#like its a textbook racist trope

[txttletale]

this isnt a defence of dnd but I was hoping to ask for clarification on a couple points you made that I dont fully understand and I'm clearly missing something. Namely that you mentioned racial connotations to the barbarian class and colonial connotations to the ranger class. Like I understand the term barbarian has imperial and xenophobic overtones to it but I can't tell where there are specific native stereotypes in it as it appears in dnd

yeah, i mean, a lot of the forms of racism that are at play here are deeply embedded into cultural norms and popular tropes, so if they're not stereotypes that affect you it can be easy to miss them. i'll be going solely by the DNDBeyond official class description: i've highlighted relevant sections

so, first of all, notice the very telling use of the word 'savage'. this is an extremely racialised term that is used against indigenous people to this day. yes, it's used here as an adjective rather than a noun, but in context it's telling, especially alongside 'tribe'--another very racialised word: europeans have 'ethnic groups' or 'nations', indigenous peoples have 'tribes'. 'savage tribe' is how indigenous people have been described for a long time, especially during the height of colonialism. some easy examples i found with a minute's googling:

note also the 'elk herd'. this class description is going to keep hammering home that barbarians are from nomadic backgrounds. a very common defense of the barbarian class is that it's based on norse berserkers--which is true to an extent, especially wrt 'rage', their headline class ability--but while the norse conducted raids and invasions, they lived in settlements. vast swathes of the conceptual makeup of the fantasy barbarian is derived from the colonialist imaginary of the nomadic, 'warlike', 'savage'.

moving on, we're hit with a barrage of direct comparisons to animals. now, i'm obviously not saying that it's racist to ever compare a character to an animal--but the barbarian class very explicitly represents a group of people with a certain lifestyle, and in the real world, comparing groups of people to animals has been a longstanding method of dehumanization that's been applied especially brutally to indigenous and Black victims of colonialism. and while 'animal spirits' is a fun vulfpeck song, here it's clearly invoked as a caricature of 'primitive' spirituality. why are the spirits 'fierce?' why must they be 'animal spirits?' why do other classes in DND invoke gods and demons, but the barbarian invokes 'spirits?'.

now it gets even more blatant. the barbarian is 'primal' -- they have an 'animal nature' -- they're explicitly contrasted to 'civilization' and associated with 'nature' -- this is a textbook example the 'noble savage' stereotype and it's as old as colonialism. and of course, the barbarian comes from 'tundra, jungle, or grasslands'.

so, here we have a very explicit confirmation of what i was talking here earlier re: barbarians very clearly intended to be nomadic peoples. they live in the 'wild places of the world' -- another colonialist trope rears its head here, the idea of an 'untamed wilderness' that can only be mastered by colonial domination, where the people are also 'wild'.

a 'frontier', huh? the idea of the 'rough frontier' is pure unadulterated colonial fantasy, straight outta manifest destiny. the 'frontier' is the area along which settler-colonialism takes place, where the civilized 'us' meets the savage 'them' in the context of the colonial national myth. and of course, the suggestion that your barbarian character might be a 'prisoner of war, brought in chains to ''civilized'' lands' is pretty clearly founded in the very racialised institution of slavery! (interesting to deploy the scare quotes around 'civilized' now when you were just drawing a fully unironic primal/civilized distiction a paragraph ago, wizards of the coast)

these same ideas about the ‘frontier’, about ‘wild lands’ and ‘the edges of civilization’ (and ‘civilization’ as a geographic notion with ‘borderlands’ that need to be ‘protected’) can incidentally also be seen here in the ranger’s flavour text. again, the idea that ‘civilization’ has a defined endpoint, beyond which there’s only ‘wilderness’ and ‘barbarians’ and ‘savage tribes’ has its origins in the roman empire, grandfather of modern imperialism, and the idea’s hold on the contemporary fantasy genre consciousness has its roots in manifest destiny and the american western frontier, where it serves the ideological purpose of obscuring the bloody and brutal wars of conquest that were waged nonstop against the many people who lived on the ‘uncivilized’ side of that imaginary dividing line in order to push the ‘frontier’ forward.

now, this part isn't on dnd beyond so i’m using a shitty little rulebook scan i found online bc i cba to properly pirate 5e again for this post, but by far the most played barbarian subclass is the path of the totem warrior. with the terms ‘spirit animal’ and ‘totem’, dnd 5e very specifically appropriates the real-world religous beliefs of native peoples. the term’s been beaten into the fucking ground over the last few years but this is some of the most cut-and-dry cultural appropriation i can imagine. and what does the path of the totem do? it gives the barbarian the abilities of animals, of course. Wolf Totems and Bear Totems and Eagle Totems, oh my! right back to the noble savage, the ‘wild man’, the dehumanizing animal comparisons we were talking about earlier.

now some of this, in a different context, could be innocuous and inoffensive. it’s not in a different context, though, it’s in this context--and in this context, it’s pretty clear that the ‘barbarian’ class has both feet planted firmly in the colonialist anti-indigenous imaginary. if you want a little more reading on this, this is a great article on the topic--but tldr: the colonial myth of the ‘wild frontier’ is load-bearing to the concepts of the barbarian and the ranger, and the barbarian in particular has anti-indigenous racist tropes marinating its flavor text.

#ask #dnd #ttrpg #long post #orc discourse

[mariacallous]

The escalating wave of protests shaking Iran since Sept. 17 isn’t the first time the country’s theocratic regime has faced mass unrest. However, the current upheavals are exceptional in scope and they show no signs of slowing down. The protests—which followed the death of a 22-year-old Kurdish-Iranian woman under custody of the morality police—aren’t confined to Tehran and other cities in the Iranian heartland but have engulfed remote border provinces as well. Within the provinces, demonstrations are taking place outside the capital cities in dozens of locations. Industrial workers and bazaar shopkeepers—important constituencies for the regime—have joined in as well. In another departure from past unrest, protesters have been fighting back against and even targeting police and security forces, who have killed hundreds of protesters. Over the weekend, Tehran’s notorious Evin prison was on fire with gunshots heard and several reported deaths. As it continues to intensify, this wave of demonstrations may pose the most formidable challenge to the regime since the immediate aftermath of Ayatollah Khomeini taking power in 1979.

Perhaps the most important aspect to the current uprising is the major role played by Iran’s ethnic minorities. According to BBC News, security forces have targeted and killed a disproportionate number of minority protesters, with a significant concentration of deaths in Baluchistan and the Caspian region in northwest Iran. Security forces perpetrated an outright massacre in Zahedan, a city near the border with Pakistan largely populated by Baluchs. On Sept. 30, regime forces killed over 80 Zahedan residents as they were leaving Friday prayers. Security forces wore traditional Baluch dress to avoid detection before opening fire on the worshippers. That this massacre was perpetrated on the Baluch minority went unmentioned in many Western media reports. Despite the massacre, the Baluchs held more anti-regime protests after prayers.

Iran’s history of ethnic grievances—especially in the non-Persian provinces dominated by Tehran—adds additional fuel to a highly combustible mix, and the regime’s harsh crackdown in Zahedan and elsewhere suggests that the regime is aware of this. Iran’s multiethnic nature is also an important part of Iranian politics, and it’s a source of potential upheaval that has been largely left out of debates outside Iran. Western experts and commentators tend to look at Iran through the eyes of its Persian elite, just like the West has long looked at Russia through the imperial eye of Moscow with little space for Ukrainian views, let alone Dagestani or Tatar ones. We ignore these realities—and the potential for internal conflict and disintegration—at our peril.

Non-Persian ethnic minorities—Azerbaijanis, Kurds, Arabs, Turkmens, Baluchs, and dozens more—make up more than half of Iran’s population, and they dominate vast regions of the country outside the Persian heartland that surrounds Tehran. Most of these minorities live in the border provinces and share ties with co-ethnics in neighboring states, such as Iraq, Azerbaijan, and Pakistan. Tehran forbids minorities to educate their children or receive government services in their native languages, but even so, according to Iranian government data, 40 percent of the country’s citizens aren’t even fluent in the Persian language. The official media and school textbooks often mock Iran’s minorities and employ racist tropes. Compared to the Persian-dominated center, Iran’s ethnic minorities face severe hardships—including poverty, poor access to government services, environmental degradation, and water shortages—likely reinforcing their sense of discrimination and depravation. Minorities experience higher rates of incarceration and execution. Activists and cultural figures who campaign for language and cultural rights are frequently arrested and convicted of national security crimes.

As anti-regime activity continues to progress, the role of the ethnic minorities will play an increasingly important role. The regime knows that many of the Persians dominating the Iranian opposition might hate the regime, but they hate the idea of losing control over the provinces even more. Tehran is already trying to appeal to Persian nationalist sentiment to try and split the opposition, stating that only the current government can keep control of the provinces. In playing the ethnic card, media and social media accounts linked to the Iranian Revolutionary Guards Corps have published maps of Iran broken up into ethnic provinces, warning the Persian nationalist opposition what could happen if the regime falls. Tehran’s missile strikes against Kurds in Iraq, which killed 13 people, were likely an attempt to tar-brush a homegrown uprising among Iranian Kurds as foreign interference. The regime is also trying to pit groups against each other, like Kurds and Azerbaijanis, who have longstanding disputes over land, water, and other resources.

Many Western journalists reporting on the protests seem to assume that since both Persians and non-Persians are calling for the end of the regime, they are united in their goals and that there is therefore no ethnicity-based challenge to the mullahs. These observers might remember that Russians, Ukrainians, Balts, Georgians, and others were also aligned in supporting the fall of the Soviet Union. But as soon as Moscow’s hold on its subjects was weakened, many of these groups pursued their national agenda, with local bonds of ethnicity, language, and culture stronger than the imperial center that once held its various conquered peoples together. Like Russia, Iran has its own imperial history, of which one legacy is the multiethnic tapestry spread across the map of Iran. And just like Western analysts largely ignored the imperial aspect of Moscow’s policies, Western observers are now largely ignoring the ethnic component of Tehran’s rule. Should the regime topple, there is no guarantee that the various groups will see their future with Tehran.

In recent years, confrontation between Iran’s ethnic minorities and the ruling regime has been on the rise. The violence is reciprocal: The regime targets ethnic minorities and vice versa. Since 2017, there has been an uptick in attacks on government targets, including the army and Iranian Revolutionary Guards Corps. Most of the attacks occur in largely non-Persian regions, including Sistan-Baluchistan, Khuzestan, Kurdistan, and West Azerbaijan. Baluch, Arab, and Kurd groups frequently strike Iranian forces stationed on the country’s borders. For instance, in October 2018, a Baluch group abducted 12 security personnel in Sistan-Baluchistan, which borders Pakistan. Kurdish insurgents have conducted attacks on Iranian soldiers and Iranian Revolutionary Guard Corps members.

In Iran’s border provinces, the personal security of the police and security service members is under direct threat. In the provinces, police officers and Iranian Revolutionary Guard Corps troops live in the towns they preside over, where they are less anonymous than in Tehran or other large cities. Local activists in many locations have made direct threats to police and security service members, warning of personal retribution if they harm the demonstrators. From abroad, opposition media has published the pictures and personal details of various local security officials participating in attacks against protesters, threatening the officers with retribution in hopes of intimidating government forces from further violence. In November 2021, Ahwaz Arab militants killed Iranian Revolutionary Guards Corps Col. Hadi Kanani, one of the main perpetrators of the deadly crackdowns against Ahwaz demonstrators in November 2019 and July 2021. According to Ahwaz activists in Iran, Kanani had been personally involved in the investigations and torture of Ahwaz political prisoners.

Significantly, the current wave of anti-regime unrest is taking place in provinces that have rarely witnessed anti-government demonstrations since the consolidation of the Islamic revolution in the early 1980s. This includes not just Baluchistan on the Pakistani border, but the Caspian Sea provinces of Gilan, Mazandaran, and Golestan, where the dominant ethnic groups are Gilaks, Mazandaranis, and Turkmens, respectively. In recent decades, the regime could count on the passivity of these provinces, even as anti-regime activity emerged in Tehran and other locations. Not this time.

Iran’s ethnic minorities could have a supersized impact on the success of anti-regime activity. Many of Iran’s most important strategic locations are located in areas inhabited by ethnic minorities. Iran’s main oil and natural gas production—and its major export ports—are in Khuzestan, where over half the population is ethnically Arab, with a long history of attempts at self-rule, in addition to a large Lur community. Iran’s strategic Chabahar Port lies in a Baluch majority area, and anti-regime activity in the port city has already created instability there.

If the regime collapses or loses the ability to control the provinces, elements of some of the ethnic groups could try to establish self-rule. This would not be new: It happened during the 1979 Islamic Revolution, when some of the major non-Persian ethnic groups—including Kurds, Turkmens, and Arabs—attempted to break away from Iran after the departure of the Shah, and the Azerbaijanis attempted to establish autonomy. The current regime and any potential replacement will oppose any change in Iran’s borders. In contrast to Moscow, which allowed most of the republics to go their own way after the Soviet collapse, the Iranian opposition cannot even agree on allowing minorities to teach their mother languages in schools, let alone have self-rule. That paves the way toward violent struggle should the regime collapse, affecting every state that borders Iran and leading to large-scale emigration to Europe and elsewhere. The United States, Europe, and Iran’s neighbors should keep a close eye on the relationship between the regime and Iran’s minorities—and prepare for a number of potential outcomes.

[thecapturedafrique]

I think the hate against Alya is intertwined with how white Marinette looks, too. If we hadn’t been told Mari is part Asian, I don’t think anyone would have known at all until they saw her parents. White leads are always given the benefit of the doubt, and even the hatred of Marinette is levied as a point against Alya. In a hierarchy of racism, it’s Adrien (none)<Marinette (some)<Alya (almost all).

It’s like any character that’s not explicitly white has to be 1) stereotyped and 2) slandered. I mean, there’s the most recent thing where the writers had Alya hold Marinette’s arms down so Adrien could give her a kiss. I saw discourse about how unhealthy that is, which yeah is true, but there were also people blaming it on her being an “aggressive black girl.” At that point it’s like, is the fandom being racist on their own or did the writers make Alya that way out of ignorance or outright malicious stereotyping?

Sorry, I’m not sure where I was going. I just got worked up bc I saw people shitting on Alya again when the problem is that the writers keep twisting her character and the fandom is full of assholes.

Sorry it took so long to answer your ask anon (which was sent in response to this post for those who may have missed it) but yeah it can get rough in this fandom. :/

On the point regarding Adrien continuously trying to greet Marinette with a kiss on the cheek (which is a standard French greeting), I will say from the lens of the narrative, Alya trying to force Mari to accept it about forcing Mari to stop denying her feelings. It’s not about violation, even if it can be perceived that way by the fandom.

But irregardless, Alya is “pushy” because that’s the sort of wingman the show decided Marinette needs (as this post highlights), which is a common enough trope in shoujo manga. The reason why it feels maliciously done is because she’s also the embodiment of the Black Best Friend trope.

What bothers me the most is how Alya haters have no trouble recognizing tropes are to blame for when their faves behave problematically (i.e. Marinette’s “stalkerish” behavior towards Adrien) but somehow when it comes to Alya, those actions become character flaws. She is another example of how characters of color, particularly Black ones, are always held to higher standards by fandoms.

The racist slandering and stereotyping you mentioned often starts to really come about once the double standard has done its job of validating the haters’ dislike of the character. After all, no one hates Alya because she’s Black; they hate her because she’s pushy and a know-it-all and doesn’t respect Marinette’s feelings and is a horrible friend.

Yet when you point out how these conclusions are directly contrary to the narrative the show itself is telling, suddenly the textbook racist claims that “it’s not about race!” emerge. Because if they have to acknowledge the roots of the depiction of Alya’s character, then they have to confront how their interpretation is indeed biased af.

#my asks #anon #miraculous ladybug #multiplication #ml fandom salt #alya cesaire #hopefully i didn’t stray too far from your original point anon 😭 #but i would say regarding the fandom or the writers being racist it is most definitely both #the writers for using the black bff trope and the fandom for denying its usage

[evocatiio]

It genuinely stresses me out a little when tv shows write a character that has so many borderline toxic traits but is portrayed as the "good nice guy" within the narrative like you're telling me a whole collaborative effort between cast and crew and no one is able see how fucked up that is???

#this one is for u #max richman #u little shit #no but I've been thinking about it since i watched that video essay #he's literally the root of all of zoeys insecurities #and the show goes aww he's such a good guy it just the wrong time for them #feels like I’m being gaslighted #see the problem with men writing other men as the nice guy #they project themselves into the character #like the amount of alarm bell ring in my head is kinda triggering at this point #also bc the s1 finale is fresh in my head #its absolutely INSANE to me that having max say i told mitch how i feel about his daughter like it's something sweet #it’s so narcissistic to centre your feelings in that moment it was so damn weird godkdncjdjd #and i know they're trying to say look how messy emotions are yes true but they've way past that #simon and zoey arguing in 1.10 was messy and then later cathartic #what max does is genuinely manipulative at best and abusive at worst #not to mention Austin saying zimon have a physical chemistry they need to explore like that's so fucking racist goddhdndhdjdj #and i know they have an episode about racial bias and yet this kind of micro-aggressive racist as trope is what will happen #do not cast black people in a love triangle with yts if ur going to have them objectified as being good for lust/sexual chemistry #like its a textbook racist trope #and the gag is simon is a better friend!!!! #god i cannot believe im getting this heated over hets #but sometimes man racism just makes my brain go very haywire in a bad way #its so annoying and frustrating when creators enable their racist fans #:/ #zoeys extraordinary playlist #zoey x simon #annnnnnnnd [rest] #shut up sarah

[writingwithcolor]

Writing a Mixed-Race Lesbian in Victorian England: Navigating Queerness, Race, & Rejection

@an-unseemly-gentleman​ submitted:

Hello! This blog and mod team are amazing! I have a question I have struggled to find previous asks for.

I have a story set in late victorian Scotland and a central character is half English (father) and half Chinese (mother) but due to her mother dying in childbirth and her father being a sailor. She was raised by her white great aunt in rural England and so is disconnected from her mothers culture and she feels that disconnect deeply. This is exasperated by being a lesbian and so feeling dosconected from the white christian culture she is being raised in too. Her father later rejected her as his daughter and does not aknowledge her after re-marrying. This hurt her as a child but thinks of it as a blessing as an adult as she owes him no loyalty. Disconect is a theme shared between all the character and she bonds with the MC through both being gay and not having their parents in their lives. With all this being said, I am concerned I am telling a story that is not mine to tell. Do you have any guidence for avoiding or remedying racist tropes with this back story and how this would effect someone?

Side note. In the actualy story i have no intention of having her face any racism or microagreasions as its completly unnecessary even for ‘historical accuracy’. This is all in her backstory that is revealed through conversation she has with other characters.

I greatly value this groups advice and I fully intend to take everything you have to say on-board.

First Things First: Race

First, I personally very much dislike this textbook Tragic Mulatto backstory that you’ve set up for this character. Sailor/expat white father? Tragic POC mother? *Yawn.* White parents rejecting their mixed children is a horrible (and really, overdone) plot device that has a long IRL history. And for some reason, monoracial people are obsessed with it. Even if the father’s reasons for rejecting her are unrelated (eg. if she were born out of wedlock, etc) the associations are subtextual and cannot be erased (especially in the born-out-of-wedlock example lol). Unless you’re mixed-race, don’t go here, please. 

Beyond that, I wonder if these struggles with identity are even something you would see at all for mixed race individuals in the time period. Your description of your character’s internal conflict sounds very modern to me. I’d wager that she would focus on her difficulty with being accepted into monoracial society (especially in the time of miscegenation laws) rather than worry about losing touch with her heritage. Even as recent as the 80s, the concern was more with xenophobia rather than embracing difference/diversity (eg. one of my older coworkers gave her half-Japanese daughter an English name & didn’t teach her Japanese for fear of discrimination, and connection to Japanese culture was secondary if not tertiary). 

But this is also the reason that I say that I’m very uncomfortable with an outsider writing this story. In your attempt at avoiding a tragedy exploitation story (which, considering the parental backstory it was a rather poor attempt), you’ve swerved into an identity story. Please read through our Can I Write About X tag. 

Historical Considerations

Research real LGBT history in the Victorian era to see the ways in which people we’d consider queer today navigated society, labels, family, and interpersonal relationships. Consider this: 

What married individuals did behind closed doors was no one’s business, as long as it wasn’t made public and as long as they followed all the rules (have children, fulfill your role in society, etc.). 

Even then, bachelor and spinster cultures were a thing, and there was a place in society for unmarried individuals (even if it wasn’t the ideal). 

However, acceptance significantly depended on social class and ethnicity.

The MC’s awareness of the cultural whiteness and cultural Christianity of her society seems unrealistic to me as well; it’s kind of a This Is Water type of situation, and most people in the 21st century don’t even have awareness of cultural christianity. Queer culture wasn’t as activist-oriented as it is today. 

Your MC is more likely to be conscious of the distinctions between different Christian sects, and their varying places in society, and may feel alienated by certain religious teachings rather than meditate on the hegemonic institution that is the Church. 

Despite institutional barriers and “don’t talk about it” social taboo, queer people back then found their own communities and subcultures to thrive in, and I think it is a much more radical and compelling story to depict that. 

If you’re wlw and you still would like to write an angst narrative, that is OwnVoices and your prerogative of course, but just know that 1) the experience didn’t look at all like the way homophobia does today, so you need more research, and 2) historical suffering narratives are also just as overdone, and don’t capture the nuanced joys and hurdles of queer life before the contemporary age. 

I can’t see this story working out in the temporal context that it’s in. The struggle themes you’ve set up simply aren’t compatible, or aren’t particularly interesting. I’d encourage you to start doing extra reading, or better yet, reconsider your setting and premise. You can write a nice, queer, found-family bonding narrative that discusses community, disconnection, and religion without the complications we’ve discussed above. 

~ Mod Rina

#mixed race #tragedy exploitation #tragic mulatto #queer #lesbian #victorian #english #scottish #scotland #Cultural disconnect #can I write about x #Historical Accuracy #historical fiction #history #homophobia #Family Life #asks

[astrovagrant]

playing thru honest hearts for the first time since i was a teenager and the racism is so frustrating in that it could simply be so EASILY avoided. fallout has an iffy track record with tribes in general, but fnv basegame already has all the answers!

instead of the white legs as a base, evil, 'savage indian' stand-in, how about a tribe so under duress and lacking in skills for self-sufficiency that it thinks joining the legion is its only answer for survival? a tribe that has some people in its ranks who are worried that the legion is taking advantage of them, but who are bound to serve their warlord (but perhaps if he was out of the picture...) - this is sooo similar to the struggles of the great khans. why was the most racist option picked instead.

the sorrows and the dead horses not as the most textbook 'noble savage' tropes, but the same as any other wasteland group - like the boomers, or the brotherhood; a people molded by their environment and common goals. and also: two tribes who have some more say and control over how much the two mormons influence them, and who don't say 'how high' whenever joshua or daniel say 'jump'.

i think that joshua becoming caesar 2.0 and daniel's extremely egregious attempts at conversion should absolutely stay, because those are Good Conversations to have. but the sorrows should rightfully have more to say about a new canaanite pushing his religion on them, and the dead horses should have room to question how much josua's time with the legion might influence how he treats them - and how much they should allow him to advise them.

and if you, the player, take a second to question the root of all this conflict, you should be able to at least try to find some kind of common ground. the white legs are not a violent monolith; they're just people trying to survive and currently backed into a corner. there's a similar questline in basegame fnv! the great khans! you can unveil the legion's deception and encourage the khans on a different path, if you put the work in! you still may have to deal with salt-upon-wounds and finding support within the white legs' ranks, but it's Worth Doing. and when the legion gets word that their manipulation won't work, they send a force to eradicate both the remaining canaanites, the sorrows and the supporting dead horses, and the traitorous white legs all in one fell swoop - but these tribes aren't fighting each other anymore. they've brokered peace under certain conditions, agreed to share resources (and in the case of the sorrows, to help the white legs become more self-sufficient after salt-upon-wounds has run them into the ground for years), and they're all ready to fight the legion for their home.

#ive just been Talking At silt abt this for a few hours bc it frustrates me soooo much

[whentheynameyoujoy]

Women in SPN—Is it Really That Bad?

TL;DR: Somewhat, yeah, it kinda is.

This is going to be a series of long ones, people.

Before I jump head first into this giant vat of weird toxic shit, let me say something:

The thing about most of the female characters is that on their own? They’re perfectly fine, ranging from serviceable to the occasional flash of thematic brilliance. Barely any of them qualify as “this is hateful on its face and incompetent regardless of context and the writers should feel bad for ever conceiving of it”, i.e. the normie benchmark for justified criticism. It’s only when you put these characters next to each other that a worrying pattern emerges;

Although discussions about sexism in the media were very much a thing in the mid-2000s, as well as shows with characters whose primary role wasn’t to serve a man’s needs, I can’t honestly claim that the flaws of SPN are out of the norm for its time; and

The first few seasons could really do with a PSA at the start of each episode, something along the lines of “A part of the reason why female characters are killed off or written out with such regularity is rabid superfans who couldn’t abide anything with tits brushing against J2, srsly, the writing team and the 2000s’ fan base were a match made in hell, except it wasn’t the writers who couldn’t do with bitching on their LiveJournals about the gall of women to exist in the show, choosing instead to harass the creators and actresses and wives and call them every sexist insult under the sun AND I MEAN WHAT THE FUCK IS WRONG WITH YOU PEOPLE HAS THERE EVER BEEN A CESSPIT AS DISGUSTING AND NUKEWORTHY AS THE SPN FANDO—“

Anyway.

SPN has a legacy (as a posterchild for not knowing when to bow out gracefully, but legacy nonetheless) and isn’t watched in 2005 but in the year of our Lord Today. Meaning that as time goes by, the issues surrounding the show’s production retreat into the background and only what’s on the screen remains, to be judged on its own merits.

So let’s run down a list of the more noteworthy and relevant female characters of the first arc, focusing on their characterization, role in the narrative, and end. In the conclusion to this series of posts, the sum of characters will be analyzed as a whole to see if there are any unique tendencies in the show’s handling of women as opposed to that of men. I’ll do this for the original five seasons as the recent finale went out of its way to say that nothing after season 5 was strictly speaking necessary so why bother.

(Also because I died of frustration in season 8 and vowed not to subject myself to any more of the post-apocalypse fanfic era)

Angels, while strictly speaking genderless clouds of energy, will be classified as men or women depending on the apparent gender of the vessel they spend most of the time riding. The same goes for demons where I also take into account their stated gender while they were alive. That’s because although beings like Meg, Ruby, Anna, or Lilith can’t technically be considered women in the show’s present day, their consistent preference for conventionally attractive and/or female vessels throughout the original arc makes claims of genderlessness essentially meaningless. For all intents and purposes, we’re watching girls and women on screen.

Baby—the only true NB of the first run

All right, time to jump.

Say hi to our ladies!

Mary Winchester

Killed in the very first scene to give the story a reason to exist, she remains an active presence throughout the first arc where she has a wide-reaching influence on the plot and characters, driving the conflict on several levels. Fleshed-out more and more with each appearance to be more than just “the dead mom”, she’s portrayed as protective, pro-active, capable, and assertive, mirroring the duo’s desire for normal life and their inability to have it. Her story comes full-circle in season 5 when the personal tragedy of her fate is embedded in the wider tragedy of the Winchester family curse and the overall theme of destiny.

Status: Dead as of s5

Importance: Major

On her own: Textbook example of fridging… and that tropes aren’t bad in and of themselves.

Jessica Moore

Comparatively, if anyone doubts fridging can evolve into something meaningful, Jess drives the point home by having no personality and no point but to prop up her boyfriend before she ends up pinned to the ceiling, the reveal of which is the most interesting thing about her entire existence. At best she’s a symbol of Sam’s civilian life, at worst an obstacle to be removed for the story to happen.

Status: Dead as of s5

Importance: Major in terms of manpain, non-existent otherwise

On her own: A cardboard cut-out, barely qualifies as a character

Missouri Moseley

A psychic and the primary reason why John Winchester even knows to wipe his ass. Appears once over the course of the first arc yet everyone wants her to come back years later—that’s how awesome she is. Has this fantastic trait of being compassionate and empathetic while not taking a single speck of shit from anyone, especially when it comes from the two main dumbos who might just as well have been raised in a barn. Is very particular about the pristine state of her coffee table.

Status: Alive as of s5, killed in s13 (wait, what?)

Importance: Major…ly wasted potential

On her own: As strong a character as Bobby Singer, and as worthy of being elevated to the main cast.

Lori Sorensen

The writers can’t figure out why anyone in the universe would care about Jess either so they insert an intentionally awkward romance subplot to convince people the time’s not yet ripe for Sam to stop grieving and start slaying. The result’s… erm… well, awkward. Lori’s naïve, sheltered, devout though accepting of her non-repressed friend, and sort of on a religious crossroads because of her hypocritical preacher father. I guess the virginal power of her virginal virginity does… something in the plot? Primarily a vehicle for Sam to mark the stages of his moving on.

Status: Alive as of s5

Importance: Minor

On her own: A bit done. Like a bit lot. Like a “could be a trope namer” bit lot.

Meg

Boom, baby!

Arguably the chief antagonist of season 1 and one of the best things about it. The first one to point out the pervasive toxicity of the Winchester family business, so props for perceptiveness. Possesses the standard qualities of a lower-level henchman—manipulative, no-nonsense, and quietly sinister which, while not exactly groundbreaking, sets her apart from the other bad guys in the season as they tend to have no distinguishing characteristics at all. Plus Nicki Aycox makes the role seem more unique and “lived-in” by projecting a sense of understated amusement at the two main chucklefucks. Is one of S1’s turning points in blurring the lines between monsters and humanity. Has a face transplant twice—once to have revenge (good on her) and the other time to pursue someone else’s goals again before getting stomped into the ground like a mook.

Status: Alive as of s5 (?), killed in s8

Importance: Major

On her own: The actresses do most of the heavy lifting. Which doesn’t mean I don’t love watching the character burst onto the scene and announcing the end of the Winchester brand of bullshit.

Layla Rourke

A terminal cancer patient in a religious cult, she’s a more mature take on a Lori-type character and the themes of faith and doubt. Serves as a conduit for Dean’s budding survivor guilt, self-loathing, and sense of worthlessness. Is kind and cheerful, with strong hints that she’s relying on forced optimism to get through the days; also understanding of the circumstances of others while realistically freaked about the possibility of death. Weirdly, she enters the episode already in a state of acceptance and leaves it just as accepting when it’s confirmed that yeah, she’ll die soon. All expressions of anger at the injustice and senselessness are left to her mother which somewhat undermines the “struggling” portion of Layla’s character and renders the final scene where she makes peace with her fate a bit hollow.

Status: Implied dead

Importance: Minor in the overall narrative, major in the episode and Dean’s development

On her own: I want to like her, I really do, just… if only she were allowed to get pissed, once.

Cassie Robinson

Dean’s ex and that’s pretty much all there is to her. I struggle to pinpoint a single personality trait of hers—the 2000s idea of a “strong woman” and “not like other girls”, perhaps? Undermined as a love interest because TPTB don’t show the happy or any parts of her relationship with Dean so really, why should anyone care if two sniping assholes with little to no chemistry get back together? Memorable for being in a horribly scored softcore scene which YouTube tries to convince me lasts for shy over a minute, not the week I remember it to. Involved in the show’s first and last attempt at incorporating the issue of anti-black racism.

Status: Alive as of s5

Importance: Minor

On her own: She’s in the racist truck episode. ‘Nuff said.

Sarah Blake

A sophisticated people-person conversationalist with a love of high art and a deep sense of introspection. Ascends to the state of godhood by being able to pull off pigtails while adult. Bonds with Sam over responding to loss by crawling into a shell but deciding to move on. Doesn’t care for your fancy schmancy fine dining, Romeo. Isn’t ashamed to openly talk feelings which includes her explicitly asking Sam if they have a thing going on (honestly, this is such a breath of fresh air for a normcore romance). Despite being scared out of her wits, she refuses to be shoved into the helpless civilian box after learning about the existence of the supernatural; Dean creates a Pinterest wedding board in response.

Status: Alive as of s5, pointlessly dragged back to be murdered in s8

Importance: Minor in the overall narrative, major in the episode and Sam’s development

On her own: A great love interest that has enough writing behind her to fool you into thinking she’s something more.

Up next, whenever I feel like it, seasons 2 and 3!

#spn #spn critical #supernatural #supernatural critical #sexist writing #mary winchester #missouri moseley #meg masters #sarah blake #layla rourke

[cctinsleybaxter]

2020 in books

2020 was a year of changed reading habits; people reading more than ever or not at all, some changing their tastes and others turning to old comforts. While there weren’t any huge overhauls on my end, more free time did mean a total of 32 in a wider range of genres. In the past couple of years I found a lot of the things I read to be kind of middling and ranked them accordingly, but this year had some strong contenders in the mix. With college officially behind me I love nonfiction again, and I really need to stop being drawn in by novels with long titles that ‘sound interesting.’ A piece of advice to my future self: they will only make you angry.

The Good

The Idiot by Fyodor Dostoevsky I loved the BBC radio play when I first listened to it back in 2017, but didn’t know if I could stomach the idea of actually reading the 700-page book, especially since I already knew the plot (spoiler alert: this had no effect and I gasped multiple times despite knowing what was going to happen; Fyodor’s just that good at atmosphere.) The story follows Prince Lev Myshkin, a goodhearted but troubled man entering 1860s Petersburg high society and meeting all of the wretched people therein as he navigates life, laughs, love, unanswerable questions of faith, and human suffering. I care about it in the same way I think other people care about reality TV shows and soap operas. I’m so personally invested in the drama and feel so many different emotions directed at these clowns that it’s like being a fan of Invitation to Love (with an ending equally upsetting to that of the show ITL is from, Twin Peaks.)

Salt: A World History by Mark Kurlanksy I adored this book. The first half reads a little like a Wikipedia article, and I was worried that it was leaning too clinical and would be disaffected with colonialism and indigenous peoples, but even that oversight is corrected for as the text goes on. It’s not going to be for everybody because it really is just the world’s longest encyclopedia entry on, well, salt, but it’s written with such excitement for the topic and is so well-researched and styled for commercial nonfiction that I think it deserves any and all praise it’s gotten. We have to talk about that time Cheshire was literally sinking into the ground, and companies who were over-pumping brine water to steal each other’s brine water said ‘no it’s okay it’s supposed to that’ so were legally dismissed as suspects.

Midnight Cowboy by James Leo Herlihy Cried. 10/10. The plot of Midnight Cowboy is very classic and actually has a lot in common with The Idiot, as 20-something Joe Buck moves from the American Southwest to NYC and meets myriad challenges as a sex worker. I’ve been obsessed with the movie for a few years now and the book made me appreciate it anew; I think it’s rare for an adaptation to take the risk of being so different from its source material while still capturing its spirit. The movie doesn’t include quieter moments like the full conversation with Towny or time spent in the X-flat, nor does it attempt to touch Joe’s internal monologue or his and Rico’s extensive backstories, but these things are essential to the book and are some of the best and most affecting writing I’ve ever read. Finally! The Great American Novel!

The Only Good Indians by Stephen Graham Jones I would firmly like to say that this is probably the best horror novel ever written. The setup is very traditional in that it’s about a group of friends facing supernatural comeuppance for a past mistake, but delivery on that premise is anything but familiar. A story about personal and cultural trauma that raises questions about what we owe to each other and what it means to be Blackfeet, with a cast that’s unbelievably real and sympathetic even at their absolute worst. Creepypasta writers trying to cash in on the cultural mythos of lumped-together tribes wish they were capable of writing something a tenth as gruesome and good as this. It could very well be a movie the visuals and writing style were so arresting, and I can’t wait to read whatever Jones writes next.

Found Footage Horror Films: Fear and the Appearance of Reality by Alexandra Heller-Nicholas This is the least accessible title on the list since it’s a college textbook for people with background in film, but it was so nice to read a woman unpacking film theory with the expertise and confidence it deserves that I have to rank it among the best. I had an absolute blast reading it and am going to have to stop myself from bringing up the horror of 1960s safety films as a cocktail icebreaker.

Blood in the Water: The Attica Prison Uprising of 1971 and Its Legacy by Heather Ann Thompson

The year’s toughest read by far, but also its most rewarding. Thompson uses mountains of documents, government-buried intel, and personal interviews to explain what happened at Attica from beginning to end, and does a fantastic job of balancing hard facts and ‘unbiased journalism’ with much-needed emotion and critical analysis. It’s more important reading in the 2020s than any kind of ‘why/how to not be racist’ book club book is going to be, and the historical context it provides is as interesting as it is invaluable. The second half drags a bit in going through lengthy trial processes with some assumed baseline knowledge of legalese (which I did not have. All that criminal minds in 2015… meaningless), but aside from that editing and prose are some of the best I’ve seen in nonfiction. 

The Bad

The Woman in the Window by A.J. Finn A friend and I decided to read this together because I’m obsessed with how insane the author is and wanted to know if he can actually write.

He cannot.

The Beautiful Thing That Awaits Us All by Laird Barron Barron is an indie darling of the horror fiction scene, so I was excited to finally read one of his collections but can now attest that I hate him. If you’re going to do Lovecraft please deconstruct Lovecraft in an interesting way. I had actually written a lot about the issues I have with how he develops characters and plots, but one of the only shorthand notes I took was “he won’t stop saying ‘bole’ instead of tree trunk” and I feel like that’s the only review we need.

Bats of the Republic by Zach Dodson Look up a photo of this author because if I had bothered to glance at the jacket bio I honest-to-god wouldn’t have even tried reading this.

This Is How You Lose the Time War by Amal El-Mohtar and Max Gladstone I went in with high expectations since this is an epistolary novella I’d seen praised on tumblr and youtube but oh my god was there a reason I was seeing it praised on tumblr and youtube. This is bad Steven Universe fanfiction. Both authors included ‘listening to the Steven Universe soundtrack throughout’ in the acknowledgements, and to add insult to injury there’s a plug from my nemesis Madeline Miller.

The 7½ Deaths of Evelyn Hardcastle by Stuart Turton The premise of this one plays with so many tropes I like that I should have been more suspicious. It’s a dinner party with stock characters one would expect of Clue, and rather than our protagonist being the detective he’s a man with amnesia stuck in a 24-hour time loop. Body-hopping between guests, he must gather evidence using the skillsets of each ‘host’ until he either solves Evelyn Hardcastle’s murder or the limit of eight hosts runs out. I read a lot of not-very-good books, and it’s so, so much worse when they have potential to be fun. This is how you lose the most points, and how I abandon decorum and end up writing a list of grievances: • Our protagonist can only inhabit male hosts, which I think is a stupid writing decision not because I’m ‘woke’ but because wouldn’t it make sense for him to also be working with the maids, cooks, and women close to the murder victim? • Complaining about the limitations of hosts makes some sense (e.g- there’s a section where he thinks that it’s hard to be an old man because it’s difficult to get to the places he needs to be quickly), but one of his hosts is a rapist and one of his hosts is fat. Guess which one gets complained about more. • One of the later hosts is just straight-up a cop with cop knowledge that singlehandedly solves the case. We spend some time being like ‘wow I couldn’t have done it without the info all eight hosts helped gather’ but it was 100% the detective and he solves the murder using information he got off-screen. • The mystery itself is actually well-paced and I didn’t have a lot of issues with it (e.g, there’s a twist that I guessed only shortly before the end), which makes it all the worse that the metanarrative of this book is INSANE. No spoilers but the reveal as to why our unnamed protagonist is even in this situation is stupid. I just know they’re going to make it into a movie and I’m preemptively going to aaaaaaaaa!!!

Trust Exercise by Susan Choi The fact that this was the worst book I read all year, worse even than the bad Steven Universe fanfiction, and it won multiple awards makes my blood boil. I could rant about it for hours but just know that it’s a former theater kid’s take on perception and memory, and deals with sexual abuse in a way that’s handled both very badly and with a level of fake deepness that’s laughable. Select fake-deep quotes I copied down because at one point I said ‘oh barf’ aloud: -I’m filled with melancholy that’s almost compassion. It’s sad the same way. -[On a friendship ending] We almost never know what we know until after we know it. -Because we’re none of us alone in this world. We injure each other.

There are also bad sex scenes that I can’t quite make fun of because I think (HOPE?) they’re supposed to be a melodramatic take on how teenagers view sex, but I very much wanted to die. Flowers were alluded to. Nipples were compared to diamonds.

Honorable/Dishonorable Mentions (categorized as the same thing because, well,)

The Life and Death of Sophie Stark by Anna North This book was frustrating because the first third of it is fantastic. It’s set up to be a takedown of the manic pixie dream girl trope, jumping from person to person discussing their relationship with the titular Sophie, and indirectly revealing that she was just some girl and not the difficult and mysterious genius they all believed her to be. Then in the third act, BAM! She was that difficult and mysterious genius and she’s now indirectly brought all the people from her past together. I wanted to scream the plot beefed it so bad, but the good news is I really liked this octopus description.

It was the size of a three-year-old child, and it seemed awful to me that something could be so far from human and obviously want something as badly as it wanted to get out of the tank.

Radium Girls: The Dark Story of America’s Shining Women by Kate Moore Cool new nightmare speedrun strat is to hear a 2-second anecdote from a documentary that people used to get radium poisoning from painting watch faces, be curious enough that you buy a book to learn more, and be met with medical and legal horror beyond anything you could have imagined. This was almost one of my favorite books of the year! Almost.

Radium Girls is very lovingly crafted and incredibly well-researched; one of those things that’s hard to get through but that you want to read sections of again as soon as you’ve finished. The umbrage I take with it is that it’s very Catholic. The author and many of her subjects are Irish and their religion is important to them, but it casts a martyr-y narrative over the whole thing that I found uncomfortable. Seventeen-year-old girls taking a factory job they didn’t know was dangerous are framed as brave, working-class heroes, but there’s not a set moral lesson to be gained from this story. Sarah Maillefer didn’t make “a sacrifice” when she agreed to the first radium tests, she agreed because she was terrified. She didn’t think she was helping she was begging for help.

The Mushroom at the End of the World: On the Possibility of Life in Capitalist Ruins by Anna Tsing Tsing is an incredibly skilled researcher and ethnographer; there are so many good ideas in this book that I’d almost consider it essential leftist text… if I could stand the way it was structured. Tsing posits that because nature is built on precariousness she will build her book the same way, allowing it to grow like a mushroom, and thus chapters don’t progress linearly and are written more like freeform poetry than a series of academic arguments. Some people are really going to love that, but I’m me and a mushroom is a mushroom and a book is a book. I don’t think in the way Tsing does, and while I tried to keep an open mind it’s hard to play along when something is this academically dense and makes so many ambitious claims. As if to prove how different our structuring methods are, I’ve made my own thoughts into a pros and cons list

Things I liked: • ‘Contamination’ as something inherent to diversity • ‘Scalability’ as a flawed way of thinking (Tsing has written whole essays about this that I find very compelling, but a main example here is that China and the US have come down on Japanese matsutake research for being too ‘site specific’ and not yielding enough empirical data) • Discussing how Americans were so invested in self-regulating systems in the 1950s we thought they could be applied to literally everything, including ecosystems • “The survivors of war remind us of the bodies they climbed over- or shot- to get to us. We don’t know whether to love or hate the survivors. Simple moral judgements don’t come to hand.” • Any and all fieldwork Tsing shares is amazing; I especially liked reading about the culture of mushroom pickers living in the Cascades and their contained market system

Things I didn’t like: • Statements that sound deep but aren’t, e.g- “help is always in the service of another.” (Yep. That’s what that means. Unless an organism is doing something to help itself which then nullifies your whole opening argument.) • A very debatable definition of utilitarianism • “Capitalism vs pre-capitalism,” which seems like an insanely black-and-white stance for a book all about finding hidden middle ground • A chapter I found really interesting about how intertwined Japanese and American economies are, but it tries to cover the entire history of US-Japan relations. Seriously, starting with Governor Perry and continuing through present day, this could have been a whole different book and it’s a good example of what I mean when I say arguments feel too scattered (the conclusion it reaches is that in the 80s the yen was finally able to hold its own against the dollar. Just explain that part.) • A chapter arguing that ‘true biological mutualism’ is rarely a focus of STEM and is a new sociological development/way of thinking which is just… flat-out not true

For all the comparisons art gets to ‘being on a drug trip’ this anthropology textbook has come the closest for me. Moments of profound human wisdom, intercut with things I had trouble understanding because I wasn’t on the same wavelength, intercut with even more things that felt false or irrelevant. I can’t put it on the nice list but I am glad I read it.

#2020 #books #long post #(in case the read more isn't working)

[paar-pahlok]

Fantasy Races and The Elder Scrolls

I made a post about this a while ago but the comments got taken over by racists so I’m just going to start fresh here. 

Shout out to TES for not making the elves fancy fantasy white people. In fact, shout out for not really making them look like people at all, but that’s a point I’ll get to later. 

In most fantasy media, elves are the perfect race. I’m going to be referencing Tolkien mostly simply because LOTR is the most textbook example of this happening. In LOTR, the elves are the superior race. They are above the greed of dwarves and the wars of men. They are elegant, immortal, and they understand magic in a way no other race can. They’re considered wise; they’re keepers of history and of culture. In short, they’re perfect. In addition to all of this, they’re also all pale with perfect skin. The antithesis of the elves are Orcs who are a corrupted mixture of man and elf. They are Evil and Dark, as displayed by their hideous features and dark skin. Being the father of modern fantasy, Tolkien had quite the influence on the genre as a whole. This trend of elves and orcs (light vs dark) has appeared time and time again in fantasy media and in the end, it perpetuates harmful tropes. 

To be clear, I am not at all attacking Tolkien here. I’m not calling Tolkien a racist or saying that LOTR is a terrible series that no one should support. I admire Tolkien greatly for what he did for the fantasy genre and I think his books are critical to the development of fantasy. I am simply pointing out the origins of many tropes we see in modern media. 

Now, there have been essays about the underlying racial tensions that exist within LOTR and that isn’t my intention here. However, I will point out that the underlying racial ideas that are found in fantasy have been harmful to many people in the real world. For example, when movies are being cast, it makes it much easier for the film industry to discriminate racially against people for ‘not fitting the description’ of the characters they’re auditioning for. It can also be isolating for people of minority groups to not see themselves represented in fun and exciting fantasy worlds that are not bound to follow the rules and history of the world we live in. 

Many (many) people would argue that there is nothing wrong with portraying elves the way they are in LOTR because they were inspired by specific folklore. Whatever your argument is you can stop right there. My point is that it doesn’t matter what the fantasy race was inspired by because its fucking made up and you control how its represented in your story. There is no law saying that elves have to look like tall white people with pointy ears. Just like there’s no law saying that sexism has to be a core part of the society you’re creating. Or that leadership has to follow the same patterns of feudal Europe in order for it to make sense. Fantasy is made up. You can do whatever you like with it and stretch the boundaries of your imagination. 

This brings me to TES. While there are many aspects of Elder Scrolls lore that are problematic (e.g Molag Bal), one thing that I do believe was done right was the fantasy races in the series, specifically the elves. Currently, there are no playable races of elves that are white. Right off the bat, this is subverting what audiences have come to expect from the average fantasy series. It would be one thing if the differences stopped there, but TES takes it a step further. Not only are none of the playable elves white, but the only human color of skin available for elves is brown. The elves do not look like what we have come to expect humans to look like. They are golden yellow, bluish grey, and green. Their eyes can be solid colors with no pupils, and they take often shapes that seem more alien than what you would find on a human face. Yes, the snow elves have pale skin, but even they don’t look human when placed next to the very white Nords. Doing this is not only more creative, but it opens the door for so many possibilities. 

Now, no one matches the description for an elf in an elder scrolls game. Just like a black woman could play a green alien in Guardians of the Galaxy, a black woman could play a golden Atlmer or a grey Dunmer the same way any white person could. 

Regardless of the intention of changing the aesthetic of elves so severely, I give credit to the teams of people who created TES for taking a step in a direction few ventures to go in. Having the elves appear the way they do is more creative and more interesting than what I personally have come to expect from most fantasy media. I hope that more fantasy series venture to take bigger risks like this when designing their races, especially when redesigning classic, well loved fantasy races into something new and exciting. TES is far from perfect, but there is a reason why we all love the games so much. Aspects such as this are what make it stand out from any other fantasy game on the market. 

#long post #Elder Scrolls #Elder Scrolls V #essay #race #fantasy #Fantasy Writing #critical analysis #tolkien #skyrim #oblivion #Morrowind #altmer #dunmer #falmer #orsimer #bosmer #tes #lore #elves #this is not the kind of post you think it's going to be #I'm not talking about racism in skyrim I promise #dwemer #rpg

[stormsbourne]

uhhhh with spoilers tho why was infinity war bad?

spoils + long post under cut

so I think the single scene that caps off how bad infinity war is is that thanos has captured gamora and forced her to tell him where the last infinity stone is. thanos, if you’ve forgotten, took gamora from her home – there’s an earlier scene that shows him grooming her as he kills half her planet – and spent her entire life pitting her and nebula against each other for his amusement and to “make them strong” in pretty much textbook abusive ways. but for some goddamn reason, the movie then shows thanos being a fucking whiny baby about gamora’s hatred of him.

gamora: [referring to thanos’ throne] I always hated this chairthanos: yes, I’ve heard that beforegamora: and I hated this roomthanos: you have said as muchgamora: and I hated youthanos: *sad baby face* :’(

anyway thanos and gamora are going after this stone. it’s about halfway through the movie at this point

double hitler red skull shows up as the guardian of the stone and also a weird dementor and tells thanos that in order to get the stone he has to sacrifice something that he loves more than anything. gamora starts laughing. she tells him that this is his just deserts, that the universe has put up a wall here to thwart him because he is incapable of loving anyone or anything so the stone will never be his. he turns around to face her and he’s crying. “tears, really?” she demands. “they’re not for him” doublenazi red skull says

there’s a very long sequence of thanos grabbing gamora by the wrist in a deliberate parallel to the earlier scene where he took baby gamora by the hand. he yanks her over to this cliff edge and throws her off, crying the whole time. poor sad abuse man. has to kill his victim. it must be hard. we see her fall. then we get a loving fucking 30 second money shot of her dead body at the bottom of this chasm just to really drive home how tragic it is. 

(baby gamora is later used at the end of the movie once thanos wins to reassure him it was worth it)

I knew this movie was gonna be a problem before then but this was The Scene where I knew it was the second worst movie marvel had made. 

in addition to all of this here are some other points

Thanos’ “sympathetic motivation” is stupid. if you haven’t been spoiled on this yet his motivation is that he wants everything to be “in balance” and he’s motivated by overpopulation, which is a racist + classist myth perpetuated by those in power to promote xenophobia. thanos’ goal is to eliminate half of every sentient species in the universe to ensure nobody is ever poor or suffering again, somehow, and also to ensure that the universe doesn’t run out of resources 

oh but it’s ok! the genocide is random! no racial or class overtones here we just flip a coin for everybody! random genocides are the best genocides!

I don’t want to sound like one of those people who soapboxes about how narratives have to tell us the badguy is bad but I honestly don’t think the movie does enough to communicate that thanos is wrong and also fucking crazy. there’s a few people like “oh thanos how can you be sure” and “thanos we make these choices and that’s what matters” but almost no one ever hears his plan and tells him “you are crazy and that is the stupidest thing I’ve ever fucking heard, you delusional fucking weirdo” 

he wins btw which wouldn’t be bad taken on its own but like, why does he not use his magical glove macguffin to make resources infinite and the universe an actual utopia instead of killing half of everybody

two significant, named characters die in the first 10 minutes before the opening screen even shows up, without any sort of buildup 

the soul gem plot even without all the ooh sad abuser shit is such a fucking nothing burger, you have all these weird and intricate things that involved entire plots of movies and weird shit that’s only barely a gem at all like the aether from thor 2 and then you have Fantasy Trope 101 oh you gotta kill somebody to get the rock! you gotta do it! but it’s sad and this strange dementor not-hitler is here to make sure it’s sad!

the black panther cast is in it for approximately 20 minutes total out of the like, 3 hour runtime. (aside: I actually saw BP and IF on the same day and holy balls was that a high to low sliding scale)

the movie ends with roughly 2/3 of the main cast being turned to dust by thanos winning but because we know none of it is going to stick because they have sequel movies and this is comics-based, it just feels pointless. it feels like a waste of time. it feels like they dragged out into 2.5 hours what could have been done in 20 minutes 

speaking of thanos winning it is exhausting to watch. it feels like the movie is kicking you over and over and every time it starts to let you get up a bigger dude comes in and kicks you instead. nobody likes to watch a movie where the villain wins over and over and over without so much as a setback. thanos starts OUT too powerful for anybody to stop so the entire movie just becomes him stomping all over everybody over and over and over again. we start out the movie with him doing it. we end the movie with him literally undoing an emotional climax moment in order to make sure he wins. oh you destroyed the mind gem? no big deal I’ll just rewind time zoooooop ok we good! I win! *little kid voice* you can’t kill me I rewound time and actually I won 10 minutes ago!

ok this one is kind of petty but someone pointed out valkyrie isn’t even in this movie and now it’s consuming me, you give ant-man and hawkeye one-off lines about why they’re not here but you can’t even be like “oh yeah valkyrie took some of our people and escaped” (we’re gonna come back to this in like 2 seconds keep it iin mind)

random annoyance: peter quill peacocking over gamora because thor is hot and he feels threatened, I hate peter quill

other random annoyance: thor your ship got fucking blown up, how did thanos only kill half your people, are the other half on his ship now?

I honestly just like, cannot fucking stress how bad the thanos and gamora shit is, how fucking horrifying it is, how we’re expected to feel sympathy for this man who literally fucking disassembled nebula to torture her to get gamora to do what he wants. oh it’s ok though. he loves gamora in his way you see. it’s fine. it’s fine! it’s fine. it’s fine. i t s f i n e : )

does the rest of the world just not realize how horrifying that is?!?!?!?!?!?!?

the vision/scarlet witch ship is like an emotional crux of the whole movie and it just. it just doesn’t work. it just doesn’t.

the plot thread with the hulk is probably going to be resolved in avengers 2019 since iirc bruce survived but as it is it feels unfinished and dangling

speaking of survivors we gotta have that man angst, we’ll turn a 17 year old boy to dust but tony’s gotta look sad about it

like fam I love tony angst but he has had ENOUGH jesus CHRIST rdj only barely wants to be involved with this franchise anymore anyway let him be free. maybe he’ll actually die in avengers 2019

it feels like it undoes a bunch of things from the previous movies which on one hand who cares! it’s all gonna be rewound anyway! but on the other hand FUCK you. the asgardian refugees are all fucking dead now. black panther’s cast exists for like 20 minutes and its setting is there pretty much just so the aliens can fuck up someplace that isn’t new york for once. rocket’s epiphany at the end of gotg2? who cares we’ve got snark to dispense! can’t have him act like he learned anything, that’d take away from his ability to be a dick to peter! 

uh I think I’m out of steam for now but that’s my list of why I hated the movie. it had some good moments and a lot of the character interactions were great, especially literally every scene involving spiderman, but you could have fucking jewels and if you bury them in shit they are still going to stink

#Anonymous #infinity war spoilers / #asks

[breathofthedice]

Letter to the CW

Hey guys, here’s an example of a letter you can send to the CW asking them to keep mon el off of Supergirl (letter under the cut for length):

Mr. Michael Roberts

The CW Television Network

3300 W. Olive Ave.

Burbank, CA 91505

Dear Mr. Roberts,

I am writing in regards to the CW show Supergirl. When Supergirl premiered on CBS, I found myself enamored with this lighthearted superhero show focused on family and the theme of ‘el mayarah’, or ‘stronger together’. Unfortunately, feminism is a rare find on mainstream TV these days, but Supergirl portrayed its main lead as a strong, capable woman who drew strength from the other women around her. Perhaps my favorite thing about the show is the bond between Kara and her adopted sister Alex. It’s so refreshing to see a show centered around the bond between two women, and two sisters at that.

When I heard that one of the DC shows would have a character come out, my thoughts instantly went to Alex, even though it seemed too much to hope for. And when she did indeed turn out to be that character, I was ecstatic. Alex’s journey this season has been everything I could have hoped for, and Chyler Leigh and Floriana Lima have been extremely outspoken in their support for this storyline. As a lesbian, representation like this is so wonderful to see, and I want to thank you for giving that to my community.

However, I have one major concern about Supergirl: Mon El. As I’m sure you know, Mon El has created a deep division among fans of the show. He perpetuates many sexist tropes, such as ‘frat boy is fixed by a woman’ and ‘inside every frat boy there’s a hero waiting to be brought out by a woman’. While I understand that the intent of the character was to show that anyone, even a person from a horrible background who is initially awful, can be a hero, I don’t think Mon El was the best vessel to tell that story. For starters, his story reinforces the idea that it’s a woman’s job to fix a man. That is not only sexist, but it frames Mon El as the lead instead of Kara and reduces her to a vessel in his story. This trope is also problematic for a very scary reason: It perpetuates abuse. Now, Mon El was not deliberately written to be abusive, and his character is meant to develop into a hero, not a villain. But girls who are watching this show will see this development and think that that is how things go in real life. When they meet a boy like Mon El, they will attempt to change him no matter how badly he treats them. And when that bad treatment escalates, they still won’t leave because they believe that if they only try harder, they can make him better like Kara did with Mon El. This is such a dangerous message to show to young, vulnerable girls. Media has a very real effect on real life, and internalizing this message can only lead to trouble.

I also don’t like how Mon El has taken up so much of the narrative. Part of season one’s charm was that the show focused around women and the relationships between them. Now Kara spends her time almost exclusively with him (incidentally, Kara has no plot line this season outside of Mon El) and barely ever interacts with her sister. Alex and Kara’s relationship was the heart of the show in s1, but now they have very little screen time together. This season, the show feels more like a romance-driven narrative, with Kara and Mon El and Alex and Maggie compartmentalized apart from one another. I understand that this is more or less par for the course on the CW, but it isn’t the show that I and so many others signed up for. Supergirl’s success wasn’t because it was similar to other CW superhero shows like Flash and Arrow; it was successful because it was different. But now that difference is slowly vanishing, and the show is losing viewers as a result.

Mon El is not the lead of Supergirl. Kara is. But it’s Mon El who gets the hero’s journey; Mon El who has driven much of this season even though CADMUS was touted as the big bad, and Mon El whose narrative is driving the latter half of season two with the arrival of his parents. The viewers of Supergirl are not interested in seeing a man take over the show when we started watching because of the powerful feminist protagonist. The product that is being sold is vastly different from the one we were promised.

I mentioned above that Mon El was not deliberately written to be abusive, but unfortunately, that’s how he has come off. Several people have come forward online, including abuse survivors, domestic violence attorneys, and therapists, and said that Mon El’s behavior is textbook emotional abuse. He has repeatedly ignored Kara’s thoughts and wishes and did what he wanted to instead. For example, when they first start dating, Kara asks him to keep it quiet for a while because her relationship with James crashed and burned and everyone knew about it. She wants time to explore this on her own. Mon El agrees without any hesitation, and in the very next scene, he blurts out their relationship to the entire DEO, which is her place of work. This behavior is disgusting. Not only does he disregard Kara’s very clearly expressed desire, he tells her coworkers about it in a professional setting. Later in the same episode, Kara asks him to be nice to her father Jeremiah, who has recently been rescued from a shady government organization. Instead of doing so, Mon El accuses the man of being a spy and calls J’onn and Alex incompetent for not being suspicious of him. He then tries to tell Kara that “all right, that’s two strikes on me”, and asks her to forget about it.

What Mon El does in the above examples is a classic case of emotional abuse. He ignores Kara’s wishes in favor of his own, and when she calls him out, he attempts to brush it off and asks her to forget it. Not only are there no repercussions for this behavior, but the viewers are shown that Mon El was correct about Jeremiah’s intentions, which is meant to validate the way he acted.

Perhaps the most disturbing thing about Mon El is that he owned slaves. We currently have a president who is endorsed by the Klu Klux Klan, which is downright disturbing, and yet someone high up the chain decided that Kara should date a man who owned slaves. Again, Mon El faces no repercussions for this behavior. Kara breaks things off with him because he lied to her about being the prince, but less than a day later, she is back together with him. And she apologizes! Mon El is the one who had hurt Kara, he is the one who has done wrong, and yet he faces no consequences and instead is given an apology. I have no words to express how disgusting and harmful this is. If Mon El were to suffer some sort of consequence, this would be less upsetting, but because he is a white man in a position of privilege, he gets off scot-free for his actions. We already see this in our day to day lives, and now it is being shown in a TV program that once prided itself on being feminist.

I could go on about the problems Mon El brings to Supergirl, but in the interest of brevity, I will stop. Suffice it to say, the messages being shown are not messages that should be perpetuated, particularly when the majority of the audience followed it to the CW because they believed they were being given a vastly different product than the one that has shown up. Mon El embodies several sexist tropes, and he has demonstrated classic abuse behavior. And yet in spite of all this, he is still dating Kara and is given quite a lot of screen time on a female-led, female-driven show. We are even expected to support this relationship and root for him because ‘he has changed’, but the reality is that Mon El has not changed much at all and has no business dating a woman he treats in such a way.

This is not the Supergirl I fell in love with. I miss the show that lived and died by Alex and Kara’s connection. I miss the show that centered around family and legacy and what it truly means to be a hero. I miss the show about the relationships between women and I miss the show about faith and love. I had hoped that the CW would keep Supergirl true to its roots, and I can’t express my disappointment that that is not what’s happened. I sincerely urge you to reconsider what you are showing and how it matches up with what your audience wants to see. On behalf of women everywhere, I ask you to consider the messages you are expressing to us. We deserve to be heroes, not to be reduced to a love interest for a sexist, racist, disrespectful man.

Sincerely,

Jordan Meyer

Fort Collins, CO

#the cw #supergirl #anti mon el #anti karamel

[50books50movies]

Get Out (2017)

Trailer

It’s taken me a while to process this film and try to figure out what to say about it for no less reason that it feels awkward for an Asian person to comment about a horror film that is couched firmly in the black American experience. Compared to other writers, I felt unqualified to try to analyze what Jordan Peele has extracted from his life and mixed with horror. It was awkward from the start to think that I could feel the danger that LaKeith Stanfield’s Andre Hayworth felt while a car followed him down the street as he tried to walk through a suburban neighborhood at night. I haven’t felt that danger in my life no matter where I am and what time of day it is.

And that’s Peele’s point to a viewer like me. 

As an Asian person, I exist in that awkward racial limbo where I’m not perceived as “bad” as black and brown people but will never as good as a white person. I’ll always be considered an outsider in white society no matter how well tailored my clothes are, how expensive my watches and ties may be, how much I try to stay out of the sun to avoid a suntan, or how many different lotions or ointments I use to make my skin “white” and “flawless.” 

(And yes, part of the cultural stigma of the suntan is to avoid the connection to outdoor work that the poor do, and fair skin is associated with wealth. But it’s hard to separate race from economic status, especially when you see the range of skin whitening products available elsewhere.)

White remains the standard of beauty for women in America, especially if the woman has Anglicized features (smaller noses, thinner lips, less prominent curves) and straight hair.

Because I’m part of the “good” minority in America, I might be able to date a white woman without causing as many social waves as a black man would. Nonetheless, it is more culturally acceptable for a white man to date an Asian woman than for an Asian man to date a white woman. Except there is no “good” minority in America; there are only short memories and examples from history that are conveniently left out of textbooks. I never read about the Chinese massacre of October 24, 1871 in Los Angeles, in which an estimated 17 to 20 Chinese immigrants were tortured and hanged by a mob of nearly 500 people, in middle school, high school, or college American history texts, even though it is the largest incident of mass lynching in American history. The Chinese Exclusion Act of 1882 gets no more than a paragraph in most textbooks; the Immigration Act of 1924′s ban of Arab and Asian immigrants is not as frequently discussed as the act’s restrictive effects on the immigration of Southern and Eastern Europeans. Franklin Roosevelt’s Executive Order 9066, signed into law on March 9, 1942, primarily targeted people of Japanese ethnicity, and over two thirds (almost 70,000) of the 120,000 Japanese men, women, and children who were evicted from the West Coast of the United States to internment camps were American citizens. 

Even if you delude yourself into thinking that you’re safe in America because you’re part of the “good” minority, the American media will remind you that the standard #NoAngel playbook for when a member of the minority in America confronts authority in America will still apply to you. Your personal history will be dragged for any crimes to justify the authority’s use of force against you; you’ll be lucky if the police officer or security agent who used force on you is ever identified, much less charged or prosecuted. Forget about hoping for a conviction, especially if that person is a police officer. You will be told that you should have handled the interaction differently because it will always be your fault that the authority had to use force against you. The media will never take the position that use of force was unreasonable or excessive; you deserve to be treated roughly because you’re a minority.

This brings us to the moment in the film when Peele has Yasuhiko Oyama’s Hiroki Tanaka ask Daniel Kaluuya’s Chris Washington, “Is the African-American experience an advantage or disadvantage?” Why have one minority, the only Asian character in the film, ask a member of another minority if there experience is an advantage? It could be that Tanaka is trying to figure out how much he should bid for Chris’s body since we see Tanaka in the bingo game slave auction later in the film. It could be Tanaka, as one of the “good” ones, is curious and blunt enough to ask that question directly; the question is about two steps removed from asking to touch Chris’s hair, and it encapsulates the microaggressions and racist dehumanization that Chris endures during that party scene, from the golf fan’s question about whether Chris swings a golf club like Tiger Woods or the question from the older woman whose husband is dying about the size of Chris’s penis and his sexual prowess. 

Though Tanaka disappears from the film after the auction scene, his brief appearance is enough to highlight that Peele deliberately inserted an Asian character into this film because we Asians, as the model minority, are very complacent about our role in the civil rights struggles around us. Tanaka might believe that he would benefit from the subjugation of a black man as much as the other bidders in that auction, but who’s to say that his family wouldn’t be subject to subjugation one day? The Armitages may have chosen black people to be the vessels by which they and their peers can extend their lives by literally exploiting black bodies because they believe that black bodies are physically stronger, but Stephen Root’s Jim Hudson also points out that they’re selected because black people are cool. Would it shock anyone if Asian people were once selected during the peak of Bruce Lee’s popularity in this scenario because East Asian culture was in vogue? Couldn’t you then connect how easily Asian characters can be portrayed by non-Asian actors to how replaceable minorities are to the white majority? 

Sometimes, it’s as simple as giving an actor angled eyes or a conical hat to transform a non-Asian actor into an Asian character. After all, black face isn’t in vogue in these times, so you can’t expect a non-black actor to play a black character unless you’re setting out for a deliberate provocation.

Of course, Asians are seen as “the model minority” in part because they’re perceived to be meek and safe. The simple fact that Asians were not forcibly removed from their homes and sold into slavery in America colors the perception that they are a safe minority. There are no distant memories of slave riots. There is no unresolved national shame of slavery. There isn’t the notion that Asians were selectively bred in order to generate the strongest, fastest, and most durable children, which gives Asians a dangerous physical advantage that extends to today. Asian children aren’t referred to as demons or compared to musclebound, larger than life professional wrestlers like Hulk Hogan. 

The idea that the Armitages and their peers only want black bodies is directly connected to the idea of slavery, of owning black bodies and counting their labor power and their families as part of the slave owner’s wealth. Peele draws that connection explicitly, whether it’s to extend an Armitage’s life or to replace a failing body for someone’s sexual gratification or simply wanting a black photographer’s eyes because the black person’s artistic skills that were honed through practice and shaped by that person’s experience are irrelevant. Part of the horror lies in how little anything but their physical bodies about Chris and the Armitages’ other victims matter to the Armitages and their peers.

Furthermore, once the Armitages and their peers have taken control of black bodies, those black bodies are then severed from the American black cultural experience. Andre Hayworth is renamed Logan King. Rose’s grandparents assume Georgina’s and Walter’s bodies, but the viewer never sees them interact. Neither Georgina nor Walter interacts with Andre/Logan. The horror also lies in how the Armitages place no value in black culture.

Peele does not invite the viewer to consider the connection between the fact that the United States has both the largest incarcerated population in the world and the highest incarceration rate in the world (USA! USA! We’re #1!) and the disproportionately high rate of incarcerating black Americans compared to white Americans in certain states’ prisons. Nor does Peele invite the viewer to consider the connection between America’s incarcerated population and the economic benefit America extracts by force from its incarcerated population. Nonetheless, a viewer could certainly draw that connection given the context and the information to draw a conclusion about the systemic dependence on black bodies.

The film wouldn’t have stayed with me for this long if it weren’t an effective horror film that subverted expectations in important ways and played horror tropes straight where it counted. Other reviews have focused on how Peele has created a horror film that uses horror storytelling devices to enhance his extrapolation of the terror of the black American experience and punctures the tension with comedy to great effect. This week’s reminder that there is no such as thing as “the model minority” helped to cement what my takeaways from watching Get Out were. It might have been a warning to Chris to save himself, but it’s also an exhortation to me to get out and be active because we’re all in the struggle for civil rights together.  

#get out #jordan peele #daniel kaluuya #allison williams #bradley whitford #catherine keener #caleb landry jones #lil rey howery #betty gabriel #marcus henderson #lakeith stanfield #stephen root #erika alexander #keegan-michael key #horror #films #movies #toby oliver

[ciathyzareposts]

The Black Gate Bonus: The Books of Britannia

One of many in-game books that make in-jokes and build lore.

         I’d have to look through my notes to see what game first offered full-text books–not as plot devices but just as random background flavor and world-building. It might have been Ultima VI. But even if they appeared in earlier games, Ultima VII is the first game to treat them this extensively, with at least a couple of dozen different titles found on desks, nightstands, and bookcases throughout the homes and workplaces of the Britannian people. The castle alone had more than 15 different books.

     Ultima VII admittedly doesn’t do as well with its books as many later titles. Many of them are goofy, or simply analogues of real-world titles, and not the world-building tomes that we find in, say, The Elder Scrolls series, the Infinity Engine games, or The Witcher series. Still, they’re fun and deserve some additional attention and analysis.

I thought I’d use this entry to organize that analysis, adding new books as I find them. I’m excluding some “plot” books that don’t have much text (like Morfin’s register of venom sales). I’ll add notes to future entries when this one has been updated. The books I’ve found so far are:   The Apothecary’s Desk Reference by Fetoau. A book that accurately describes which potions have which effects. Very useful.

The Art of the Field Dressing by Creston, with a forward by Lady Leigh. It has some advice about cutting cloth into strips to bandage wounds, something that actually works in the game. While Lady Leigh is later found in the game, I don’t believe Creston is.

The Bioparaphysics of the Healing Arts by Lady Leigh. The bible for in-game healers. I believe Lady Leigh will be found later in Serpent’s Hold.

The Book of the Fellowship by Batlin of Britain. The first page of the game manual–the one time it makes sense for a real-life book to appear in the game.

Chicken Raising by Daheness Gon. A relatively useless instruction manual for raising chickens and producing eggs. The anatomical advice seems accurate, but I’m not sure how it helps in-game. Found on the shelf of a farmhouse, which makes sense.

Chitty-Chitty-Bang-Bang by Ian Fleming. The real-life 1964 book by the author better known for creating James Bond. Lead Ultima VII writer Raymond Benson later went on to become the official James Bond writer from 1997-2002.            

With a couple of syllabic substitutions, this could easily have been a James Bond title.

          Collected Plays by Raymundo. An anthology of plays by the guy who runs the theater in Britain. Play titles include Three on a Codpiece, The Trials of the Avatar, The Plagiarist, Clue, and Thumbs Down. “Raymundo” is the in-game avatar of lead writer Raymond Benson, and at least three of these plays are real plays written by Benson. Clue is a 1977 musical based on the board game–a full 8 years before the Tim Curry film. The Plagiarist and Thumbs Down are more obscure; I’m not sure when or if they were ever staged, but they were published as short stories by Amazon Shorts in 2006. Three on a Codpiece is described in-game as a performance art piece in which audience members “tear an undergarment into tiny pieces, after which they are placed in funeral urns and mixed with wheat paste . . . then the audience may glue the pieces anywhere on [the actor’s] body that they wish.” One Ultima site suggests this might be a reference to Yoko Ono’s Cut Piece (1965).

A Complete Guide to Britannian Minerals, Precious, and Semi-Precious Stones by B. Ledbetter. The book discusses some of Britannia’s natural resources, including veins of gold and lead. It is notable for a paragraph on blackrock, a “recently discovered” substance with little practical use, rumored to have a “profound effect” on magic. This will of course become a major part of the game’s plot. I don’t believe Ledbetter appears in-game. I thought it would be funny if it was the guy who runs the jewelry shop in Britain, but his name is Sean.

The Day It Didn’t Work by R. Allen G. A collection of essays about “overseeing a group of well-meaning misfits in a mechanical environment.” An obvious joke about Richard Allen Garriott and the staff at ORIGIN.                Everything an Avatar Should Know about Sex. This book is blank after the title page. Ho-ho-ho. Or maybe it’s not a joke and it’s foreshadowing the upcoming unicorn encounter.

            The Honorable Hound inn register. The guest list for this Trinsic inn has four recent names: Walter of Britain, Jaffe of Yew, Jaana, and Atans of Serpent’s Hold. Jaana is of course the Avatar’s companion going back to Ultima IV. I don’t believe the others are ever seen or heard from in the series.

How to Conquer the World in Three Easy Steps by Maximillian the Amazingly Mean. The ravings of a “megalomaniac cleric.” He plans to acquire VAS CORP (“Mass Kill”), which he thinks will make everyone fear him, and that not even Lord British himself is immune. I’m pretty sure that Lord British survives a VAS CORP (which is a real spell). Lord British doesn’t even die from VAS CORP IN BET MANI (“Armageddon”). Also, there are no “clerics” in this setting. As an aside, I wonder if employees of Vascorp Network Solutions know that to a portion of the public, their name means “Mass Death.”

Hubert’s Hair-Raising Adventure by Bill Peet. A real 1969 children’s book by a real author. It tells in rhyme how the proud lion Hubert had his mane scorched in a series of escalating misadventures. We learned about its presence in Britannia in Ultima VI, where Lord British spent every night reading it to Sherry the Mouse. I don’t know which idea is worse: that the adolescent Lord British was carrying the book while hiking through the English countryside, or that he later went back for it.              

It’s good that Lord British has priorities.

            Jesse’s Book of Performance Art by Jesse. A “controversial and eccentric Britannian actor” who has published a book of “scripts” for performance artists and argues that performance art is basically the same thing as acting. Jesse is an NPC in Britain who jokes about playing the Avatar and having only three lines: NAME, JOB, and BYE.

Key to the Black Gate. A cluebook to the game, found within the game (but without any of the actual text). Probably meant as a subtle in-game advertisement. Can you imagine needing a cluebook to solve this game?             

A crummy commercial?!

             Lord British: The Biography of Britannia’s Longtime Ruler by K. Bannos. The biography frankly acknowledges that Lord British is from another world. I wasn’t sure that was public knowledge until now. He entered Britannia through a moongate and became one of the rulers of the eight kingdoms of Sosaria. The people proclaimed them the king after he successfully dealt with Mondain, Minax, and Exodus. The book recounts his role in Ultima IV and Ultima V but ends just as the gargoyles become a threat in Ultima VI. Unfortunately, the text also re-affirms the idea that the Avatar is the same hero as the one who defeated Mondain, Minax, and Exodus–the dumbest retcon ORIGIN ever introduced.,           

Part of Lord British’s bio. A party of Fuzzies defeated Exodus and nobody can convince me otherwise.

              Mempto Rays: A Qualitative Study in Metaparaphilosophical Radiation by Mempto. Some rantings about Britannia always being bombarded by radiation “lethal to all non-living matter.” Probably meant as a send-up of pseudo-science in the modern world.

No One Leaves by R. Allen G. This sequel to The Day It Didn’t Work is a humorously-phrased paragraph about missed deadlines and forced overtime.

No Way to Jump by Desmonth. A treatise on tropes found in adventure stories. This is probably another in-joke about game development. After all, Ultima VII, for all its realism, does not allow the Avatar to jump. The issue continues into the present day and is found on TV Tropes as “The Insurmountable Waist-Height Fence.” Note that Ultima VIII does feature jumping and jumping puzzles.

On Acting by Laurence Olivier. Philosophical notes on acting “written by a noted thespian of a distant land.” The text notes that it was apparently “one of the many brought to Britannia by Lord British.” Why was the kid hiking with half a library on his back? Anyway, Sir Laurence did in fact publish a book of this title in 1986.

Play Directing: Analysis, Communication, and Style by Francis Hodge. A “respected textbook” written by “an eminent professor emeritus from a university in a distant land.” It is in fact a real-world book, published in 1971 by a professor at the University of Texas at Austin. Probably someone that Raymond Benson or someone on the staff at ORIGIN (which was based in Austin) knew. Hodge passed away in 2008.

The Salty Dog inn register. This inn and tavern in Paws lists seven recent visitors: Addom of Yew, The Avatar, Jalal of Britain, Tim of Yew, Blorn of Vesper, Sir Dupre, and Penelope of Cove. Addom is a traveling merchant who later shows up in Moonglow and plays a role in that city’s plot. To my knowledge, Jalal and Penelope never appear in the game, although I think Jalal appears in another register. Tim of Yew is also an unknown (there was a bard named Tim in Ultima V but he’d be long-dead). Blorn is an anti-Gargish racist who we later find in Vesper. The idea that Dupre recently visited a tavern is entirely within his character. The most disturbing entry is that someone is wandering around passing himself off as “The Avatar.”

Thou Art What Thee Eats by Fordras. A nutritional analysis that pre-dates the Atkins crazy by suggesting meats and vegetables ahead of carbohydrates. The author recommends certain foods in order, and I think it roughly corresponds with how filling those foods are in-game. 

The Transitive Vampire by Karen Elizabeth Gordon. This is a real book by a real author, originally published in 1984. As best I can tell, it’s a real book about English grammar and syntax, but all the examples are vampire-themed and there are vampire illustrations. If there’s something deeper going on, someone’s going to have to tell me. I suppose if it actually gets people to read a book on grammar, there are no bad ideas.             

Go figure.

           Tren I, II, III, IV . . . XVII. An autobiography by “the obtuse mage” which “reveals Tren’s life in all of his incarnations as he continually strove to possess more powerful beings.” As far as I know, we never meet a mage called Tren, nor do we ever see an application of magic that involves possession of beings. 

Up Is Out by Goodefellow. A treatise on gravity and mass, including “falling apples.” It’s a clear analogue to Isaac Newton, but I otherwise don’t know if the title and author are a reference to anything. If Goodefellow is an actual Britannian trying to research physics, his life is going to be rough.

Vargaz’s Stories of Legend. This anonymous book is subtitled Reasons Why One Should Never Build Doors Facing North or West. The book has two stories, one about a plague of locusts foretold by Father Antos (Ultima II and IV) which destroyed houses with north-facing doors. The other tale suggests that monsters fleeing sunlight are more likely to flee east and thus invade houses with west-facing doors.

The Wayfarer’s Inn register. This tavern in Britain lists five recent guests: John-Paul of Serpent’s Hold, Horffe of Serpent’s Hold, Featherbank of Moonglow, Tarvis of Buccaneer’s Den, and Shamino. I later found Shamino shacking up with an actress, so he probably only had to stay for one night. I don’t believe Tarvis or Featherbank appear in the game, but John-Paul is in fact the ruler of Serpent’s Hold and Horffe is his Gargish captain of the guard.

What a Fool Believes by P. Nolan. The book only has a brief paragraph, describing it as “the story of a bard, a blonde, and a bottle . . . a classic tale of the war between the sexes.” There’s a song of this name, of course, recorded by the Doobie Brothers and Aretha Franklin among others, but it doesn’t mention a blonde or a bottle and has no association with anyone named “Nolan” (although, in a weird twist, the R&B artist Nolan Porter did cover the song, but not until 2011). 

The Wizard of Oz by Frank L. Baum. The real book from the real world, except that in the real world, the author is L. Frank Baum. It is given a quick summary in-game. I assume it’s in Lord British’s castle because I stole it for him as part of an Ultima VI side-quest.

         source http://reposts.ciathyza.com/the-black-gate-bonus-the-books-of-britannia/

#retro games #dos games #retro #crpg #adventure #amiga #oldcomputers #8bit #16bit #blog #repost

[newscitygroup]

Silencing the Beast of Bolivian Populism

Drawing by Nathaniel St. Clair

The risible tension between the tailored elitism of the Bolivian bourgeoisie and the restive pueblo of indigenous peasants was memorably captured in the 2005 film Our Brand Is Crisis. The documentary colorfully exposes the sleazy underbelly of American political influence. Yes, the very thing our wizened mandarins in Washington have been raising such a clamor over since the wrong candidate was elected by the dull, unseeing demos. Congressional luminaries like the walleyed Adam Schiff, presiding like a demented pontiff over his carnival of moral outrage, continually effect, with little effect, the most astonished reactions to claims of Russian meddling.

(As an aside, it should be noted that ‘meddling’ is the softer form of ‘interference’, which itself is the diminutive of ‘active measures.’ We are delusional by degrees. The meddler crowd have in them a trace of lost sanity. The active measures of adherents are simply lost. It is something like the difference between Tucker Carlson and John Brennan: one faintly aware of a bright reality, the other living wholly and adventurously in a world of windmills and apparitions.)

Schiff and his tentpole pals have evidently no awareness of America’s storied track record of international regime-change efforts. They’ve not watched Our Brand Is Crisis nor seen serpentine Clintonite James Carville teach amoral Bolivian careerists to massage the narrative against young Evo Morales. They succeed in planting an elite-groomed handmaiden of American capital in the presidency, leaving the riveting provocateur Morales to wait another couple of years. The cocalero with the sheaf of sable hair and the sun-warmed smile would soon be carried into power on the backs of rural campesinos. His 12-year reign atop the scrum pile of Bolivian politics led to hemispheric growth records, near eradication of deep poverty, and a shunning of the economic hitmen and finance jackals of extractive neoliberalism.

But that is all over now. Carville worked his fell magic once, but the sight of Morales winning a fourth term was too much for the beltway puppeteers to abide. And so, a coup d’état. But when one looks at the state of our corporate media and its recent coverage of Bolivia, it is understandable why asylum escapees like Schiff and Nancy Pelosi are so madly unmoored from the fact-based universe. Here are some of the particulars:

* In its celebrated fashion, the deeply reactionary New York Times delivered a raft of obfuscation to readers following the coup d’état in La Paz. It claimed the vanishment of Evo Morales from power signaled the ‘End of Tyranny.’ The merest familiarity with Bolivian politics would disabuse any reader of this cookie-cutter trope applied with utter failure of imagination by the soi disant ‘paper of record.’ A man, like Hugo Chavez, who won election after election by wide margins because he followed the will of his people, can hardly be characterized as a dictator. Unless of course, you live in a deconstructionist world of moral and material relativity.

* Likewise, the Times chirped its standard line that there was “mounting evidence of electoral fraud” and that the recent election was “widely seen as rigged”. Yet no evidence has actually surfaced of fraud, let alone fraud committed by Morales’ own party, the Movement Toward Socialist (MAS). Only the Washington-funded OAS raised ‘grave’ concerns about the election, rehearsing the standard beltway tactic of seeding doubt in the institutional integrity of foreign electoral processes. One tactic to that end was conducting early reporting of results before votes from rural strongholds of MAS support were counted.

* The Grey Lady also parrots the de rigeur step-plan from the regime-change playbook, which is for ‘reputable’ western institutions to clamor for ‘fresh elections’ even though the actual election just had was legitimate. It just produced the wrong result again. The EU’s High Representative of the Union for Foreign Affairs and Security Policy aped Hillary Clinton after the 2009 Honduran coup, calling for “new credible elections” that express the “democratic will” of Bolivians. As though this hadn’t just been done.

* This is exactly how it went down in Honduras in 2009 and what was attempted in Venezuela in the last two years. In fact, here’s a shortlist of Washington-backed coups in the last several decades. According to journalist Sarah Abdallah, this is the 20th Washington-backed coup d’état in Latin America and the Caribbean since 1954.

* Morales was said to “defy term limits” to run for a fourth term last month. However, the supreme court overturned the term-limit legislation long before the election. Like it or not, his campaign was strictly legal.

* Many of the objections to suspension of term limits come from supporters of ‘democracy’ who fundamentally misunderstand that socialists like those of the MAS are more interested in establishing a dictatorship of workers instead of a duopoly of elites. Because it is really one or the other. There is no mythical middle ground; the state serves one class or another. The so-called democracies of the western world feature the institutional trappings of the textbook democracy but have cleverly resided control of the economy in an autocracy of monopoly capital. This situation leaves the majority facing neoliberal outcomes including, as Medea Benjamin expertly put it, “…high rents, stagnant wages, cradle-to-grave debt, ever-rising economic inequality, privatized healthcare, a shredded social safety net, abysmal public transportation, systemic political corruption and endless war.”

* Meanwhile, US interference, from funding false polling to supporting the tiresome street theater of protest, to training all of the coup plotters, has been exposed as it is nearly everywhere a beltway-backed putsch occurs. It follows the same unimaginative script first laid out by Gene Sharp in his destabilization handbook From Dictatorship to Democracy. Create violent protests in the streets, make outsized demands including a change of government, and hope for government repression. Then let western media handle the rest. First, it will portray any government response as a ‘brutal crackdown’ and a shift toward ‘authoritarian measures’. It will also assume that protests, of whatever size, represent the collective will of the people. These protests implicitly replace elections as the true avatar of popular intent, particularly as doubt is cast upon ‘incorrect’ election results.

* None of the mainstream publications appeared to declare the coup to be a coup. The Times predictably substituted various terms to evade the damning ‘coup’ usage. Morales had “resigned” and “steps down” and “quit” and “lost his grip on power.” None bothered to mention he was forced out by the military with backing from the US. There were plenty of “accusations” and “allegations” being circulated about Morales and the election that were never validated. This is simply another way of saying that MSM supports coups.

* And, of course, lurking silently in the background is the ever-present bounty: unbeknownst to almost everyone, Bolivia has stupendous reserves of lithium, that lightest of metals so excellent for the electric cars of tomorrow.

* Evo Morales even offered to redo the elections to satisfy the histrionic outcries from Washington puppet protestors. He offered to bring all sides together in dialogue to plot a path forward. As the regime-change playbook prescribes, attempts at dialogue are to be ignored or brushed aside.

* Jeanine Anez, the legislator who appointed herself president of Bolivia in Morales’ absence, has been suitably whitewashed by the Times and lapdog mainstream media, which has avoided any discussion of her anti-indigenous racism and clear class prejudice against Morales’ Movement Toward Socialist (MAS).

* Anez may be legitimated once the Congress approves Morales removal. No doubt they will be given that the coup police are aggressively preventing leading MAS representatives from even entering the halls of power. President of the Senate Adriana Salvatierra was driven back by ferocious police when she tried to enter her rightful workplace. The visuals are conspicuous: On the one hand, unarmed popular representatives, looking like average civilians, harmlessly approaching their workplace. On the other, the designed-to-intimidate wardrobes of la policia, the neofascist all-blacks with their spit-polished boots, trusty truncheons, and smoked visors.

* Now, as was entirely predictable, right-wing police are rounding up indigenous members of the MAS, literally smoking them out of their dwellings, carting them off in rickety paddy wagons, like some Dickensian scene from Victorian London. It has all the hallmarks of a right-wing purge rooted in a centuries-old racist impulse of colonial power.

* It’s inspiring to see indigenous citizens, like a stout, brave matron wrapped in a hand-knitted shawl, lecturing the jack-boot neofascist brigades, lined up in stony silence. Reminds you that for all the official histories about our ‘postcolonial’ world, the usurpers are still suppressing the indigenous. Just with guns not swords.

* Fortunately, Morales has been sheltered in Mexico. One half expected to see him unearthed in a ditch by bloodthirsty regime-change fanatics wound tight by Washington propaganda and greenbacks, a la Muammar Gaddafi and Saddam Hussein. There’s a reason leaders like Vladimir Putin and Bashar al-Assad fight so vociferously for their survival and those of their allies. They understand the personal brutality that awaits them should they relent.

Grim Alternatives

When you see one socialist project after another unraveled by the naked avarice of western capitalist vanguards, it makes you wonder what the alternatives are? Siege socialism is real and very poorly understood. As soon as a country like the USSR or China erect defenses against the siege of the imperial capital, such as capital controls or denying NGO status to various organizations, the western press cries, “Authoritarianism!” and issue calls for ‘free-market reforms’. Naive westerners, awash in commodities and comforts in the comparative calm of the metropole, post pious demands for freedoms for the distant oppressed nations, ignoring the unexampled crimes of their own nations–and their nation’s role in triggering foreign unrest. Few can truly articulate what freedoms violent Hong Kong mobs are missing as they clamor unwittingly for a return to some sort of proxy British colonialism. Nearly every form of western subversion of left-leaning governments is supported by the entire US establishment: the steady-state, both parties, and its media. Identity politics liberalism and the freedom of markets is the Janus-faced disguise that hides the reality of global class warfare.

Mass Deception

There is clearly no bottom to the guile and mendacity of the corporate media in preserving its hallowed neoliberal ideology. Here’s George Orwell on the complex relationship between serving as a purveyor of false historical narratives and believing one’s own lies:

The process [of mass-media deception] has to be conscious, or it would not be carried out with sufficient precision, but it also has to be unconscious, or it would bring with it a feeling of falsity and hence of guilt… To tell deliberate lies while genuinely believing in them, to forget any fact that has become inconvenient, and then, when it becomes necessary again, to draw it back from oblivion for just so long as it is needed, to deny the existence of objective reality and all the while to take account of the reality which one denies – all this is indispensably necessary.

—George Orwell, 1984

In the film version of Our Brand Is Crisis, an uber-confident Sandra Bullock rolls into a conference room to declare her ingenious device for swinging the election from the populist to the strongman. As she warms into her oratory, the brilliance of which becalms everyone in the room, she argues that the candidate mustn’t change, only the narrative. The population must be made to fear the populist (i.e., champion of their cause) by stirring up notions of chaos and collapse. The narrative thus becomes “crisis” rather than “hope” and the strongman is duly elected to thwart a mythic national implosion. It may be nauseating to see how cavalierly the publicists shape their storylines, but plotlines of this sort are being massaged every day. How many refer to the Hong Kong terrorists and vandals as ‘pro-democracy protesters’? We all do, reflexively. They are anything but, just as the ‘voluntary resignation’ of Evo Morales was anything but a willful concession, and was rather a coup d’état designed to speed Bolivian wealth and power into the nervy grip of the neoliberal north.

Source link

The post Silencing the Beast of Bolivian Populism appeared first on News City Group.

from News City Group https://newscitygroup.com/silencing-the-beast-of-bolivian-populism/981990/