as a communist i do not care abstractly about questions like "will i be able to acquire this commodity at exactly the same rate in exactly the same locations" because the way they reach distribution centers is premised on exploitation, violence, and in many cases genocide
those people matter to me, the people whose lives were transformed into cogs for profit. for extraction. thats the relationship i want to change.
if that means less bananas fine. if it means more bananas fine. bananas arent the aim. emancipation is.
Émile Bonnaire. Adventurer, mercantile traveller, ladies’ man. Likes a drink, likes a laugh, loves to tell tall tales. Flamboyant, fun, and impressively fleshed out by the tiny, dapper, gravel-voiced charms of James Callis. Even his name derives from the French for “a good time” (or, depending where you look: “good bloodline”).
We first meet him accompanied by jaunty music on his way from the docks to a tavern, tipping his hat to interested women with a smirking flash of big, dark, pretty eyes, before roaring his intentions to pay for everyone’s drinks as he bursts through the door.
A bit of a rogue, Bonnaire. A bit of a weasel too, but a funny one. And he has an excellently aggressive wife.
Bonnaire is the kind of person who gets other people into trouble but always slips free himself. Pay attention - that’s going to be important later.
Once he’s successfully wriggled his way back into the clutches of the Musketeers, he treats Porthos (and us) to the glories of his exotic wanderings, revealing himself to be something of a liar, or just prone to exaggeration and fawning.
So far, so funny.
Except that the people he’s pissed-off have a habit of finding him, and again it’s those around him who pay the price. Our lads drag a potentially mortally wounded Porthos on to Athos’s old house and, despite comedy punching, it’s clear that things have taken a turn for the serious. The music is cluing us in, you see.
And it turns out that being beholden, duty, debts owed, and notions of family and belonging are massive themes here. As well as definitions of humanity, of who gets to be chattel. Of who gets to own the enacted tragedy.
Porthos rails and growls, and Bonnaire defends himself, claiming that the barbaric (“disgusting” - thanks, Athos) acts he’s perpetrating in the name of profit are “strictly business”. Not prejudice. Porthos spells it out for us, time and again: people are not belongings, everyone is free, no man has a right to own and dispose of another living soul. Except Bonnaire is. Except Athos has. Except the King and Richelieu do, and will. Arguably, these men who kill for duty, as Maria Bonnaire threatens for love (and is killed for revenge) are part of that same culture of disposable humanity.
The episode shows us this, asks us to consider a multi-faceted view of people and their motives and actions. People can be noble and be murderers. People can be friendly and polite, and ruthless killers. People can be charming and fun and human traffickers.
We have a problem in this fandom. A pretty big one, and frankly an old one too. Dumas, for example, seemed to be showing us an unredeemably monstrous Milady while simultaneously demonstrating that, in the society where she found herself, she had little choice - drown, or by killed for a witch, essentially. Tragic, noble, beautiful Athos drowns his sorrows under a nom de guerre, and charges at well-armed enemies in a bid to escape from a crime that d’Artagnan labels correctly as murder right from the get-go in the books. And in the show, Athos condemns Milady over and over for the sins that he himself commits, of killing at the command of the powers-that-be, forever drawn to and repulsed by a woman who shows him all-too-clearly what they both are, and have chosen to be. And yet certain facets of fandom cannot see Milady as anything but evil, and Athos as thoroughly blameless. So many adaptations (or perceptions of them) see Richelieu as nothing but a big old panto baddie and d’Artagnan as a beloved puppy who never did anything wrong. Hi. We have some things we need to address. Dumas gave us a raft of characters who are frankly horrible, selfish, violent people, every one of them flawed in some way, every one of them with issues they need to face, sins to atone for. We do the source material an injustice if we reduce them to simply Good Guys and Bad Guys.
And here, in response to an adaptation deliberately rendered for a modern audience, with dozens of layers in every interlocking scene and arc, people persist in seeing Bonnaire as a funny wee guy who was merely a bit greedy. But he’s funny and flash, so no real harm done, huh? Oh, he’s misguided, not evil!
The late, great Terry Pratchett broke down millennia of debate by saying that evil starts by treating people as things. Oh, it may head elsewhere, become more granular and a matter of opinion, but actually it’s pretty simple: don’t treat people as commodities.
The people who watch that episode and come away uncritical Bonnaire stans stagger me. This one isn’t even subtle - not only does he leave his beloved wife to die; not only does he lie and cheat and slide away from accountability at every turn, but Porthos roars (and later mutters) an absolute and no-holds-barred, emotional and intellectual take-down of the ethical nadir, the moral pit that is perpetrating slavery. He outlines in pitiless detail what it really means to the individuals (“Men, women, and children!”). He show how the long-term effects of that abuse, even once freed, shorten a person’s life, have resounding repercussions through generations. And he must feel so alone - the others holding him back from hurting Bonnaire, Athos telling him “Yes, it’s horrible, but it’s legal, and we have our duty to take this man to the Cardinal,” before ducking out of said duty himself to go on an drinking binge epic even by his standards. The others are more sympathetic, but still follow the course set for them by their superiors.
I want to tell the Bonnaire fans: yeah, he’s supposed to be fun and funny. You’re supposed to pick up that people can be interesting and quirky and ABSOLUTELY, THOUGHTLESSLY EVIL. That evil isn’t just the simple, unattractive thuggery of Labarge et al, it’s men doing ruthless things for the good of their country or for profit or for love or for power. It’s people feeling desperate and it’s people feeling dutiful. It’s not any one thing (except, at root, commoditising people), and just because they sold the role, doesn’t mean that the actor didn’t understand that either.
This is the message that I want them to understand: evil can look pretty. Evil can be charming. Evil can seem absolutely harmless. Evil can make you laugh, feel flattered, feel affection, feel pity. Yes, there are moral grey areas in the world, but human trafficking is not, cannot, and will never be anything other than irredeemable savagery. Slavery is cruel and vile and inhumane. And just because something has never been condemned in law, does not mean it is justifiable if it diminishes lives.
And just because you find someone attractive does not mean they’re the good guy. Come on, now.
What if your whumpee is hit by a chain on their lower back? What are the consequences?
[Post inspired by discussions in the Musketeers Garrison server about the possible consequences of Aramis being hit by the metallic chain during the skirmish in Commodities]
Depending on where the chain hits your whumpee, they may get:
Broken/bruised ribs
Due to the length of the chain, if multiple ribs break in multiple places, whumpee can get a flail chest (sharp, severe chest pain, difficulty in breathing, requires immediate medical attention)
Broken vertebrae/spine (can lead to permanent disability)
Internal bleeding (requires immediate medical attention)
Scars where the chain broke skin
Pissing of blood! This happens due to kidney injury. Depending on the extent of kidney damage, this symptom maybe harmless or very serious. In Grade 1 injury, basically there is a little contusion or a small amount of blood accumulates under the capsule. It resolves over time. In Grade 2 and 3, a small amount of blood collects around kidney. Again, they heal with time. In Grade 4, there is urine leakage and extensive laceration of the kidney blood vessels. It might require surgery. Grade 5 is a shattered or devascularized kidney with active bleeding. It's an emergency
Stiffness of movements (if there is a fight, this lack of agility on part of whumpee can prove costly)
Ignoring the injury for a long duration may cause:
So yesterday, I had a nap and dreamed that Porthos and Aramis were arguing that ended with Porthos shouting "You want to kiss me so bad it makes you stupid" (Yes, Tumblr has rotten my brain)
Now it is my new conspiracy theory that the real reason Aramis was so stupid throughout the show was because he wanted to kiss Porthos
In this video, I talk a fair bit about the recent moves in GDL, SLV, GDX & SILJ and how these can serve as an indicator as to where the stock market may be going next.
A brief synopsis of topics I also cover include:
Do I wear sweatpants when participating in interviews or videos?!
The pauses and pullbacks in the stock market.
Why gap downs are actually a good thing.
What the sentiment chart is showing about what people are expecting to happen next.
What worries me about the Apple and Tesla charts.
Try not to get caught up in the hype around what an election year means to stock market performance. Follow the price instead, and stay sane.
The war in Ukraine is exacerbating preexisting problems with global grain supplies and prices. Although higher prices are felt by all, North African and Middle Eastern countries along the Mediterranean are more directly and severely affected.
So we consider: The lilies of Jesus’ day were of the buttercup family, not like the Easter lilies that I depicted with Sumi ink, gold, and platinum. They were small, dainty flowers, that sprang up in the morning dew, and shriveled at night. They were like weeds. “They do not spin or toil” because they grew uncultivated anywhere and everywhere. These lilies were used to fuel fires because they were so spindly [….]
Jesus is telling us that these things we use and take for granted, like the arts, can have a central place in our conversation about the eternal. Because they are ephemeral and spindly, they ignite. Because they are throwaways, they serve a greater purpose. Precisely because the arts are useless, peripheral, and ephemeral, they are significant, essential, and permanent for God’s Kingdom.
The arts are a gift, not a commodity. To the extent that we commoditize art and value art as the price dictates, to that extent we will devalue ourselves. To the extent that the arts are devalued in the church, to that extent we will dehumanize and devalue the gospel. We will end up “selling” the gospel as cheap, utilitarian merchandise, filling our mall-like churches with trinkets only worthy of 15 seconds of fame and attention.