I kept saying "one day I will type the Nemesis rant” and I finally did
TL,DR: I criticize Nemesis because it’s my favorite. It had so much potential and good build-up in the first parts, but the ending was rushed, anticlimactic, and unsatisfying to me. Act 3 really dropped the ball. I know, “revenge stories aren’t supposed to be satisfying, they’re supposed to leave you empty!” There are ways to execute that theme while still doing justice to a story. Build more upon lore and motives. Make the side characters along the way less of stock characters. Make the story mechanically engaging to play. I felt strong emotions for several weeks following Nemesis and it will be a story that haunts me forever. I don’t think it was a bad story, but there are parts that definitely could have been better.
Obvious major spoilers for Nemesis. Also spoilers for SMEN, Railway, Bag a Legend, and some minor ones for the other ambitions. Finally, a note that I started playing in late 2020 when the ambitions were finished so I do not have context for what it was like to wait long times between updates or what FL was like in its earlier days. The views and opinions expressed ahead are solely from my own experiences, etc.
Mechanics
Nemesis is the shortest of the ambitions. When I finished, I sort of felt like, “that’s it?” Every other ambition needs the lab and/or Parabola. Why not this one? There’s a whole section of the ambition that happens in Parabola that could have been easily integrated. Studying the cardinal’s honey could have been done in the lab and could have given a unique item or something afterward like the jaguar blade in Bag a Legend. I just felt lost and overwhelmed when I finished Nemesis with no idea what I was supposed to do next, no clue how to progress into Railway and other newer content. There was no bridge from ambition to endgame.
The whole climax of the ambition was just buying knives! Not mentally stimulating or creative, nor does it open any path for character development. Working towards a variety of sequential goals like other ambitions’ endings are set up would have been more engaging. I think the other ambitions struggle with pacing too, with action spaced between long grinds that risk losing the player’s interest. Nemesis is my favorite, though, so that’s what we’re picking apart here!
Narrative Stakes
There's little sense of escalation. You’re scheming to do the impossible and unheard of: kill a Master of the Bazaar. That ought to make you Public Enemy No. 1. But you never face any serious obstacles or consequences. Getting the mirror shard into the Bazaar gives you some suspicion but. Okay. That’s it? You kill or otherwise seriously injure Cups, and you walk away without any repercussions. No one acknowledges it.
I focus primarily on Act 3 here, but I can’t resist adding how most of the characters along the way are underdeveloped stock characters. What reasons do Mackay, Carrywell, the Sanguine Auctioneer, etc. even have to be invested in the plot? What debts did Scathewick need to repay that led to being a licentiate for a Master? We get some detail that Lilac is being forced into it by Cups, but her whole part is not explained at all and I’m still confused as to what happened during the Missing Month or what it was meant to accomplish.
There's a brief part saying the relickers are watching you, but that never actually goes anywhere. It would have been a pain to draw cards, but what if there was something of having to deal with all four of them before you could progress? Cups explicitly says it had been watching your movements, so why didn’t it do literally anything to try to stop you? It didn’t want to die.
I thought it would have been cool to have some step of having to go to the slow boat to finish the job. A man who seeks revenge must first dig two graves, etc. While we’re talking about wounds, I’d have liked more acknowledgement of how physically taxing cardinal’s honey is on the body and give some sort of consequence or quality. Furthermore, where does cardinal’s honey come from? That isn’t well explained, Lilac isn’t well explained, the book of red murder isn’t well explained. Please, some lore?
I played Nemesis because I wanted, you know, a nemesis, a personal rival and the character dynamics that arise from that. Cups doesn’t even appear till the end. We know next to nothing about it. We learn Mirrors’ entire backstory moments before meeting Cups but... nothing about Cups whom the ambition was actually about. And its motives? It wanted painful stories to hurt the Bazaar because it wants her and the sun to suffer. This is vague and requires significant lore knowledge to comprehend. I know it’s a popular fan theory that Mirrors’ demise was what broke Cups to seek revenge stories, and I like the theory, but it remains a theory. Please a crumb of canon info.
The only tie-ins during railway I can remember are a small thing at Helicon House, an option in waking the Merchant, and a vague comment Pages makes to you when talking about how the Masters have lost some of their ranks (which you also get from doing BAL). I want recognition! Give the player acknowledgement in revolutionary and criminal circles. Make the Masters nervous around them. If they killed Cups, make them still scared of disappearing or being arrested. BAL has the player kill Veils but it still shows up in other stories and is replaced by Stones for BAL players, so why can't they do the same for Cups? At the very least, I would have enjoyed some acknowledgement at Station VIII (and this goes for LF players with Fires as well). Why would the Masters nonchalantly accept food from the player who poisoned one of them? We know how I love Wines, but me bringing it up here is relevant since it’s the Master that takes over for Cups and Mirrors if you do the murder ending. Could Wines not have special dialogue acknowledging Nemesis in some of its interactions with the player? Please, it’s my favorite bat to bully and I made its life exponentially worse here, give me a crumb of acknowledgement for my crimes.
(One thing I must say: the Esurient Smith is my best friend, my skrunkly, my poor little meow meow, and there is NOTHING wrong with him.)
The Dreaded Aside about SMEN
Disclaimer: while the above sections are objective to the source material, this section is purely speculation. We all know how I feel about SMEN and AK, and I feel like the conspiracy board meme bringing it up here, but it is something I think about a lot when I think about my criticisms of Nemesis, and this rant is entirely about my own opinions so I’m including it. Feel free to skip to the conclusion section if this isn’t your thing.
The tone and mechanics of Nemesis very much to me feel like pre-2020 Fallen London, as if Nemesis was finished long before the other ambitions and never revisited.
If you kill Cups, at the end you get a choice to leave a story on the Bazaar either of mourning for its victims or a tale of a vengeance never satisfied (I chose mourning). To me, this is a glaring parallel to the two ending paths of SMEN, “grieve” and “hate.” Now there’s nothing wrong with playing a Nemesis character who turns into a seeker, it makes a lot of sense for someone who wants to take vengeance upon the Masters a step further! I almost went down that path. But wait, there’s more!
Nemesis is the ambition that takes the player to the Avid Horizon and is one of the only ways to visit if you aren’t doing SMEN (The ES Where You And I Must Go and a certain ending of Watchful Gains being the others). There’s that brief part when you’re deducing who did it and you can guess Eaten and get some nice horror text. Nemesis has the Lady in Lilac as a major character, who also plays a major role in SMEN as well as the bizarre theater scene in Feast of the Rose which was clearly written by AK, man has a distinct writing style (derogatory). To make another point with mechanics, ehhhh making the player buy 777 knives and rely on a luck check for no other reason than to frustrate the player is reminisce of winking isle and AK’s philosophy with cultist sim and ssea. Additionally, Nemesis has the part villainizing the Revolutionaries and having February be mean to the player for no reason? Ok, sit down, AK, I know it’s you!
HD, LF, and BAL all have references to SMEN; LF alongside Nemesis is mentioned at the Carnival at Midnight; BAL has the plot point and ending path with the Third City and Vake-the-Betrayer (which I usually avoid thinking about because ehhh demonizing and stereotyping an indigenous culture). Nemesis isn’t unique in having connections to SMEN or having parts that aged poorly, but it does have much more than the others.
“R you can’t blame everything you don’t like about Fallen London on AK, and Nemesis was finished long after he left the company!” Yes, yes, I know this. This is all purely conjecture, where am I going with it? It just makes me wonder if he wrote more of Nemesis than other ambitions, and since the devs generally don’t touch/update things he worked on, maybe Nemesis was in an awkward phase where no one knew what to do with it. Cracked foundations, etc.
In Conclusion
One ambition has a complex and emotionally charged relationship with a rival who is revealed to be a Master of the Bazaar; makes the player make increasingly dramatic choices that make them wonder how far they’d go for their goals; naturally involves the revolutionaries in killing a Master; has a powerful climax that takes all of your strength, wits and resources to stand against a powerful foe that does not want you to win; explores in personal detail its backstory; rewards the player with Master’s Blood at the end in exchange for the large chunk of monetary resources required to complete the ambition; and has long-term repercussions for the fact you killed a Master of the Bazaar with people acknowledging you with the fear you deserve. And the other ambition is Nemesis. I love Bag a Legend, have nothing against it, and am glad it was that good, but where was this energy for Nemesis?
I just heavily squint at all of it.
52 notes
·
View notes
Hey guys!! this is just my insane ramble on Still Waters Run Deep that's made by the lovely @un-local. I've had so so sooooo many thoughts about this fic and I decided to try and put it all coherently in a post :)
Probably not a lot of new insights, just many, many rambles
Magdalene analysis and her view on Rogier + some other stuff
Magdalene, at the start of the story, is aimless and refuses to follow any line of Grace, putting off whatever it leads to and going in the opposite direction. Yet Grace is fickle, and it all eventually converges, so she gives in. (aaaand a life-changing partnership ensues)
She wants out of the competition of becoming Elden Lord, and she wants nothing to do with it. Someone else to take lordship is what she wants. Magdalene, in her eyes, is not worthy to take the throne. But Rogier on the other hand…
Rogier is, quite literally, built different. He thinks differently compared to Magdalene (a STR vs INT user difference lol). He’s able to pick out all the details that she would miss. Be able to extrapolate and examine it all and be able to learn from it. Magdalene can't do that.
It's basically:
Rogier: says some fun facts about the most random thing in the room, saying all the history behind it, and what the tiny details could mean
Magdalene: yeah, that's a rock.
So instead, she becomes a tool for Rogier to be able to use, because that's the least she can do for him.
“She can already feel the faint grin forming on her lips at the thought. She never wanted to be Elden Lord. She’d finally picked up and followed grace to... to get away, with no idea what it called her to do. When Melina told her where it led her, she felt only dread.
But Rogier...
To save Those Who Live in Death...
Two birds, one stone. She meets his eyes, and doesn’t look away. In them, she doesn’t see pride, or avarice. She doesn't see a man who wants to rule the world.
Not at all.
The path forward is clear now.”
-Chapter 22
For once, she really sees a light from the dark future she sees. She's hopeful that she won't have to take the throne, that Rogier can burden it instead of her. He's worthy in her eyes and because of that, she devotes herself to him with all she can do. (Ah but… I believe Rogier wants her to be Elden Lord? Not sure but her not wanting to be Elden Lord doesn’t quite fit with what he has planned)
Magdalene really holds onto Rogier, and his guidance (a comfort wizard, if you will). And so the idea that he won’t make it… that she’ll be left alone with Grace again, forced to join back into the competition for lordship... It's sickening to her. So she really clings to him, desperate to not be left alone with a destiny that she despises.
Magdalene is always pulled into different directions. Grace pulls her to one but she pulls herself to the opposite one. Fia and D are both on extreme sides of the spectrum on Rogier's survival, and Magdalene is caught right in the middle of it.
But for her, Rogier will survive, he has to survive otherwise... that light, that small hope she has will all fade into obscurity.
Ghosts from the past (Lorens and Ida)
I absolutely love how something, or rather, someone haunts both of them.
Lorens had been the catalyst of all of what Rogier does now. Why he’s so desperate to save those who live in death. He's literally devoted his body and mind to Lorens just to see him alive (maybe Rogier's devoting all of himself to finding a solution to death because he wants it to come back to the old times when it was just him and Lorens in the Rise, or maybe not!! I'm just rambling lol).
Every thought of Lorens is painted with a sort of bittersweetness to it. From Rogier's perspective, at the very least (I'm super curious as to how Lorens would view Rogier but we'll probably never get it because... you know...). He's almost obsessed with him, and it's all pretty unhealthy lol.
Magdalene, who’s haunted by Ida who's probably a sort of lover that hadn't been fully brought to fruition. Different opinions on what they have had made Magdalene leave with (from what I have seen at least, we have scrapes of her, people! I can't wait to see more of Ida though)
Now with Ida... Magdalene absolutely shakes herself out of every thought she has about Ida. Spurning every single thought or imagination she has of that woman.
"Nausea comes in waves. Fever. She can feel delirium taking her—she’s convinced she’s submerged in the very waters of creation, for a while. She vividly feels herself sinking deeper and deeper into a current; cold and dark and inescapable. As it pulls her down, she’s overcome with the instinct to breathe it in—
Against her temple she feels a hand, with gentle fingers dragging softly through her hair. Suddenly, every layer of the dream collapses in on itself, and she jolts awake with a gasp.
Here, in Liurnia, she hauls herself up, rubbing at her face. Even the memory is a shock of cold water to her. She’s a woman haunted."
-Chapter 23
(I just really love this part- I can't help it)
I think it's also really interesting how Magdalene leaves Ida due to their differences in what they have (?) while Rogier just absolutely hangs onto Lorens no matter what, despite him being... er... him. Not so sure about his personality with the small flashbacks we get of him but he’s probably not good for Rogier.
In short, Rogier venerates Lorens, while Magdalene absolutely rejects Ida. (Opposites!)
Rogier’s overthinking
Also found it interesting that when Rogier thinks he really thinks. He's a professional overthinker, even in the past
"He thinks of the labyrinthian etiquette, the way he’d triple-check every sentence for a double meaning. The secrets, the ruthless political schemes. It all felt like a spider’s web to him. He’d learned the game, and he played it well, but it had been nothing but paranoia and misery for him. Just like it was for everyone else."
-Chapter 17
It's what's kept him alive (Ch. 17), and what's been able to pave the way for his findings Yet, it’s also his curse. He tries to pick out every detail that he can and think of every possible reason or motivation. Every single outcome he just needs to know so that he won't get caught by surprise again. He needs to be in control of the situation, he needs to be the master of the chessboard.
Oh and once this guy spirals, he really spirals. He starts thinking and looking at details, rewinding every single thing, every interaction, and trying to label a reason for every little thing. Yet... something emotional seems to break the surface of the water.
I personally think that he was raised to overthink. He was a noble after all, and he dealt with politics. He truly needed to check, double check, triple check, every single sentence and word in case it would have a double meaning. "He’d learned the game, and he played it well" (Ch. 17) . Getting worse after Lorens' death, being fooled by "Only a cut." (Ch. 25) and seeing the aftermath of it.
He can't not do it because if he doesn't, and he gets surprised it would break him (or at the very least, freak him out).
ALSO!! Rogier hating on "saccharine conversations" (Ch. 17) good lord. This guy cannot be real with anyone. Rogier refuses to show vulnerability because:
1. He was raised like that (the whole attachment theory thing)
2. He will absolutely break if he does
Do you guys remember when Fia tells Magdalene that "dear Rogier began to weep as he spoke" (Ch.14)? Fia saw through Rogier's walls through the cracks and he just absolutely breaks down. (Get yourself a man who, after "embracing" tells you all about this thing he's obsessed about and then cries because of it)
It's a mortifying ordeal, that someone's able to see through the walls you've meticulously put up. It hits something deep within that he’s tried to bury.
Despite the walls he puts up people other than Fia see through them. Magdalene (Ch.7) was able to see through the small cracks that have broken, and Roderika... hoo she really hit a nerve didn’t she? (But it also hit one of her nerves too, Rogier vs Roderika am I right?)
Chapter 17 analysis
Also, while we’re on the topic of Roderika, let's talk about chapter 17! Seems I have a lot to talk about.
I absolutely love this chapter so much, it gives us so much insight into Rogier's backstory and the way he thinks. His noble background really shines through here, with how he acts with Roderika who is a fellow ex-noble too.
"His grin is wide and carefree, but it rather feels like he's baring his teeth.
There’s no room for your pity here."
-Chapter 17
This guy cannot accept any sign of sympathy/compassion with anyone. It's all pity to him, and he absolutely hates pity. Once Roderika starts to console him too it sickens him and it makes him bare his teeth like an animal, his baser instinct showing just a little bit.
He’s probably bore his teeth to other nobles in the court, or whatever meetings they have with one another. Small threats that get the message across by a vicious smile, is something he is all too familiar with.
I also think that it's a little bit funny how he gives advice to Roderika but then is also a little bit of a hypocrite about it
“It’s hard, to leave it behind. But the old world will keep its claws in you, if you let it.”
-Chapter 17
Rogier while it's not his past life that he's stuck but rather, he is stuck on Lorens. Even though Rogier is no longer Lorens' student, even though Lorens is dead, he still has his claws on Rogier. It's his entire motivation, why he's in a "pathetic" state now. He isn't letting those claws go, he lets them dig deeper within him, and they dig in deep.
“You already have it within you," he says. "They were only trying to bury it.”
-Chapter 17
Rogier immediately buries his own emotions in this interaction when Roderika tries to console him lol. Just based off of him being an ex-noble and his whole family thing, it's well established that he is very much used to burying it all down his gullet. I mean, is it really Rogier without emotional suppression?
Also Rogier tends to close off all the matters that relate to what he feels in his dialogue both in game and in SWRD. This guy cannot let out just a slight moment of vulnerability
A Color Theory Thing on my read on Rogier's garb:
Rogier, with his background being grounded in nobility has suppressed his baser desires in exchange for meaningless political schemes that have only brought him misery. Yet after coming to these lands, he finds himself with Lorens.
He wears a Raya Lucarian Robe and it has red on it. It's a sign of baser instincts being shown for once. He has grown an infatuation with Lorens despite being his student.
Yet, Rogier is still mostly blue, and he still suppresses that baser desire that he’s developed, that infatuation for Lorens. He never once builds up the courage to be able to tell Lorens what he feels. He would always bury those feelings down, and as a result he can't let go of it. It's far too deep to be buried back up.
But once Lorens has died, Rogier changes too.
He exchanges those garbs for yellow and turquoise (I think?). He's a mix of colors and beliefs.
He still has the blue in the turquoise, which symbolizes calm, intelligence, and emotional control (you can’t spell Rogier without emotional control) But turquoise isn't just blue, it also has green.
Green represents growth, life, and new beginnings. This is a new beginning for Rogier, who's set out for a new goal, to be able to save those who live in death (and perhaps give them life? Not so sure on that but in SWRD that seems to be the case with Lorens).
It's balanced by yellow. Creativity and originality, he's almost the only person we meet who wants to save TWLID. Not only that but yellow also symbolizes illness, which could be a foreshadowing of what happens to him later in his life.
It's not just sickness though, yellow also symbolizes deception. Rogier lies, but I necessarily think he's someone who is always deceptive. He's more like the type of guy who would lie so that an encounter would go well or not hurt someone else's feelings. I think he's like that from that whole ex-nobility thing he's got going on. Political schemes and lying through a smile is something that he's familiar with. (It also doesn't help that he keeps being emotionally suppressed too lol)
Cowardice is another. Rogier is scared to tell anyone about his emotions, to take that risk of being honest with someone. His background in nobility and his family definitely doesn't help either.
Rogier had been too scared to be true to Lorens and tell him his feelings, and because of that, he would never be able to. I feel like he's avoided it even more afterward. He refuses to take that jump of being honest with someone, whether it's about his emotions or his ideals, he doesn't let them go.
But when he does? With D, it completely breaks off everything they've had. Everything that they could have been.
"Beguiled fool. A rotten, sick bastard. Fouled by them.
A wicked, two-faced user. Heartless. Loathsome parasite. How could he? Were they not supposed to set this crooked world straight?
Profane. A perversion of honor. A madman."
-Chapter 5
“Get out of my sight.”
“I’m sorry.” He’d said, and he was. But Darian’s lips curled back, and he jerked his head away and locked his eyes on the horizon. His jaw twitched, in the moment he took to reply.
“Don’t talk to me.”
There was nothing he could do to fix this. To undo his mistakes, to spare Darian his intentions."
-Chapter 5
It's all gone because he had been honest about his goals (presumably). This experience probably strengthened that emotional suppression so as to not be hurt/caught by surprise.
So when Magdalene, someone who wholeheartedly accepts his ideals and sees his side for once, he's cautious. He can't believe that someone can genuinely agree with him because all the times that he has been honest, he's been punished for it. (though, he reminds himself that she's not like that)
In short, this guy's a mixed bag. A mixed bag with problems
(basing this off of the Elden Ring color theory video, it was an absolute joy to watch)
[EDIT]: Another thing I've noticed is that Rogier kind of views himself lowly (self-esteem issues ayyyy).
"He still doesn’t understand why. What did he do, specifically? Or was he just past his usefulness? Deemed unfit to rule? He never truly wanted to rule as Lord, but to be cast aside so indifferently—it had shaken him.
Every now and then he fumbles with this, again and again, but he knows. He does. He knows that grace has forsaken him for good reason. He’s a heretic. An apostate. He who does not obediently bow before a faltering, decrepit Order, so ill-equipped to handle the world as it is. "
-Chapter 5
"All these years. Couldn’t change a thing. Rather pathetic, I’d say—what a fool, thinking that this crooked world could be made right by mortal hands.
Sure, deathblight. Truly, a fitting end for a worthless, rotten bastard."
-Chapter 12
Now, speaking from some personal experience, being raised in a family that's of nobility and expects so much out of you from a young age definitely breeds some kind of self-worth issues that really stick with you. Especially if you haven't had anyone to truly support you.
Because of that, I believe that Rogier, in a way, is trying to prove his worth. But not to the Order, I think that he's in some way trying to please Lorens. Even in death.
He puts everything into his studies of Death, searching and scouring for scraps of information just to give him a single lead on anything, and for what?
"Its fulfillment will be a selfish act of altruism. These crooked lands will set right, by his hands, for a reward of nothing at all. But make no mistake: he needs another day. And another after that, and another after that. He needs his questions answered with questions, he needs his notes corrected in an unreadable hand, he needs to hear one more “Well—” followed by the most opaque, convoluted tangle of sentences ever constructed.
There’s no reward he seeks, but the warm smile of cold gray eyes and a scoff about just what he’s wearing nowadays. "
-Chapter 19
Rogier devotes himself to saving TWLID (saving Lorens, in reality), but it's not because it's all for selfless reasons, he seems to want things to go back to the way things used to be. Back at the Rise, with just him and Lorens once more.
I don't think Rogier ever accepted Lorens' death. He's determined to bring back Lorens, desperately trying to find a solution to bring him back no matter what.
Rogier is a man who refuses to grieve and is desperate for a solution for a dead man who's probably not even good for him. Get this man some therapy
This entire post's summary is just me going:
Anyway, that's all for my crazy rambles! I can't wait to see how SWRD will progress, and how everyone will intermingle and grow with one another (Rogier and Mags)!!!! :0)
Have some doodles + a WIP that I'll probably never finish as a treat for reading this! (Mag's torso was wayyy too long on the second one oops)
(bonus boggart because I love him)
8 notes
·
View notes
Is your pro-Palestine activism hurting innocent people? Here's how to avoid that.
Note: If you prefer plain text, you can read the plain text version here.
Over the last few days, I’ve had conversations with several Jewish people who told me how hurt and scared they are right now.
To my great regret, some of that pain came from a poorly-thought-out post of mine, which – while not ill-intentioned – WAS hurtful.
And a lot of it came from cruelty they’d experienced at the hands of people who claim to be advocating for Palestine, but are using the very real plight of innocent Palestinians to harm equally innocent Jewish people.
Y’all, we need to do better. (Yes, “we” definitely includes me; this is in no small part a “learn from my fail” post, and also a “making amends” post. Some of these are mistakes I’ve made in the past.)
So if you’re an advocate for Palestine who wants to make sure that your defense of one group of vulnerable people doesn’t harm another, here are some important things to do or keep in mind:
Ask yourself if you’re applying a standard to one group that you aren’t applying to another.
Would you want all white Americans or Canadians to be expelled from America or Canada?
Do you want all Jewish people to be expelled from Israel, as opposed to finding a way to live alongside Palestinian Arabs in peace?
If the answer to those two questions is different, ask yourself WHY.
Do you want to be held responsible for the actions of your nation’s army or government? No? Then don’t hold innocent Jewish people, or Israelis in general (whether Jewish or otherwise), responsible for the actions of the Israeli army and government.
On that subject, be wary of condemning all Israeli people for the actions of the IDF. Large-scale tactical decisions are made by the top brass. Service is compulsory, and very few can reasonably get out of service.
Blaming all Israelis for the military’s actions is like blaming all Vietnam vets for the horrors in Vietnam. They’re not calling the shots. They aren’t Nazis running concentration camps. They are carrying out military operations that SHOULD be criticized.
And do not compare them or ANY JEWISH PERSON to Nazis in general. It is Jewish cultural trauma and not outsiders’ to use against them.
Don’t infuse legitimate criticism with antisemitism.
By all means, spread the word about the crimes committed by the Israeli army and government, and the complicity of their allies. Criticize the people responsible for committing and enabling atrocities.
But if you imply that they’re committing those crimes because they’re Jewish, or because Jewish people have special privileges, then you’re straying into antisemitic territory.
Criticize the crime, not the group. If you believe that collective punishment is wrong, don’t do it yourself.
And do your best to use words that apply directly to the situation, rather than the historical terms for situations with similar features. For example, use “segregation,” “oppression,” or “subjugation,” not “Holocaust” or “Jim Crow.” These other historical events are not the cultural property of Jews OR Palestinians, but also have their own nuances and struggles and historical contexts.
Also, blaming other world events on Jewish people or making Jewish people associated with them (for instance, some people falsely blame Jewish people for the African slave trade) is a key feature of how antisemitism functions.
Please, by all means, be specific and detailed in your critiques. But keep them focused on the current political actors – not other peoples’ or nations’ political or cultural histories and traumas.
Be prepared to accept criticism.
You probably already know that society is infused with a wide array of bigotries, and that people growing up in that environment tend to absorb those beliefs without even realizing it. Antisemitism is no exception.
What that means is, there’s a very real chance that you will screw up, and get called out on it, as I so recently did.
If that happens, please be willing to learn and adapt. If you can educate yourself about the suffering and needs of Palestinians, you can do the same for Jewish people.
Understand that the people you hurt aren’t obligated to baby you. Give them room to be angry.
After I made a post that inadvertently hurt people, some were nice about it, and others weren’t. Some outright insulted my morals and intelligence.
And I had to accept that I’d earned that from them.
I’d hurt them, and they weren’t obligated to be more careful with my feelings than I had been with theirs.
They weren’t obligated to forgive me, trust me, or stop being mad at me right away.
I’ll admit, there were moments when I got defensive. I shouldn’t have. And I encourage you to try not to, if you screw up and hurt people.
I know that’s hard, but it’s important. Getting defensive only tells people you care more about doubling down on your mistake than you do about healing the hurt it caused.
Instead, acknowledge that they have a right to be angry, apologize for the way you hurt them, and try to make amends, while understanding that they don’t owe you trust or forgiveness.
Be aware that some antisemites are using legitimate complaints to “Trojan horse” antisemitism into leftist spaces.
This is a really easy stumbling block to trip over, because most people probably don’t look at every post a creator makes before sharing the one they’re looking at right now.
I recently shared a video that called out some of the Likud and IDF’s atrocities and hypocrisy, and that also noted that many Jewish people are wonderful members of their communities.
I was later informed that, while that video in particular seemed reasonable, the creator behind it is frequently antisemitic.
I deleted the post, and blocked the creator. I encourage you to do the same if it’s brought to your attention that you’ve been ‘Trojan horse’d.
EDIT: Important note about antisemitism in leftist spaces:
While it's true that some blatant antisemites are using seemingly reasonable posts to get their foot in the door of leftist spaces, it's also true that a lot of antisemitism already exists inside those spaces.
This antisemitism is often dressed up in progressive-sounding language, but nonetheless singles Jewish people and places out in ways that aren't applied equally to other groups, or that label Jewish people in ways that portray them as acceptable targets.
If you want to see some specific examples, so you can have a better idea of what to keep an eye out for, I suggest reading this excellent reblog of this post.
Fact-check your doubts about antisemitism.
Depending on which parts of the internet you look at, you’ve probably seen people accused of antisemitism because they complained about the Likud and/or IDF’s actions. So you might be primed to be wary, or feel unsure of how to tell what counts as real antisemitism.
But that doesn’t mean antisemitism isn’t a very real, widespread, and harmful problem. And it doesn’t mean many or even most Jewish people are lying to you or being overly sensitive.
So if someone says something is antisemitic, and you aren’t sure, I encourage you to:
A. Look up the action or thing in question, including its history. Is there an antisemitic history or connotation you aren’t aware of? For best results, include “antisemitic” in your search query, in quotes.
B. Understand that some things, while not inherently antisemitic, have been used by antisemites often enough that Jewish people are understandably wary of them. Schrodinger’s antisemitism, if you will.
C. Ask Jewish people WHO HAVE OFFERED TO HELP EDUCATE YOU. Emphasis on WHO HAVE OFFERED. Random Jewish people aren’t obligated to give you their time and emotional energy, or to educate you – especially on subjects that are scary or painful for them.
@edenfenixblogs has kindly offered her inbox to those who are genuinely trying to learn and do better, and I’ve found her to be very kind, patient, reasonable, and fair-minded.
Understand that this is URGENTLY NEEDED.
In one of my conversations with a Jewish person who’d called me out, they said this was the most productive conversation they’d had with a person with a Palestinian flag in their profile.
THIS IS NOT OKAY.
I didn’t do anything special. All I did was listen, apologize for my mistakes, and learn.
Yes, it feels good to be acknowledged. But I feel like I’ve been praised for peeing IN the toilet, instead of beside it.
Apologizing, learning, and making amends after you hurt people shouldn’t be “the most reasonable thing I’ve heard from a person with a Palestinian flag pfp.”
It should be BASIC DECENCY.
And the fact that it’s apparently so uncommon should tell you how much unnecessary stress and fear Jewish people have been living with because of people who consider themselves defenders of human rights.
By all means, be angry at the Likud, the IDF, and the politicians, reporters, and specific media outlets who choose to enable and cover up for them.
But direct that anger toward the people who deserve it and are in a position to do something about it, not random people who simply happen to be Jewish, or who don’t want millions of people to be turned into refugees when less violent methods of achieving freedom and rights for Palestinians are available.
Stop peeing beside the toilet, people.
3K notes
·
View notes