#why are people incapable of engaging in a fun and constructive way??????

[tozettastone]

I'm so tired of how much of the tumblr experience is just people I don't know reblogging my happy little fandom posts with "well, actually—" and sometimes I do just snap and actually respond to them. This isn't constructive but, your honour, I'm being provoked.

Sometimes they even make interesting points, and I still have to block them because they think this is a constructive way to talk to strangers about their fanfic ideas.

But half the time, they're not even right. They're confidently wrong and they're correcting me on a post about what would make a fun fanfic.

Listen. I am presenting a fic idea. It is the realm of make believe. I am playing a happy little game of pretend. That's why I introduce these posts with "there should be a fic where," or "the world needs more fics where..." I am signifying to you, my peers in this social activity, that this is a creative exercise and we are playing.

If you join in by telling me I am playing wrong, and actually the idea I presented is bad, you are being rude. Go make your own post with your own better ideas.

You engage constructively with posts like this by saying "yes, and," rather than "well, actually."

[the-gateway-to-madness]

So anyway Ducktales 2017 is super fun for me because I'm literally exactly like Louie except I have a deep-rooted fear of becoming him because I live in reality and not a mansion-

There's satisfaction for him in finding loopholes, putting together the pieces in various situations, and being the strategist, but at the same time he can't think too much about the future or he'll stress out (given the fact the creators of the show confirmed Louie is like this because he grew up poor and took on a lot of that pressure emotionally, I assume that's part of why he doesn't plan for his future, but anyway-).

For him, that means coming up with strategies and tactics in the moment, on adventures. For me, that means finding ways to carefully integrate fictional characters and OCs into established worlds, analyzing things and picking them apart. Either way, we're not planning ahead all that far, both trying to escape reality.

And he's smart. Like, REALLY smart. But he's insecure about it because he's not book-smart in a family that really values book-smart. His family never really makes him feel bad for not being their kind of smart, just for the actions that stem as a result of it (his schemes, for example). You can tell they don't understand how he thinks, except Della (i, too, have a parent who gets me and a parent who does Not), and he has a lot of emotionally vulnerable moments with her because of that.

He only lets down his guard and genuinely connects with people he really feels get him, even though he's very eloquent and perfectly capable of casual connections with almost anyone. Same. I'm deeply, almost self-damagingly empathetic- my emotional attachments are a point of great vulnerability for me. I've chosen to embrace that vulnerability and the closeness and care it can bring me, but that's not a very natural choice for Louie like it is for me.

A lot of society only really seems to value "math-smarts", like what Huey has- more rigid intelligence, strong memorization of facts and figures, and being adept with numbers if you're lucky. But Louie has "language-smarts". Flexible, adaptable to different situations, but wow you don't come off as smart most of the time when you're this kind of smart. I was reading at a 12th grade level in 3rd grade- I know for a fact I grasp the English language at an abnormal level. But that intelligence really isn't applicable in a lot of situations, and I 100% recognize the form of lacking-self-esteem that comes with it- the form Louie shows consistently in season 2. For him, his linguistic, flexible, imaginative intelligence comes out as strategizing, lying, and scheming. For me, it comes out as quick, easy storytelling/writing with friends.

We share an ability to see patterns others don't while missing the patterns others do see.

Our kind of intelligence comes with this- very basic level of practicality. I hate sports because they seem unnecessary, over-hyped. I don't want to do a lot of very societally normal things because they seem convoluted and not necessary for happiness. I engage with television and movies because I find the construction of story and characters fascinating.

It all makes me feel like I'm lazy or can't ever do enough because I just... don't have an interest in a lot of things that people think one should. It's like- there's this level of intrinsic, constant self-awareness and practicality in me, to the point where I feel incapable of engaging with anything that doesn't interest me.

Combine that mentality with the burnout and emotional strain of being under severe financial pressure your entire life and, more specifically, not being able to do anything about it or get out of it- so why try to do anything at all? -, and bam, you get Louie Duck. He's motivated by money because to him money = comfort, and comfort = safety.

I also started consciously knowing what it'd be like and feel like when my childhood ended at something like- age 15 or 16. I was desperate to cling to the freedom, the lack of responsibility, the privilege of a safety net- for years. I see some of that in Louie too.

Oh, and of course Bobby Moynihan sold it. Really just went all in on giving Louie depth and feeling, 10/10 incredible performance-

Point is, it's cool to see someone who thinks like me actually portrayed pretty accurately onscreen. Thanks @suspendersofdisbelief :)

[mr-entj]

What do you think are the most common flaws / logical errors that INFPs fall into that prevents them from achieving things? I'm trying to identify errors in my thinking / priorities / approaches that don't fit the current world & its demands instead of thinking of myself as a failure / intrinsically broken

Thoughts below, applicable to ENFPs, ISFPs, and ESFPs.

The top 4 common flaws and logical errors in xxFPs

1. “Constructive criticism is bad and it’s a personal attack against me.” 

Also known as the “If you dislike what I’ve done, you must dislike me as a person” syndrome. This results in oversensitivity to feedback and taking everything personally. This prevents INFPs from achieving success because it’s difficult to interact with someone who can’t receive constructive criticism and apply it to fix issues. It’s difficult to improve, grow, and mature without being able to study mistakes, analyze shortcomings, and listen to solutions. This kind of thinking also causes INFPs to close up and withdraw for fear of being “attacked” by other people. It causes communication to break down, barriers to be raised, and prevents effective collaboration. 

Key takeaway: What feels good isn’t always good for you and what feels bad isn’t always bad for you. Look at situations, feedback, and people through an objective lens and ask questions like: “Is this true? Is it helpful? Will it make me/my life better?”

2. “Who I am now is who I am forever.” 

Also known as the fixed mindset which is the belief that traits and talents in people are fixed and can’t change. This inhibits growth and blocks success because it causes logical errors in INFPs like this math example. Yes, some people have natural advantages over other people at certain things, but no, it’s not impossible for you to achieve the same level of baseline proficiency with enough hard work. For example, I’m not the best at math but I put hours into practice problems, attended tons of office hours, watched and rewatched weeks of lectures, and became good enough to get admitted into multiple medical schools. I wasn’t born into this world doing multi-variable calculus equations in my diapers-- I had to work very hard at it.

Avoid this logical error because it will discourage you from pursuing things you love but that you’re not automatically good at. It will cause you to feel perpetually inferior to people who are “naturally talented” at the things you want to try. You’ll severely limit your potential by staying in your “safe zone” -- things you’re naturally gifted at -- because you’ll incorrectly think this is all you can do and you’ll be discouraged to try anything new.

Key takeaway: Mastery is not granted at birth, it’s a result of years of practice and repetition. Understand that and apply principles of hard work, discipline, and perseverance to your own life. The results of your honest effort will amaze you and energize you to pursue even bigger goals.

3. “I want to achieve my goals and only do it my way.” 

Also known as the “inflexible goal and inflexible method” syndrome. This prevents INFPs from achieving things because it makes them incapable of compromise to do what’s required to get things done. 

For example, let’s say you want to become a screenwriter but you don’t want to attend a university with a top screenwriting program, you refuse to network with other writers, and you avoid attending/joining writing groups. You just want to do it your way: post your scripts on Tumblr or email random movie studios and try to get discovered that way. It’s not going to work. To become a screenwriter, you need to mimic some of the steps that other screenwriters have taken to forge a successful career. You need to hustle and rub shoulders with people in the industry. If you’re inflexible with your method, you won’t achieve your goal.

Key takeaway: Love the goal more than the steps required to get there. Understand that not every part of your journey will be enjoyable, fun, and comfortable but that it’s worth the struggle if it gets you where you need to go. It’s better to suffer the pain of compromise than the pain of failure.

4. “There are only these options and nothing else.” 

Also known as black and white thinking or lose-lose syndrome. This commonly rears its head in INFPs in a number of inflexible beliefs, examples include:

"I can either make money doing what I hate or be poor doing what I love.”

“I dislike you so everything you say is wrong/invalid/false” or “I like you so everything you say is right/valid/true.”

“The world is screwed up beyond redemption, people are the worst, and nothing anyone can say will change my mind.”

This type of thinking prevents INFPs from achieving success because it shuts their minds to alternative possibilities. It causes them to become cynical, bitter, and withdrawn from the world because they’ve presented themselves with a (false) impossible choice. It saps them of motivation to try because there’s no point if the odds are so “stacked against them.” It becomes a spiral of pessimism where things are increasingly miserable with no hope of getting better.

Key takeaway: Look closely and objectively at the things that upset you, study why they’re upsetting, and look for solutions in the space between. Understand that very few things in life are “all or nothing”-- there is always a gray area, and it’s up to you to find it through exploration, engagement, and good faith effort. Ask people who have figured it out and pick their brains for ideas. Imagine the world in its ideal and perfect form, now compare that to the current reality, and use your creativity and idealism to push the world in the right direction. Find more solutions, not more problems.

[dillydedalus]

january reading

why does january always feel like it’s 3 months long. anyway here’s what i read in january, feat. poison experts with ocd, ants in your brain, old bolsheviks getting purged, and mountweazels. 

city of lies, sam hawke (poison wars #1) this is a perfectly nice fantasy novel about jovan, who serves as essentially a secret guard against poisoning for his city state’s heir and is forced to step up when his uncle (also a secret poison guard) and the ruler are both killed by an unknown poison AND also the city is suddenly under a very creepy siege (are these events related? who knows!) this is all very fine & entertaining & there are some fun ideas, but also... the main character has ocd and SAME HAT SAME HAT. also like the idea of having a very important, secret and potentially fatal job that requires you to painstakingly test everything the ruler/heir is consuming WHILE HAVING OCD is like... such a deliciously sadistic concept. amazing. 3/5

my heart hemmed in, marie ndiaye (translated from french by jordan stump) a strange horror-ish tale in which two married teachers, bastions of upper-middle-class respectability and taste, suddenly find themselves utterly despised by everyone around them, escalating until the husband is seriously injured. through several very unexpected twists, it becomes clear that the couple’s own contempt for anyone not fitting into their world and especially nadia’s hostility and shame about her (implied to be northern african) ancestry is the reason for their pariah status. disturbing, surprising, FUCKED UP IF TRUE (looking back, i no longer really know what i mean by that). 4/5

xenogenesis trilogy (dawn/adulthood rites/imago), octavia e. butler octavia butler is incapable of writing anything uninteresting and while i don’t always completely vibe with her stuff, it’s always fascinating & thought-provoking. this series combines some of her favourite topics (genetic manipulation, alien/human reproduction, what is humanity) into a tale of an alien species, the oankali, saving some human survivors from the apocalypse and beginning a gene-trading project with them, integrating them into their reproductive system and creating mixed/’construct’ generations with traits from both species. and like, to me, this was uncomfortably into the biology = destiny thing & didn’t really question the oankali assertion that humans were genetically doomed to hierarchical behaviour & aggression (& also weirdly straight for a book about an alien species with 3 genders that engages in 5-partner-reproduction with humans), so that angle fell flat for me for the most part, altho i suppose i do agree that embracing change, even change that comes at a cost, is better than clinging to an unsustainable (& potentially destructive) purity. where i think the series is most interesting is in its exploration of consent and in how far consent is possible in extremely one-sided power dynamics (curiously, while the oankali condemn and seem to lack the human drive for hierarchy, they find it very easy to abuse their position of power & violate boundaries & never question the morality of this. in this, the first book, focusing on a human survivor first encountering the oankali and learning of their project, is the most interesting, as lilith as a human most explicitly struggles with her position - would her consent be meaningful? can she even consent when there is a kind of biochemical dependence between humans and their alien mates? the other two books, told from the perspectives of lilith’s constructed/mixed children, continue discussing themes of consent, autonomy and power dynamics, but i found them less interesting the further they moved from human perspectives. on the whole: 2.5/5

love & other thought experiments, sophie ward man, we love a pierre menard reference. anyway. this is a novel in stories, each based (loosely) on a thought experiment, about (loosely) a lesbian couple and their son arthur, illness and grief, parenthood, love, consciousness and perception, alternative universes, and having an ant in your brain. it is thoroughly delightful & clever, but goes for warmth and humanity (or ant-ity) over intellectual games (surprising given that it is all about thought experiments - but while they are a nice structuring device i don’t think they add all that much). i haven’t entirely worked out my feelings about the ending and it’s hard to discuss anyway given the twists and turns this takes, but it's a whole lot of fun. 4/5

a general theory of oblivion, josé eduardo agualusa (tr. from portuguese by daniel hahn) interesting little novel(la) set in angola during and after the struggle for independence, in which a portuguese woman, ludo, with extreme agoraphobia walls herself into her apartment to avoid the violence and chaos (but also just... bc she has agoraphobia) with a involving a bunch of much more active characters and how they are connected to her to various degrees. i didn’t like the sideplot quite as much as ludo’s isolation in her walled-in flat with her dog, catching pigeons on the balcony and writing on the walls. 3/5

cassandra at the wedding, dorothy baker phd student cassandra returns home attend (sabotage) her twin sister judith’s wedding to a young doctor whose name she refuses to remember, believing that her sister secretly wants out. cass is a mess, and as a shift to judith’s perspective reveals, definitely wrong about what judith wants and maybe a little delusional, but also a ridiculously compelling narrator, the brilliant but troubled contrast to judith’s safer conventionality. on the whole, cassandra’s narrative voice is the strongest feature of a book i otherwise found a bit slow & a bit heavy on the quirky family. fav line is when cass, post-character-development, plans to “take a quick look at [her] dumb thesis and see if it might lead to something less smooth and more revolting, or at least satisfying more than the requirements of the University”. 3/5

the office of historical corrections, danielle evans a very solid collection of realist short stories (+ the titular novella), mainly dealing with racism, (black) womanhood, relationships between women, and anticolonial/antiracist historiography. while i thought all the stories were well-done and none stood out as weak or an unnecessary inclusion, there also weren’t any that really stood out to me. 3/5

sonnenfinsternis, arthur koestler (english title: darkness at noon) (audio) you know what’s cool about this book? when i added it to my goodreads tbr in 2012, i would have had to read it in translation as the german original was lost during koestler’s escape from the nazis, but since then, the original has been rediscovered and republished. yet another proof that leaving books on your tbr for ages is a good thing actually. anyway. this is a story about the stalinist purges, told thru old bolshevik rubashov, who, after serving the Party loyally for years & doing his fair share of selling people out for the Party, is arrested for ~oppositional activities. in jail and during his interrogations, rubashov reflects on the course the Party has taken and his own part (and guilt) in that, and the way totalitarianism has eaten up and poisoned even the most commendable ideals the Party once held (and still holds?), the course of history and at what point the end no longer justifies the means. it’s brilliant, rubashov is brilliant and despicable, i’m very happy it was rediscovered. 5/5

heads of the colored people, nafissa thompson-spires another really solid short story collection, also focused on the experiences of black people in america (particularly the black upper-middle class), black womanhood and black relationships, altho with a somewhat more satirical tone than danielle evans’s collection. standouts for me were the story in letters between the mothers of the only black girls at a private school, a story about a family of fruitarians, and a story about a girl who fetishises her disabled boyfriend(s). 3.5/5

pedro páramo, juan rulfo (gernan transl. by dagmar ploetz) mexican classic about a rich and abusive landowner (the titular pedro paramo) and the ghost town he leaves behind - quite literally, as, when his son tries to find his father, the town is full of people, quite ready to talk shit about pedro, but they are all dead. it’s an interesting setting with occasionally vivid writing, but the skips in time and character were kind of confusing and i lost my place a lot. i’d be interested in reading rulfo’s other major work, el llano en llamas. 2.5/5

verse für zeitgenossen, mascha kaléko short collection of the poems kaléko, a jewish german poet, wrote while in exile in the united states in the 30-40s, as well as some poems written after the end of ww2. kaléko’s voice is witty, but at turns also melancholy or satirical. as expected i preferred the pieces that directly addressed the experience of exile (”sozusagen ein mailied” is one of my favourite exillyrik pieces). 3/5

the harpy, megan hunter yeah this was boooooooring. the cover is really cool & the premise sounded intriguing (women gets cheated on, makes deal with husband that she is allowed to hurt him three times in revenge, women is also obsessed with harpies: female revenge & female monsters is my jam) but it’s literally so dull & trying so hard to be deep. 1.5/5

the liar’s dictionary, eley williams this is such a delightful book, from the design (those marbled endpapers? yes) to the preface (all about what a dictionary is/could be), to the chapter headings (A-Z words, mostly relating to lies, dishonesty, etc in some way or another, containing at least one fictitious entry), to the dual plots (intern at new edition of a dictionary in contemporary england checking the incomplete old dictionary for mountweazels vs 1899 london with the guy putting the mountweazels in), to williams’s clear joy about words and playing with them. there were so many lines that made me think about how to translate them, which is always a fun exercise. 3.5/5

catherine the great & the small, olja knežević (tr. from montenegrin by ellen elias-bursać, paula gordon) coming-of-age-ish novel about katarina from montenegro, who grows up in  titograd/podgorica and belgrad in the 70s/80s, eventually moving to london as an adult. to be honest while there are some interesting aspects in how this portrays yugoslavia and conflicts between the different parts of yugoslavia, i mostly found this a pretty sloggy slog of misery without much to emotionally connect to, which is sad bc i was p excited for it :(. 2/5

the decameron project: 29 new stories from the pandemic, anthology a collection of short stories written during covid lockdown (and mostly about covid/lockdown in some way). they got a bunch of cool authors, including margaret atwood, edwidge danticat, rachel kushner ... it’s an interesting project and the stories are mostly pretty good, but there wasn’t one that really stood out to me as amazing. i also kinda wish more of the stories had diverged more from covid/lockdown thematically bc it got a lil repetitive tbh. 2/5

[avoutput]

Final Fantasy VII Legacy || Nomura, Complex?

This is the 3rd out of 3 articles. Find the second here.

It’s time to get down to mythril tacks. At this point, I have talked about what this game meant to me when it was released and how it’s newest installment fared as a game. Finally, it’s time to talk about the impact the Remake has on what has unexpectedly become a robust and diverse universe. What does this mean for us at large, the players? This is a no-holds-barred SPOILER frenzy about anything and everything in the Squaresoft/Square-Enix pantheon. This means not just the games in the orbit of Final Fantasy VII, but the entire catalog at Square-Enix. To be honest, this is just the introduction, I don’t know if I even have an intent of going so far beyond the purview of the Remake, but in the spirit of the Final Fantasy gatekeeper, Tetsuya Nomura, I refuse to limit myself.

It’s been almost exactly a month since I started writing this article. It took so long to come back to this because I kept finding more and more content related to Final Fantasy 7 that I either forgot about or didn’t even know existed. On my own shelf sits Advent Children, Dirge of Cerberus, and Crisis Core. I decided to watch Advent Children immediately after beating Remake. As a movie fan and amateur critic, the film is littered with terrible film decisions and was clearly the work of people who spend much of their time penning and creating video game stories. It’s a series of cutscenes without a controller attached and at a certain point, you realize Advent Children was never meant for film fans, but for fans of the game. Specifically for fans desiring an epilogue and more directly fans of Cloud, Tifa, and Sephiroth. The story is almost unintelligible because there is tons of connective tissue left to be assumed by the viewer. It is at once too far removed from FF7 in both linear real time and in-game universe time to be recognizable, and simultaneously inexplicable in what has transpired and why. It takes a crack at explaining it from moment to moment, but largely, it looks like they were looking for excuses to push the characters to act. I am not trying to review the film but rather my intent is to create a modus opendai for the gatekeeper, Mr. Nomura. The more I learned about the world of FF7 that was being created over the years, the more it seemed to lean on the stylings of this one man. In a way, Nomura launched Squaresoft and himself into a whole new stratosphere of fame and broke all expectations. In my first article, I mentioned that for a certain generation of fans, it was the perfect storm, but I would later find out the cause of the storm was Nomura breaking open lightning in a bottle, releasing his brand of design on the world with a multi-million dollar international company backing him.

If I may, let me take a parallel series by the same creator infested by the meta of his own other original creations, namely Kingdom Hearts. In its inception, it looks like two producers at Square were trying to make a 3-D adventure platformer game with characters as popular as Mario, but only the biggest brand on earth, Disney, could possibly beat the king of platformers. Nomura was… walking by and pushed himself into the conversation, and they decided if they could do it, they would let him direct. (Read more here) Yada yada yada, Kingdom Hearts was created. While I can’t seem to find (and didn’t look too hard to find) proof, I can only imagine that with KH having a tenuous new relationship with big-corp Disney, they focused more on a simple game that was straightforward. KH is very much a disney product with a little bit of artificial Nomura sweetener. With its unbridled success, Nomura was unleashed. Kingdom Hearts 2 would go on to be, in my opinion, one of the most unintelligible video game stories ever inscribed to plastic discs. But the power of Nomura’s story-telling is that we all understand it differently. He creates bedrocks, little story islands of unshakable facts that are connected via a salty sea of undefinable liquid moments. Cast out to sea, rudderless and deprived, you try to bring to your mouth this brine only to be dehydrated faster than if you had just sailed the sea and died in the sun between fact islands or lived long enough to tell the tale. And that metaphor is my tribute to Nomura. Long, winding, hard to remember, and just clear enough that you think you got it, but you still have problems with its construction.

It has now been over two months since I have last visited this article. What is keeping me from continuing? The incomplete nature of my knowledge of Final Fantasy VII lore. Unlike the Kingdom Hearts sea, VII is like a series of interconnected caves, and the more you unearth the more you learn. And therein lies the problem. The Nomura-verse is composed of both his methods and his circumstances. His methods, we have discussed, but his circumstance is game development. Unlike movies or books, games obviously have an interactive capability, but they also have a variable development cycle. Some titles come out quickly, others span decades. They also consist of different teams, story writers, directors, and a myriad of producers. This in turn can make it much harder to make a solid universe, especially when new additions start off in a place where a continuous story was never meant to exist. Nomura is at once hindered and strengthened by his circumstances. He can’t tell a better story because the development cycle of his vision is variable, and success is based on sales and popularity. Without success, he can’t create a new addition, and often in games, the end is meant to tie the whole thing up. Were there to be a sequel, a whole new story is thought up and tacked on wherever it fits. Gamers are pretty forgiving of this concept. Still, at the same time, Nomura probably wouldn’t make a concise story because it's not his style. For comparison, see the Dark Souls series. A game that both has deep lore and an involving story, but at the same time, the game doesn’t require you to know a single point to continue moving forward. This is almost the antithesis of Nomura’s style. In Souls, they let the player decide to explore its story caves, but doesn’t confront them with it to continue advancing. This is a strength of  video games. A strength that Nomura keeps using to his disadvantage.

Yet, Final Fantasy VII still excelled to unparalleled heights. It engages you in the same way all of the previous games in the series have, but with a slight departure on the strict fantasy theme, instead a merger with steampunk or semi-future. The series was changed forever, and so was gaming. Instead of doing the Dragon Quest method, expanding on the same universe design with different stories, Final Fantasy was emboldened to try completely random approaches with vector entries like VIII and X. For longtime fans, or fans of their original design, Every future title, MMO or Single Player, would go on to be successful, but not fully realized in their original context. Even the return to form in IX was much more playful than any of the original six entries. Gaming franchises have since become playgrounds for developers. Once they are accepted by fans, developers are emboldened and experiment with what would normally be a new IP, but instead use the financial shield of the famous namesake to move forward with new ideas. And in the case of Final Fantasy, when this concept of change works, it means that every numbered game becomes a wildcard. It’s a double edged sword for a gaming franchise that dates back to the 8-bit era. It has fans over 40 years old by this point and they may be willing to buy anything new. But this isn’t new to you and it isn’t a revelation for me. Final Fantasy VII Remake causes me to reckon with these demons I had buried years ago. It rips off a scab I thought had healed. I had given up on the past, a past where I was excited for a singular story, contained in a single universe, in a single title. I had given up on the glory years of Final Fantasy, but the Remake took me back and said, what if we told you everything you remember about the original was true, and everything we added after that was also true, even though you probably didn’t play it or even know it existed. Even if you do your very best, you probably won’t be able to track the story or interconnected characters if you aren’t in the know. It’s like joining a group of long time friends that are constantly referencing inside jokes, all of them just winking at each other, nudging you in the ribs and asking, “Do ya get it?” Truly, the Remake series thus far makes me feel lost at sea when what I wanted to feel like was coming home.

This retrospective has left me feeling broken. Based on the end of the FFVIIR, I sought out to reconcile all of the loose ends to all the connected media. However, spending time with the prequel Crisis Core for over around 40 hours, I realized this was a crapshoot. None of it mattered. It didn’t enrich the characters, it only made the story longer. It just added wibbly-wobbly, timey-whimey “facts” to an otherwise complete(ish) origin point. The FFVII universe can’t handle the weight that is put on it. It’s a faulty bridge over a treacherous pass. On the other hand, that same bridge for some is a point of excitement. You tread the boards, one by one, testing your weight, hoping to get to the other side intact. And I think that is why we keep trying these games and why they keep getting made. We don’t want the fun to end, despite the fact that it has nothing left for us to be excited by. It’s a closed loop that we keep looking for something new in. By the end of the Remake, we are somewhere between ⅓ or ½ way across the faulty bridge, dangling between where we have been and where it is taking us. At this point, I am too mentally exhausted from trying to make sense of it all. Yet I am incapable of not enjoying it, the mental somersaults one does to understand the interconnected mess that is Final Fantasy VII. It’s too dear to me. I got on the bridge for so many reasons, but the biggest one is to be on the other side with all of the other fans who dared to play and dared to complete the game. To be in the know, to wink across the room. I want to be in that hyper-critical utopia where we all have one thing in common: We played Final Fantasy VII in 1997. And we all have something to say about it.

[daresplaining]

Some Musing on Muse

    Soule created quite a few new characters for his run, some more long-lasting than others but most of them pretty neat. One of my favorites was the gruesome artist Muse, who originated in the “Dark Art” arc (#10-14) but maintained a presence in the comic up until his death in #600. While I wish he’d lived on to continue his artistic vision, I appreciate how great he was while he lasted.

    In interviews leading up to the start of his run, Soule talked about wanting to bring a horror element to Daredevil. For me, Muse was his strongest work in that direction. He is profoundly creepy in concept, behavior, and appearance (I can’t get enough of his character design), while also feeling fresh and unique among the ranks of DD villains. Muse is unpredictable, and operates based on his own carefully-constructed internal logic that, when you remove it from the context of all the murder and mutilation involved, makes sense. He is passionate about what he does, and feels it is right because it’s done with artistic integrity. He is the concept of wild creativity taken to a horrific extreme; an artist who draws inspiration from working in one specific medium-- which, unfortunately, happens to be people.

Sam: “You... you don’t have to do this... you--”

Muse: “Wow, man-- don’t you think I told myself that? After that first one... it was a woman, just someone I picked up. I made her into something... abstract. Told myself I shouldn’t. That it was wrong. But it didn’t feel wrong. The truth is, kid, when I’m creating, when I’m making, I’m strong. I am right. But people don’t really understand what I do. They object to my preferred medium, if you get my meaning. I only have so much time to work before someone manages to stop me. I need to use every moment. So yes, Blindspot, I have to do this. If I don’t... who will?”

    While Muse would be horrifying/fun (which is, uh... the ideal combination of traits for a villain, right?) in any context, he is particularly engaging as a Daredevil antagonist because he is... a visual artist. Thus, while Matt is aware of how horrible Muse’s behavior is, and is subjected to the hypersensory nastiness inherent in encountering brutalized corpses, he is still spared the full gruesome effect of the “exhibits” because he doesn’t have to look at them. There’s irony in Muse asking Matt, at the end of #11/beginning of #12, “Do you like my work?” Muse wants sincere artistic engagement with his creations, and while obviously no superhero would have given that to him, it is funny that he picked one who is actually incapable of doing so. 

Matt (caption): “Blood. Overpowering. It even tastes like blood in here. Radar sense can pick up the body and... what is he holding? A paintbrush. But that’s all. I can’t... There’s something on the wall, but I’d have to touch it to understand it, and I can’t. Not yet. It’s a crime scene.”

Matt: “Blindspot. Tell me what I’m seeing.”

Sam: “It’s a painting. Huge, like a mural. Covers the whole wall. Some kind of war or something. It’s all different shades of red. I looked at it, up close-- I think... I think it’s painted in blood.”

    Conversely, the one person who is repeatedly faced with the full horror of Muse’s crimes is Blindspot-- and in many ways, Muse is his antagonist more than Matt’s. 

Muse: “Ah. You’re still alive. I really thought you were dead just there. I suppose we can call this the latest exciting twist in the saga of Muse and Blindspot, eh? I’ve got another one for you. Imagine the tension if we put off the final battle for another day. You defaced my work... but I’m willing to let that go, just for tonight, in service of the greater story. Blindspot vs. Muse... one for the ages! Why not keep them waiting? Tension can be a powerful artistic tool. No? You’d rather climb up here and hash this out now? I can make that work.” 

    Muse takes an interest in Sam from the beginning, and personally invites him-- and only him-- to his first “opening”. Even after that, once Matt has gotten involved, Sam almost always seems to encounter Muse first. Muse gives Sam the first defining personal challenge of his career by blinding him. And it is through his interactions with Muse that Sam is first confronted with many of the questions all superheroes inevitably face, and is driven to figure out what kind of hero he wants to be. 

Sam: “I need to understand, Muse. I need this to make sense. Why do you do what you do? Why do you hurt people? Why do you kill? Why?”

Muse: “You know why, Blindspot. It’s the same reason you want to kill me right now. It makes you better it makes you strong it shows them your power it says something it means something it solves your problems it gives you control you’re big they’re small it’s art it’s art IT’S ART!”

    Sam refuses to kill Muse, but Muse chooses death anyway, burning alive in a characteristically dramatic fashion. But given the effectiveness of his character-- the strength of his voice and the visceral creepiness of everything he did-- I would love for him to be revived someday. 

[douxreviews]

Rome - Series Review

“You look like laundry.”

Costume dramas and toga parties aren’t for everyone. But even if Gladiator left you cold, Caligula left you cringing, and I, Claudius left you feeling overly-British, HBO’s now-defunct series Rome is still worth checking out during the summer television wasteland.

Rome is about two legionaries, Titus Pullo and Lucius Vorenus. It’s about pre-middle-class urban life. It’s about colonialism. It’s about pre-Christian morality. It’s about sex, and violence, and loyalty, and fatherhood, and childhood. Oh, yeah: it’s about Julius and Augustus Caesar and the bloody chaos of the rise of the Roman Empire.

I know this is a genre site. I know that HBO’s Rome ended years ago. But what else are you going to do during the Summer TV Wasteland? (Especially if you don’t have cable?)

Season One covers Caesar’s return from Gaul (which is divided into three parts, as you will recall from Latin 101) after eight years subduing the hairy natives. Victorious, angry, and with an astonishing amount of popular support for someone who’s been away for so long, Caesar crosses the Rubicon with his vast army—a real no-no according to Republican laws, which didn’t allow generals to command troops within the Roman environs. Caesar, who is stolid, smart, and pleasantly sharp-witted, gets into a power-play with the hapless and pudgy Pompey, wins, and becomes a tyrant who is assassinated by Brutus, Cassius, and 42 other Roman senators. And if you feel spoiled, well… you should have paid better attention in Roman Civ.

Season Two is far more rushed: the producers found out that they were being cancelled mid-filming, and decided to compress what had been a five-year plan into about five episodes. So Season Two takes us from Caesar’s death to the rise of Augustus to Mark Antony’s defeat (and steamy relationship with Cleopatra) in Egypt. Against the backdrop, Lucius and Titus contend with the difficult adjustment to civilian life, and even, for a while, become something like Mafiosi in the city of Rome itself.

Lucius and Titus are, for me, the heart of the series. Lucius (Kevin McKidd, who is now on Grey’s Anatomy -- he's the grumpy one in the photo) is a “Catonian” -- he believes in the sacred Roman Republic. But he also believes in loyalty and keeping his promises. Over the course of the two seasons, this means that he, more often than not, winds up working against his own political philosophy out of loyalty to Caesar (first) and Mark Antony (later). Lucius’s home life is no simpler: after eight years away, he and his wife have some complex issues to work out. How they work them out I’ll leave for you to discover.

Titus (Ray Stevenson), who is in the brig for general disorderliness when we first meet him, is Lucius’s polar opposite. He doesn’t have a political philosophy. He doesn’t have a philosophy, at all. But he’s a spectacular fighter who is, it turns out, capable of his own kind of loyalty -- to Lucius, with whom he becomes fast friends, and to Augustus Caesar, whom he taught to fight (as a youngster) and for whom he does occasionally gruesome favors (when Caesar is actually Caesar and not just Octavius). Watching Titus grow, but stay essentially true to his essentially good nature, over the course of the series is definitely one of its high points. I liked him so much I even rented the most recent Punisher movie, in which Ray Stevenson plays the eponymous character. Sadly, I am not a Punisher fan.

History buffs will love this show -- at least, I think that’s a huge part of my affection for it. My own deep-seated hatred of Cicero for all of those damned dependent clauses and odd ablative uses made me laugh out loud when I saw him sniveling, groveling, and grasping at straws in the Caesar-Pompey death-match. But, schadenfraude aside, his death scene made me cry. Seeing Old Man Cato, scrawny and protesting in the Roman senate in a skimpy black toga, was equally amusing (Cato has a great part to play in Dante’s Purgatory, which has always endeared me to him).

Both Caesars are rather unreadable, especially Ocatvius/Octavian/Augustus, who is played by a child actor for the first half of the series, and an adult actor for the second half. He’s brilliant, cold, proto-Machiavellian, and completely unable to understand illogical, emotional behavior -- he demands loyalty but is incapable of it himself. The complexity of his character, over about 22 episodes, pretty much reveals why I think this show is just awesome. Mark Antony isn’t quite as well drawn, but I get the impression that he just wasn’t that complex of a guy. Either way, James Purfoy does a great job.

I feel like I should say something about the women -- Atia, Julius’s niece, prominent among them. And Cleopatra, of course. Their roles are complex but they’re usually stuck in the domestic sphere, attempting to control the men and circumstances around them through sex, parties, and social snubs. It’s fun to watch, but in retrospect it’s easier to forget.

Rome received a lot of press in its heyday: it wasn’t nearly as popular as Deadwood, Six Feet Under or The Sopranos, but it was far more expensive than all of those shows. The sets for the Forum and the Avantine were the largest sets ever constructed for a TV show, on an Italian backlot. The money was well-spent: until I did some research, I assumed that the producers had simply taken over a town in, say, Croatia, and Romanized it within an inch of its life. It just looks real. If they ever do make a movie, which is a rumor floating around, it should look great on a big screen.

For all the cost and bluster, Rome got some flack for not being “sweeping” or “epic” enough. But it’s not supposed to be Gladiator for the small screen. Rather, it’s about the personalities involved in a battle that seems epic in retrospect, but at the time was a vivid, lived experience for a select group of powerful men and women. Also, the life of the “common man” (whoever he is) was typically dark, cramped, and dirty. Rome wasn’t a planned city, and alleys were far more common that wide boulevards and open spaces.

Rome wasn’t built in a day, and it wasn’t built by just one man engaging in some mythological Pax Romana or something like that. It was people with money and power wanting more money and more power, but it was also people with strong philosophies (Lucius, Cicero, and Cato among them) just trying to do what is right according to old Roman virtues. It’s also, of course, about the death of the virtuous against the greediness of others. But when isn’t that the story of civilization?

Four out of four togas.

Josie Kafka is a full-time cat servant and part-time rogue demon hunter. (What's a rogue demon?)

[timeisacephalopod]

4, 6, 9, 10, 12: Rhodey and Bucky, 15, 16, 21, 23, 27, 29, 30, 32, 35, 37, 43, 46, 50, 54: Tony

You know that meme where the white woman is looking at the math overlaying the picture in confusion? That was me when I got this ask because instead of reading the fucking questions on the ask meme I put up I decided ‘Rhodey and Bucky’ were some other thing? Long story short I’m a moron lmao.

4- Favorite actress

Tbh I don’t pay much attention to the actresses and thus I almost missed out of saying Tessa Thompson like some kind of savage. I appreciate how hard she worked to try and make Valkyrie bisexual and also her character was basically the only thing I liked about Thor: Ragnarok (controversial opinion, I know).

6- Favorite quote

“Trust my rage” from Thor The Dark World. This line is so visceral and poetic. Like shit son, the rest of the movie was eh, but that line? Fucking amazing, and Hiddleston’s delivery of it is top tier bois.

9- BROTP

Pepper and Tony. I’ve never seen the romance between them, and in my opinion it was there because it seems movies are fucking incapable of not having a romance subplot (no hate to pepperony shippers either, everyone likes what they like and the entire point of fic is to circumvent canon anyways). But as a friendship pairing these two are excellent- they’re a great team, they understand each other on a fundamental level, and their friendship dynamic is interesting. Also, to me, I think their relationship is more compelling without the romance.

10- How did I discovered Marvel?

I’ve mentioned this in other asks but I had a friend make me watch Avengers and I didn’t like it lmao. I only gave it another show two years later and started from the beginning with CA:TFA and then I got into it. I’m not sure what changed or why I took to it later, especially when I found the later half of TFA to be kind of boring (I love Skinny!Steve ok) but it happened and when WS came out I saw it in theaters. From then I was hooked.

12- Make me choose between two characters: Rhodey and Bucky

Damn, I’d rather not have to choose, you suck! But, for the sake of the ask, Rhodey. As a character he’s better constructed, has his own story and motivation outside Tony, he’s funny, and while he has his moments (that I mostly blame on shit writing) he’s a great friend. I honestly wish that we could get a whole movie about him doing things but I did hear some rumors not long ago about Marvel looking into making Iron Man 4 an Ironheart movie and the only thing that would make that better is if Rhodey were her mentor (I literally wrote a story about this once).

Anyways, although I write Bucky a lot more than I do Rhodey I do prefer his character in a more fundamental way simply because he’s more fleshed out. Plus I love male friendships that are actually good and James Rhodey Rhodes is the God Tier of friends. The man spent 3 fucking months combing the desert for his disaster friend and that’s some damn dedication. Especially when you know people must have gotten real damn annoyed with him using resources and shit. But that action alone tells you everything you need to know about him and none of it is bad. I love Rhodey, seriously.

15- Top 5 ships

Tony/T’Challa

Tony/ Bucky

Tony/ Stephen

Tony/Rhodey

And, because I feel compelled to put a ship that doesn’t have Tony in it Steve/Howard

Honorable Mentions: Tony/ Peter Q

16- Top 5 villains

THANOS

Erik Killmonger

Loki

Justin Hammer (he’s just so absurd)

Ghost (from Ant Man and The Wasp)

Seriously, this was hard because Marvel’s villains are shit. They’re all the same one dimensional ‘they’re evil’ type characters.

21- Dream crossover

Basically any urban fantasy world I loved in my teens and the MCU. I’ve written a Vampire Academy/ MCU crossover but I’d love to write a House of Night crossover (I hate the characters in HoN, but love the world ok don’t judge), and a Shadowhunters crossover. I’ve seen some cool stuff with Teen Wolf being crossed over too though.

23- Most layered character

Tony fucking easily. His arcs are always the most compelling (or close to it), he’s had the most character development, and his trauma plays out so beautifully on screen. I’d argue Steve is a close second post WS, but the MCU will never let his character play out the development he’s gotten because they’ll never let Steve be less than perfect, which pisses me off. Otherwise his transition from a solider who wants to do right by his country to a cynical man who doesn’t know how to process the new world he’s been tossed into or how to handle a situation in which the morally correct solution isn’t abundantly obvious would be a compelling watch. But its been consistently proven that Steve will never get a real realization of his new characterization because ~~perfection~~.

27- Favorite moment

Shiiiit. That’s a lot of material and because I have a bad memory I’m going to go with ‘don’t call us plucky, we don’t know what it means’ because that was hilarious lmao.

29- Saddest moment

Shit boi, probs a toss up between Peter P’s death and Bucky’s. Peter’s is obvious but Bucky fucking dusting in front of the dude who spent so long trying to find him again in an effort to feel, even if its just for a moment, like he’s home again? Sad af. I felt awful for Steve there.

30- Most beautiful scene

Pretty much all of Black Panther is a visual treat, but I’m especially fond of T’Challa in the dream world with his father. That scene was so beautiful, and all the colors? Amazing. Only Guardians of the Galaxy even compares visually and even then Wakanda’s beauty has something else to offer that space doesn’t.

32- Actor/Actress I’d like to be cast by Marvel

As mentioned above I pay literally zero attention to actors- its a personal choice not to spend time being a voyeur into other people’s lives and treat them like commodities to consume because I loath celebrity culture (and this isn’t a slam to anyone who enjoys it, its more a slam to people who over engage in it- ie people who care enough to send death threats or paps basically). Anyways that’s an opinion you didn’t ask for, but because of that personal opinion I have no real cast choice lmao.

35- Most boring plotline?

I love Thor but all his movies. The first movie had good personal growth but eh. The second was an ok movie but forgettable (aside from my fav line from Loki in it), and unpopular opinion I hated Thor Ragarok. I mean it was funny. That’s all the good I have to say about it really. Though I have no idea why every comedy writers room is not leaping at a chance to get Taikia on their staff because the man is a comedic genius and that’s honestly being impolite to his comedy skill. Still, as much as I like Thor I didn’t really love any of his movies and all his villains were so fucking boring, even Loki wasn’t that interesting till Avengers. Poor Thor, MCU did him dirty :(

37- Most well done character death

Peter P. I give this to him over Bucky because apparently most of that scene was improv? I cried over my spider son ok. There’s someone who was in that theater with me who heard me sob out ‘my spider son’ and went home to tell people about it. That shit was heartbreaking. Second runner up goes to T’Challa but I didn’t think it was well done, I just thought it was sad as shit for Okoye and I love her so it was upsetting to see her lose her king :(

43- Characters I wish they’ve met

I don’t understand the question :( I think it’s supposed to be ‘characters you wish would met’ but all my wishes were granted in IW. Tony and Stephen met and so did Tony and Quill. I shipped Tony with both characters before they’d interacted on screen so it was nice to see :) Rhodey and Quill would be a fucking hoot together though, throw in Okoye and Valkyrie and you’ve got a bunch of drunk overpowered people telling war stories or, in Quill’s case, stories about that time he stole some shit.

46- What characters outside of the Mcu I’d like to see in a Marvel movie?

Ironheart, but I heard rumors they might do a movie with her. I think it’d be fun to have Riri in screen, especially since Peter is around her age. I’d also love to see a Young Avengers movie or a Kamala Khan/ Ms. Marvel movie though apparently there’s rumors of that too.

50- Characters that deserved better

Tony, Bucky, and Steve but all for different reasons. Steve deserves his fall from grace and not because I think he should suffer, but because keeping him on his pedestal means he’ll never be able to fully process his trauma and move on. Allow him to fall, allow him to know he isn’t perfect, then allow him to know that that’s ok, he doesn’t need to be, he just needs to do the best he can and then allow him a proper chance to move on.

Bucky because he deserves to be a character outside of Steve and, to a much smaller extent, Tony. Let the man have a movie about self actualization after trauma, let him figure out he isn’t Steve Roger’s best friend anymore (and that Steve isn’t really Steve anymore) and that that’s ok, they can both accept themselves as they exist now and still be friends. Let him develop hobbies outside of Steve, have him bond with Rhodey, he needs a good friend. Shit, let him bond with Sam too. Give me a buddy movie where Sam lowkey therapies Bucky into being a fuckin person again and Bucky finds some way to repay him. He can go beat up Scott for that time he kicked Sam’s ass lol.

And Tony because the MCU makes fuckin everything his fault, even stuff that only somewhat involves him. They drive him to an absolute breaking point and then have the characters get pissed that he broke? The only one that I found acceptable was Pepper and that’s mostly because I understand why she’d be freaked out both by Tony’s obsessive behavior and by nearly being eaten by one of his suits. She had her own shit she was dealing with post Mandarin so her I understand. Everyone else though? Mostly makes no sense. Why are you surprised that a person snaps when they’re pushed to the limit? That’s how people work lmao but that’s also because the writers make an active, and completely senseless, choice to have the characters react like Tony’s mental health problems are a choice he made and now he has to suffer because he has PTSD or some shit. Idk, but AoU was the worst for it, and, to a lesser extend IM3 but I refuse to believe Rhodey would really tell Tony to get over himself after a panic attack- the man is emotionally intelligent ok, IM3 did Rhodey dirty.

54- 5 things I love most about: Tony

Tony’s sheer level of wonder at the world around him- the look on his face in IM2 when he rediscovers that element perfectly encapsulates how he feels about learning and moving forward. (Flipside is that sometimes he has trouble staying in the present and that causes problems).

The way he tries no matter how badly he fails. Bih, if my random tests on a rock nearly ended the world I’d out and out throw myself off a cliff. Instead he accepts his part in it (and more) and chooses to try and make the best of it. He’s done that from the moment he got snatched by terrorists in Afghanistan. That in itself is basically a superpower.

His humor. I, too, hide my emotional distress under jokes so I can relate to being a lil bit of an asshole to hide how I feel. (Flipside: people don’t think he takes stuff seriously- hence Steve in the Avengers).

His mental health problems. Ok this one is weird, but I can appreciate that someone drew up a hero that isn’t based in perfection, but who tries to get there anyways. But the dude has problems, a lot of problems, and they aren’t always pretty. But they are complicated and it is compelling to watch.

The way he builds relationships. Its unconventional- Rhodey is probably the only person he’s super close to that he met in a normal way. Happy and Pepper were both people that worked for him and instead of just being their boss he took the time to learn about them and get to know them on a personal level. Obviously he ended up engaged to Pepper, but a guy who knows what his driver’s favorite show is and why he likes it is a good dude. He’d be nice to wait staff in restaurants.

[withinthescripts]

Season 2, Cassette 4: Bardo Museum (1975)

[tape recorder turns on]

Welcome to the international Bardo Museum of Tunis. I am Ama Cudjoe, director of curations. We are proud to present this audio cassette guide of “Unfinished Nightmares”, the new sketches of Claudia Atieno. These drawings were discovered two years ago in a previously unknown crawl space below Atieno’s Cornwall home. This audio guide will be narrated by historian and expert in Atieno’s oeuvre, Roimata Mangakāhia. While Atieno’s whereabouts remain a mystery, these sketches give eery insight into her last creative thoughts before her disappearance. This special exhibit is located on level 2. Works with audio guidance are numbered and begin on your left, moving counter-clockwise around the room. Each narration will be followed by a tone, so that you may pause the cassette between pieces. Please return the cassette player, headphones, and shoulder strap to the member services desk on the ground floor.

[bell chimes]

Sketch One. “Untitled Figure with Hat”.

This drawing is of the society’s secretary of trade, Vishwati Ramados, wearing a wide-brimmed fedora. You can see a wry smile on Ramados’s face, like in reference to the brown western hat juxtaposed against her soft blue sari. The staff at the Bardo disagreed with my identification of Ramados. Rather, they do not believe the figure is meant to be anyone in particular, but I know her face well. Ramados was a frequent visitor to Atieno’s Cornwall home, as well as her Mwanza apartment. I knew Ramados, and while I was not close to her, I know she greatly respected Atieno’s artistic talents.

Ramados also greatly resented Atieno’s constant critique of the societal council, her frequent jibes about Ramados’s capitulation to bureaucratic strictures. Ramados, like most of Atieno’s invited guests, was an avid art collector and ardent fan of Atieno’s work.

Ramados had a technically perfect smile. One that is vibrant and beautiful, regardless of her intentions. Look at her smile in this sketch. What are Ramados’s intentions? What are your intentions?

One of Atieno’s most notorious paintings, “(-- [0:03:26] Madurai”, currently part of Manhattan Museum of Modern Art’s permanent collection, featured a verdant ravine covered in ferns. In the center of the gully, a single camera held by two seemingly disembodied hands literally suggesting a nature photographer, but figuratively critical of the council’s surveillance scandal of 1958 where staff members, under the oversight of the trade commission, kept secret and extensive records of international merchants, including artists such as Atiano.

Placing the subject of the painting in Ramados’s birthplace of Madurai was a particularly harsh jab at a powerful and, it has been rumored, vindictive woman. The surveillance records were unearthed by four journalists from Vancouver, but they could not prove Ramados directly authorized the surveillance of these merchants. Ramados was publicly (-) [0:04:20] for this direct violation of the Citizen Espionage Act of 1951, but never faced a tribunal for these crimes. In “Untitled Figure with Hat”, Atieno did not detail much of Ramados’s surroundings, just her face, smile, hat, and shaded eyes. But notice the pencil stroke in the upper left, suggesting the flat horizon of the ocean.

I believe this was drawn on the patio of Atieno’s Cornwall home overlooking the sea. Ramados’s contagious charms are made vivid in this drawing, and were likely her salvation in the congressional hearings on her scandal. Ramados was friendly with Atieno for the most part, and they had lively conversations about everything except politics. But in the time I spent with Ramados in Cornwall, I sensed she was always planning every word, every gesture. She was carefully choreographed, her intentions were complex and hidden.

[bell chimes]

Sketch two. “Untitled Automobile with Driver”.

Scholars at the Royal Cornwall Museum noted that it was a 1950 Rolls Royce Silver Wraith, a vehicle which was owned by late president of the Bank of Western Europe, Archie McPherson. In the sketch, however, the man standing next to the vehicle is not Archie, who was a large man, broad-shouldered and tall, with a round belly and young face. The man in the sketch is small, barely taller than the vehicle itself. He is wearing thick-rimmed eyeglasses and wearing an unbuttoned shirt.

Look carefully inside his jacket. There appears to be a pistol on a shoulder holster. Although this is a small debate among critics. Notice the shape? The handle of the supposed gun is longer than seems ordinary for a pistol. How long is a pistol?

This man also does not bear any of the uniform elements common to the International Police, who are the only people legally allowed to carry firearms. So either it is not a pistol, perhaps an unfinished umbrella or poorly drawn driver’s gloves, or this unknown man is a guard/driver for a wealthy non-political individual such as McPherson.

Look in the windows of the car. Do you see the outline of a heavyset banker? What does wealth look like?

Hiring armed private guards would also be a criminal offense, but one which money or influence could help alleviate. McPherson owned a large collection of private works by Atieno, Pavel Zubof and Cassandra Reza. He underwrote an exhibit of Atieno’s work at the Tate Modern in 1971. He was one of Claudia’s supporters in her critique of the new society. McPherson believed Ramados and other high-ranking members of the society were covertly constructing an institute in the former United States to imprison violators, the Family Dissolution Act of 1955. He claimed the institute kidnapped and tortured adults who sought to reconnect with their birth families. 

Archie and Claudia did not just enjoy sharing conspiracy theories, they actively believed them.

McPherson was found dead outside his home last year. The official statement claimed he died of a heart attack, and this is not an appropriate forum for speculating about the honesty of official statements.

Look again in the windows of the car in the sketch. Who else was in the vehicle? Do you see yourself inside the car?

[bell chimes]

Sketch three. “Untitled Waves”.

Atieno had drawn a cross-section of waves crashing upon a rocky shore. Look closely along the top of the water. She has masterfully depicted the turbulent force of sand and seaweed caught in an undertow, using only a pencil. She has colored darkly the sky, ostensibly just bad weather, but also symbolizing the nightmare of being dragged out alone into the ocean.

The markings are boldest near the rocks. Look at the rocks and follow the lines out into the sea. See how the pressure of the pencil lightens significantly? The charcoal sky dissipates, not into light but into nothingness. Fear of the void. Of loneliness.

The cliffs of the Cornwall home were always my favorite scene to sketch. Sitting on Claudia’s patio deck overlooking the cliffs, I would often practice shading gradients. Claudia asked me once why I drew this scene so often. I explained to her it was a relaxing way to pass the time, particularly when I needed to keep busy but lacked motivation to create new work. It wasn’t long after that before her sketch pad was filled with drawings of the same scene. You can see here in “Untitled Waves” that even with pencils, Atieno was masterful. I hated her for that. I hated that about her.

Look again at her gradients. Don’t they make you mad? Think about everything you are incapable of achieving.

[bell chimes] [tape recorder turns off] [ads] [tape recorder turns on]

Sketch four. “Untitled Dinner Party”.

Dinner parties were common at the Cornwall house, with visiting artists and dignitaries. I say “dinner parties”, but due in part to the remoteness of the house and in part to the untamed nature of parties, they ran through the night and into the next day, when people could more safely make their way back to land. On occasion, the parties bled through to the next day and further. Atieno was well known for her social events, and many of these were wild engagements with drinks, music, dancing and gregarious unpredictable personalities who sang, or told stories. Or in the case of several dancer friends, stripped naked and performed improvised dance routines on tables.

In this drawing, though, the party seems subdued. Look at how the well dressed figures gingerly hold their glasses of wine, standing stiffly about cocktail tables, with little sign of the debauchery I associate with Atieno’s get-togethers. It is difficult here to discern specific identities, but it is likely that these are representatives from the Council. I believe Atieno was attempting to capture the Council’s trepidation about what they had interpreted as political art. I am not so sure of this interpretation, especially given the source. If you’re looking for dissidence, you’re likely to see it, whether or not it’s really there.

She welcomed friends and enemies alike, and in the case of World Council and Architects of the New Society, she would have happily invited any of her well-appointed detractors into her home, as long as they told good stories and didn’t ruin the fun. The Council were happy to attend the parties, as long as they could mentally know who was there, and what they said.

Atieno’s home country of Tanzania was dissipated during the creation of the society in 1939. The founders of the society removed national bonders in favor of the nine united regions. While this gave way to an eastern Africa independent of English imperialist rule, it stole away the agency of the smaller Tanzanian officials fighting for their own governance. The sub capital of Dodoma now reports to the regional seat in Nairobi. Europeans no longer govern the former Tanzania, but the open trade enabled astronomic growth in several reasons of Africa, and the European population grew there in two decades following the war. Atieno felt disconnected from her homeland and family in Mwanza, as well as with the dilution of the [Ipo] population by the English-speaking Europeans. Still, as a globe traveling artist, many of her childhood friends dissociated from Atiano, feeling she had abandoned her home. Perhaps she had. It would not be the only time she had abandoned her home.

In “Untitled Dinner Party”, we likely see a room full of politicians watching and recording Atieno subtly, as Atieno subtly watched and recorded them in return, in her own way. Look at the revellers in the sketch. Or is “revellers” an appropriate word to use? Which of these people do you think last saw Claudia?

[bell chimes]

Sketch five. “Untitled Artists at Work”.

This meta-sketch of a sketch is quite indicative of the occasions when guests would work together to develop new work. Someone would paint, as you see here in this sketch, a painting on an easel, three artists gathered around discussing the work. I used to believe that one of the figures was Claudia herself, as the painting on the easel, the art within the art, appears to be her, and appears to be her work, “Sunshine Afternoon”. But “Sunshine Afternoon” was painted in 1968. This sketch, while not dated, is likely from the early 1960’s if not late 1950’s. This painting is someone else’s entirely. It was not uncommon for artists to work together to share ideas and paint similar concepts, but an oft-had discussion with other artists in Atieno’s circle was: when does inspiration become theft? I have no proof that another artist originally created “Sunshine Afternoon”. In fact, Claudia might have created it first in this sketch, only to realize it fully in oils years later. But one of the artists in this work, so you see the woman with the long dark hair, I’m certain is Vanessa Wynn. The more I think about her signature rays of light, I think that “Sunshine Afternoon” was certainly her original idea, or at least I had my suspicions.

Look at the sketch in the sketch. Do you recognize that as an early study of “Sunsine Afternoon”? Does this serve as proof, of anything? Are all affirmatives true, until they are successfully debunked?

[bell chimes]

Sketch six. “Untitled Rope and Parrot”.

This, of all the newly discovered sketches, disturbs me the most.

As a sketch, it is simple and beautiful. It is the least suggestive of sinister guests. As you can see it is just a square knot lying atop a wooden table. Next to the tope is a bird. The curators at the Bardo have called this bird a parrot, but it is specifically a kea. Note its long narrow beak. I argued with the curatorial staff about this, and they noted it was more likely an African grey parrot, a bird Atieno would have seen in her parents, as opposed to a kea, native in New Zealand, a place she had never been.

I know this bird to be a kea, even if Atieno had never seen one in person. First, the bird is missing the patterns of the grey parrot, but there is a more significant reason for my certainty. Second, I had an identical painting: a kea on a table, next to a knotted rope. It was one of my earlier attempts to capture wildlife stills. I was fortunate enough to have a friend who worked in nature conservation in the south Ireland, specifically maintaining the help of native birds. She’d taken in an injured kea. She had nursed it back to health. But it could no longer fly. I remember clearly the bird had a small plaster rap, almost like a cast, at the base of one of its wings. My friend allowed me to paint the immobilized bird, and it was a good subject, as it held perfectly still.

Notice in Atieno’s sketch the shoulder area on the bird’s left side. Do you see where the pencils are absent in a horizontal swathe? Is that an unfinished section, or merely Atieno playing with light and shadow, or is it a plaster band?

I brought the painting with me to London early in my career, hoping to get a showing in a gallery. At the time, I thought it captured a unique perspective and approach to still lifes. But over time, I began to feel the painting was not satisfactorily executed, so I left it with other early studies and incomplete paintings in a trunk in my closet.

Atieno rarely came to see me in my small flat in Plymouth, because it was so far from her home. For all of her love of world travels, she detested long commutes to others’ homes. Plus, as I said it was a small flat. But a few weeks after her last visit to my flat in 1970, I noticed that my trunk was open and a handful of my papers and drawings were missing. Since I did not check the trunk regularly, I thought it had perhaps broken open in transit and I’d just never noticed. But upon seeing these sketches, this year, I recognize the sketch of the bird and the rope, and I suspect Atieno had found my old painting. She not only stole the picture, but bettered it. Even without the richness of color and the depth of oil on canvas, Atieno captures shadows and light so well, even the kea, without the motion blur of a realistic photograph, Atieno.. [chuckles] using only a pencil, shows the bird’s lack of attention spam, its nervous energy sitting next to a human. Even the chips and dents along the table’s edge, where the bird had bit away the wood. I don’t recall ever including that detail in my original painting.

What is most maddening about Atieno is her talent. Even in plagiarism, she makes it perfectly her own.

[bell chimes]

So this concludes your audio tour of “Unfinished Nightmares – the New Sketches of Claudia Atieno”. Before you turn in your cassette player at the members desk, I’d like to say a word about Claudia’s absence. She may never return to us, but I believe she’s not dead. Just as she left her home in Mwanza, she left her home in Cornwall. Perhaps she will continue to make art and we will find her once again.

Her former partner Pavel Zubov told the staff at Bardo Museum that he found the sketches for this exhibit in a crawl space in Claudia’s home. I’m not certain what he was doing in her home recently, but I’m weary of the idea that the simply found these in one place no one had ever looked. I admit to looking thoroughly through her home when she wasn’t there. I never saw these. I’m hoping his claims are false, and that Claudia gave them to him to put in the Bardo. It’s possible she simply doesn’t want it known that she’s still somewhere in the world making art.

I expect more exhibits of newly discovered works by Claudia Atieno. [softly] I hope, anyway.

[tape recorder turns off]

“Within the Wires” is written by Jeffrey Cranor and Janina Matthewson and performed by Rima Te Wiata.

With original music by Mary Epworth. Find more of Mary’s music at maryepworth.com.

[char27martin]

Good Writers and Good Friends: How to Get the Support You Need

Enlisting the support of your friends, family, and fellow writers is critical to your success. And it makes your writing life so much easier. From Writing with Quiet Hands by Paula Munier, here are some rules to live by to ensure that you’re getting the encouragement and assistance you need:

To write with quiet hands is to embrace the journey all writers must take: from seeking inspiration and shaping raw material to cultivating a personal support network, navigating the various pathways to publication, and committing to a lifelong practice.

In Writing with Quiet Hands, author and literary agent Paula Munier helps you hone your words into well-crafted stories and balance this satisfying work with the realities and challenges of the publishing world.

You’ll learn how to tame your muse, manage your time wisely, and treat your practice with the seriousness it deserves. You’ll develop a distinct voice, write with style and substance, employ the tenets of strong structure, and engage your readers by injecting narrative thrust into your stories. You’ll explore the finer aspects of craft, refine your work, and boldly bridge the gap between published and unpublished. From drafting and revising to querying agents, you’ll discover the secrets to writing artfully, and publishing bravely.

Offer tit for tat.

If your significant other resents the time you spend on your writing, then negotiate a tit-for-tat swap. For every guilt-free hour you spend writing or at writing events, your partner gets a guilt-free hour to shop or work out or spend time with pals. If you have kids, this can be particularly effective, as you can offer to watch them while your partner gets some “me” time—and vice versa.

Take a writing class.

A class is a great place to meet other writers as well as work on your craft. There are many places where you can find great instructors and valuable instruction—from continuing-education classes at your local community college and workshops run by groups like Grub Street, Gotham, and the Algonkian New York Pitch Conferences to online seminars, classes, and boot camps run by Writer’s Digest. I’ve taken hundreds of classes, seminars, and workshops over the years—and I’ve benefited from every one. Now I teach them as well—and I learn even more from my students than I did from my teachers.

Join a writers’ group.

A writers’ group can be a wonderful incentive to write as well as an encouragement to keep writing. The trick is to find the right writers to participate. You want people who are committed to writing, will produce and share pages, and will give constructive criticism. You also want to make sure that you’re not the best writer in the group. Finding a writers’ group is like buying a house—you don’t want the best house on the block—you want to buy “up.” You don’t want to be the best writer in the group; you want to learn “up” from the writers in the group who are more experienced and (hopefully) published. Keep the group small—six to eight writers, tops—and don’t be afraid to ask people to leave if they prove difficult or unreliable or incapable of giving or receiving constructive criticism.

Join a writers’ organization.

Every genre has its association. Find yours and join. Now. Not only will you meet other writers, you’ll be able to take advantage of the organization’s many benefits, which typically include mentors; classes; information on publishers, editors, and the marketplace; PR and marketing assistance; speakers’ bureaus; and more. Most organizations have online chapters as well, so if you live in a remote area, you can connect with writers all over the country, if not the world. When I first moved to Chico, California, some years ago, I was too far away to attend Mystery Writers of America meetings in San Francisco. So I looked up writers in my city in the member directory, called one, and invited her to lunch. We hit it off and invited more writers from the directory to join us in a writers’ group.

Go to a writers conference.

This is another great way to learn more about writing, publishing, and the marketplace. You’ll have the opportunity to meet writers, agents, editors, and publishers. Not to mention these events are so much fun! There are writers conferences for every genre and sensibility, coast to coast and abroad. If you’re timid, take a writer friend with you. Take advantage of everything the conference offers: Attend the banquet, go to all the sessions that time allows, and hang out in the bar (because that’s where all the interesting people end up after hours). Channel your inner Oscar Wilde, and work the room!

Eliminate negativity.

The last thing you need as a writer is people insulting you, your work, or even publishing. (As somebody once tweeted: “Give someone a book, they’ll read for a day. Teach someone how to write a book, they’ll experience a lifetime of paralyzing self-doubt.”) Listen only to constructive criticism and helpful information. Don’t let anyone discourage you in any way. I hear people talk about the death of books all the time—but they’ve been having that discussion for thirty years. The book business has gone through great transition—as has all retailing—and that transition is bound to continue. People ask me why I became an agent in the middle of all this change, as if it were preordained that I would fail right along with publishing. I’ll tell you what I tell them: There’s plenty of opportunity during times of transition, but only if you take advantage of it. Someone’s going to make it—it may as well be you.

Find a mentor.

The best part about writers’ groups and organizations and conferences is that they give you the chance to meet writers who are farther along the publishing path than you are—writers from whom you can learn and who might be willing to mentor you. You may be lucky enough to encounter some of your favorite writers and even befriend them. You’ll also meet new favorites. Be nice to everyone, go to their book signings, and buy their books. Do keep in touch with everyone you can. These contacts will come in handy sooner or later—especially when it’s time to find an agent, get endorsements, promote and market your work, and so on.

Prime the pump.

Now that you’ve made writer friends—you have made some writer friends by now, right?—ask one to join you on what Julia Cameron calls an “artist’s date.” This is anything fun that appeals to the artist in you: concerts, art exhibits, films, readings, literary events and pilgrimages … whatever feeds your writer’s soul. As I’ve mentioned, my writer friend Susan and I have been rewarding ourselves with artist’s dates on a regular basis for years—we’ve been to jazz festivals and book festivals, countless movies and plays and book signings, galleries and museums, and most of the literary landmarks in the Northeast—from Emily Dickinson’s house to the House of Seven Gables.

Give back.

Most of these communities are very supportive, and you’ll want to be very supportive in return. Publishing is all about relationships, so be sure to cultivate good relationships, return favors, promote goodwill, and build up good book karma.

About the Author:

Paula Munier is the senior literary agent and content strategist at Talcott Notch Literary Services. A well-published journalist, author, copywriter, and ghostwriter, Paula has penned countless new stories, articles, essays, collateral, and blogs, and has authored or co-authored more than a dozen books, including Plot Perfect, Writing with Quiet Hands, and The Writer’s Guide to Beginnings.

The post Good Writers and Good Friends: How to Get the Support You Need appeared first on WritersDigest.com.

from Writing Editor Blogs – WritersDigest.com http://www.writersdigest.com/editor-blogs/there-are-no-rules/excerpts/good-writers-good-friends-get-support-need