"Seven years ago we all went through the flames; and the happiness of some of us since then is, we think, well worth the pain we endured."
Although Dracula was published in 1897, some think that it takes place in 1893 because of the way the days and dates used line up. If that's the case, Jonathan Harker's epilogue, seven years later, would have been added around 1900. A new era bubbling with new change and new conventions. The story ends with Jonathan looking ahead to a new century filled with the unknown and being able to look on the past, despite its darkness, "without despair."
Okay, so as the fandom likes to claim that Harry/Hermione wouldn't work because Harry himself says that he likes her as a sister, I thought I'll make a post about that. After all, it's something we hear from his mouth, right? It's supposed to be the "smoking gun" evidence.
All we have to do, however, is to look at the situation more closely.
*rubs hands together*.
First of all, you can say one thing and mean another. As canon shippers claim that there's evidence of Romione before book 4 which are NOT romantic in nature (as in you don't have to actually say that you like someone, as Romione shippers bring up things like Hermione noticing Ron's face closely in the first book, etc), we can apply the same principle to Harmony. There's a whole lot of textual evidence that Harry finds her attractive.
“After you left,” he said in a low voice, grateful for the fact that
Ron’s face was hidden, “she cried for a week. Probably longer,
only she didn’t want me to see. There were loads of nights when
we never even spoke to each other. With you gone..."
Two things to note here:
Harry's apparently grateful that Ron's face is hidden when he makes this statement, which should make us wonder how truthful he's being.
The emphasis on the "nights" is interesting. We do know that they were actively discussing the location of the Horcruxes, from an early chapter, despite being sad initially that Ron had left. But of course Harry cannot tell him that. He had just returned, and so he makes it sound as if they hardly spoke to each other after Ron had left. That's a lie.
Like I said, we have to look at the context. They had moved on without Ron, and part of the reason Harry says that is probably to make him feel better now that he's back.
And lastly, Harry even considered Ginny as his sister initially. Have a look at this:
They had lived, had they not, like brother and sister all summer, playing Quidditch, teasing Ron, and having a laugh about Bill and Phlegm?
Yes, Harry's rationalizing it to himself, but he's doing that by thinking back to how he essentially considered Ginny as his sister while they were at The Burrow.
So, no, it's not a slam-dunk argument when canon shippers bring it up, even though it certainly looks like that on the surface.
Asking because you’re a librarian: I read 1491 and liked it; what other nonfiction books would you recommend on precolonial Indigenous civilizations in the Americas, especially on civilizations other than the famous (Aztec, Mayan, Inca) ones? I was especially interested in the parts on Amazonian civilizations.
Hello! I'm hopefully living up to my librarian title with these titles!
Indians Before Columbus; Twenty Thousand Years of North American History Revealed by Archeology by Paul S. Martin
Fair Gods and Stone Faces by Constance Irwin
America Before: The Key to Earth's Lost Civilization by Graham Hancock
The First Americans: The Pleistocene Colonization of the New World edited by Nina G. Jablonski
Daily Life in Pre-Columbian Native America by Clarissa W. Confer
This is only a handful of what I was able to find, but there is plenty more if you'd like those as well. Hope you find something you like in this list and happy reading!
can you recommend a book about the end of world war one
There are SO many that it kind of depends on what exactly you're interested in reading about: the story of the Armistice and actual end of the war; the negotiations that led to the Treaty of Versailles; an overview of how the world tried to start putting itself back together (and how so much of that "reconstruction" ended up leading to World War II less than 20 years later and many of the conflicts around the world since 1918), and so on. I'll try to give you a suggestion for each of those aspects of the end of the First World War.
Eleventh Month, Eleventh Day, Eleventh Hour: Armistice Day, 1918: World War I and Its Violent Climax by Joseph E. Persico (BOOK | KINDLE | AUDIO) is an excellent look at the military aspect of the end of the war.
Paris 1919: Six Months That Changed the World by Margaret MacMillan (BOOK | KINDLE | AUDIO) is probably the best book about the diplomatic negotiations following the end of the war which, among other things, led to the Treaty of Versailles, carved new boundaries and created new territories in vast parts of the world which led to decades of conflicts that are still being fought today, punished Germany so harshly that it led to the rise of Hitler and the Nazis, and much more.
The Vanquished: Why the First World War Failed to End by Robert Gerwarth (BOOK | KINDLE | AUDIO) is the story of the brutal consequences of the war and diplomatic blunders of the victors which ultimately resulted in scores of governments falling, empires collapsing, dynasties going extinct, economic chaos -- and the aftermath of those disasters.
But my highest recommendation is Charles Emmerson's book Crucible: The Long End of the Great War and the Birth of a New World, 1917-1924 (BOOK | KINDLE | AUDIO), which was published in 2019 and is, without a doubt, the absolute best book I've read in the past 10 years. It's on the short-list of best books I've EVER read. Crucible touches on all the aspects of the end of the war that I mentioned, but does so through the stories of individual people -- mostly notable people, but in a much different manner than normal biographies or history books. It's actually kind of hard to explain the book because it's so original in the amazing way that Emmerson writes, but I don't simply recommend Crucible for someone wanting to read about the end of World War I; I think everyone should check it out. I give a lot of book suggestions, but I don't exaggerate when it comes to praising a book to this extent. It's remarkable and as I've said before, I'm always frustrated that I can't read it for the first time all over again.
How do I say, without coming across as a jaded miserable little bitch who likes raining on everybody's parade, that the PJO Disney plus adaption is nostalgia bait, in the same way that their live action remakes are
No actually though while I'm on a roll ranting about the funny monke show
THIS FUCKING SCENE IN PARTICULAR GETS ME SO BAD. I THINK ABOUT THIS SCENE SO OFTEN
The timing of MK's words and what we see on screen.
"I'd never abandon her when she needs me"
When MK says this, the shot is focused on Wukong, as he listens in and starts to glance back at Macaque.
LIKE WE KNOW. WE K N O W WUKONG ABANDONED MACAQUE. Those two have SOME shit going on in their past. Macaque needed Wukong, and he left him (either intentionally or unintentionally) and that left Macaque bitter and sad, and that bitterness was prolly left to rot after hundreds of years (not to mention that whatever happened between them got worse and worse and. Yknow jttw. Wukong ends up killing him.)
BUT WHAT GETS ME IS THE NEXT PART AFTERWARDS.
"We're heroes, it's what we do!"
Macaque and Wukong have ALWAYS been compared to the sun and moon. Like, canonically. Wukong calls Macaque his shadow, Macaque compares him to light-- they're opposites.
When MK talks about them being heroes, it's focused on Macaque because- well, he's NOT a hero. Not to himself, anyway. And this is brought up again and again; during his shadow plays, he specifically refers to Wukong (and MK) as "the hero". And they are! But Macaque doesn't see himself like that-- he refers to himself as "the Warrior". He doesn't feel like a hero. And this is brought up again in the s3 specials. "I'm not a hero, bud-" and "then be a warrior".
He's so used to living in everyone's shadows and being at the bottom of the barrel-- he's got a "worse version of Wukong's powers" (in Wukong's own words), he's revived by LBD only to be forced to do her dirty work, he's punished when he doesn't fall in line with her- he loses no matter what.
AND LBD SAYS IT HERSELF.
As soon as Macaque was given the chance (or, a "breath of new life") he tries to fuck off and do his own thing! He tries to stay far away from everything else.
But he doesn't get to.
He's threatened and shoved down into the dirt again and again and again and it's no wonder he was so desperate in s3e8-10. He tries to freak Tang out, tries to compare them to each other, but it backfires. LBD immediately tries to off him, but he desperately screams at her about a weapon MK and the others are planning to use- he doesn't care that he's giving her information, he just doesn't want to DIE. He begs MK and everyone else to stand down, that he just wants to take the Samadhi Fire and leave. He sounds just so DONE with it all during that scene. And when Tang does finish the ritual and the Samadhi Fire is reawakened-- what does it do?
It gets rid of LBD's hold on Macaque. He's no longer being trapped in crystal.
And he says, all happy, "it worked!"
You see the same thing in s3e8. After Tang tells him "don't you see the Samadhi Fire is our only way of helping humanity?"
Macaque tells him, "the Samadhi Fire is MY only chance at getting far away from the Lady Bone Demon"
He never wanted to help her. All he wanted to do was get away from her. He never intended to give her the Samadhi Fire, the rings-- nothing.
He's selfish, and honestly, who can blame him? Given everything we know about him, he owes everyone here nothing. He doesn't want to help them, he doesn't want to help or listen to WUKONG, who (again, either intentionally or unintentionally) abandoned him and later killed him, he doesn't even want to rlly hurt MK that much ("stand down, or I will PUT you down" implies that he doesn't want to fight him if he doesn't have to, but at this point he's so desperate for his own survival that he will if MK won't get out of his way).
Macaque doesn't see himself as a hero because he can't identify himself with that kind of title.
man i have really been thinking about worldbuilding and exposition in books recently
when i was like, i don’t know, twelve-ish, I picked up this book about a teenage girl in a spy school. and i absolutely fell in love with it - I thought it was incredibly neat how the book just seemed to drop me into the middle of the story, even starting in the girl’s second year. in fact, the main character frequently referenced events from her first year (falling in love with a civilian, things ending badly, finding secret passageways, losing her mother’s trust etc.)
and I actually really enjoyed the fact that the character had a rich and vibrant life outside of what i had read and that the book didn’t go out of its way to explain her past in flashbacks or anything. i understood the main takeaways and why she was reacting to things based on what i gleaned, and more than that i understood the growth of the character, why she was cautious in certain places but reckless in others, etc and i felt smarter for not being handed the answer on a silver platter
anyway it wasn’t until i finished the book and realized there was a sequel that i looked it up and found out that. in fact. i had started with the second book in the series.
What’s up with Fear and Hunger? You’re the second person I’ve seen blogging about it and I’m curious. It’s a video game - is it difficult or scary?
It's both!
Fear and Hunger is a survival horror game masking itself as an RPG. It kind of has a similar vibe to Pathologic, if you're familiar with it? Both games gained cult following due to how difficult and unforgiving they are, although to be honest, a lot of the difficulty in Fear and Hunger comes from not knowing what you're doing when you first start playing. That's very much on purpose - the game doesn't explain shit. As a result, you die a lot (especially if you try to play the game like a normal RPG), but each run helps you to gain a bit more knowledge of how the game, its world and the enemies operate, making each successive run slightly easier and more efficient.
The first game in the series is a dungeon crawler heavily inspired by Berserk, while the second game is a weird mix of a post-WWII setting, a battle royale premise, and eldritch horror (although that last one is also very much present in the first game). Both games are very brutal and come with a ton of content warnings, but they're also made in the RPGMaker, so you know. Personally, I found that due to the weird stylised look of RPGMaker games, the graphic violence never felt like too much, even if the acts being depicted were in themselves brutal/disturbing.
If you'd like to find out more and enjoy long video essays, I'd recommend Super Eyepatch Wolf's video on the game! It's what made me fall into a rabbit hole of watching playthroughs/videos about the lore of Fear and Hunger, which in turn really got me into the game's story and made me want to play it myself. I'm currently playing the second game in the series and having a lot of fun with it!
like leafpool is one of the very very few characters we see that like. actively chooses to be a medcat because she cares so much about it. like its not because of a prophecy or because starclan decides it she just wants to help people. and she cant even be a mother to her own kids that she loves until shes dead LEAFPOOOOOOOOOOOL. LEAFPOOL
Who here has read The Invisible Library? 👀 I'm still in the beginning but it's CRAZY; there was just a steam-powered robot centipede attack in the middle of a city, but a heroic detective fought it off with an electro-sword (that was disguised as a cane up until that point), and when they were done (after some banter between the dastardly villain and the detective), everyone just sat back down to resume their dinner.
i hate the commercialisation of the avengers inside the mcu both bc i find it cringy and meta but also bc it narratively doesn’t make sense.
we spent ten years establishing that the avengers are a contentious presence, civil war was literally about people not trusting them bc of what/who they are and now it’s almost completely erased and everyone loves them now? and don’t even get me started on rogers the musical
the way clint reacts makes it seem like the writers are trying to say it’s in poor taste but it’s less bc it trivialises a literal alien invasion but bc clint misses natasha and it hurts him to see an interpretation of her. not bc people are singing and dancing about an event that got hundreds if not thousands of people killed. the closest american equivalent i can think of is 9/11. people can’t even joke about it without being torn apart and it happened over 20 years ago. the battle of new york happened 10 years ago in the current mcu, the snap happened maybe a year ago, you’re telling me everyone’s chill with a musical about one of the worst days of their lives?
“i can do this all day” being their tagline encapsulates everything i dislike about it. the only people steve said that to were nazis that were immediately killed, tony who would never talk about what happened in siberia and the 2012 version of steve says it to him. no one else would know that phrase and acting like it’s something he crowed from the rooftops is at best a plot hole and at worse, an indictment of how little care the writers are having for the new era of the mcu