eugenics provided the unquestioned and unquestionable foundation for academic writing and public policy. Eugenics preached a world of predestination, where an individual’s worth was irrevocably determined at birth by race, religion, gender, sexuality, disability, economic status, and family history. No one could escape his or her essentialist destiny by dint of action, accomplishment, or character. Eugenics began as parlor conversation among well-born, well-educated, often well-meaning British academics. Then, it jumped the Atlantic and gave rise to a sexual sterilization machine in America—enabled by a debauched Supreme Court. Finally, it leaped back to Europe, where it metastasized into the Holocaust. 

In our time, the equivalent academic tendency is one that travels under many names—diversity, equity, and inclusion (DEI); critical race theory (CRT); antiracism; white fragility; intersectionality; social justice; anticolonialism; social and emotional learning; progressivism; safetyism; critical social justice; identity Marxism; and (primarily to its denigrators) “wokeness.” The central connective tenet in all of this is something called “equity”—which does not in any way resemble any traditional definition of the word. 

A note on nomenclature: “equitism”

Writers like Thomas Klingenstein on the right, Freddie DeBoer on the left, and Bari Weiss in the center decry the lack of a consistent name for this intellectual and activist movement. I use the term “equitism” here and suggest it to others. Unlike “equity,” “equitism” offers no ambiguity of meaning. Unlike, say “the equity agenda,” “equitism” is a single word. Advocates of this philosophy often present “equity” as a substitute for “equality,” so “equitism” is parallel to “egalitarianism.” Unlike “woke,” “equitism” is not an insult or pejorative, and the web shows that a few advocates have used the term to describe themselves. I’ll use the term below for simplicity and clarity. 

Equitism as echo of eugenics

Like eugenics a century earlier, equitism presumes that demography is destiny, with some demographic groups imperiled by the immutable malignities of other groups. This often manifests itself as a Manichaean “oppressor/oppressed” dichotomy across demographic categories. Intersectionality and other frameworks array groups along a spectrum between these polar opposites. In its most extreme manifestation, this weltanschauung justifies horrific punishment of perceived “oppressors.” Hence, the pro-Hamas marchers proclaiming “by any means necessary”—which presumably includes baking babies to death in ovens, tying parents to children and immolating them together, raping young girls till their pelvises shatter, beheading children in front of their parents, and visiting all manner of depravities upon elderly Holocaust survivors—as long as they are Israelis and Israelis are classified as oppressors.

Clearly, those Western professors celebrating Hamas have not absorbed whatever lessons that Holocaust Museums were designed to impart. To name one category of protestors, LGBTQ+ Jews marching for Hamas seem not to understand the message of Martin Niemöller. The most enthusiastic practitioners of Holocaust Remembrance, unfortunately, seem to be the members of Hamas, who learned the lessons of those years all too well. It should noted that David Patterson’s 2022 scholarly work, Judaism, Antisemitism, and Holocaust: Making the Connections, documents Hamas’s literal organizational and philosophical links to Hitler’s Nazis. 

The central feature of both the Holocaust and of Hamas’s slaughter is that once one abandons the sanctity of individuals and considers only the presumed virtues and vices of demographic groups, one is free to attack those deemed unvirtuous in any way. 

Furthermore, equitism, like eugenics, can anesthetize those who do not share the murderous intentions of the Nazis or Hamas. The United States Holocaust Memorial Museum has been open for 31 years, but its mission clearly failed to educate the Ivy League presidents who hemmed and hawed and equivocated over questions of whether calls for genocide against Jews qualified as protected speech on the same campuses where subjectively discerned microaggressions or misuse of preferred pronouns are grounds for ostracism and punishment. 

Who wants to contradict something called “social justice” or “diversity” or “equity?” The anesthetic effect seems to have impacted even the Holocaust museums themselves. At Commentary magazine, Seth Mandel asked, “Why Are Holocaust Museums Cowering in Silence?” 

Corrosion begins in microscopic proportions

The most important lesson for Holocaust Remembrance comes from Dr. Leo Alexander’s simple, chilling statement that “corrosion begins in microscopic proportions.” Alexander, an American psychiatrist, neurologist, educator, and author, of Austrian-Jewish origin, was a key medical advisor during the Nuremberg Trials. He wrote part of the Nuremberg Code, which provides legal and ethical principles for scientific experiment on humans, and discovered that German doctors didn’t fail to stop the Nazis’ program of genocide and barbaric medical experimentation. Rather, he discovered they didn’t do more to stop the horrors because they were instrumental in initiating them. In a 2018 article on this subject, I argued that:

German doctors enthusiastically volunteered for [service] to, and leadership within, the Third Reich. Deputy Fuhrer Rudolf Hess declared Nazism ‘nothing but applied biology,’ and many German doctors apparently agreed.” Collectively, they decided that medicine’s primary purpose was to build “an economically productive populace,” a concept that “opened the floodgates for atrocities.” 

By contrast, Alexander found that Dutch physicians following the Nazi conquest of the Netherlands, unanimously rejected this assumption and viewed their role as healing and comforting the sick and dying. Even when threatened with punishment and death, “humility assured that no Dutch doctors participated in the Holocaust.

German doctors, besotted with eugenics, gladly segmented society by ethnicity, by disabilities, by sexuality, and so forth. And once they began thinking of groups (e.g., productive versus nonproductive races), rather than of individuals, then they were free to commit atrocities in good conscience—or at least to acquiesce in the atrocities committed by others. The same dynamic plays out today on the campuses of America or the streets of London and Paris and Sydney.  

Alexander’s work is described in James A. Maccaro’s brief 1997 article “From Small Beginnings: The Road to Genocide.” Alexander’s full paper is his 1948 New England Journal of Medicine report on “Medical Science Under Dictatorship.” A century ago, the oxidants that began society’s corrosion lay in eugenics. Today, the oxidants lie in equitism. 

In the early 20th century, eugenics was almost universally accepted by academicians, politicians, doctors, the general public, and celebrities. Opposing eugenics put one’s career and friendships in peril. One of the few public intellectuals to oppose this madness was the British writer G. K. Chesterton, author of Eugenics and Other Evils (1922). Chesterton understood better than anyone that evil comes most often not from evil people, but rather from good people with unmoored ethics. In 1908, he wrote:

The modern world is not evil; in some ways the modern world is far too good. It is full of wild and wasted virtues. When a religious scheme is shattered (as Christianity was shattered at the Reformation), it is not merely the vices that are let loose. The vices are, indeed, let loose, and they wander and do damage. But the virtues are let loose also; and the virtues wander more wildly, and the virtues do more terrible damage. The modern world is full of the old Christian virtues gone mad. The virtues have gone mad because they have been isolated from each other and are wandering alone. Thus some scientists care for truth; and their truth is pitiless. Thus some humanitarians only care for pity; and their pity (I am sorry to say) is often untruthful.

Holocaust Remembrance Day is a worthy project, but not if it is solely backward-looking. Looking for Nazis in 2024 is a futile endeavor. Scanning the horizon in front of us for those with parallel intent is far more urgent and challenging. 

As goes the aphorism, “History doesn’t repeat itself, but it rhymes.”

[acorpsecalledcorva]

I just think if we're going to headcanon deities as being plural we can use much more interesting examples. And I don't mean the myriad of three face Goddesses out there. I think my favourite of these is Persephone, goddess of the underworld.

In the story we all know and love, Persephone, daughter of Demeter, is minding her own damn business frolicking in a field when Hades, god of the underworld kidnaps her and drags her down to the land of the dead where he tricks her into eating pomegranate seeds and forces her to be his bride. Demeter, upset at the loss of her daughter drops the ball on the whole bountiful harvest growing the grain thing she does and a great famine falls on the earth. In a deal struck with the higher gods to save the earth, Hades agrees that Persephone may return to the upper levels so long as she spends at least 1/3 of the year down in the underground as his bride. It is due to this deal that Persephone is viewed as the goddess of Spring as it is her return to the higher planes that alleviates Demeter's grief and allows the grain to grow once more.

Except..Persephone as Queen of the underworld predates any written appearance of Hades. Before there was he, there was she. At the time called Melaina, a dark goddess of night, death, and sex. At one point she had the body of a horse, literally a night mare, but also an aspect of Aphrodite (being the goddess of the kind of love that occurs at night). So how, if Persephone came before Hades, did Hades kidnap Persephone, and where did Hades come from anyway?

In Existential Kink by Caroline Elliott, it's suggested that this whole story was engineered by Persephone herself. Having grown bored of her unfaltering status in the pantheon, she sells a more complete experience of life and existence. To this end, she takes all of her darkness from within her and splits her essence into Hades and Demeter, creating a new dichotomy of life and death. She gives birth to herself through Demeter, as a goddess called Kore, and gets herself kidnapped (and other things I'm sure) by Hades as the embodiment of her own darkness.

In this act she is able to simultaneously experience canal desire for herself in the way that death craves to take the living, she gets to experience the loss of a loved one through Demeter, granting perspective and wider understanding of the consequences of her role as goddess of death, truly knowing the full weight, and she also got to have the experience the trauma of birth and death (for how else can you describe being taken from the land of the living to the land of the dead). Through this predetermined scenario Persephone has given herself the most complete experience of life available to her and can move on having fully participated in all the world has to offer with a new enlightened empathy for those she has dominion over.

Looking at the story from this angle, Persephone was not tricked into eating the pomegranate seeds, but did so willingly to seal the deal on her new station in life as one facet of life, death, but most importantly rebirth. Demeter, Hades, and Kore/Persephone are all Melaina and Melaina is the three of them. Together, they are more than the sum of their parts and much more than they ever could be as one and a level of self love and appreciation is achieved that one could not have for themselves