#if there's a character on family matters that women should aspire to it should be laura winslow | Explore Tumblr Posts and Blogs

gegengestalt · 11 months

Text

Some thoughts on how Dmitri Karamazov and Pavel Smerdyakov are perfect foils

*Keep in mind that this contains spoilers for the entire book and that in order for this comparison to work, one must assume that the rumour about Fyodor being Pavel Smerdyakov's biological father has to be true.

While there is a lot written on the theological debate of Ivan and Alyosha Karamazov, I have yet to see a comparison of Mitya Karamazov and Pavel Smerdyakov. Perhaps I haven't explored enough, but these are my two cents (dare I say 3000 rubles) on the matter. Both taken care of by Grigory, both suspects in the murder of Fyodor Pavlovich, yet two men couldn't be more different from each other. I will write down my thoughts in this order:

Different from their birth (social circumstances)

Contrasting the individuals (their descriptions and characterization, side by side)

Brotherhood (relationships to Ivan and Alyosha, preparation for the next point

Narrative (their place in the narrative)

1. Different from their birth

From even before they were born, their paths are opposed. Mitya is born out of the union of Fyodor Pavlovich and Adelaida Miusova, an aristocratic, beautiful and educated young woman who married Fyodor against her family's wishes and was no innocent victim of his. Even when he left her son, it was her choice, though a hard one (and probably the best one, considering her fate.)(BookI,chapter1). Stinking Lizaveta didn't have much of a choice. She was a poor and mentally disabled woman who suffered violence from Fyodor shortly after Adelaida left, and died in childbirth (BIIIch2). Mitya keeps a connection to his mother through his inheritance, but for Pavel, it's a curse. He is "the stinking son of Stinking Lizaveta", and ironically the child that remains in his father's home for the longest time.

From these circumstances, the children grow up to be a firstborn who feels entitled to what he feels is owed to him, and an illegitimate son whose work as a servant is taken for granted. Yet, even when Mitya is of a good social position and Pavel is of a lower one, Mitya is the one who seems to sink below what is considered to be how an aristocrat should act in public and is compared to a beast, and he has often surrounded himself with peasants in his parties. Pavel is the one who takes small steps to strive for more than what he's given, he likes to dress well, he learns and has aspirations beyond what he's expected to do. (For this whole paragraph, BVch2)

2. Contrasting the individuals

Their differences come down to individual characteristics as well, and it's evident even in how they present themselves. Mitya is described as muscular and sporting signs of masculinity like a moustache that is often seen in military men (BIIch6) He walks with long strides, he's loud, outwardly emotional and often gesticulates in exaggerated manners. Pavel's main physical feature is his weakness and sickliness. Compared to Mitya's masculinity, Pavel is portrayed as emasculate, as he is compared to an eunuch. He has a silent and discreet demeanour, and he's not very expressive. (BIIIch6, BIXch6)

Mitya is impulsive. This causes him to have a temper and not be very smart in the way that requires focus, patience and forethought (seeing him as completely stupid leaves out so much of his character). What Pavel lacks in the physical strength that Mitya has, he makes up for with a more calculated and patient approach. He's neat and meticulous even in the night of the murder, while Mitya runs around stained in blood. Speaking of meticulousness, it's interesing to me how Pavel's behaviour could be described as effeminate, while Mitya's masculinity is overdone through several masculine stereotypes at once (the knight of honour, the brute, the sensitive and tortured artist).

When it comes to women, God, their country and poetry, their opinions are comically different. Mitya enjoys the attention he gets from women and returns it, he expresses love for God and Russia in the text and he's very fond of poetry, quoting it often and even speaking with rhymes and wordplays at times. (BookIIIchIII&IV, Epilogue 2). Pavel happens to disdain all of these. While he holds contempt for both men and women, the suggestion of marriage digusted him. He rejects God, claims to hate all of Russia and declares that poetry is rubbish ("who ever talks in rhyme?" well, it seems like Mitya does)(BIIIch6, BVch2).

3. Brotherhood

Ivan and Alyosha, the children of Sofia Ivanovna, have contrasting relationships with their half- brothers. Mitya, who quickly grew fond of Alyosha, puts him in a moral high- ground and pours out his heart to him. Alyosha accepts it and reciprocates his brotherly love, even if he isn't as outwardly enthusiastic. Pavel, on the other hand, looked up to Ivan on the basis of thinking they could be alike and shows great interest in Ivan's displays of intellect. Ivan is increasingly scornful of Pavel as the story progresses. Ivan and Alyosha's contrasts extend to their half- brothers as well. Mitya and Alyosha are the life- affirming pair of half- brothers, while Ivan and Pavel are the pair with the ideas deemed destructive by the narrative.

Two fun contrasts I noticed, as a side note:

Mitya and Alyosha are two sides of not working for money, and Pavel and Ivan are two sides of work.

Book III ends with Alyosha and Mitya parting ways and Book V ends with Pavel and Ivan parting ways.

4. Narrative

While Ivan and Alyosha carry the theological and philosophical discussion in the heart of the book, Mitya and Pavel are the main players in the world that puts the theories and ideals to the test. Dostoyevsky's narrative attempts to make the reader sympathize and have faith in the greatly flawed human being that is Mitya. Those who believed in his capacity for spontaneous good will never believe that he murdered his father, while those who didn't would have a harder time believing in his open- ended redemption. Pavel's case is a little more complicated. His inner thoughts aren't as exposed as Mitya's, and his motivations aren't explicitly nor reliably stated, so it's harder to consider his importance unless one pays attention to how the narrator presents him as an outsider, a shallow presence. Not even his relationship with Marya is explored. I have my reasons to believe this may be a deliberate choice, since a theme in Fyodor Dostoyevsky's work is the suffering of the lower classes. Mitya is a great character, but Pavel isn't, not because he's badly written, but because perhaps his conflicts aren't Mitya's intense and paradoxical angst and passion. Perhaps there is a lot of boring and unromantic pain in the world.

Mitya and Pavel execute Alyosha's and Ivan's respective positions, even further. Mitya's religious fervor surpasses Alyosha's, his faith is a simple and unwavering affirmation even when he's drowning in the guilt of sin or Rakitin pesters him to dissuade him from his faith. His religiosity goes so far that he overdoes one of the core ideas of the book: while he embraces Zosima's idea of guilt for all, it doesn't just mean that he should be guilty for everyone, but that everyone is guilty for everyone else. Those are fundamentally different things. As for Pavel, he dared to do what Ivan doesn't, he put his ideas in practice (BXIch7-8). However, I don't believe that he was directly inspired by him. I think he adapted the ideas to his own interests. Sometimes people love to realize what they already knew, and wait until they find a justification. One of my favourite things about Dostoyevsky is that we see the philosophical content happen in the world of his stories.

From their birth to their fates, two men couldn't be more different. Mitya, who acted or expressed himself in a suicidal manner well over ten times, ultimately stays away from the pistols and declares a sense of responsibility for a crime he did not commit. Pavel, who was shown to feel attachment to his own life and save his own skin, destroys himself out of his own volition after tormenting Ivan.

Thank you so much for reading if you made it all the way to the end!

#the brothers karamazov #how do I even tag this? tbh I could write even more on this #tbk #dmitri karamazov #pavel smerdyakov #fyodor dostoyevsky

71 notes · View notes

iheartweiwuxian · 5 months

Text

LWJ Character Analysis

(Forewarning that this is basically just an entire rant on why I love him)

Lan Wangji– birth name: Lan Zhan. Courtesy name: Huanguang-jun. The younger of the Twin Jades. The most elegant man of the Lan Clan of Gusu- perhaps the whole cultivation world entirely.

Born of parents who didn’t marry out of love- he didn’t know what love was. Didn’t know how it should look. His father had fallen in love at first sight, but the women in whom he loved did not return the sediment. Instead, in refusing the man’s advances, she murdered his mentor, sending him into deep grief.

Alas, the Lan Clan is known for their deep seated perspectives when it comes to matters of the heart. He locked her away within the Cloud Recess (the residence of the Lan Clan) and forbade himself from seeing her. He withdrew himself entirely, choosing to cultivate year round, for how could he move on from the one in which he loved? But how could he not grieve as well? It was because of this that Lan Wangji and his elder brother- Lan Xichen, were raised by the respectable Lan Qiren.

Strict, harsh, formidable rules were forced upon little Wangji as Lan Xichen rose to the challenge as sect leader, for their father was in no shape to do so. Years went by like this. Their mother died when they were mere children.

But this isn’t about the Twin Jades of Gusu. Rather, it is the story of a Jade of Gusu. Of how Lan Wangji lost, loved, griefed, and rose above all else. How he overcame the fate that was destined upon him.

The Lan Clan of Gusu is known for their rules.

“Go reflect at the Wall of Discipline,” They’d say. “Only return after nightfall.”

Being that Lan Wangji’s parents no longer sought after him and his brother, Lan Qiren raised them as his own. Lan Wangji became his prime pupil- a spectacle that everyone should admire and aspire to be.

For he, ever since he was young, always followed the rules. He never stepped out of line. He was never restless. He never spoke unless spoken too. The perfect child.

The rules were mandatory. They must be followed if you were to cultivate under the clan title. Such disciplinary actions were only further induced by the wearing of a white headband, one instilled with flowing blue clouds- symbolizing self restraint, and purity of both the body and mind (it is also to be stated that the headband mustn't be removed by anyone other than someone of close familial connections or a significant other).

Such rules were hard to follow, but Lan Wangji found it to be no problem, even becoming Lan Qiren’s personal “deputy” of sorts; finding rule breakers and administering them to other elders to receive their punishment.

No running.

No shouting.

Meals must be taken in silence.

Alcohol is prohibited.

No private fighting.

No rushed walking.

Every couple of years, the Lan Clan of Gusu would host a seminar of sorts, welcoming sect disciples from other clans. It would be used to teach the disciples not only the history behind cultivation and its dealings, but also to provide the disciples with the opportunity to train under an immortal clan.

The scene was set.

Lan Wangji fulfilled his role to the tee, punishing rule breakers and being the prime example during class. It had been dark out that night, as he patrolled the area as usual.

Noticing nothing out of the ordinary, he squinted, lifting his sleeve to turn back to the Room of Tranquility.

In the midst of the moonscape was a silhouette. The silhouette was of a young man- not much older than himself, draped across the tiles of a roof, leg swinging haphazardly as he strung up the jar to his lips, finishing it in one go. The boy then turned to look at Lan Wangji, flashing him a grin. Lan Wangji’s brow furrowed.

That was the first time he saw Wei Wuxian.

My Analysis

More often than not, I find myself completely enraptured by MDZS. More specifically, all of its worldbuilding. Truly, in my opinion, one of MXTX’s best novels, due to the simple fact that everything is interconnected. As much as I adore Wei Wuxian, since the story is told from his perspective, I’d like to think I understand him fairly well. However, that is to say, I have wished on numerous occasions it was told from Lan Wangji’s perspective. Because, well, he doesn’t speak. Okay, he does, but I’m dying to know what his internal monologue would be like, witnessing such events transpire. I’ve even considered rewriting some parts of the novel from his perspective.

There seems to be the misconception that Lan Wangji is a boring person, and I beg to differ. I mean no offense, but how could one find him boring? He’s calm, quick witted, and quite frankly, sassy. How could one misunderstand his character so much? I’m aware that he doesn’t speak much, but that is hardly any excuse due to the fact that we (as readers) are given numerous context clues onto how Lan Wangji truly feels and why he does what he does.

Thus, I find it to be my duty to explain it to the best of my ability, as well as some other protruding factors about his character that I not only like, but also find incomparably important to the story. Without further adieu…

When did Lan Wangji fall in love with Wei Wuxian?

I find it fascinating that in the novel- the canon source material, we are given zero explanation or implication as to when Lan Wangji actually fell in love with Wei Wuxian. It is because of this, that

I think it is possible that he fell enraptured (I use this term lightly because it was definitely more than interest, but I don’t think he was in love with him quite yet), a little after the summer Wei Wuxian had spent at the Cloud Recess.

Due to the fact that Lan Wangji’s father had fallen in love at first sight, I find it highly likely that the same thing had occurred with Lan Wangji, but I doubt that was all that was at play.

They were teenagers at the time (roughly fifteen or sixteen years of age), so it was only natural that one might feel an inclined attraction to the other- hardly making that love at first sight.

There was definitely a shock factor attributed though. Up until that point, Lan Wangji (who I will be referring to as LWJ from now on, as well as WWX for Wei Wuxian for easier accessibility), had lived a very structured life. From the moment he woke, to the minute his eyes closed, his life was in accordance with the Lan Clan’s precepts.

To see someone laying there without a care in the world on top of a roof, chugging a jar of Emperor’s Smile (a very strong wine), must’ve stirred something in LWJ. Such a blatant disregard in not only the rules, but proper etiquette, and yet when LWJ broached the subject, WWX didn’t find any fault with himself and even offered the other jar to LWJ.

LWJ had never fallen into this type of situation before, so he had nothing to look back on on how he should proceed. He must’ve been flustered beyond belief, for he pulled out his sword and began to fight WWX, himself breaking the rules!

Definition of: Oh no, he’s hot. Quick, do something!

And as their time together only grew, I think LWJ found himself more and more captured by WWX and everything he is. His teasing, his jokes, his prodding, the way he viewed the world, I think they all matched something deep within LWJ that even he was afraid to discover.

WWX was loud. He was unafraid to voice his opinions. He was shameless. It was everything LWJ was the opposite of, everything the Lan Clan was against. And yet, LWJ couldn’t get enough. He kept seeking WWX out, whether consciously or not, and WWX kept going along with it.

This is why I believe that LWJ did not fully fall in love at first sight, rather he fell in love with WWX’s principles first, for he had never seen anything like it in his life. It was a complete 180 of everything he ever knew.

However, I doubt it was classified as “love” at first, given the…tension, but, I digress! I find it possible that sometime after WWX’s stay at the cloud recesses, LWJ fell in love with him.

When did Lan Wangji write “Wangxian”?

This is a hard one. Based on events in the novel, I’ll compose a (somewhat) linear timeline of what occurred. Please only view until the underlined text if you do not wish for any spoilers.

It is as follows:

Lan Clan welcomes disciples for their “summer school”.

LWJ supervises WWX in the Library Pavilion/WWX’s endless teasing.

WWX leaves and returns to the Jiang Clan of Yumeng.

Wen Symposium (where they shot corpses)/WWX pulling off LWJ’s forehead ribbon.

Xuanwu Cave Arc.

Wen’s slaughter Jiang Clan of Yumeng in the name of retribution.

WWX thrown into the burial mounds.

WWX returns, LWJ asks him to return to Gusu with him.

Sunshot Campaign.

Marriage between Jiang Yanli and Jin Zixuan.

Interception on the trail/Jin Zixuan dies.

Slaughter of Nightless City/LWJ brings WWX back to burial grounds and holds him on the brink of death.

LWJ receives punishment (thirty three whips).

LWJ enters reflection/Seizure of the Burial Grounds.

WWX dead/LWJ mourns.

Please keep in mind that this rough timeline only depicts the events that transpired during the “flashback” scenes, meaning that it is those happening in WWX’s past life as the Yiling Patriarch, not the current arcs.

However, now that we have the events, I will answer the question: I think LWJ wrote Wangxian after WWX had pulled off his forehead ribbon at the symposium, but before Xuanwu Cave.

This is the most logical explanation because it gives time for LWJ to sort his feelings out, enough to write a song about it. Although he is still very much conflicted up until this point, he had enough of a push to write and compose such a song.

Those who do not know, “Wangxian” is a canon song that LWJ wrote and composed for WWX, the title being a combination of their names. The songs’ lyrics show his longing for WWX and how he can see the tides turning.

Here is an excerpt:

“Gusu welcomes the spring tide once more.

Fleeting mountains beyond the clouds,

White wisps paving a path for my longing.

Even though you’ve gone, my frozen heart has yet to melt.”

Although it could be argued that LWJ added these lyrics after WWX died, they can still be applied here. During the symposium, WWX had tugged on LWJ’s forehead ribbon, causing it to fall off.

Those of the Lan Clan know this well, but other sect disciples don’t. You never remove someone’s forehead ribbon- as the act is strictly allowed only by members of their close family, or significant others- usually after marriage. It is done that way because they believe as they are married, they can be released of their self restraint.

So for WWX to accidentally tug LWJ’s forehead ribbon off, it was definitely a moment for him. Even though it in no way forced him to harbor feelings toward WWX, let alone begin an intimate relationship with him, paired with the fact that it was an accident on WWX’s part, LWJ took it personally, in a way that it wasn’t intended.

So personally that he couldn’t even find himself upset at the idea of him and WWX being together. I think that shortly after this incident, he wrote “Wangxian”, understanding his feelings a bit more, but not dwelling too deeply on them.

That is, until Xuanwu Cave.

Why did Lan Wangji kiss a blind-folded Wei Wuxian on Phoenix Mountain?

For this, I have two possible explanations.

One- lust. It is by no short measure that there was not any sexual tension present between the two, and in that moment, when LWJ saw a blind-folded Wei Wuxian sitting on a tree’s roots, his self restraint snapped.

Two- he knew this opportunity wouldn’t come by again, and paired with lust, he acted before thinking.

In the later novels, when WWX finds out LWJ was the one that kissed him that day, he teased him.

“‘You’ve harbored improper thoughts about me for that long?!’ Wei Wuxian asked.

‘...I…At the time, I was aware it was wrong of me. Very wrong of me.’ Lan Wangji mumbled.”

(Page 149, english novel 5)

This shows that it was a combination of both lust, and the fact that he wouldn’t get the chance in the future. For at the time, LWJ was too scared to share his feelings after being so forcefully denied at the famous: “Return to Gusu with me,” line. Furthermore, he might have been repressed.

It is possible that, since cut-sleeves (what the novels called homosexuals) were so frowned upon, LWJ himself was deeply repressed. Only accepting his feelings for WWX little by little, refusing to categorize it as “love”.

However, I find that hard to be the case as MXTX herself has stated that LWJ and WWX are the only two canon queer characters in MDZS, so maybe he wasn’t repressed at all- just too scared to tell WWX.

Additionally, after the kiss, LWJ stormed off in a flustered mess, punching trees everywhere. Even WWX was shocked when he found him, commenting on how he had never seen him before in such a state, to which LWJ turned around bleary-eyed and shouted at WWX to stay away from him.

This also proves that although LWJ did kiss WWX, he had shocked himself by his own actions, immediately feeling terrible, like he’d taken advantage of the situation.

So, my final answer is this: It was a combination of both lust and the fact that LWJ did not have the confidence to outright say his feelings.

Why did Lan Wangji bring Wei Wuxian back to the Burial Grounds after the Nightless City Slaughter?

Simple. LWJ- who was on the brink of death himself, had dragged his body over to a nearly collapsed WWX and brought him back to the Burial Grounds, where he sat with him for two days, holding his hand and muttering under his breath while transferring his spiritual power to WWX to keep him alive.

That’s the easy answer.

The hard answer is the one that brings the politics into question. Why did LWJ do it, if he knew he’d be punished once he returned to Gusu? Why was he protecting the Yiling Patriarch? Why did he care so much?

These questions are hard to answer, as we ourselves (the reader) do not know either. In the novels, WWX is known for his bad memory. So in the days where LWJ and WWX were on the brink of death, WWX had no recollection of what happened after the slaughter. He simply remembers waking up alone in the Burial Mounds, only to be killed soon after.

But what about LWJ?

LWJ had risked not only his life, but his reputation to bring WWX back. He was more concerned about WWX’s safety than his own, willing to give up everything to protect him from the world that was out to get him. In Lan Xichen’s (LWJ’s older brother) words to WWX, he claimed that to anyone who had seen LWJ and WWX in that cave, it would’ve been clear as day what WWX meant to LWJ. Meaning, LWJ no longer hid his feelings when he cared for WWX in that time, but it was already too late.

Even LWJ was shocked that upon WWX’s rebirth, he had no recollection at what happened. So that leaves one to wonder…what really occurred then?

What happened that was so dire that LWJ was taken aback? What did LWJ say/do that made it so abundantly clear of his affections- as he knew he was running out of time?

I think during this time frame, LWJ confessed. He knew WWX wasn’t all there, but he confessed regardless. Holding his hands and muttering under his breath for two days, he confessed. He confessed everything he felt toward the man in his arms, the one almost gone, the one ridiculed by the world, and couldn’t take it anymore.

How could he stand by and watch as every person wished for WWX’s downfall, and wanted him dead? How could he stand still knowing his love was being tortured like this?

LWJ was a man of principle, he grew up with it. WWX was everything he wasn’t. WWX was the sun, and LWJ the moon. If WWX died, where would that leave him? It would leave him once again shrouded in darkness.

LWJ didn’t care if he himself perished in the process, for if WWX was protected, that was all that mattered.

In the present-day arcs, why does LWJ continuously drink with WWX if his clan rules forbid it?

A much easier question to answer. LWJ does this because he feels comfortable with WWX, entrusting him completely. In the time WWX was dead, LWJ had mourned of course, but came to terms slowly with all the emotions he felt toward WWX. So, upon his rebirth, LWJ felt no need to try and hide anything. He readily accepted WWX fully, not questioning anything he did, as he wanted to do so all those years ago.

Did Lan Wangji love anyone else in those years when Wei Wuxian was away?

This, I wholeheartedly believe, is a no. As I stated previously, LWJ is a man of principle and righteousness. He would not go against matters of the heart, and he couldn’t even begin to love someone else other than WWX.

Furthermore, LWJ was busy.

He raised the bunnies WWX had given him, trained a whole new generation of sect disciples under his wing- teaching them to be unbiased and to house their own thoughts and judgment. Unlike he had. He even raised Lan Sizhui as his own (previously known as A-Yuan), teaching him how to play the Guqin and learn Inquiry.

During this time, LWJ mourned. He mourned WWX every day for thirteen years. He never believed WWX would come back though. He didn’t get his hopes up- he knew WWX was gone, but he kept going through life with the same pace he always had.

Thus, the famous saying in the cultivation world sprung from this.

“Appearing where there is chaos.”

LWJ started showing up everywhere, even to minor problems with minor ghosts/monsters. I think that even though LWJ knew WWX was gone, he still showed up in search of him. Never getting his hopes up, though I still believe he was subconsciously searching for him.

The night when LWJ found out WWX had been killed, he rushed into town, buying the same alcohol WWX had so many years ago.

He got drunk.

When he came to, he had burned a sun mark on his chest- the same one that had been burned in WWX’s, that night in the cave of Xuanwu. However, LWJ’s wounds were far deeper emotionally than physically.

He had turned the Library Pavilion inside out, frantically searching for something, anything, of WWX’s. When Lan Xichen approached him, worry written evidently on his face, LWJ blank stared and asked for a flute. Lan Xichen retrieved a flute for him.

It wasn’t the right flute.

Thirteen years had passed like that.

Thirteen years of endless regret and among them, new beginnings. He watched the juniors grow up just as he wanted them too. He watched them grow up and be different from him.

He had watched his only love suffer and was powerless to save him.

Thirteen years of grief. Of sad glances; heartfelt sincerity.

Thirteen years of silence. Of being completely and utterly alone.

And then, thirteen years of acceptance.

Of cherished memories.

Thirteen years of somberness.

Of quiet.

Thirteen years of peace.

Until one day, something stirred.

“He had drunk the liquor he had drunk; he had suffered the injury he had suffered.”

(Page 185, english novel 5)

#mdzs #grandmaster of demonic cultivation #mxtx #lan wangji #lwj #wei wuxian #wangxian #mo dao zu shi #the untamed #mxtx mdzs

25 notes · View notes

donnerpartyofone · 2 months

Text

Everything I Watched While I Was Recovering From the Plague

I have a fantasy that watching a bunch of movies of wildly varying quality and content in close proximity can really bend your wires out of shape, like being exposed to too much radiation. I like to tell people that I had to get all those eye surgeries because of all the deranged stuff I subject my eyeballs to. My criteria for this marathon were "movies I want to watch but it's never 'the right time'" and "movies my sick husband in the next room is not interested in".

THE IRON CLAW: Pretty much the big, dumb, lummoxy movie that you might expect. The script is surprisingly weak--the girlfriend declares that everything is a matter of fate minutes before saying "I believe we make our own luck"??--but the family curse part is sort of compelling in spite of it all. I admit I was partially in it for the freak show of muscle mania; for various cultural reasons the way bodies were presented (and the kinds of bodies people aspired to have) in the '80s was so different than it is now, the exhibition of flesh had a very different kind of character that's hard to describe but this movie with its bulbous wrestler bodies filling the screen gave me flashbacks. Zac Efron should keep his He-Man haircut.

DARK HARVEST: I've been struggling to describe this certain type of movie that's very form over function, with a pretty specific form: there's like a really forced "stylized" nostalgia thing with a lot of humorless "weirdness" attached in movies like FINAL GIRL and KNIVES AND SKIN, and to some degree THE REFLECTING SKIN although that's a more sophisticated example (that I still don't enjoy). Anyway DARK HARVEST adds a Pumpkinhead guy (not pictured below) to the mix, and he looks pretty good at least.

THANKSGIVING: Well it's the best movie Eli Roth has made in a long time! It's OK. I like that the inciting incident is a Black Friday stampede, but it's too bad he didn't have the means to make it look more convincing; it feels like about a 150 people running around yelling and there's conspicuous amount of breathing room for the victims getting "crushed".

ZONE OF INTEREST: A tour of the ogre's castle, creepy and effective. Łukasz Żal's spy cam setup cleverly establishes a sense of being trapped in forbidden chambers.

GODLAND: Danish priest makes the perilous journey to Iceland, is a complete asshole to everyone he meets. Interesting, but more beautiful than interesting.

LINGERING: Goofy K horror in which a handful of different neurotic women are relentlessly mean to a small child. I often wonder about this trope of like, someone who is categorically unsuited to parenthood gets saddled with an orphan, and they REALLY don't want to adopt the orphan, but eventually they turn against their own personality and rational estimation of means because the orphan is so cute and/or sad. The implication seems to be that every one of us can and should be parents, and maybe this is even related to the (usually comedic) trope of the solitary curmudgeon who just wants to be left alone, until they undergo some kind of forced exposure therapy at the hands of their nosy neighbors who insist that no human being could actually enjoy their own company. This is an ongoing concern for me.

UNREST: Anarchist watch factory workers in love. Second movie in the list that uses early photography as a motif (also GODLAND). Pretty interesting formally, and I like all the stuff about the development and spread of standardized hourly time.

WITCHHAMMER: 1970 Czech allegory for Communist "show trials". Man, whether you're making an exploitation movie or a political statement, witch hunt movies are always tough stuff, huh?

HONEYCOMB: A woman unravels mentally when her childhood furniture arrives at her home, and she and her husband play out a series of weird infantile psychodramas as an escape from the pressures of their bourgeois existence. More interesting than enjoyable, and I'm not always sure how interesting it really is. There's a certain brand of European '60s filmmaking that involves a lot of improvised shrieking and laughing and crying and rolling around on the floor that makes me question whether it's really as hollow as I think it is, or if I'm just not a sophisticated enough viewer to understand the power of it, or if its original power was really dependent on its context in the development of cinema. Maybe the answer is a little of everything.

THE SWEET HOURS: A Spanish writer's latest play parses the Freudian mysteries of his childhood, and he fully immerses himself in the rehearsals to seek the truth by reliving his memories. It's actually not that deep but maintains a great air of importance anyway.

NIGHT GAMES: A young aristocrat brings his bride to his childhood manse where their surroundings trigger immersive memories of his debauched youth, in which--wait a minute, am I watching the same fucking movie for the third time? Not really but that was weird. Criterion notes that this is supposedly John Waters' favorite movie, which makes a lot of sense when you've heard him say that he used to force Divine to drop acid with him and go see Bergman movies, which Divine HATED. What's really funny to me is that if you basically do not want to drop acid and watch a Bergman movie then you'd think nothing could make you do it more than once! The idea of John Waters tricking Divine into doing this repeatedly is fucking hilarious.

SAM NOW: Disturbing documentary made by some young dudes trying to find out why their mother suddenly abandoned them when they were kids. It's a decent enough movie but I was extremely unsettled by the blithe naivete of the young brothers set against the increasingly obvious fact that there's something pretty bad going on with the mom. Get ready for a lot of discomfort and unresolved questions if you watch this.

LIZZIE: Why is it that nobody has made a good Lizzie Borden movie? It's one of those overly familiar tales that's just sitting there in plain view still waiting for a solid adaptation, kind of like The Legend of Sleepy Hollow, but that at least has the great Disney cartoon in among all the so-so film attempts. You really want this to be good with Kirsten Stewart and Chloe Sevigny AND Denis O'Hare who I love to death, but it's just not that compelling. Actually it doesn't even dig into the most interesting details of the story in my opinion, I guess we needed to save time for extra lesbian makeouts. Also I hate to say it but Chloe Sevigny is really miscast; I love her but her whole thing is being really easy-going and natural, and that doesn't really work for this character (or she's not getting the direction that worked on AHS). Oh well.

MAIDSTONE: See my notes at the end of HONEYCOMB. I found this almost totally unwatchable. I've never read any Norman Mailer. Is Norman Mailer still cool, or did he just seem cool to some people at the time? Was Norman Mailer sort of like an adolescent rebellion phase that American literature had to go through in order to get to wherever it is now? A cursory review of his legacy seems to indicate this. Or maybe it's just really hard for me to sympathize with someone who goes way out of his way to piss off women, and then his defense against the inevitable backlash is "SEE? Feminism is fascist bullshit because look how I'm being treated!" I still see men do this on the smaller scale of their personal relationships--you know the drill, drive some poor woman insane, and then when she acts insane, invalidate everything she says by calling her insane--and they don't even need the excuse of clumsy satire to keep doing it, so forgive me if I don't find this approach very radical. And that's all setting aside Mailer's fetishization of the American Negro for whom it is not my place to speak, but you can imagine what that consists of if you don't already know. In any case I did not enjoy this movie, but I was on the edge of my seat the entire time waiting for the infamous Rip Torn hammer attack. I developed this whole fantasy that Rip Torn must reach a point where he just can't take it anymore and he tries to kill Norman Mailer. I mean *I* sure wanted to kill Norman Mailer, somebody has to do it, right? There are several moments in the film where it seems like someone has finally snapped and the cathartic murder might take place. What actually happens is that Rip Torn wanders up to Norman Mailer with a claw hammer, totally wild-eyed, and declares that he has finally understood that this great work of art can only be resolved with the death of the character Mailer plays. He really seems to believe what he's saying, and the sequence is extremely disturbing. In a way it's even disappointing, there were perfectly good, sober reasons to kill Norman Mailer without putting an unstable person in a chaotic and violent situation where he might naturally flip the fuck out! If MAIDSTONE has anything to tell us about the myth of the cowboy auteur, it might be that somebody like Norman Mailer shouldn't have free reign to abuse large groups of people even in the name of social critique or whatever, because one of them might turn out to be fucking crazy.

WANDA: I love movies that are made in Pittsburgh, I find them all totally fascinating. Or even just Pittsburgh-adjacent, like contrary to everybody else my favorite part of THE DEER HUNTER is the very beginning with the wedding, it's totally captivating to me. Anyway this is an odd, grimy little drama written and directed by Barbara Loden in which she plays the most incompetent woman in the world. It's a good time for a bad time, and if you're watching closely you'll see a poster for THE BRAINIAC in one of the scenes!

KISS DADDY GOODBYE: Obscure psychic kids movies starring Marilyn Burns and Fabian. Marilyn Burns is the nice teacher and Fabian is the cop who try to solve the mystery of the psychic kids, so they inevitably have sex because we have time for that I guess, but man Fabian's like roadside bachelor pad is SO SCARY. It has to be somebody's real hoarder house and it looks like it should be condemned, I felt nervous for Marilyn Burns! Marilyn Burns do NO eat or drink anything that comes out of that kitchen! Have you had your tetanus shot Marilyn Burns? Please run screaming, this is not a normal bachelor pad mess and it is not a good place for you to be naked!

The End.

#long post

18 notes · View notes

hawkshadowwrites · 9 months

Text

Barbie (2023); Gloria learns to have hope in Barbie again; 1k, character study

—

Gloria loves her life. Truly. Sasha is a beautiful daughter, strong and opinionated and everything she wants her daughter to be. But she is also a teenager, and as such, hates her mother.

It’s not a surprise, really. Gloria remembers hating her mother at this age, the age where everything is too much and not enough, the age where the world is blossoming around you but also breaking around you, the age in the hopes and dreams and limitless possibilities shatter into a million pieces, forced to face the fractures of what once was and what once could be.

Barbie.

A doctor. A lawyer. An astronomer. A scientist. A planner. A dreamer.

Barbie was supposed to be the ideal, but as with all gilded houses and rose colored glasses, the ideal is much more of a poison than a promise.

Gloria remembers her childhood, the joys she felt when she could just be, the joys in all of the ways that anything was possible if she just believed hard enough. The outfits and the adventures, the way that Barbie was Barbie and Barbie is Barbie. In the ways that anything is possible.

She remembers though, growing up. The ways that life came too hard to fast too soon; crying in the bathroom from shame of blood soaked jeans, looking in a mirror and realizing you aren't the same as everyone else, realizing that there are limits and expectations and somehow you are not enough.

Not enough.

Never enough.

The burning shame of realizing that you don't look a certain way or sound a certain way, that the world wants you to be a hundred million things, a thousand impossible things. Watching the years go by, understanding that it doesn't matter what you do or how hard you try, you will always fall short of impossible standards created by people who don't actually want you to succeed.

A pawn in the patriarchy, systemic oppression enforced to encourage infighting and complacency, a redirect away from the glass ceiling down to the glass bars of the gilded prison in which is just what womanhood is.

So Gloria can't blame Sasha. Beautiful, wonderful Sasha, an extension of herself but with so much more bravery and agency that somehow she can't find anymore.

A job where she is just a face — not even a name – but someone who sits at a desk and allows the men to make the decisions for and about women.

She can't blame her own daughter for losing faith, not when she doesn't have faith of her own. When her entire identity has been stripped down to motherhood, that the hopes and passions and fire inside of her has long since frozen, that the aspirations that she could be anything was a carrot on a stick designed to keep her running.

Do you ever think about dying?

Gloria does. Or doesn't. Sorta. Or kinda.

Isn't that the existential horrors of intrusive thoughts? The ones that creep in at the edges of consciousness and awareness and lingers in the ways that make you feel.

She loves her life. She does. She loves her daughter. Her husband is... well. He's there. There's nothing wrong with him but she doesn't love him. She does, but not in the ways she knows she should. He is sweet, and kind, and a good father, but he doesn't make her heart race in her chest, cheeks flush with exuberant joy, in the ways she longs for more.

Life is... there.

People call this depression, but is it really just that? Or is it that she finds herself moving through life without a purpose? Why is she here? What was she supposed to do? Was she always supposed to be here? In a job that she once found joy in because it was an embodiment and expression in what she believes in, but is now a room of male executives that keep their doors shut and ideas dismissed for everyone else.

Is it really a surprise she wanted to go back to where it all began? It is a surprise that in her job, and family, and life, wanting to revisit the hopes and dreams that Barbie offered? The adoration she had over the doll, the way Barbie could have been anything and was everything.

There were days she wanted to be an artist, months where she found joy in the drag of pen across the paper, in the seep of ink that blooms into color that stains the page. She used to draw, until one day she stopped drawing. One day she closed her sketch pad and never opened it back up again. One day the creativity that she used to cultivate seeped away until there was nothing left.

Barbie as a child was a conduit of her future, but now she is a marker of her complacency. She stopped trying. She stopped believing. She stopped creating.

The first sketch was nothing, broken charcoal on paper, smears on her hands as her fingers clench too hard with too much pressure. The second was more of the first, but she felt something uncoil in her with each tear of the sketch pad.

Ideas came to her: Barbie, as who she is now. Barbie, that is a representation of who she, Gloria, is now. Barbie — with her effervescent enthusiasm and energy — as a representation of the trials and pitfalls of life.

Of human emotion.

Of the crack in her heart and soul but also the warmth of her child in her arms, the smell of her hair pressing into her cheek. The way she can watch her daughter grow into something.

A Barbie who can allow herself to be. Cellulite, and anxiety, and depression. Barbie who is something more than perfect.

Barbie who is real. Barbie who feels and loves and dreams, who is a creator, not a thing created. Who is a dreamer, not just a dream made. Gloria knows that Barbie is a conception, not real, but isn’t that the whole point? That the reality and truth are the things we speak into existence? That the power we give to concepts are the concepts that hold the most weight.

Gloria needs Barbie now, more than ever. So she grabs her sketch pad, and she draws.

And hopes.

And believes.

And dreams.

#barbie #barbie 2023 #Gloria (Barbie 2023)#margot robbie #Margot Robbie’s Barbie (2023)#Barbie (2023) fanfic

38 notes · View notes

ididntwanttohavetohauntyou · 1 year

Text

#SAVE WARRIOR NUN

Avatrice is the best intentional slowburn wlw ship out there (you can’t change my mind). I will fight for them and Warrior Nun always for several reasons:

1) this representation is the kind we’ve been missing for decades (at the very least)

2) the team behind the show has shown that they’re willing to fight with us

3) this fandom is willing to take the time to fight passionately without blaming anyone but the people actually responsible - the network that didn’t promote the show and cancelled it despite good numbers

4) this show helped so many people (especially people like me who have struggled to reconcile their religion and their sexuality)

5) this show is female led and tells a story where the main storyline isn’t the women fighting for leadership positions or being catty unnecessarily

6) I love found family stories bc so many people can relate to them. We all find people who complete us and have our back no matter what and they aren’t always the people society says should do that

7) this show is genuinely just good. I’m studying film/communications rn and this show has all the components of the best ensemble shows:

a) strong and diverse characters who are not one dimensional or stereotypical (diverse in terms of race but also much more: personality, aspirations, paradigms, backgrounds, etc.)

b) conflict within the main group but also outside of it that play off of each other without being the same thing

c) major character development that is logical and well paced

d) realistic dialogue. It’s scripted but the jokes land when they’re supposed to and fall flat when they’re supposed to

e) the relationships (romantic and otherwise) are realistically complex and fluctuate

f) relatable characters and storylines (Ava exploring her newfound freedom recklessly, the girls all struggling with loss and change and Ava’s attempts to fit into that puzzle without replacing Shannon, Bea’s struggle with her sexuality, Camila’s need to prove herself and show her growth, Lilith’s thirst for validation, Mother Superion’s closed off nature because of loss, Mary’s stubborn fearlessness, Jillian’s loss of her son not once but twice, etc.)

g) natural chemistry between actors that shows onscreen

This show has done what so many have found impossible; It has balanced dozens of categories of expectations - that so many shows and movies don’t even attempt - and it has executed them all flawlessly.

I would like to thank the cast and crew for their amazing work. From one filmmaker/actor to many many more: thank you. This isn’t easy, but you did it, and you’re willing to do it again for us.

#i will never shut up about this #I will memorize every episode #I will sear it into my eyelids #I will play it in the background always #I will make all my friends watch it #and rewatch it #I love this fandom cast and crew so much #and I hope for all our sakes that it gets renewed or taken up by another platform #also sorry about the really long post #warrior nun #save warrior nun #avatrice #simon barry #kristina tonteri young #kty #alba baptista

95 notes · View notes

prvtocol · 6 months

Text

Brianne is a subversion of the High Powered Career Woman trope

From TV Tropes: ❝ What does it take for a woman to succeed in the male-dominated corporate world? She's got to be independent, strong-willed, no-nonsense, and most importantly ambitious enough to not let blatant and persistent sexism stand in her way to success. She's got to be a High Powered Career Woman.

Almost always a Lady in a Power Suit and often sporting Power Hair, these characters are portrayed as gutsy Determinators with big aspirations. (Brianne wears the suit dress but it hardly defines her as badass as the trope goes. No power shoulders. No pants. Heels give her some height but she's altogether unassuming in stature and dress). They are typically attractive and stylish out of necessity, in order to be at least acknowledged by their male peers and superiors. (She heavily dislikes being acknowledged by her coworkers in a sexualized way. She will not use her looks as a form of power. Her dress is modest and upper-class stylish. Her attractiveness is more assessed as the Girl Next Door by her peers. I am also adamantly against sexualizing my muse if you didn't know).

Personality can vary. The vast majority are highly competent and hard-working as a baseline. Many start off as a Plucky Girl or Go-Getter Girl and later harden into an Ice Queen or Iron Lady after years of dealing with ostracization due to sexism in the workplace and outside, from those who disapprove of the not traditionally feminine career focus. (Her family approves and pushes her forward in her career). When they reach the top of the corporate ladder, don't expect them to get any nicer, either. (I have major qualms with media tending to always devoid career women of their "feminine softness." They must be hard and masculine in their manner to stay on top. Brianne may be inundated in her career but she does not lose her empathy or warmth nor her maternal instinct). Focusing predominantly on their careers, these versions are often socially inept outside of business matters. (Yes and no on this one. Brianne was classed in social etiquette, she's good at networking for business, but outside of business, she is rather dull and sans a social life). Other depictions, however, overlap with The Social Expert, as these women rely on their superior interpersonal skills to solve problems in what is typically coded as a more "feminine way." (To a certain extent, her career success is built on her mediation skills as a director). Those who don't ever harden may end up as the Plucky Office Girl, who often serves as a foil for this character.

...Should they decide to pursue their career goals instead of romance and family, such women are often portrayed as Married to the Job and criticized by the wider society. Some discover that Wanting Is Better Than Having, as the success doesn't make up for the personal and familial life they sacrificed to get it. Often, these women end up Lonely at the Top, the narrative implying (either intentionally or not) that their Ambition Is Evil. (Brianne is lonely. Her continual desire for romance and family never happens and her career can be partially blamed but so can her fear of change and lack of trying. No social life aids in this as well). Taken to its logical conclusion, several end up a Corrupt Corporate Executive and a Girlboss Feminist. (Neither fit her case. Corruption in some verses is related to external dealings but does not change her nature).

On the occasion that they are able to maintain a romantic life long enough to get married, these deconstructions' partners are often shown to be resentful, Henpecked Husbands and their children, neglected and distant from them because these career-focused women are Maternally Challenged or simply too busy to care about what their kids are up to. (Brianne would be neither if this were the case. Family and children would be the priority and she would probably run herself ragged making sure those two full-time jobs were filled). ❞

#⚘ ˚◞ ooc ◞ 𝓅𝓇𝒾𝓋𝒶𝓉𝑒 𝒿𝑒𝓉 𝓈𝑒𝓇𝓋𝒾𝒸𝑒 𝒻𝑒𝑒.#⚘ ˚◞ headcanon ◞ 𝓉𝒽𝑒 𝓌𝒶𝓋𝑒𝓈 𝓌𝑜𝓃’𝓉 𝒻𝑜𝓇𝑔𝒾𝓋𝑒 𝓎𝑜𝓊.#(( ugh. i feel very strongly about her depiction as being a needed change to how we view women in business ;; ))

4 notes · View notes

peoplcshope · 7 months

Text

character building meme / accepting / @kiealer

10, 11, & 14!

OH YES HE DOES Day daydream but it really depends on the period of his life..Lemme give you the skinny.

Does your muse tend to daydream? What about?

As a kid Trunks often daydreams of a peaceful life without the androids. He was at home with his mother and (faceless) father along with gohan and his parents as well and they would go on the many adventures his mother often used to tell him about.

Going into his teens Trunks would days dream of well you know a life WITHOUT the androids, maybe by now he could have probably aspire to be an engineer like his grandfather and mother before him, also Gohan was with them with both his arm, having a dinner whilst discussing how their days went, something that mundane would be absolutely perfect.

As an adult before Buu, Trunks had the time to actually have small day dreams of what it would be like to go on dates should their be a woman actually interested in him. He was polite yes but his confidence in his own appearance were humble at best, Trunks never saw himself as a pretty boy, or anyone women would fawn over. But yes he’d also dream about having a family one day with a career as well.

These here are like the little bits of what Trunks would daydream of, if you saw a theme behind ‘em you’ll see the theme was just a normal regular life. None of the fighting, time travel that comes with it, he just wants a peaceful life where he only needs to worry about mundane things.

What is the longest your muse has gone without sleep?

How long he’s gone without sleep? There was a time he’s gone at least two weeks without sleep during the days where the androids attacked. With new towns and city’s being under attack, there are times where Trunks would round up survivors and lead them down the sewers so they can traverse through the city undiscovered until they’ve arrived at the underground bunkers. So yeah there’s been a time where he hasn’t been to sleep an entire week because Trunks is extremely proficient in his search believing no soul should be left behind.

What would your muse say is the pettiest thing they’ve ever done?

“This I can handle, you see no matter what Timeline I travel to, Ninazu will ALWAYS look out for me. Case and point back to the second time I traveled back into the past to help them deal with the androids. There was a little bit of down time after Goku decided to stay behind in Otherworld. You see me and Gohan we’re hanging out in the grasslands, basically playing and we found really cool mushrooms, Nina spoke out against eating wild mushrooms and believe me that would be something she’d say even as an adult. She also had a tone as if she knew what was best and whatnot granted in my heart I knew she had my best health at heart. Well…umm the moment she realized the sun was setting and it’d be best if we flew back to the house I kind of took one secretly just so I can prove she’s not always right…turns out she was..ugh I was sick for a week.”

#❛ mail ━━ i've been fighting but i just can't do enough.#kiealer #some rp insight XD

2 notes · View notes

sweetcedar · 2 years

Text

6: Onerous

character: ser camille descatoire || wc: 774

My dear Count Charlemend,

I pray that you and your family are well. All in the Descatoire house anticipate your visit with utmost gladness. Lest I startle you with this correspondence, certainly our unsettled matters of business shall wait until then. In fact, today I have put quill to paper regarding more gentle matters, those that weigh most heavily on a mother’s heart. I speak of my daughter, in large part. Although she is ever successful in the martial sphere, I cannot as her mother be relieved until she has settled a safe retirement for herself. As we both well know, those aspirants who do enter the Knights Dragoon often serve only for a few summers’ time before injuries force their hand.

I will say first and foremost, I have no requests of you that would be challenging to meet— we have no need for money, training, or armor. The young Lady needs little from either of us besides your continued encouragement and pride in her successes. No, as her mother, I simply wish for her a soft place to land her head once all is done. It brings me great sorrow to inform you that I have not, as of yet, been successful in seeking a match for her. She is nearing eighteen summers now – more than marriageable age. I am beginning to fear that her lack of success on the marriage market is a black mark upon both my House and yours. In all my summers in the Fury’s holy city, I have never once seen a child who finds socializing with respectable suitors to be as onerous an idea.

My letter was prompted by a recent declaration she has made: she intends to die unmarried! I wish not to yield her rightful status as the eldest of her cousins, but she intends to do so herself. I beg of you to assist in reversing her course. I would regard such a request as a favor, but I truly believe that this effort will be advantageous to the both of us. Camille is a pious and reliable young woman, and she has been expertly crafted to be an example of House Durendaire’s enduring military presence in the Knights Dragoon. If better examples could be set for her, I believe she can yet balance the demands of her service to Ishgard with the equally joyous requirements of domestic life.

She has had her fair share of interest, but I have received varying criticisms of the matches I have attempted to make for her. Enclosed, you will find a few pages from her calendar, complete with her thoughts on each. As you shall certainly see, I find myself challenged to introduce her to anyone that might meet her rather exacting standards, and worse yet, I have been unable to convince her that those standards are unreasonable. If one of your darling nieces might have the time, I should be most indebted if they might speak with her— any of the women Knights would certainly be more convincing than I. Similarly, if there are any young suitors that might be interested in a rather spirited marriage, I would be delighted to introduce them to her. I thank you most truly for your time, and again I must say that I look forward to our dinner.

May the Fury’s blessing be always upon you and yours.

Lady Ettiennette Descatoire

Attached within the perfumed envelope is a small cutting from a social calendar, damaged by multiple ink-blots and coffee stains.

14th Sun of the 3rd Astral Moon – Tea with Matthieu de Dzemael

Boasted his prowess with a longsword for the better part of six bells and was bested in less than six ticks. Mother, dearest, most beloved: I only elaborate because you request it of me. My peers would laugh me through all seven of the hells and back.

25th Sun of the 3rd Astral Moon – Haillenarte Fete escorted by Anastase Bettencourt

He should be thanking the Fury with every waking breath that I only poured wine on him. He should also be grateful that I shall not elaborate what prompted the wine-pouring— you may ask him, if you like!

16th Sun of the 3rd Umbral Moon – The 47th All- Ishgardian Chocobo Races escorted by Sylvestre Gaudibert

I cannot manage the battlefield, the house, and the stables, and he could do none of the above. He can barely even ride a chocobo. At least Matthieu of the Dull Blade would have been able to make conversation.

28th Sun of the 3rd Umbral Moon – Opera Performance escorted by Launcaire de Fousserete

A note from Lady Etiennette... She struck him. His nose is broken. I shall spare you the details, for you have doubtless already heard them.

#FFXIVWrite2022 #ch: rarest of knights #writing #more letters! sorry i like them #camille starting her 'get disowned' speedrun

11 notes · View notes

yomifuda · 1 year

Text

volume four

Is a sport still a sport if no one is watching? Can you call yourself an athlete if no one is supporting you? What is the purest victory: the one where you best the opponent against whom you are most unfairly matched, or when you deliver the win to your most devoted fan? However you may angst over these questions, Chihayafuru does not dwell on them. Its answer is definitive: karuta is a sport played as a community. This is a volume full of coaches who shape you in their image, rivals who once beaten cheer on their former opponents from the sidelines, mentors who realize your worth, families secretly making scrapbooks, and teammates. To "win" is to represent everyone who came before you and will come after you, the effort of many channeled into the body of one. Even at its peak—the master match—you will still be surrounded by others, in front of lights and cameras and an audience watching your every move.

I'm conscious of the fact that the "volume" is a fictional constraint, as Chihayafuru was serialized on a biweekly basis. But it is so delightful, so perfect, to end volume 4 on chapter 23, with Arata revealing his most shameful trauma: he has allowed himself to think of karuta as a thing he did alone, for himself. He is so alone that Chihaya does not even hear his confession; she, distraught at having to forfeit in the first round, has cried herself into a state of exhausted sleep. So far, Arata has been a lonely figure, more holy being than a boy of flesh and blood. When Chihaya prays for a miracle, she is not praying to Arata exactly, yet still he appears. He alone had been to Omi Jingu before and could tell Chihaya what it looked like (bright red, just like the "chihayaburu" card). So of course it is at Omi Jingu that Arata, Pinocchio-like, becomes a real boy. Finally, he trades in his solitude, which was a boon and a curse both. If he had stayed away from karuta, he could live on peacefully in divinity, tending to napping stray cats and reading Chihaya's messages like a kami receiving offerings at a shrine. But now he must begin the messy work of carrying on his grandfather's legacy, of competing against and in front of others, of being human, of karuta.

One of my favorite tropes in any type of media is when women take on roles or tropes more traditionally seen in or done by men. Chihaya is in many accounts the prototypical shounen protagonist, something C. has touched on about this series. I love that she has terrible grades. I love that she’s generally unaware of the draw she has on other people. And I love the brief moment of focus she displays when she captures the final card against Sudo. It is the same type of clarity you see from Hinata or Ashito or even fighting shounen leads like Naruto and Ichigo. It’s that moment of hyperfocus where the only thing that matters is the objective. It is superhuman. It is aspirational. It makes you believe the character can do anything, and in turn, of course, it makes you believe you could do anything too with the right amount of focus. Here we have Chihaya, a 16 year old girl, in her own superhuman element.

Which is of course immediately upended in the next few chapters as we head to nationals. She collapses immediately. Arata has returned, and in a fervor she bolts up to greet him. The whole thing is a fever dream. We get more of Arata’s backstory, which is sad of course but I don’t know, something about it is kind of hard for me to empathize with. I feel like I should care more about Arata and his story, but thinking back even to first seeing it in the anime, I found him harder to relate to. I think it’ll shift in the coming volumes, but for now this volume definitely felt more like a connective tissue than meat.

#chihayafuru #week by week

3 notes · View notes

mogwai-movie-house · 2 years

Text

Cruella (2021)

There have been a lot of parallels drawn between this film and the similarly overrated Joker, and there's something to the comparison: both are good-looking films with no plausible character development or coherent story, that cannot fit into the larger fictional universe they come from in any way.

The difference between them is Joker was a shallow and hamfisted attempt at making a deep and serious movie, and although it failed in its attempt to sympathetically depict the causes behind crime and mental illness, it at least made for a powerful cinematic experience. Cruella, on the other hand, is simply a bizarrely lighthearted attempt to rewrite a long-established embodiment of evil as a plucky heroine, entirely for political reasons.

It seems obvious they were early on going for an Addams Family-type vibe, but the great difference is that the character of Wednesday Addams does not have a 60 year history of murdering puppies as an adult, and our connection with her is as a comical depiction of a cute child doing humorously callous things. Whereas our association with the character of Cruella DeVille is of someone singlemindedly trying to hurt and kill the characters we care about, so there's nothing funny about the filmmakers trying to insist she is a hero, and the film can never get past that hurdle, no matter how manipulatively it tries, and the more it tries, the more unpleasant the results.

Before the first three minutes are up, we've already seen the young Cruella be bullied by boys (white boys - please don't think that was coincidental) and ground down by The Man at school while she befriends and defends a black girl, thus setting up the facsimile of moral structure we've become so used to in recent years: If you have a minority on your arm and hate men, you're in the right, no matter how objectively greedy, violent and malicious your actions objectively are.

And that's the crux of the problem with this and so many other recent films: its message to little girls is "whatever you want to do, and whoever you want to hurt, you're still in the right because you're a girl!". Telling little 21st century girls that they are an oppressed underclass is a terrible thing to do to them and to the society that will have to put up with them: What kind of women are we creating by doing this?

Heroes and villains are important: they teach us what beneficial actions to aspire to and what harmful actions to avoid. WE'RE NOT SUPPOSED TO WANT TO BE LIKE CRUELLA DEVILLE. When even the most clearly drawn and irredeemable psychopathic monster can be rehabilitated in this way, entirely for political reasons, it becomes impossible to depict ANY female characters as villains, and so little girls no longer have anything to navigate by, since they are being told that everything they can do is 'good'.

As with previous feminist revisionist works such as Wicked and Maleficent, the biggest and most unscalable flaw is that the rewritten characters seem utterly unrecognizable from the characters we are so familiar with: there is no way of linking THIS Cruella up with the Cruella we know from the books and movies the past 60 years. She's a completely different, if equally reprehensible, character who just happens to share the same hair colour.

So this Cruella is a genuinely toxic and harmful statement to be putting out into the world and impressionable minds: a morally-bankrupt vision of the world in which bad is good and white is quite literally black (central and long-established characters are race-swapped, again only for political reasons) and it actually tries to make the dalmations into the bad guys. Imagine that.

By rehabilitating yet another classic Disney villain in this way, Cruella teaches little girls only that selfishness is good, violence is an acceptable way to get what you want, and evil is empowerment. A truly abhorrent film that we all should avoid.

★✰✰✰✰✰✰✰✰✰

#film reviews #cruella

2 notes · View notes

potteresque-ire · 3 years

Text

More ask answer about Word of Honour (山河令, WoH) and the so-called “Dangai 101 phenomenon” under the cut ~ with all the M/M relationships shown on screen, does it mean improved acceptance / safety for the c-queer community?

Due to its length (sorry!), I’ve divided the answer into 3 parts: 1) Background 2) Excerpts from the op-eds 3) Thoughts This post is PART 1 ❤️. As usual, please consider the opinions expressed as your local friendly fandomer sharing what they’ve learned, and should, in no ways, be viewed as necessarily true. :)

(TW: homophobic, hateful speech quoted)

After WoH had started airing, I had waited for one of China’s state-controlled media to publish opinion pieces about the show. Specifically, I’d like to know ~ what is the administration’s current take on Dangai (耽改), as a genre? How does it characterise the closeness of the same-sex leads—the closeness that is suppressed when the original IP, of the genre Danmei (耽美) was converted for visual media presentation?

This is important, as China is a country where the government’s attitude becomes the official public attitude. The state opinion pieces will be quoted and parroted, especially if they come from heavy-weight sources (state-controlled media also have their importance/influence hierarchy). Production of the upcoming Dangai dramas will adjust their scripts accordingly. Marketing tactics will also adjust, make sure it doesn’t spread “the wrong message”; Dangai and Danmei dramas have both been pulled off shelves during or immediately after its airing before (Addicted 上癮 and Guardian 鎮魂, respectively), despite having already passing the censorship board.

If a heavy-weight state opinion piece pans the one-lead-fawning-over-the-other scenes in WoH (there are a few of them), for example, scenes / lines of such suggestive nature will likely disappear from the upcoming Dangai dramas for at least a year or two. If the critique spills over to a harsh stance against the presence of queers in Chinese media, all future Dangai dramas can become strict “socialist-brotherhood” stories, their “no homo” message reinforced by, for example, by inserting a female lead (or changing one of the leads to female).

Whether the official public opinion equates the true public opinion or not, public behaviour in China is quickly driven by the official public opinion. Example: the Xi regime’s conservative stance on queer issues has already translated to a quick deterioration of queer tolerance in China; open expressions that were tolerated, even welcomed, just several years ago are now met with significant hostility in the public.

This is a reflection of the nature of their government. A quick thought experiment may explain this. Take … jaywalking. It’s probably fair to say we’ve all committed this “crime” before?

Will you still jaywalk if your government declares it immoral to do so? Where I am, in the United States, the answer is definitely a no. The public will probably laugh at (and make memes about) the poor official who made the declaration, kindly ask the government to do something useful for once (f*** off), and keep jaywalking.

Now, what if the declaration comes with a law that includes a one-year prison term + lifelong criminal record for jaywalking? Let’s say this law is fully executable and irreversible, given this being a thought experiment—nothing you, or the public, can say or do can contest it.

Will you still jaywalk, even if you disagree with government’s stance that the act is immoral? You’ve got a neighbour who continues to defy the law. Will you think twice before letting your young loved ones go out with them?

Very soon, jaywalking becomes “bad”—even though such “badness” had little moral basis at its origin. It is bad because the government has “characterised” it to be so—an authoritarian government that doesn’t allow challenge of the characterisation.

The retention of queer elements in Dangai is the jaywalking in the example. The Chinese government stepping in to characterise (定性) an event, a phenomenon etc is common, and the people know the drill well that they fall in line quickly.

If a powerful state-controlled media publish a negative opinion piece on the queer elements in Dangai / Danmei, therefore, those elements can disappear overnight.

My question had been: will the state do it? The Xi regime has made its distaste for LGBT+ representation in visual media abundantly clear with its NRTA directives. However, while the Chinese government typically puts ideology (意識型態) as its Guiding Principle, exceptions have always been made for one reason. One word.

Money.

TU is a legendary financial success story every production company (Tencent itself included) wants to replicate. As a result, there are ~ 60 Danmei IPs (book canon) with their copyright sold for Dangai dramas; this long line of Danmei dramas in the horizon has been nicknamed “Dangai 101”, after the name of the show “Produce 101” Dd was dance instructor in. These dramas are all competing to be the next TU by profit.

Adoration from fans is nice, but money is what matters.

C-ent is currently in a financial bleak winter. The anti-corruption, anti-tax-fraud campaign started by the Xi regime in 2018, which cumulated to a sudden (and unofficial) collection of 3 years of back-taxes from studios and stars, has drained a significant amount of its capital; the number of new TV dramas being filmed fell 45% between 2018 and 2019, and production companies have been closing by the tens of thousands. The tightening of censorship rules also means production is associated with more risk. The commercial sector outside c-ent is also eager for replications of TU’s success—they need more “top traffic” (頂流) idols like Gg and Dd whose fans are sufficiently devoted to drive the sales of their products. Such “fan economy” would benefit the government, even if it doesn’t have direct stakes in the companies in and outside c-ent. People’s Daily, the Official State Newspaper, previously published a positive opinion piece on fan economy in 2019, estimating its worth at 90 billion RMB (~13.7 billion USD) per year.

But if the state allows the queer elements in Dangai’s to pass the censorship board (NRTA) for profit, how can it do so with the current “No homo” directive in place? From previous experience (scarce as it may be), the queerness has to be sufficiently obvious for the shows to make the profit everyone is wishing for. Dangai dramas in which the leads’ romantic relationship remains subtle have not sold the way TU does, even if they are well-reviewed and feature famous, skilled actors (as Winter Begonia 鬓边不是海棠红 last year.)

NRTA, and the government behind it, can’t just say I’m turning a blind eye to the flirting and touching for the money. What can it say then?

Here’s what I’d thought—what it can say, or do, is to “characterise” these Dangai dramas in a way that leave out its queerness. It did so for TU. TU’s review by the overseas version of People’s Daily devoted a grand total of two characters to describe WWX and LWJ’s relationship—摯友 (“close friend”). The rest of the article was devoted to the drama’s aesthetics, its cultural roots. (The title of the article: 《陳情令》：書寫國風之美 Chen Qing Ling: Writing the Beauty of National Customs).

How could it do that? The State’s power ensuring few questioning voices aside, I’ve been also thinking about the history and definition of Danmei (耽美)—Dangai’s parent genre as the causes. Based on the history and definition, I can think of 3 ways the queer elements in Danmei (耽美) can be characterised by the state, 2 of which provide it with the wiggle room, the movable goalposts it needs should it choose to want to overlook the queerness in Dangai.

The 3 characterisations I’ve thought of, based on the history and definition of Danmei (耽美) are:

1) The queer characterisation, which focuses on its homoerotic element. * Summary of the characterization: Danmei is gay.

2) The “traditional BL” characterisation, which focuses on BL’s historic origin as a “by women, for women” genre. The M/M setup is viewed as an escapist protest against the patriarchy, a rejection of traditional gender roles; displays of M/M closeness are often “candies” for the female gaze. * Summary of the characterization: Danmei is women’s fantasy.

3) The aesthetic characterisation, which focuses on beauty—from the beauty of the characters, the beauty of a world without harm to the romance. * Summary for the characterization: Danmei is pretty.

The queer characterisation (1) is well-understood, and likely the default characterisation if it is to be made by the fraction of i-fandom I’m familiar with. Most i-fans I’ve met, myself included, would likely and automatically associate the M/M relationships in The Untamed (TU) and WoH with queerness.

The “traditional BL” characterisation (2), meanwhile, equates Danmei with BL as the genre of homoerotic works developed in 1970’s Japan for women comic readers, and has been widely interpreted from a feminist point of view.

Under such interpretation of “traditional BL” works, the double male lead setup wasn’t meant to be an accurate depiction of homosexuality. It wasn’t about homosexuality at all. Rather, it was about the removal of women and along with it, the rage, the eye-rolling, the unease women readers had often felt when attempting to interact with mainstream romance novels of the time, in which the female leads had mostly been confined to traditional women roles, and their virtue, their traditional feminine traits.

The M/M setup therefore acted as a “shell” for a het relationship that allowed removal of such social constraints placed on women. The lead with whom the woman audience identified was no longer bound to the traditional role of women, such as being the caregiver of the family. The lead could instead chase their dreams and roam the world, as many contemporary women already did or aspired to do; they were no longer limited to playing the passive party in life and in the relationship—and they enjoyed such freedom without risking the love, the respect the other male protagonist felt for them.

BL, in this traditional sense, has therefore been interpreted as an answer for, and a protest against the heteropatriarchal gender norm still dominant in societies deeply influenced by Confucianism, including Japan, Korea, Taiwan, Hong Kong, China. The M/M setup is, at heart, (het) women’s fantasy. The inclusion of two young-and-beautiful male leads also satisfy “the female gaze” ~ the popularity of BL among het women has therefore been compared to the popularity of lesbian porn among het men. In both cases, the audience is drawn not for the homosexual element but by the presence of double doses of sexual attraction.

(Please forgive me if any of my wording comes as disrespectful! I’m not used to talking about these topics.)

The availability of the “traditional BL” characterisation (2) is key to bypassing queerness as a topic in the discussions of Danmei (耽美).

The aesthetic characterisation (3) is very closely related to 2) in origin, but deserves its own point as a characterisation that can stand on its own, and may be more obscure to the English-speaking fandom given the common English translation of Danmei (耽美) as Boy’s Love.

Boy’s Love, as a name, amplifies the queer characterisation (1) and de-emphasises the aesthetic characterisation (3); Danmei (耽美), meanwhile, does the reverse.

Where does the name Danmei come from?

When BL was first developed in Japan, it used to have a now out-of-fashion genre name: Tanbi. Tanbi was borrowed from same name describing a late 19th century / early 20th century Japanese literary movement, known as Tanbi-ha and was inspired by Aestheticism in England. Aestheticism “centered around the doctrine that art exists for the sake of its beauty alone, and that it need serve no political, didactic, or other purpose”. Along the same line, the core belief of authors of Tanbi-ha was that art should celebrate beauty and reject the portrayal of ugliness in human nature, the darkness of reality:

…Tanbi writers argued that the ideas of naturalism writers such as “objectivism,” “truth is more important than beauty” and so on would “oppress human beings’ desire” so as to “lose beauty and human nature.” Accordingly, they insisted on “acute mental and emotional sensibility” [Ye, 2009].

(Source, with more details on Tanbi.)

Neither romance nor homosexuality were requirements for works in the original Tanbi-ha genre. BL borrowed the name Tanbi because its early authors saw their work created under the same principles: the emphasis on the beauty of their characters, their love (romantic and platonic), in a world that was also beautiful and untouched by ugliness such as sexism and homophobia.

The stubborn persistence on keeping one’s eyes trained on the beautiful, the willingness to turn a blind eye to reality for the sake of the beauty is built-in in the genre’s name. Tanbi meant more than beauty, aesthetics; its kanji form was written as 耽美; 耽 = to sink, drown in, to over-indulge in; 美 = beauty.

Tanbi, therefore, literally means to drown in, to over-indulge in beauty.

Over time, as the genre expanded its writing style, Tanbi eventually fell out of favour as BL’s genre name in Japan. However, as it gained popularity in the Sinosphere in the 1990s, starting with Taiwan and Hong Kong, the kanji of Tanbi was retained as the Chinese name of the genre.

In Mandarin Chinese, 耽美 is pronounced Danmei. A hyperfocus on the aesthetics, the utopian aspects of traditional BL is therefore retained in Danmei by its name. People’s Daily could therefore devote its review of TU on its aesthetics. Realism, including politics and all discussions of social issues, can therefore be swept aside in the name of respecting the genre’s tradition.

I’ve mostly been reading about and observing c-fandom, and I believe these 3 characterisations have all attracted its own kind of fans. Fans who care and talk about queer issues even when it isn’t encouraged by their sociopolitical environment, who shine a light upon these issues in their fan works. Fans who treat the M/M leads as if they were a traditional cishet couple, such as calling one of the leads 老婆 (wife) and assigning him biologically female functions when needed (via, for example, the ABO trope). Fans who insist the works must meet their beauty standards, rejecting those that fail (for example, if the leads are not good looking enough) by claiming they’re there for Danmei, not Danchou (耽醜, “over-indulgence on ugliness”). Fans who are drawn to the genre by a combination of these characterisations.

By the history and definition of the genre, all the above reasons for fanning Danmei are as valid, as legitimate as one another.

I thought about this related question then: are c-fans of the second (traditional BL characterisation) and third (aesthetic characterisation) groups homophobic? When I first asked this question, I—a fan whose fandom experience had been entirely in English-speaking communities—assume the answer was yes. I thought, in particular, the insistence of treating Danmei’s M/M couples as cishet couples in a homosexual shell had to be conscious queer erasure. How can anyone ignore the same-sexness of the leads? How can anyone talk about Danmei without associating it with homosexuality?

However, as I read more—again, specifically about c-fandom, and in Chinese—I realised the answer may be a little more complex.

Previously, I had largely thought about homophobia in terms of individual attitudes. This has to do with my current environment (liberal parts of the United States), in which the choice to accept or reject the queer community has become a close to personal choice. Pride flags fly all over the city, including the city hall, every summer, and most churches welcome the LGBT+ community. I hadn’t considered how an environment in which queers have never enjoyed full social exposure, in which education of related topics is sorely lacking, would affect Danmei’s development as a genre.

In such an environment, it is difficult for Danmei to evolve and incorporate up-to-date understanding of RL queerness.

The consequence I can see is this: Danmei is more likely to be “stuck” in its historical characterisation as (het) women’s fantasy inside than outside the Great Firewall, with its queerness de-emphasised if not erased—and it draws fans who are attracted to this kind of characterisation accordingly. This is, perhaps, reflected by the fact that the (het) women-to-queer ratio of Danmei / BL fans is significantly higher in China than in the West (Table 1 in this article summarises how Danmei / BL fans have split between different genders and sexual orientation in the Sinosphere vs the West in different research studies).

Another driving force I can see for Danmei to retain BL’s traditional feminist and aesthetic characterisations: women in China are not free from the social pressure that led to the birth of BL in 1970’s Japan. While many of them have achieved financial freedom through work and have high education, the young and educated have been subjected to immense pressure to get married and have children especially in the past decade.

In 2007, the China’s state feminist agency, the All-China Women’s Federation (中華全國婦女聯合會), coined the term 剩女 (literally, “leftover women”) for unmarried, urban women over 27 years old. The government started a campaign that, among other things, associated women’s education level with ugliness, and their unmarried status with pickiness, moral degeneracy. The reason behind the campaign: birth rates are plummeting and the state wants educated women, in particular, to nurture a high quality, next generation workforce. More importantly, the government sees a threat in the M/F sex imbalance (high M, low F) that has commonly been attributed to the country’s “one child policy” between 1979-2015, which encouraged female infanticide / abortion of female foetuses in a culture that favours surname-carrying boys. The state fears the unmarried men will become violent and/or gay, leading to “social instability and insecurity”. Therefore, it wants all women, in particular those who are educated, to enter the “wife pool” for these unmarried men. (Source 1, Source 2: Source 2 is a short, recommended read).

For Chinese women, therefore, patriarchy and sexism is far from over. Escapist fantasies where sexism is removed—by removing women from the picture—are therefore here to stay.

Danmei is therefore not queer literature (同志文學). The difference between Danmei and queer literature is highlighted by this reportedly popular saying (and its similar variations) in some Danmei communities:

異性戀只是傳宗接代，同性戀才是真愛 Heterosexuality is only for reproduction. Only homosexuality is true love.

The attitude towards heterosexuality is one of distaste, viewed as a means to an end the speaker has no interest in. On the contrary, homosexuality is idealised, reflecting the disregard / lack of understanding of some Danmei fans have towards the RL hardships of c-queers. The ignorance may be further propagated by gate-keeping by some Danmei fans for safety reasons, keeping queer discussions away from their communities for fear that their favourite hangouts would meet the same uncertain fate of other communities that previously held open queer discussions, such as the Weibo gay and lesbian supertopics. Such gatekeeping can, again, be easily enforced using tradition as argument: the beauty 美 is Tanbi and Danmei (耽美), remember, includes the beauty of utopia, where ugly truths such as discrimination do not enter the picture. A Danmei that explores, for example, the difficulty of coming out of the closet is no longer Danmei, by its historical, aesthetic definition.

[I’ve therefore read about c-queers viewing Danmei with suspicion, if not downright hostility; they believe the genre, by ignoring their RL challenges and casting them as beautiful, even perfect individuals, and in some cases, by fetishising them and their relationships, only leads to more misconceptions about the queer community. Dangai, meanwhile, has been viewed with even more distaste as potential weapons by the state to keep gays in the closet; if the government can shove the Danmei characters into the “socialist brotherhood” closet, it can shove them as well.

I haven’t yet, however, been able to tease out the approximate fraction of c-queers whose views of Danmei and Dangai is negative. The opposing, positive view of the genres is this: they still provide LGBT+ visibility, which is better than none and it would’ve been close to none without Danmei and Dangai; while Danmei may skim over the hardships of being queer, fan works of Danmei are free to explore them—and they have.

This article provides insights on this issue. @peekbackstage’s conversation with a Chinese film/TV director in Clubhouse is also well worth a read.]

That said, Danmei can only be dissociated from the queer characterisation if there’s a way to talk about the genre without evoking words and phrases that suggest homosexuality—something that is difficult to do with English. Is there?

In Chinese, I’d venture to say … almost. There’s almost a way. Close enough to pass.

The fact that M/M in traditional BL has been developed and viewed not as queer but as a removal of F also means this: queerness isn’t “built-in” into the language of Danmei. The name Danmei itself already bypasses a major “queer checkpoint”: it’s impossible to refer to a genre called Boy’s Love and not think about homosexuality.

Here’s one more important example of such bypass. Please let me, as an excuse to put these beautiful smiles in my blog, show this classic moment from TU; this can be any gif in which the leads are performing such suggestive romantic gestures:

How can I describe this succinctly? In English?

Two men acting in love? Er. That’s… the definition of gay, almost.

Two men acting gay? Well. GAY.

Right. Fine. Let’s go negative. Queerbaiting? … Still gay, because the word “queer” is in there.

[Pie note: for the record, I don’t think TU or WoH is queer-baiting.]

Personally, I find it impossible to describe the GIF above in English that I do not automatically associate with RL romantic love between two men, with homosexuality. But can I do it in Chinese?

… Yes.

There’s a term, 賣腐 (pronounced “maifu”), literally, “selling 賣 the rot 腐”, derived from the term known among i-fans as fujoshi and written, in kanji, as 腐女. Fujoshi, or 腐 (“rot”) 女 (“women”), describes the largely (het) female audience of the Japanese BL genre (>80%, according to Wikipedia). Originated as a misogynistic insult towards female Japanese BL fans in the 2000s, fujoshi was later reclaimed by the same female BL fans who now use the self-depreciative term as acknowledgement of their interest being “rotten”, for BL’s disregard of the society’s traditional expectations on women.

賣腐 is therefore to “sell the rot” to the rotten women; ie. the suggestive romantic gestures, exemplified by the GIF above, between the M/M leads are catering, performing fan service to their target audience.

[賣腐 is also a term one will see in the state opinion pieces.]

There’s nothing gay about this term.

I’ve therefore found it possible to talk and think in Chinese about Danmei while giving little thought to queerness. The history and definition of Danmei allow that.

Again, I’m not saying any of this to excuse homophobia among in Danmei and Dangai fandoms. The point I’m trying to make is this — given that Danmei has three potential characterisations, two of which can be discussed without abundantly evoking queer concepts and vocabularies, given that history of Danmei, as a genre, already favoured characterisation 2 (traditional BL), the government addressing homosexuality in its opinions on Danmei and Dangai is far from a given.

By extension, the popularity of Dangai may mean a lot or little to c-queers; by extension, the state can approve / disapprove of Danmei and Dangai in a manner independent of its stance on homosexuality, which is itself inconsistent and at times, logic-deying (example to come…).

This is both good and bad, from the perspective of both the government and the c-queer community.

For the government: as discussed, the “triality” of Danmei allows the state to “move the goalpost” depending on what it tries to achieve. It has characterisations 2 (the traditional BL characterisation) and 3 (the aesthetic characterisation) as excuses to let Dangai dramas pass the censorship board should it want their profit and also, their promise of expanding the country’s soft power overseas by drawing an international audience. These characterisations also allow the state to throw cold water on the popularity of Danmei / Dangai should it desire, for reasons other than its queer suggestions—despite the Xi regime’s push against open expressions of queerness (including by activism, in media), it has also been careful about not demonising c-queers in words, and has countered other people’s attempts to do so.

Why may the government want to throw cold water on Danmei and Dangai? They are still subculture, which the state has also viewed with suspicion. In 2018, a NRTA directive explicitly requested that “c-ent programmes should not use entertainers with tattoos; (those associated with) hip-hop culture, sub-cultures (non-mainstream cultures), decadent cultures.” (”另外，总局明确要求节目中纹身艺人、嘻哈文化、亚文化（非主流文化）、丧文化（颓废文化）不用。”).

Subculture isn’t “core socialist values”. More importantly, it’s difficult to keep up with and control subculture. 環球網, the website co-owned by People’s Daily and Global Times (環球時報), ie, The State Newspaper and The State Tabloid, famously said this on its Weibo, on 2020/03/04, re: 227:

老了，没看懂为什么战。晚安。 Getting old. Can’t figure out what the war is about. Good night.

The State also cannot stop subculture from happening. It doesn’t have the resources to quell every single thing that become popular among its population of 1.4 billion. What it can do to make sure these subcultures stay subcultures, kept out of sight and mind of the general public.

Characterisation 1 (the queer characterisation), meanwhile, remains available to the state should it wish to drop the axe on Dangai for its queer elements. I’m including, as “queer elements”, presentation of men as too “feminine” for the state—which has remained a sore point for the government. This axe have a reason to drop in the upcoming months: July 23rd, 2021 will be the 100th birthday of the Chinese Communist Party (CCP), and the state may desire to have only uniformed forces and muscled, gun-toting “masculine” men gracing the screens.

What about for c-queers and their supporters (including group I fans)? What good and bad can the multiple characterisations of the genres do for them?

For c-queers and their supporters (including group I fans), their acceptance and safety are helped by the Dangai genre, by the Dangai 101 phenomenon, if and only if the state both characterises the queer elements in these dramas as queer (characterisation 1) AND their opinions of them are positive.

Personally, I had viewed this to be unlikely from the start, because a queer characterisation would mean the censorship board has failed to do its job, which is embarrassing for the Chinese government.

Characterisations 2) and 3) are not bad for c-queers and their supporters, however, and definitely not “enemies” of Characterisation 1); they can not only serve as covers for the queer elements in Dangai to reach their audience, but also, they can act as protective padding for the LGBT+ community if the content or (very aggressive) marketing of the Dangai dramas displease the government — with the understanding, again, that the “traditional BL” arm of the Danmei community is itself also highly vulnerable by being a subculture, and so its padding effect is limited and it also deserves protection.

The downside to achieving LGBT+ visibility through Dangai is, of course and as mentioned, that these dramas are, ultimately, deeply unrealistic depictions of the c-queers. The promotion of these dramas, which has focused on physical interactions between the male leads for “candies”, can encourage even more fetishising of queers and queer relationships. The associated (character) CP culture that makes and breaks CPs based on the dramas’ airing cycle may also fuel negative perception of queer relationships as attention-seeking behaviour, something that can be initiated and terminated at will and for the right price.

Finally, with all this said, which characterisation(s) have the government taken re: Dangai and/or WOH? And what opinions has it given to its characterisations?

PART 1 <-- YOU ARE HERE PART 2 PART 3

#pie metas #yizhan #bjyx

365 notes · View notes

momtaku · 3 years

Text

A word about Eremika and the final chapter leaks

I’ve just returned from a regrettable jaunt on Twitter and I’m having trouble wrapping my head around why the leaks surrounding Mikasa have created so much turmoil in the fandom. My understanding is rather than a single panel of Mikasa visiting Eren’s grave, we get a sequence of four panels demonstrating how throughout her life she remained devoted to Eren.

Let me address the first elephant in the room. I’d have much preferred the focus of the final chapter be more on how inexcusable Eren’s actions were rather than additional pages of him being glorified. I am personally uncomfortable with how unbalanced the final chapter continues to be. In amongst his friend’s sadness, we needed something to remind the reader that Eren isn’t a hero. Yes, his friends should mourn him, but the horrific and inexcusable nature of his actions should be thematically written in bold letters alongside that grief. I personally am still extremely uncomfortable with the final chapter because we didn’t get that.

Ignoring that for a moment, it makes perfect sense for Mikasa’s character to be showcased this way. I understand and admire her capacity for unconditional love. I see beauty and poignancy in her never forgetting Eren, and I appreciate that love existing in the story. So while I uncomfortably squirm that a continued focus on her devotion is all we get, I don’t mind that it’s there.

Onto elephant number two: Sometime after the four year time skip, Mikasa decided to have a family.

I completely understand those who’d have rather Mikasa stayed single because I think there’s power in that. Had Mikasa been depicted as having a full life while remaining single I’d have applauded that decision. I’d have even preferred it because News Flash to everyone who needs to hear it: Women can have a full and satisfying life without marriage. Being alone doesn’t mean being lonely. And let us please smash those nasty stereotypes that women need children to be fulfilled. It’s disgusting and demeaning.

But choosing to have a partner who clearly respects and honors Eren’s place in her life? I’m fine with that too. Here’s what I know to be true. Moving on doesn’t erase the past. Moving on isn’t an insult to the past. And personally, I’ve always admired people who find love after loss. I see it as a compliment to the person they loved, not an insult. So I do not understand certain ship communities crowing about how this is “death to Eremika” when a focus on her lifetime of devotion is the exact opposite. This is a solid win for Eremika. I do not understand how it can be viewed as anything otherwise.

In the podcast discord we were talking about this and the obvious reference to Rose and Jack from the Titanic came up. Spoilers if you haven’t seen the movie, but after Jack dies saving Rose, she chooses to honor him by living the fullest life she can. That life includes marriage and children. Whomever her husband is remains nameless and faceless, and at her death, she is reunited with Jack. My friend Al made the point that no one aspired to be Rose’s husband, they all wanted to be Rose and Jack. Eren and Mikasa are Isayama’s version of Rose and Jack and if the art and fic doesn’t exist yet, I’m shocked.

Five years ago I wrote, “No matter what, Mikasa will survive. She’ll spend her remaining years making sure Eren is never forgotten. She will teach her children, who in turn will teach theirs, about the heroic boy who became a monster to fight monsters—and ended up saving humanity.” How I wish that last sentence had been true.

I don’t know how she’s presenting Eren to her children and grandchildren, but I choose to believe she’s telling them the cautionary tale of the boy she loved who became a monster to fight monsters--who lost his humanity in the process and very nearly destroyed the world. I hope it’s a balanced story. In other words, I hope she’s giving them what Isayama failed to deliver to us.

#snk series ending #eren jaeger #mikasa ackerman #congrats to eremika #I mean that sincerely #you've put up with so much crap #ship wars happen #they are all disgusting #but even I can see that your rival ship community is a different level of awful #snk spoilers #snk chapter 139

176 notes · View notes

starksinthenorth · 3 years

Text

Musings on ASOIAF Ladies and Ambition

I’ve noticed people use “ambition” to describe Sansa and Daenerys as if it’s a bad word or an insult (often called “power hungry”). Yet in the text of the series, neither of them are shown to be ambitious people as a core characteristic. I blame the series for a lot of this, because it failed to explore the internal dialogue of Sansa, Arya, and even Cersei, who ends up more humanized than either of them by the end (because of the maybe baby).

Cersei Lannister is the classic ambitious ASOIAF lady, whose point-of-view is introduced in perhaps the most iconic sentence of any introductory chapter:

She dreamt she sat the Iron Throne, high above them all.

I can’t think of a sentence in ASOIAF that better introduces the internal thoughts and view of its leading character.

In comparison, Sansa’s first sentence is receiving news about her father’s whereabouts, Daenerys is shown her new dress to meet Drogo, and Arya has crooked stitches again. Arya’s works to frame her relationship with Sansa and her internal struggle to fit the feminine Westerosi mold, while Sansa and Daenerys are setting up plot points. None of these interactions signal ambition, bad or good. Daenerys did not arrange her wedding, Sansa is just told the information by her Septa, and while Arya is aspiring to have straight stitches, that’s hardly an ambitious goal for a girl of nine.

Fans rarely, if ever, deny Cersei’s cruel, cold, often stupid ambition. In fact, it’s one of the reason people seem to love her. She’s internally open about what she wants - power - and when she wants it - now:

All of them are burning now, she told herself, savoring the thought. They are dead and burning, every one, with all their plots and schemes and betrayals. It is my day now. It is my castle and my kingdom.

- AFFC, Cersei III

The rule was hers; Cersei did not mean to give it up until Tommen came of age. I waited, so can he. I waited half my life. She had played the dutiful daughter, the blushing bride, the pliant wife. She had suffered . . . She had contended with Jon Arryn, Ned Stark, and her vile, treacherous, murderous dwarf brother, all the while promising herself that one day it would be her turn. If Margaery Tyrell thinks to cheat me of my hour in the sun, she had bloody well think again.

- AFFC, Cersei V

Cersei is the definition of a power hungry lady, scheming and cheating at every point. Yes, Sansa learned from her, but most of Sansa’s internalized lessons of Cersei’s were to do the exact opposite.

"The night's first traitors," the queen [Cersei] said, "but not the last, I fear. . . . Another lesson you should learn, if you hope to sit beside my son. . . . The only way to keep your people loyal is to make certain they fear you more than they do the enemy."

"I will remember, Your Grace," said Sansa, though she had always heard that love was a surer route to the people's loyalty than fear. If I am ever a queen, I'll make them love me.

- ACOK, Sansa VI

Cersei isn’t the only POV character who views herself outside of conventional Westerosi standards and aspires to something beyond being a wife and mother. Arya Stark has ambition writ clear on the page, though it is not so cold or denying other people their rights or chances. Compared to Cersei, Arya doesn’t want everything, crown and throne and kingdom and all. She just wants something, and even that is denied to highborn women in Westeros. Even when she asks her father about her future, a man who wants to do right by his children and loves them, Eddard Stark is blinded by Westerosi patriarchy:

Arya cocked her head to one side. "Can I be a king's councillor and build castles and become the High Septon?"

"You," Ned said, kissing her lightly on the brow, "will marry a king and rule his castle, and your sons will be knights and princes and lords and, yes, perhaps even a High Septon."

- AGOT, Eddard V

With Arya in this, I see some parallels to Elaena Targaryen, who was so good at math and management she served as the secret Master of Coin while her husband carried the title. Elaena was “more willful than Rhaena, but not as beautiful as either of her sisters,” yet is also said to have been “more beautiful at age seventy than at age seventeen,” growing into herself like Arya is expected to. They both even cut their hair, Arya to hide her gender and Elaena to hide her beauty, both instances to gain freedom from captivity in the Red Keep.

Despite both these examples of ambition - Cersei’s all-encompassing, without care for how it affects the realm, and Arya’s attempt to find a place in the world outside the Westerosi model - it still becomes an insult when people speak of Daenerys and Sansa.

Critics claim Sansa is ambitious, and negatively so, because she “wants to be queen.” But this criticism misses a vital point of Sansa’s character. Unlike Cersei, she does not want to be queen because of the power and political influence, but because she will be living a song. In the start, Sansa’s got her head in the clouds, not to the dirty world of politics. Her very first chapter lays out this motivation incredibly clearly:

All she wanted was for things to be nice and pretty, the way they were in the songs.

When she thinks of Joffrey and being in love with him, it’s because he’s “handsome and gallant as any prince in the songs” (AGOT, Sansa II),

Alternatively, it has been said that Sansa is ambitious because of her claim to Winterfell. But compare how Sansa thinks of her claim to how Big Walder Frey does. Despite being far down the inheritance line, he is certain he will someday possess the Twins. He’s likely willing to kill his family to become Lord of the Crossing, and already has killed Little Walder.

In comparison, Sansa isn’t the one who realizes her claim as heir to Winterfell, even after her two younger brothers are believed dead. It’s Dontos who mentions it, and after she still thinks that Robb will have sons to inherit.

But she had not forgotten his words, either. The heir to Winterfell, she would think as she lay abed at night. It's your claim they mean to wed. Sansa had grown up with three brothers. She never thought to have a claim, but with Bran and Rickon dead . . . It doesn't matter, there's still Robb, he's a man grown now, and soon he'll wed and have a son. Anyway, Willas Tyrell will have Highgarden, what would he want with Winterfell?

- ASOS, Sansa II

Sansa’s not ready to kill Bran and Rickon if they show up. Her arc is about taking off the rose-tinted glasses and seeing reality, but also working to make reality like a song. For example, her idea of the Tournament of the Winged Knights for Sweetrobin. It’s a song come to life, all by her making. TBD how the ending goes, of course, but it shows that trajectory.

And finally, Daenerys.

Daenerys is not driven by some lifelong desire to win and dominate. She’s forced into it, a la Brienne’s “no chance and no choice.” If Daenerys were raised in a stable environment, I have a feeling she’d be much more like Sansa: dreamy, hopeful, sweet and studious. Happy.

But instead, her eyes are open.

When she’s introduced as a character, she shows an awareness for the schemes and politics of the world. She knows her brother is called the Beggar King in the Free Cities, and is doubtful of the smallfolk’s secret toasts to Viserys III that Illyrio Mopatis claims happen across Westeros.

Like Sansa and Cersei, there’s evidence of her goals, hopes, and wishes in the very first chapter:

"I don't want to be his queen," she heard herself say in a small, thin voice. "Please, please, Viserys, I don't want to, I want to go home."

. . .

Dany had only meant their rooms in Illyrio's estate, no true home surely, though all they had, but her brother did not want to hear that. There was no home there for him. Even the big house with the red door had not been home for him.

Daenerys remembers home as the house with the red door in Braavos. It’s her brother whose only home and stability was the Red Keep, not her.

Throughout her journey of power to take back the Seven Kingdoms, she is doubtful at every turn and most of her wishes are for happiness, for peace, for stability.

Dany had no wish to reduce King's Landing to a blackened ruin full of unquiet ghosts. She had supped enough on tears. I want to make my kingdom beautiful, to fill it with fat men and pretty maids and laughing children. I want my people to smile when they see me ride by, the way Viserys said they smiled for my father.

- ACOK, Daenerys II

A queen I am, but my throne is made of burned bones, and it rests on quicksand. Without dragons, how could she hope to hold Meereen, much less win back Westeros?

- ADWD, Daenerys II

Even later, Daenerys is determined to bring peace to the lands she currently rules. She does plan to return to the Seven Kingdoms, but it’s not driven by pure ambition. And this is, notably, from a conversation when Prince Quentyn Nymeros Martell asks her to come back and claim them now, saying she has allies for that conquest. And still she turns him down, with promises that it will only happen eventually:

"Daenerys said. ". . . .One day I shall return to Westeros to claim my father's throne, and look to Dorne for help. But on this day the Yunkai'i have my city ringed in steel. I may die before I see my Seven Kingdoms. Hizdahr may die. Westeros may be swallowed by the waves."

- ADWD, Daenerys VII

And yet in both Sansa and Daenerys, these visions and hopes for the futures they might have are considered unbridled ambition, although they turn more on happiness and peace for themselves and their people, rather than the type of ambition Cersei has, which is clearly her own power and being heralded above everyone.

Daenerys’ thoughts in her sixth chapter of ADWD have the same energy as Sansa’s “I will make them love me.”:

"A queen must know the sufferings of her people."

. . .

A queen must listen to her people, Dany reminded herself.

Daenerys has figured out how to make her people love her, by wearing her “floppy ears” and appealing to the masses, listening to them, et cetera. She’s also a bit ahead of Sansa in the realm of ruling, to be sure.

But how are these similar thoughts ambition in either of them? It’s an attempt to empathize and connect, not to throw away and disregard and rule by force and domination. Both these ladies are more nuanced, and the fandom does them a disservice by painting them as ambitious or power-hungry when at the end for both of them, it’s a desire to have a happy, stable, loving life.

#asoiaf meta #sansa stark #daenerys targaryen #cersei lannister #arya stark

132 notes · View notes

echo-hiraeth · 3 years

Text

The Depiction of Women in Frankenstein: Mary Shelley as a Staple of Social Commentary

A/n: As promised, my final piece of uni writing! This landed me a 13.75/20, which means that it is fairly-well substantiated and a valid piece of literary analysis. The main point of critique was that I didn't interact or go into discourse enough with existing sources. Otherwise my essay was deemed "quite inspirational". So instead of uwu fanfiction I'd like to present you this more scientific and academic (maybe even boring) side of myself. Do enjoy!

P.s. My dm's are always open should anyone be interested in going into this a little bit more or should anyone have any questions.

The Depiction of Women in Frankenstein: Mary Shelley as a Staple of Social Commentary

Daughter of two vociferous literary revolutionaries and wife to a renowned poet and activist, societal expectations for Mary Shelley and her work were always set high. Her publication of Frankenstein was nothing short of successful and pivotal in that “Shelley invented modern science fiction” (Sturgis 59). Though the novel was initially presented and perceived as a “ghost story” (Shelley 7) there appeared to be an underlying tone of social commentary present. This, however, is not surprising, as Mary’s mother, Wollstonecraft, was an avid advocate for women’s rights and gender equality. It becomes apparent through the characterisation of women within the text that Shelley seeks to denounce the idealisation of uneducated, objectified and submissive women. In doing this she presented herself, akin to her mother, as an activist for women and their rights.

In this essay I will argue that Shelley condemns the view of women as submissive, passive creatures through the male protagonists’ descriptions of women. I will do this by analysing the stark contrast in depiction and characterisation of several women within the text, through the male protagonists’ eyes. To achieve this, I will primarily focus on three female characters, namely Elizabeth Lavenza, Safie and the female creature. I chose these personalities specifically because they each represent different values and types of women. In addition to this, I will also be touching on Mary Wollstonecraft’s call to the education of women as addressed in her A Vindication of the Rights of Woman. This because Shelley herself plays around with the same ideas and concepts. In doing so I will bring forward Shelley’s own advocation for the education and emancipation of women.

Before I start analysing Shelley’s work I want to introduce Mary Wollstonecraft’s A Vindication of the Rights of Woman. In her work, which was “the first book on women’s rights published anywhere in the world” (Botting 296), Wollstonecraft called for the education of women as she believed that “if woman isn’t fitted by education to become man’s compassion, she will stop the progress of knowledge” (2). She furthermore argues that education was crucial in women’s understanding so they wouldn’t revolt or rebel against their “duty” (Wollstonecraft 2). On top of this, she condemns the sensibilization of women, stating that “their conduct is unstable because they feel when they should reason: and their opinions are wavering because of contradictory emotions” (Wollstonecraft 42). Here we see that Wollstonecraft disapproves of the emotionalism of women and how she wants to step away from the stereotypical depiction of woman as a sentimental creature. In her work she ultimately claims that due to the lack of reason and plethora of sensation, women are considered to be weak and “fragile in every sense of the word” she also adds that they are therefore “obliged to look up to man for every comfort” (Wollstonecraft 42). This then implies that the emancipation of women is achieved through education and reason.

Continuing on, I would like to shift my focus to Shelley’s novel and its female characters. As stated before, I will be analysing the three figures of Elizabeth, Safie and the female creature. In this part of my essay I will concentrate on Elizabeth Lavenza specifically. I will be analysing her characterisation and portrayal through the eyes of Victor, the main narrator in the book. In the novel, we are introduced to Elizabeth through Victor who describes that she, as a “sweet orphan” (Shelley 35) was taken in by his parents. From the very start she is presented as some sort of object, Frankenstein’s mother even referring to her as “a pretty present for [her] Victor” (Shelley 35). He seems to consolidate this sentiment, describing Elizabeth as “[his]” (Shelley 36), the possessive pronoun reaffirming the objectification. Aside from being seen as a possession, we see that after mother Frankenstein passes away, Elizabeth is appointed the new matriarch of the house. This is especially shown here: “She devoted herself to those whom she had been taught to call her uncle and cousins” (Shelley 44). Here Elizabeth is presented as the nurturing, parental figure and even further along in the story we see that she often intervenes as a nurse or caretaker: “how often have I regretted not being able to perform it myself! I figure to myself that the task of attending on your sick bed has devolved on some mercenary old nurse, who could never guess your wishes, nor minister to them with the care and affection of your poor cousin” (Shelley 64). Examples such as these reinforce the portrayal of the compassionate, caring woman. In terms of her personality, we soon learn that Elizabeth is a very emotional and sensitive woman. A good example would be her reaction to the death of William: “She fainted, and was restored with extreme difficulty. When she again lived, it was only to weep and sigh” (Shelley 72). Remarkable here is that Victor is said to be the “comforter” (Shelley 73) of the family, which coheres with a concept that Wollstonecraft previously introduced: because Elizabeth is so frail and emotional she needs Victor’s support. Wollstonecraft’s sentiment regarding the wavering of rationality and reason due to overwhelming emotionality is furthermore confirmed when Elizabeth is called on as a witness during Justine’s trial. We see here that while “simple and powerful” Elizabeth’s testimony “was excited by her generous interference, and not in favour of poor Justine” (Shelley 85). In other words: her passions and emotions contributed to the conviction of her friend, thus reinforcing the idea that strong emotions are a weakness, as they cancel out any reason. In terms of characterisation, we also see that Elizabeth is often described as a “sweet girl” with “gentleness, and soft looks of compassion” (Shelley 189-190). Throughout his narration it becomes apparent that Victor sees Elizabeth, as the perfect woman, even going so far as to state that he “never saw any woman who excited, as Elizabeth does, [his] warmest admiration and affection” (Shelley 151). We can conclude from this, that Victor deems the emotionally vulnerable, nurturing and motherlike woman the ideal one.

The second character I will be discussing is Safie. Here it is important to mention that unlike Elizabeth and the female creature, this character is observed and narrated from the creature’s point of view. We are introduced to this character in chapter XIII when the monster is in hiding, taking refuge in a local cottage. Very noticeable is that in comparison to Elizabeth, the focus with Safie mostly lies on the woman’s physical features rather than her emotionality. The creature describes her as having “a countenance of angelic beauty and expression” (Shelley 116) and being “charming” (Shelley 121). In terms of her personality, the creature deems the Arabian to be “sweet” as well as “lovely” (Shelley 117). She is furthermore described to be “always gay and happy” (Shelley 118). While these traits are directly worded by the creature, through reading her story we see that Safie is actually a very brave, smart and self-governing woman rather than an overly sentimental one. Her independence and bravery were inspired by her mother who “taught her to aspire to higher powers of intellect, and an independence of spirit, forbidden to the female followers of Mahomet” (Shelley 124). Following her mother’s advice, Safie abandons her religion and sets out to Europe as “the prospect of marrying a Christian, and remaining in a country where women were allowed to take a rank in society, was enchanting to her” (Shelley 124). This reveals to the reader that Safie’s priorities include intelligence and independence, rather than motherhood or love. While Felix is definitely a romantic partner to her, having been referred to as her “lover” (Shelley 127), the marriage is also a sort of leverage, ensuring her freedom as it offers an escape from her repressive and sexist religion, as mentioned in the quote. However during her travels to unite with Felix, Safie’s companion falls ill and passes away, leaving her “unacquainted with the language of the country, and utterly ignorant of the customs of the world” (Shelley 127). Here her true bravery shines through as she keeps pushing forward with the help of an Italian family, despite being alone in a foreign country. Eventually once settled in with the De Laceys, the creature, who is equally “unacquainted” (Shelley 127), informs the reader on their learning process, stating that “she and [him] improved rapidly in the knowledge of language” (Shelley 118). This then also supports the statement that Safie is indeed a smart woman, being capable of learning a new language in a matter of months. When we apply Wollstonecraft’s philosophy to this, we see that Safie closely resembles that new woman considering that she is in touch with both her reason and passion. She furthermore endorses Wollstonecraft’s educational stance as she actively pursues knowledge. In terms of sensibility Safie has only been described to “[appear] affected by different feelings; wiping a few tears from her lovely eyes” (Shelley 117) once, when meeting Felix. We can conclude that in terms of this character we see a healthy balance between emotionality and rationality, therefore introducing a different “type” of woman. It is safe to say that Safie is to be regarded as “the incarnation of Mary Wollstonecraft in the novel” (Mellor 5).

Moving on, the third and final character I would like to discuss is the female creature. It is once again important to note that this part of the story is told from Victor’s perspective and that this creature was never actually brought to life. She was merely an idea and request. We learn that the idea of the female creature is introduced by Frankenstein’s monster, after he fails to find a human counterpart: “I am alone, and miserable; man will not associate with me; but one as deformed and horrible as myself would not deny herself to me. My companion must be of the same species, and have the same defects. This being you must create” (Shelley 144). This request, or demand, is however not well-received by Victor: “Shall I create another like yourself, whose joint wickedness might desolate the world? Begone!” (Shelley 145). However after a lot of contemplation and convincing, Victor agrees: “I consent to your demand, on your solemn oath to quit Europe for ever, and every other place in the neighbourhood of man, as soon as I shall deliver into your hands a female who will accompany you in your exile” (Shelley 148). The task proved easier said than done, as Victor struggles to “overcome [his] repugnance to the task which was enjoined [him]” (Shelley 149). Victor seems to think and overthink his decision until ultimately he decides against it, therefore breaking the agreement. He comes to this conclusion after thoroughly considering what a new creation might bring forward:

I was now about to form another being, of whose dispositions I was alike ignorant; she might become ten thousand times more malignant than her mate, and delight, for its own sake, in murder and wretchedness. He had sworn to quit the neighbourhood of man, and hide himself in deserts; but she had not; and she, who in all probability was to become a thinking and reasoning animal, might refuse to comply with a compact made before her creation. They might even hate each other; the creature who already lived loathed his own deformity, and might he not conceive a greater abhorrence for it when it came before his eyes in the female form? She also might turn with disgust from him to the superior beauty of man; she might quit him, and he be again alone, exasperated by the fresh provocation of being deserted by one of his own species. (Shelley 165)

This revelation brings more to light than meets the eye and requires a more thorough reading. I will start with analysing the female creature’s speculated character. This is speculation because she was never actually brought to life. In other words: this version of the female creature only ever existed in Victor’s inner thoughts. Nonetheless, we see that this female is depicted as malevolent or violent and seemingly emancipated since she might not conform with what her creator, Frankenstein, imposes on her. On the other hand, the creature is also described as “a thinking and reasoning animal” (Shelley 165), which strives from Victor’s ideal woman (cf. Elizabeth) and makes her a threat. Here lies the sexism and Shelley’s critique thereof. She exposes Victor because “he is afraid of an independent female will, afraid that his female creature will have desires and opinions that cannot be controlled by his male creature” (Mellor 6). What we can also deduce from this is that Frankenstein seeks to adhere to the “sexist aesthetic that insists that women be small, delicate, modest, passive, and sexually pleasing – but available only to their lawful husbands” (Mellor 7). We see throughout the story that aesthetics and beauty are important virtues as both Elizabeth and Safie, though perceived by two different protagonists, are praised for their beauty. This is in stark contrast with the female creature, as Frankenstein reasons that the male creature might perceive her as a “greater abhorrence” (Shelley 165). Shelley with this shows the superficial mind of Victor Frankenstein and brings a whole system of sexism in societal standards to light. It is remarkable to see how, despite never even having lived, the female creature becomes one of the most crucial characters in outing her criticisms.

When comparing the three female characters with one another, we notice a sort of spectrum. On the one end there is Elizabeth who is seen as the perfect woman and wife by Victor’s standards and on the other end we have the female creature who is nothing short of horrifying, violent and a threat to him and his standards. Somewhere in the middle we then find Safie, the fictional embodiment of Wollstonecraft and her ideals. Now, what sets Elizabeth apart from these other two women is her objectification. She is often presented as a matriarch and sometimes even an object or something akin to a pet in relation to Victor. She is submissive and for the most part reliant on the men in her life as previously mentioned. The other two women differ in that they strive for emancipation and independence. Furthermore these two women are described as rational creatures, rather than “sensible” or emotional ones, which is exactly what Wollstonecraft was advocating for.

To conclude, while Shelley’s Frankenstein at first glance presents itself as a “ghost story” (Shelley 7), a thorough, more critical read brings to light a sharp piece of social commentary. Shelley masked her criticisms, which were heavily inspired by her mother’s A Vindication for the Rights of Woman, by writing mostly from the perspective of males. These criticisms entailing women and the sexist expectations that society has provided are revealed through the male depiction of three female characters. There are several things to be established surrounding these women. First of all it becomes apparent that Victor favours his Elizabeth, who is the staple of a housewife: submissive, oppressed and dependent on her husband or provider. Then there is the self-governing Safie, who travelled across the continent just to obtain her freedom as a woman. The third and final personality, the female creature, is pivotal in that she is the epitome of Shelley’s critique. Victor Frankenstein fears this female creation as she is rational and will likely have a strong will of her own and can therefore not be controlled by his male creature. He furthermore is appalled by this creature as she does not conform with the stereotypical beauty standard. Throughout this narration Shelley brought to light the intricate and subtle elements of sexism in which Victor, the man, presents himself as superior to women. Shelley’s work went on to inspire and “managed to change the Western world’s conception of women’s rights, human reason, education theory and romantic love” (Sturgis 55). In her work Shelley advocates, as her mother before her, for the education of women and gender equality and seeks to denounce the submissive woman as a whole.

(2681 words)

Works Cited

Botting, Eileen Hunt. “Crossing Borders and Bridging Generations: Wollstonecraft's ‘Rights of Woman’ as the ‘Traveling Feminist’ Classic.” Women's Studies Quarterly, vol. 35, no. 3/4, 2007, pp. 296–301.

Mellor, Anne K. “Possessing Nature: The Female in Frankenstein.” Frankenstein: The 1818 Text, Contexts, Criticism. By Mary Wollstonecraft Shelley. Ed. J. Paul Hunter. New York: W.W. Norton, 2012.

Shelley, Mary. Frankenstein. Edited by M.K. Joseph, Oxford University Press, 2008.

Sturgis, Amy H. "Feminism, Frankenstein, and Freedom." Reason, vol. 47, no. 2, 2015, pp.54-60, 6.

Wollstonecraft, Mary. A Vindication of the Rights of Woman. Edited by J. Bennett, Oxford University Press, 2017.

#uni stuff #literary analysis #mary shelley #frankenstein #mary wollstonecraft #a vindication of the rights of woman

40 notes · View notes

showtunesdream · 3 years

Text

Ok, so I have seen almost every English version of Cinderella made since 1950 and it is my favorite fairy tale. So I saw the new Amazon version and I have a LOT OF THOUGHTS: (Spoilers)

I am here for Cinderella remakes, and I really hoped this one would enchant me. But...it didn't. I've read several reviews to help me specify just what didn't work for me, and I think it ultimately comes down to discord in nearly every element. Discord: too many notes at the same time; no unity, no connection. I'm all for pulling popular tunes, but they have to fit the character's emotion. I'm all for powerful female choreography, but having a chorus of women violently pelvic thrusting in ball gowns was...just weird. The artistic choices have to fit the narrative.

All the women in the story are trying to assert some authority and agency in a world we are consistently told is exclusively patriarchal "because tradition." But it feels like that tone clashed with the producers' desire to include all the fairytale elements they felt audiences would expect. I think they could've done it, but they didn't get it right. It would be a fine line to tread, bc on the one hand you are talking about female disenfranchisement and lack of agency/rights, and on the other you’re trying to do fairytale love--the subject matter is really quite a heavy burden for that storyline.

I've also seen comments that the cinematography and pacing were a mess, but I didn't get past my "do I like this?" vibe enough to notice.

A few other assorted critiques: There was no chemistry between the prince and Ella, there was a lot of tell and not show (you can have a chorus sing it multiple times but I'm not gonna buy it unless you back it up with acting), and also the prince was not appealing in the least. Like, maybe that was the point, but if so, forget the romance plot altogether bc if I'm not falling for the guy, why would our heroine? There was more chemistry between the prince and his manservant (braid guy) than between Ella and him. There was nearly more depth of character in the manservant than in the prince as well, which is saying something.

One of the most annoying instances of tell and not show was Ella’s appearance. They kept talking about how dirty she was, and the stepmother even says “you would be so pretty if…” but the only real difference in Ella’s appearance is that she has a darker complexion… So what are we saying here, that she is unappealing bc she isn’t white enough? Admittedly that is reading into it a bit much, but just put some damn ash on her face and it’s a non-issue!

Moments of magic included the original songs (why did they not do the whole score this way???), and the performances from the sterling cast members as you'd expect. Also, I loved the building they chose for Ella's family estate/basement. (Oh, and also if you are going to turn the stepmother into Mrs. Bennett, then you have to show the financial difficulties in some wayyyy...)

Overall, I could see what could've been a homerun concept in the script. I wanted to love it. I really did. But the execution fell woefully short for me.

**If I could, like Fab G, wave my wand and fix some things:**

-All original songs, not poorly fitting pop covers. The worst offenders in my eyes were “Material Girl,” “What A Man,” and “Find Me Somebody to Love.” The ball song should be about the princesses/stepsisters’

/Gwen/Ella’s aspirations, and maybe the prince’s too, if this fix version means he gets character development, like, say, a superobjective.

-We open as before, with the narrator telling us how tradition has ruled everyone’s lives for years. As the townsfolk sing, we get the feeling that Ella isn’t the only one who is not so happy with the status quo. Ultimately everyone will learn through Ella that they don’t have to be struck in the same old ways.

-As she works in the house we see Ella using her flair for fashion, her gift for making women feel beautiful to act a modiste/lady's maid to her stepmother and stepsisters. We see her transform an outfit/hairdo with a clever and fresh idea noone would have thought of. We get that speech about “it doesn’t matter if I think you’re beautiful. What matters is how you feel...etc.” Insert song about fashion and how amazing women are just in general, with makeover magic. (She didn’t feel like a fashion designer to me, I didn’t feel that creative spark/passion. I needed them to amp this up.)

-Ella’s personal appearance reflects her gift for inventive style as well. (I really struggled with her being on one hand a fashion designer and on the other hand having no color in her dress, AND having everyone talk about how untidy her appearance was (which again, it wasn’t. Also, were she really covered in cinders and ash, she wouldn’t be able to handle fabric without making it dirty….)

-Ella’s dresses are made of found and reused materials, cleverly crafted. Like a set of old drapes a la Sound of Music, or forgotten antique dresses harvested for their fabric. After the prince buys her dress she can afford to buy new fabric and make her pink dress (that then gets ruined by Vivian.)

-If we *are* going to keep the idea of borrowed pop songs, then at some point all of the women sing No Doubt’s “I’m Just A Girl,” illustrating how their gender in this society makes them second class citizens: the stepsisters, Vivian, and princesses have to marry to gain opportunity/privilege, Gwen can’t get a word in on state matters, the queen is constantly shut down by her husband, etc. However, better for them to sing an original song that reflects this--maybe have “Dream Girl” come in earlier and get expanded/reprised.

-We needed to see the hardship that Vivian spoke of, bc I never saw it. Why remarry when you are clearly a wealthy widow?

-I still haven’t figured out how to give the prince a character that Ella could fall in love with. Show his kindness separate from supporting Ella? Give him an “I want” song that isn’t about his father wanting him to get married? Give him some kind of point? We’ve seen the “I don’t want to be king and am lost until this amazing girl inspired me” trope work before, but your boy has to have more to him than this guy did.

-I also would like to find some way to extend the insta-love a bit. I’m a huge fan of meeting as commoners, as in the 1997 Cinderella, and there, they make a connection that properly works. Maybe it all boils down to a lack of chemistry between the actors? And/or give me better lyrics? Hmm.

Anywho, I'm just rambling. So sad to see this fall so short of its potential.

#cinderella 2021 #amazon cinderella #cinderella #amazon prime

19 notes · View notes