#just. thinking about how he has a fictional Empress Maud | Explore Tumblr Posts and Blogs

hacash · 4 years

Text

celticaurora said: OH HO HO MORE PERIOD DRAMAS ABOUT THE ANARCHY??? Truly an underrated time period, how have I not heard of Cadfael before????

Did someone say my favourite medieval detective show ever? (yes, me) Well if you’re looking to watch a show that combined murder mystery, medieval history, nuanced portrayals of organised religion and gentle herbology then put on your slippers and get comfy, pal, because you are in for a smooth ride.

Cadfael is one of those cosy british murder mysteries like Poirot and Midsomer Murders that you used to watch with your gran on a rainy Sunday afternoon. Unlike most murder mysteries, however, it’s set in the middle ages - which makes it even better, because what’s a good mystery without a few swords to brighten things up?

it’s the 12th century, and England is in the middle of the Anarchy, our first proper civil war centuries before Cromwell made it cool (yes, I am salty that it’s never recognised as such by historians). The Empress Maude and King Stephen are fighting for the crown, the country is in turmoil, and with so much bloodshed, who has the time or the inclination to investigate unlawful murders in these dark and dangerous times? Our boy Cadfael, that’s who. Cadfael is a former soldier and crusader who’s since settled down and become a monk-slash-pharmacist in Shrewsbury Abbey. His general know-how and tendency to care about teensy little things like cold-blooded murder mean he’s often off solving unexplained deaths and dangerous political scrapes that the abbey finds itself drawn into.

Be warned, the show was put together in the mid-nineties, and you can definitely tell, with such classics as Patented Plastic Swords, Wounds With No Bloodshed, and Knitted Chainmail. Fortunately there’s not much you can do to screw up a monk’s cowl and habit.

The show is based on a series of books by Ellis Peters (real name Edith Pargeter), and they are just as good, if not better, as the show. Would highly recommend.

Reasons for watching:

The Anarchy. A truly underappreciated period in British history (because it was interesting, not because it was particularly fun); Cadfael proves a neat introduction if you’re looking to get a bit more into that wacky time when we had a war for nineteen years all because Henry I never had a legitimate son. While it shows some clever insight into the various politics and events that took place (even though I’ll never get over the show’s painfully inaccurate portrayal of Stephen) it’s particularly good at portraying what life was like for ordinary people who had no real interest in whether Stephen or Maude ruled, but found themselves swept up in the conflict.

Murder Mystery Bros

Before Sherlock and Watson made it cool, England had Brother Cadfael and Undersheriff Hugh Beringar. Crime-fighting duos are always fun, but the broship between Kindly Badass Cadfael and Death-before-Dishonour Beringar is really lovely to watch. (with the slight proviso that Beringar’s appearance changes...more than once.)

One-Dimensional Religious Characters? Never Met Them

One thing I love about this series is because it’s set in an abbey, it covers all the different spectrums of how you could be a Christian in 12th century England and basically goes ‘the Church was an institution made up of humans and like all other such institutions was capable of great grace and kindness, and unbelievable dickbaggery’. Where else would you get such a span of characters ranging from:

Cadfael, who’s basically that one bloke that atheists on tumblr will say ‘oh, I don’t like organised religion but that one Christian dude’s pretty cool, why aren’t the rest of you like that: kind, cares about the down-trodden, deeply pious but also pretty worldly-wise. Brother Oswin: lovely and earnest in his faith but also essentially useless when it comes to doing anything practical. Abbot Heribert: nice cuddly grandpa abbot who’s very lovely but doesn’t do all that much. Abbot Radulphus: firm but fair Reasonable Authority Figure (tm). Prior Robert: pompous stuck-up git who exhibits all of the authoritarian tendencies of the medieval church without actually being downright evil. Brother Jerome: equally fundamentalist tattling little sod who’s nonetheless so pathetic that you occasionally pity him, if only because it can’t be fun being that unlikable.

The one problem with this is that there are no female regular characters, monasteries being famously non-female-centric. Plenty of awesome female guest characters though.

(Also, the conflicts between Cadfael and his more conservative colleagues? Not Politically Correct History, this was actually a thing! Neo-Aristotelian thought was a way of thinking that arose in the Middle East (Cadfael was a crusader) that relied on logic and reasoning, as opposed to the blind acceptance of authority demanded by orthodox Augustinianism; and this became a big intellectual Thing amongst academics during Western Europe at this time. Not only did Ellis Peters write a historically accurate character we can relate to, it’s a humongous fuck you to anyone who thinks medieval Europe was full of cavemen still working out how to make fire.)

Cadfael Himself

Sir Derek Jacobi playing a lovely old soldier-turned-monk whose main cares are promoting peace over bloodshed and seeking justice for the underdog (as well as usually setting up the Couple of the Week amidst his sleuthing, because of course). With plenty of snark. What’s not to love?

Also if you’re interested in reading about the Anarchy, may I humbly suggest Sharon Penman’s When Christ and His Saints Slept? Penman’s storytelling isn’t always the best – it’s sometimes less historical fiction and more dramatic retelling of the facts with some additional characters popped in - but it’s pretty good fun and fully introduced me to the sheer chaotic madness of the Anarchy. (Also for those of us who’ve been burned by medieval authors’ inability to write a well-founded female character to save their life, her stories always seem to stray clear of the typical pitfalls; eg gross sexual assault/this woman really likes sex so she’s obvs a harlot/this woman dislikes sex so she’s obvs a prude/i am a Strong Female Woman and anything Feminine is Beneath Me, which is a definite plus.)

#cadfael #medieval stuff #celticaurora #chat

73 notes · View notes

jadelotusflower · 3 years

Text

October Roundup

Happy Halloween!

It’s been another unproductive writing month for which I don’t have an excuse other than laziness not feeling it - I ended up getting an ultrasound on my shoulder and, as expected, tendonitis/bursitis and while that’s an excuse not to do certain kinds of cardio, it’s not really an excuse not to write. But it is what it is.

I’m still undecided whether to do Nano this year - the plan was to bash out some fic this month and then focus on my (poor, neglected) novel in November, but that didn’t happen, and I’m not sure I want to stress myself out over it. So I might do an informal nano and just try and get as many words done on whatever project I’m feeling and see how we go.

Anyway, on to what I did do while I wasn’t writing.

Katheryn: The Tainted Queen by Alison Weir - I’ve enjoyed all of the “Six Queens” novels so far; Weir’s prose style isn’t exactly poetic and she does have that annoying tendency to conflate her historian credentials and fictional narrative, but its detailed as to the day to day life in the Tudor court and is engaging enough for that alone. I’ve always felt Kathryn Howard’s story to be one of the more tragic of Henry’s wives, not only because she was so young (in this novel 21 at the time of her death, although her true birthdate is unknown), but because her life seemed to have been played at the whims of various older men eager to take advantage of her. All but abandoned by a disinterested father to the home of her grandmother, the Dowager Duchess of Norfolk, coerced into relationships with Henry Mannox and Francis Durham while still a teenager, pushed into Henry’s orbit by her scheming uncle, and pressured into an affair by Tom Culpepper. Weir’s Katheryn is naive and flighty, in and out of love with each of her abusers, but it’s not an unsympathetic portrayal.

The Pillars of the Earth by Ken Follett - this has been on my to read pile for years and I was finally in the mood for it. I was expecting it to be interesting, but I was surprised at how engrossing I found this book, knowing nothing about it going in other than it was about building a cathedral during The Anarchy. But I was drawn in by the interweaving narrative of Tom the Builder, Prior Philip, Lady Aliena, and the impact the tussle of power between King Stephen and Empress Maude has on their lives.

The writing is a bit male-gazey - especially Tom’s lust for Ellen, William Hamleigh’s vile inner monologue (the rape scenes in particular are unnecessarily described), and did not need to hear (many times!) about Aliena’s huge breasts and pubic hair. That said, Aliena is a wonderful female character and along with Philip the most sympathetic and engaging. Jack seems a bit like Follet’s self insert and didn’t find the romance with Aliena that convincing, but overall I really enjoyed this book and will seek out the sequel/prequel.

Gutsy Women by Hillary and Chelsea Clinton - So, I am not the biggest fan of Clinton, but this was a gift and I am a fan of the subject matter, so... It is a nice introduction to some awesomeladies, and had certainly introduced me to a few I’d never heard of before and may seek our some full biographies.

Lucifer (seasons 3-5a) - I like this show, although I do wish they’d lean into the mythology side a bit more over the procedural/relationship angst. I really enjoyed seeing Tricia Helfer as the Supreme Goddess and Tom Welling as Cain, but both the latter and Eve are lost in plotlines that seem aimless rather than deliberate, and the show seems to take more delight in namechecking biblical figures than actually developing them as characters. Similarly, Michael is more an irritant than Big Bad (and Ellis’ American accent is terrible); he never seems truly threatening and the writing for Maze is just all over the place. I do continue however to appreciate the writers resisting the urge to pit the female characters against one another and it’s overall rather entertaining.

The Trial of the Chicago 7 (dir. Aaron Sorkin) - I have a love/hate relationship to most of Sorkin’s work - on the one hand I (mostly) find them engaging and eminently watchable, on the other hand he tends to veer into jingoistic cringe, sexism, and you can always pinpoint the exact moment the character stops speaking and Sorkin starts (the scene where Tom Hayden berates Abbie Hoffman’s activism as the reason why Democrats lose elections today is very yikes.) It’s important with any film based on true story not to take the filmmaker’s word for the events portrayed, as it’s always coloured by perspective and agenda, and Sorkin definitely has one. This is an interesting article about the real women excised from this film.

The Spanish Princess (Part 2, episodes 1-3) - Sigh. This show is definitely the “I don’t know what I was expecting” meme, but you know what, I was not expecting a bizarre Margaret Pole/Thomas More romance I ( mean, wtf?). But that’s not where the bullshit ends, we have the show, unintentionally or not, depicting Katherine as at least partly responsible for the death of her children, the first by leaving baby Henry on the cold floor all night why she prays for God’s favour (subtle, this show is not), and then (maybe) triggering a stillbirth by riding out into battle at Flodden complete with pregnancy armour.

This is what really annoys me with these shows that purport to tell history from a feminist perspective, is that they go for the nth degree and just make it ridiculous. It’s enough that Katherine was an excellent regent raising the army and rallying the troops, we doesn’t need to see her actually participating in the battle WHILE HEAVILY PREGNANT. It doesn’t make her look badass, it just makes her look moronic. They actually make Henry seem somewhat justified in his frustration with her!

This is a hit piece on Katherine of Aragon in yass kween coating and I’m hate watching at this point.They also seem to be careening towards The Great Matter which seems to defeat the show’s purpose, to explore Katherine’s life as queen and marriage to Henry before all of that. There was enough drama in the years before Anne Boleyn came along, there’s no need for Katherine to stomp around in armor and Henry to declare he wants a “wife, not a solider”.

The death of Henry, Duke of Cornwall is one of those great “what if” moments, as if he had lived to adulthood there would likely have been no Great Matter, no English Reformation (at least in the way it happened), no Elizabeth I. For a while I’ve been mulling over an idea of an alternative history where Henry lived, which I know has been done before, but I’m more interested in Mary Tudor and how different her life would have been. Add it to all the other ideas for novels I think about a lot but will probably never write!

#october roundup #personal #the spanish princess #the pillars of the earth #lucifer

7 notes · View notes

mossflowermouse · 4 years

Text

Over the last couple of weeks I’ve been reading ‘When Christ and His Saints Slept’ by Sharon Penman, writing my thoughts down as I went. Currently writing a proper review of the book as a whole, but for now I’m posting those original bullet-point reactions. It got kind of long so this is part one of three. I’ve also gone back through and divided things up by chapter, because otherwise it’ll get really confusing.

Below the cut, the civil war begins, everyone is picking sides (but not necessarily staying where they first choose), and I am emotional about the mess this has very quickly become for everyone involved.

Did a bit of reading up on this period – for historical fiction, I like to know more or less what will be covered, especially for Penman books since there's such close attention to detail (also because it can lead to some lovely dramatic irony, knowing how things will play out, and I don’t think of it as spoilers in the same way as other fiction). I’m now aware of the broad strokes – bits of the family tree, the ship sinking, some of the key events during the Anarchy. Also thanks to that one Horrible Histories song, I know Stephen becomes king but Maude is never crowned queen, and her son Henry succeeds Stephen.

I’ve read one other book by this author, ‘The Sunne in Splendour’, but fully expect this to be a completely different experience – I’d spent months studying and reading up on the Wars of the Roses before that, whereas here all the knowledge I have is from like half an hour of Googling, the family tree in the front of the book, things from a few Tumblr posts, and some other faintly-remembered facts about the earliest Plantagenets. I’m really looking forward to it, though, and fully expect to be destroyed with family drama, incredible historical accuracy, and the heartbreak of getting attached to these people while knowing the inevitable conclusion. Here goes.

Chapter I:

Oh no Stephen's got so many relatives on the White Ship

William’s giving me Edmund of Rutland déjà vu – there seems to be a running theme of Penman’s books opening with the death of a 17-year-old noble sibling of one of the main characters.

Oh no I got attached to William

(HOW did I get attached to William, he was alive for like five pages)

Just finished reading the sinking of the White Ship, decided to research it a bit more. I really ought to stop being surprised by how much of the stuff in Penman's novels is real – in this case, Berold as the sole survivor and William's attempt to go back for his sister were the details I'd wondered about. In conclusion: already hooked.

[then I forgot to write anything for a while because the book was too gripping]

Chapter IV:

Ranulf is fairly prominent in these chapters - according to the character list, he seems to be the only notable fictional character. When reading The Sunne in Splendour, I didn't find out Veronique was made up until the author's note at the end, so comparing the experience of reading about those two will be interesting. I like him though.

Note to self: look into William Rufus' death - Stephen and Ranulf's conversation about how Ranulf’s father took the throne has me intrigued.

Chapter V:

First impression of Geoffrey was that he was awful; a hundred pages in and he's done nothing to really change that. Currently resisting the temptation to Google and find out how much longer the characters and I have to deal with him.

I know Maude's not going to get the throne and it's making me sad because of her line about freedom.

And then listing the people she trusts and Stephen's one of them...oh you poor dysfunctional family. And the worst part is, it really doesn't seem like he's going to take the throne for his own gain - he's going to think it's for the best for all of them and he cares about Maude and all their siblings and cousins will have to choose sides :(

And there it is.

Chapters VI and VII:

Stephen: what other choice does Maude have but to accept my kingship? ...well, according to Wikipedia, wage war against you for twenty years, Stephen.

Oh god even Robert's accepted Stephen as king, I was expecting him to side with Maude. He doesn't seem happy with it, though - maybe a change of heart later on?

Ranulf's the only one so far who definitely seems to be on Maude's side.

Okay, yeah, less than half a page later and Robert's already explaining that his loyalty to Stephen is largely a waiting game.

Ranulf's going to get himself killed with his recklessness and open loyalty to Maude isn't he. And I can't even look him up to know for sure and prepare myself because he's fictional. Why.

Oh no and Amabel just mentioned he's seventeen, that's absolutely a death flag as far as Penman characters are concerned (William in this one, Edmund of Rutland and Edouard of Westminster in TSiS come to mind).

Amabel's like "well what does Ranulf have to lose by supporting Maude" and while Robert replies by talking about his betrothal, I'm suddenly very worried that the real answer is "his life"

(Also, I appreciate that much of the book up to this point has been dedicated to the bonds between family members who will soon be on opposite sides of a civil war. This is going to hurt, but I do like being invested in characters.)

Annora :(

Awww, Maude and Ranulf (and poor Ranulf's looking back on his memories of Stephen)

First mention of Eleanor of Aquitaine!

Ugh, Geoffrey.

UGH, GEOFFREY

And first mention of William de Ypres!

Ranulf is still so optimistic and he's going to get his heart broken.

And Ancel says Annora's married. Yup, I suspected she might not be as willing to wait as Ranulf, given the circumstances.

Hmm, Stephen's having difficulty with his court.

Any reference to Robert as 'Gloucester' is making me instinctively like him more after TSiS. (Also, even besides that, the king's relative Gloucester being one of the most powerful nobles is something that keeps cropping up in medieval England. Although Robert's the Earl rather than Duke like later ones)

Chapters VIII and IX:

Robert and Amabel have decided to support Maude! Yes! Now I'm wondering if this will be permanent, though, because there's still 750 pages and like fifteen years of civil war to go. Something other than Geoffrey is going to have to go wrong for Maude for the war to continue that long, because Stephen's really not doing well here.

More traitors in Stephen's court (Miles and Brien) - I wasn't sure at first if it was just unfounded suspicion from Stephen and the other barons, but yeah, it seems they're loyal to Maude.

Matilda's taking a much more active role in the war - first the Dover siege, now the treaty with David of Scotland. I'm enjoying seeing her grow in confidence and discover what she’s able to achieve. Maybe it's not that things will go wrong for Maude, but instead a case of things starting to go right for Stephen and Matilda's side.

Meanwhile, Stephen's being peer pressured into becoming a harsher ruler (well, it's more that several of the nobles are pretty much ruling though him. And the Beaumonts aren't happy about Matilda's influence. Please give me all the court drama, this is good.)

(Also I keep reading Beaumont as Beaufort. The vague similarities between them don’t help. Noble family with even more questionable ambitions than the average noble family and whatnot)

u g h

Poor Henry's having quite the turbulent childhood (though both Maude and Geoffrey love him, so at least there's that. Honestly wasn’t sure what to expect from Geoffrey, relieved he’s apparently a decent father. But considering everything else, the bar really is on the floor here.)

Maude, Robert, Ranulf and Rainald are so good. I've always got a soft spot for siblings who band together in a crisis (and because of TSIS, can't help but draw vague parallels between this lot and the later Plantagenet siblings)

Awww, Uncle Ranulf with Maude's kids

Adeliza's offering to let them land at Arundel Castle - based on what's been said about the situation in England (and Maude's main difficulty being the crossing from Normandy, with nowhere to land safely), this could really be a turning point!

Chapter X:

Just met Adeliza and I like her already.

Robert and Amabel's farewell has me concerned that something's going to happen to one of them

Well that went wrong quickly (they arrived at Arundel Castle a week ago and Stephen's already besieging it)

...wait, how did Stephen find out they're here so quickly? (Possibilities I can think of: Robert was discovered en route to Bristol (please no), there's a spy somewhere in the castle, Adeliza and Stephen had this planned all along (would also be upsetting, I like the glimpse we've had of her friendship with Maude))

Okay, so it's not Adeliza. That's good. I'm worried about Robert though.

"His barons seemed to take turns standing as sentinels between Stephen and his better instincts." This is such a good line and it really sums up my thoughts on Stephen's position right now.

Aw, Stephen's still fond of Maude. I can't decide whether this is more heartwarming or tragic.

“...it was only when he was on his way back to the castle that the significance of the Bishop’s words penetrated. Stephen’s allies made a point of referring to Maude by the title she herself detested: Countess of Anjou. Her own supporters accorded her the rank she much preferred, that of empress. And so, Ranulf finally realized, had the Bishop.” wait what

So does this mean Henry's going to defect or????

I knew he was angry with Stephen about not becoming Archbishop but still. Maybe he's just being petty and this isn't a sign of an actual betrayal.

Robert :)

And Miles and Brien are openly supporting Maude!

...aaand time for war. And there's the chronicle the title's from!

#I'll try to post the next part of this today or early tomorrow #and a proper coherent review eventually #when christ and his saints slept #sharon penman #everyone please read this book it's so good #(it also seems to have got me out of a reading slump)#iz.txt #penmanblogging

3 notes · View notes

howtofightwrite · 6 years

Text

Q&A: War Prince, Peace Prince, or Athletic Prince? What's the world he lives in?

Should a crown prince character learn how to fight? On one hand, learning to fight could be seen as ‘we expect the crown prince to be put in a situation where he would need to fight’ which would mean his guards have failed. On the other hand, learning to use weapons could be treated more like a sport to build dedication, endurance, confidence, etc. Then again, I’ve seen references to princes fighting in history so I’m not sure how this should be handled/explained if I want a fighting prince.

Depends.

The only rule for the conqueror throughout most of history is you can have it if you can take it, and it’s only yours if you can hold onto it. The idea of kings and princes being insulated from combat is one which we come out of England at the end of Henry VIIIs reign and into the Elizabethan era, but it’s worth remembering that Henry VII took the crown by force. The word Normans comes from Northmen, and the original province of Normandy in France was given over to raiding Vikings led by a man called Rollo by the Frankish king under the agreement that they would protect the Frankish coast from other invaders. Many a king, prince, and nobleman has been created by simply having the biggest and baddest raiding force. In the Middle Ages, the king was expected to lead his forces into battle.

You know Richard III from Shakespeare’s eponymous play? The real one was killed on the battlefield by Henry VII, Elizabeth I’s grandfather at the end of the War of the Roses.

William the Conqueror, Henry II, Richard the Lionheart, Henry V, Edward the Black Prince, Empress Maude, Alexander the Great, Genghis Khan, Owain Fawr, Llewellyn the Great, Robert the Bruce, Edward IV, Richard III, Henry VII, and the list goes on.

You don’t have to justify it. History supports the conqueror prince and the conqueror king, and situations where the prince had to be able to fight because he was expected to lead his men into battle. If he couldn’t then someone else, a brother, a cousin, another nobleman, or even some nobody could swoop in and take the crown from him. You’ll find history is littered with instances like this.

So, here’s the real question: what kind of crown prince and setting are you imagining?

Is this the Fairy Tale Crown Prince? For all his trappings, the fictional fairy tale Crown Prince is post Treaty of Westphalia in 1648. He carries the aesthetics, but he’s not based on the warrior princes of Medieval Europe. This is the beginning of the modern era. When most people think about monarchies in terms of fairy tales, they’re essentially imagining Catherine the Great’s Russia without the guns. These are codified nations with standing militaries and treaties, which only go to war with each other frequently instead of constantly. Where the Crown Prince would be educated in the ways of the military, even be expected to serve in a ceremonial role, but never sets foot on the battlefield’s front lines. Similarly, this is also when the local nobility starts transitioning from warlords you need to appease to general rich dudes whose ancestors were great at killing people that you still need to appease.

The above is the Crown Prince you seem to be imagining.

Outside the Merchant Prince, who controls his kingdom through trade, the warrior Crown Prince is an auxiliary commander under his father or, in cases where the king is weak, the true commander of his countries forces. He’ll be landed in his own right as an earl or a duke with a province to rule over, his own vassals, lordlings, and young knights who strive to be in his service. He’s surrounded by followers and advisors with his own household and a vassal to his father, the king. He’s unlikely to be just sitting around spinning his heels until he takes the throne, unless he’s got a father who is very controlling about what powers he has access to.

This Crown Prince may seem appealing, but the world he exists in is cutthroat, rough and tumble. There’s none of the stability provided by the Treaty of Westphalia, which is the unnamed factor seen in modern fairy tale kingdoms. The chances of him fighting to keep his crown or simply fighting on the battlefield at some point in his life is a certainty rather than a maybe. He has to know how to fight and he has to be damn good at it or else it will end badly for him. This includes if he’s living in a world under the medieval warfare rules where there’s the possibility ransom. Kings, princes, warlords, and leaders are always priority targets on the battlefield. Everyone wants to kill or capture them because that ends the battle/raid/war.

They’re not just rich guys, they’re expected to be leaders of men. If they can’t do that, and they’re not supported by excellent nobles then they lose the crown, lose their land, or lose their empire. As has happened with many an unfortunate prince throughout history.

Even if you’re going for the type of Crown Prince seen in fiction and post-Westphalia, military service is often considered traditional and is expected. A modern example is our current British royal family, many of them have served in the British military in some capacity whether they saw combat or not; this includes Elizabeth II.

However, the question of whether your character should learn to fight or not is heavily dependent on the kind of setting they live in and the social expectations their role places them under. The legacy of his family, the number of generations they’ve held onto their throne. Then, there’s the question of who he is versus who he expects to be, the boy versus the prince and the man versus the king. He might be expected to be good at fighting, but he might not want to be. Is it necessary for him to be a skilled combatant? Or can he rule without the need for those skills? Does he want to be good at fighting? Does he enjoy it?

These are the sorts of questions that only you, the author can answer. The situation, the politics, and the world your character live in all affect the role he has inherited.

So, start sorting out that world. Pick a period in history where princes fought. Learn everything you can about that time period, and why they behaved the way they did.

Do you want an athletic prince? Do you want a warrior prince? Or both? Both are fine. Does your prince live in a war time or a peace time? Which of the two does he long for? Quiet or conquest? If he isn’t bound to a parliament or some other body of government his nobles use to control him then he has the power and resources to make either happen.

Ultimately, the decision is up to you.

– Michi

This blog is supported through Patreon. If you enjoy our content, please consider becoming a Patron. Every contribution helps keep us online, and writing. If you already are a Patron, thank you.

Q&A: War Prince, Peace Prince, or Athletic Prince? What’s the world he lives in? was originally published on How to Fight Write.

490 notes · View notes