| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
My relief is here. Have a good day, everyone.
I bet... you are relieved~! :D
/Kelven timeline ST reference
(Still a good movie.)
EDIT: Aaaaaaaaand I keep my clothes on to post here, dang it!
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
My relief is here. Have a good day, everyone.I bet... you are relieved~! :D
/Kelven timeline ST reference
(Still a good movie.)
EDIT: Aaaaaaaaand I keep my clothes on to post here, dang it!
love that movie.
love that movie.My relief is here. Have a good day, everyone.I bet... you are relieved~! :D
/Kelven timeline ST reference
(Still a good movie.)
EDIT: Aaaaaaaaand I keep my clothes on to post here, dang it!
It's good!
So I'm watching S3 of Daredevil, and it's both really good in some ways and kind of surprisingly cliche - or even standardized? - in others. And that latter isn't a bad thing, really, but it's a surprise because the first season especially worked so hard to be... not that? And there are definitely interesting concepts for making things new - Karen's story, Foggy's story, and even Matt's story are all really interesting takes and variants.
Though it seems slow, once it's revealed the Kingpin doing his thing is... surprisingly solid, if very frustrating ('cause, you know, bad). The villain(s) this season are really interesting as well.
Anyway, not done with it, yet, though and can't finish it today, but it's a fascinating watch.
| 3 people marked this as a favorite. |
Please don't leave the lit nerds hanging and at least tell US what the other stories they could have chosen were. :)So, I gave my kiddos a short project: pick one of eight Romantic short stories from this list. Take notes, make a visual, and tell me about it.
It took no time at all for the kids to open the PDFs and realize two in particular were far shorter than the others.
So I've sat through about ten presentations on "The Masque of the Red Death" already today, and I still have two periods left, where I will no doubt hear more. I may never want to hear about it again.
...what gets me is that I had kids who went after the others who were still freezing when I asked them the theme and Romanticism tie-ins.
Can do.
Rappaccini's Daughter
The Birthmark
The Fall of the House of Usher
The Legend of Sleepy Hollow
Rip Van Winkle
Bartleby the Scrivener
Young Goodman BrownI've heard from at least one kid doing each of these.
You've got a pretty neat selection!
I have to admit, I don't remember either Rappaccini's Daughter or The Birthmark. Gotta go look those up.
EDIT: Hm. I remember Rappaccini's Daughter, now, though it's been a while and I mostly remember a vague sense of not liking it much.
I really don't remember the Birth-Mark, but it sounds exactly like the kind of story I'd hate.
Yeah, they're basically the same story. Hawthorne had issues.
"Alas, why did I try to alter nature?!"
I didn’t feel that way about all the romantics, I mean, in addition to feeling lied to/being sold a false promise. The Romantics are not, I emphasize not, romantic.
It’s false advertising! It’s outrageous! I have never forgiven them for being labeled “Romantics.”
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
I didn’t feel that way about all the romantics, I mean, in addition to feeling lied to/being sold a false promise. The Romantics are not, I emphasize not, romantic.
Well, Romantic in the sense that "feelings are important, okay!" and a romanticized view of the individual as opposed to the whole Age of Reason's emphasis on science, logic, and society as a whole.
Of course, I feel similarly about Shakespeare’s tragedies, being labeled “good literature.” Oh, sure, they’re brilliant, clever, and well-written, but I DO NOT CARE about the BLITHERING MORONS who just WON’T SHUT UP and then, in the face of everything, continue to make the absolute worst life choices. I do not greatly value spending my free time watching people suffer for little gain. It’s why I get so frustrated by Soaps/shows like Jessica Jones (especially when they are self-inflicted).
EDIT: to be clear, Shakespeare is a brilliant, excellent writer. However the emphasis placed on his tragedies at the expense of literally all of his other works is, in my opinion, a tragedy in and of it’s self. Effectively, almost anything else that he wrote was more enjoyable for me to read then his tragedies. I get it, I recognize their literary value, but I still don’t enjoy watching people suffer, especially over an extended period of time, most of which is a fruitless endeavor. At least with most modern quasi-tragedies, like Jessica Jones, there is a grander purpose, a higher narrative, and a potential feeling of hope amidst the despair. Shakespeare’s tragedies bring none of that and generally just feel flat and unfulfilling, even though they are excellently written masterpieces.
I didn’t feel that way about all the romantics, I mean, in addition to feeling lied to/being sold a false promise. The Romantics are not, I emphasize not, romantic.Well, Romantic in the sense that "feelings are important, okay!" and a romanticized view of the individual as opposed to the whole Age of Reason's emphasis on science, logic, and society as a whole.
Oh, I know. I get it. The LIARS.
(My bitterness runs deeper than reason; kind of like the romantics!)
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Of course, I feel similarly about Shakespeare’s tragedies, being labeled “good literature.” Oh, sure, they’re brilliant, clever, and well-written, but I DO NOT CARE about the BLITHERING MORONS who just WON’T SHUT UP and then, in the face of everything, continue to make the absolute worst life choices. I do not greatly value spending my free time watching people suffer for little gain. It’s why I get so frustrated by Soaps/shows like Jessica Jones (especially when they are self-inflicted).
EDIT: to be clear, Shakespeare is a brilliant, excellent writer. However the emphasis placed on his tragedies at the expense of literally all of his other works is, in my opinion, a tragedy in and of it’s self. Effectively, almost anything else that he wrote was more enjoyable for me to read then his tragedies. I get it, I recognize their literary value, but I still don’t enjoy watching people suffer, especially over an extended period of time, most of which is a fruitless endeavor. At least with most modern quasi-tragedies, like Jessica Jones, there is a grander purpose, a higher narrative, and a potential feeling of hope amidst the despair. Shakespeare’s tragedies bring none of that and generally just feel flat and unfulfilling, even though they are excellently written masterpieces.
I'm kinda the opposite. I appreciate his comedies, but a lot of them are really, really samey to me. It feels like they're nearly all about an arranged marriage gone wrong, cross-dressing is WaCkY!!!, and/or twins = mistaken identity. There's just as much poor decision making in the comedies as in the tragedies, but the tragedies at least have a little bit of differentiation in how it all goes wrong.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
I didn’t feel that way about all the romantics, I mean, in addition to feeling lied to/being sold a false promise. The Romantics are not, I emphasize not, romantic.Well, Romantic in the sense that "feelings are important, okay!" and a romanticized view of the individual as opposed to the whole Age of Reason's emphasis on science, logic, and society as a whole.Oh, I know. I get it. The LIARS.
(My bitterness runs deeper than reason; kind of like the romantics!)
yes...yes...let the hate flow through you...
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
I'm kinda the opposite. I appreciate his comedies, but a lot of them are really, really samey to me. It feels like they're nearly all about an arranged marriage gone wrong, cross-dressing is WaCkY!!!, and/or twins = mistaken identity. There's just as much poor decision making in the comedies as in the tragedies, but the tragedies at least have a little bit of differentiation in how it all goes wrong.Of course, I feel similarly about Shakespeare’s tragedies, being labeled “good literature.” Oh, sure, they’re brilliant, clever, and well-written, but I DO NOT CARE about the BLITHERING MORONS who just WON’T SHUT UP and then, in the face of everything, continue to make the absolute worst life choices. I do not greatly value spending my free time watching people suffer for little gain. It’s why I get so frustrated by Soaps/shows like Jessica Jones (especially when they are self-inflicted).
EDIT: to be clear, Shakespeare is a brilliant, excellent writer. However the emphasis placed on his tragedies at the expense of literally all of his other works is, in my opinion, a tragedy in and of it’s self. Effectively, almost anything else that he wrote was more enjoyable for me to read then his tragedies. I get it, I recognize their literary value, but I still don’t enjoy watching people suffer, especially over an extended period of time, most of which is a fruitless endeavor. At least with most modern quasi-tragedies, like Jessica Jones, there is a grander purpose, a higher narrative, and a potential feeling of hope amidst the despair. Shakespeare’s tragedies bring none of that and generally just feel flat and unfulfilling, even though they are excellently written masterpieces.
But he’s not all tragedies and comedies! He’s also got straightforward fantasy, drama, poetry (also not my bag, but interesting nonetheless and clearly excellently made) and the whole nine yards. Sure the tragedies are different, but the emotion isn’t. “Alas, the dumb decision we made was, in fact, dumb! Now we and our loved ones suuuufffffeeeerrrrrr”
Yeah, okay. Blech.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
VISHKANYA!Please don't leave the lit nerds hanging and at least tell US what the other stories they could have chosen were. :)Can do.
Rappaccini's Daughter...
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Again, this isn't to undermine their value as written works, nor to undermine their value to others. But I'd read everything I could get my hands on from Shakespeare by the time I was twelve and, honestly, the guy was skilled, but not as^^ entertaining (to me). And his tragedies were consistently the worst at this.
^^EDIT: The word "as" was important here. For context, I've read a loooooooooot by this time, and though Tolkien's Silmarillion was a bit much for me ("OH MY WORD, man, we GET it, arg!"), his works were mesmerizing. The Bible had fantastic heroes and really stupid people getting their comuppance, too. La Mordt d'Arthur was a tragedy, sure, but it had a lot of high points on the way there, and ended with, "But thing's'll get better, and he'll be there to help!" Narnia's Silver Chair was an absolute chore to start, but the series as a whole was smooth. Hardy Boys. Nancy Drew. These days, you'd have to add Potter (and, for some, maybe the one with sparkle vampires), too. Effectively, with a large enough library, seeing the dude that made those things work originally wasn't as interesting, because I'd seen the later versions refined into even better stories. Of course, reading a stage play isn't really as exciting as watching a stage play or reading a story - it's kind of a sad half-way between the two: still entertaining, just less. Mix that in with, "not my favorite genre" and "all bad decisions are bad" and you're left with an experience that isn't fun. And doing the whole thing four times again a few years later was... not really engaging.
He's always too wordy (reasonable as he was paid by the word), and his characters were annoyingly chatty (he says without a hint of self-consciousness), and when combined with making bad decisions meant that reading their idiocy and them talking about whether or not to do the bad/evil/stupid thing (then they always did) and the suffering that came out from it was just... no good. You already know that it's going to turn out bad. It's in the name. The rest is just watching it play out. And torment ain't really my thing.
The comedies had a persistence and pattern to them, absolutely, but they did so with interesting and fairly unique characters, settings, and conceits. And, you know, he had other writings, too.
But then I'm fifteen and I've read all of his stuff* and the Hardy Boys (and some Nancy Drew) and I knew which of the two I preferred. And it wasn't Willy.
And the same basics have continued. I follow soap operas MCU Netflix stuff, but rail against the stupid-stupid decisions of the characters that bring themselves and their friends tragedy, because, you know, it's clear to the audience that they're making a bad choice and should feel bad. Compare that to something like the Good Place, and the former is absolutely fantastic and I will watch it because it's good, but the latter is fun and I will re-watch it, because it gives a sense of good (whether or not I agree with its moral values). (And I will watch Saiki K. - and Galavant - as many times as it takes. As it takes for what? AS MANY TIMES AS IT TAKES. PERIOD.)
This is the second Shakespeare thing I'm attempting, and I typed up a long thing of similar regard toward the romantics where I poke fun at myself for saying I'm incensed that they're not, you know, romantic (in the modern sense of the word), when that's actually just an easy short hand, instead of getting into the nitty-gritty of why I disagree with much of their moral and cultural stance as often presented in the stories (though, uh, Hawthorne is one of those "special" ones that really stands out as... well... um... not... not great... also plus bad feels), but that whole EDIT is gone, too, apparently, and I'm not going to remake the whole thing here.
Short version = while I don't unilaterally like the comedies, there is much to be desired, I find, in the over-emphasis of tragedy, and I wish school had taught me more of Willy's yuks and other works and I spent less time reading how yet another daggum collection of morons managed to ruin their lives with bad things.
* Well, as much as could fit in, like, five super-sized volumes claiming to be "the Complete Works of William Shakespeare" which, you know, obvs. wasn't, but still. It's what we had.
EDIT: well at least one of my Shakespeare rants survived! But my Romantics rant did not. Oh well! Stickin' with it!
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
1 Bartleby
2 Rip van Winkle
1 Rappaccini
6 Birthmark
2 Goodman Brown
2 Usher
2 Sleepy Hollow
TOO MANY Red Death
And stragglers tomorrow...
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
I really need to watch Gundam Unicorn again.
I think I will do just that.
The score alone makes it worth it.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Though the translation could be tweaked a bit.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Here is the best thing that came out of the old Shakescene's creation: Elegy of Fortinbras.
1 Bartleby
2 Rip van Winkle
1 Rappaccini
6 Birthmark
2 Goodman Brown
2 Usher
2 Sleepy Hollow
TOO MANY Red DeathAnd stragglers tomorrow...
I'd Usher that puppy to kingdom come.
Rip was a great setting. Bart was a really interesting look at a broken and frustrated man. Sleepy Hollow actually made early America kind of interesting (usually it wasn't), though everyone was a manipulative jerk. Red Death was just depressing. Goodman was both boring and depressing. >insert vague dislike for Rapp<
So, yeah, despite whatever I said about tragedy and poetry not being my thing, I'd be all aboard the Ush-train.
(Though Bartleby was probably the easiest to read for whatever reason.)
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
Seriously? The forum decided that my explicitly later post is earlier one and switched their order...
(But I'd totes be a straggler. Sorry, Scint.)
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Some of the stragglers were actually ready to go today, but we ran out of time.
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
Or am I a prophet that predict my own actions?
| 3 people marked this as a favorite. |
It’s false advertising! It’s outrageous! I have never forgiven them for being labeled “Romantics.”
Well, they were too emo to allow themselves to be called emo.
Surprised not more Fall of the House of Usher. Poe was a big one when I was in school, but I guess between that and Masque they were going to pick the one that sounded more metal.
| 4 people marked this as a favorite. |
It’s false advertising! It’s outrageous! I have never forgiven them for being labeled “Romantics.”Well, they were too emo to allow themselves to be called emo.
Surprised not more Fall of the House of Usher. Poe was a big one when I was in school, but I guess between that and Masque they were going to pick the one that sounded more metal.
More the PDFs I found for Usher contained illustrations and thus showed a page count of 15 vs. the un-illustrated Masque's 10. They did the math and made their choice.
(You can tell I care about the Children, though.)
Hahah! Suckers!
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
OH MY WORD SHOWER FEELS SO GOOD
For the record, our water company is sucky as ever, and our water is not fixed, but our neighbors are not having our problem, and offered their showers to us, and it is glorious.
(Our neighbors are <figurative> literal angels sent from heaven for our family.)
Seriously? The forum decided that my explicitly later post is earlier one and switched their order...
... yyyyyyyyyyyeah, my last three posts are currently in reverse chronological order.
EDIT: maybe four. I actually only get this one when I quote stuff and I honestly can't tell when this one will post relative to the others, so. I'unno where any of the last four posts will end up.
For the chrono-record:
OH MY WORD SHOWER FEELS SO GOOD
For the record, our water company is sucky as ever, and our water is not fixed, but our neighbors are not having our problem, and offered their showers to us, and it is glorious.
(Our neighbors are <figurative> literal angels sent from heaven for our family.)
More the PDFs I found for Usher contained illustrations and thus showed a page count of 15 vs. the un-illustrated Masque's 10. They did the math and made their choice.
Hahah! Suckers!
(You can tell I care about the Children, though.)
the stuff up there
this post you're reading
I have no idea what's happening, though, as the post order is all outta whack. Technically I can't see this this post I think I'm editing right now,b ut I'm on the computer, so I should be doing okaaaaaaaaayyyyyy typing wise question mark?
| 4 people marked this as a favorite. |
Yeah, it's a good thing you clarified because it looks like
(You can tell I care about the Children, though.)
Hahah! Suckers!
And it seems I can only see my own posts after someone else posts after them. Weird.
Yeah, it's a good thing you clarified because it looks like
(You can tell I care about the Children, though.)Hahah! Suckers!
Well. I suppose it evinces the same earnestness either way, really.
It just varies in who I'm calling the suckers, in my reading.
But to be clear the kids who outsmarted themselves by going with the picture-free poem are suckers. Heh.
(Though, uh, I do actually hope they enjoy. They probably won't, 'cause school, but, you know. It's nice to hope.)
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
I read Sleepy Hollow.
Never considered it a romantic story.
Loved the Disney cartoon as a kid.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Yet another job with a gate with about an inch of clearance on either side of the mini bobcat.
Also, there is such a thing as too much sedum, which is a surprise to no one.
New job is in Oregon (the town), or as it's called in Wisconsin, Or-AH-gone.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Yeah, for English class purposes it's "belongs to the Romantic movement, rejecting society and a reliance on reason in favor of high emotionality and focusing on the individual" rather than "10/10 would watch on a date and make out to" romantic.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
I went through a significant Hawthorne phase in high school, but I remember thinking that damned near every Hawthorne protagonist was a total dumba**, especially Zenobia from The Blithedale Romance, and (2) that if you combined random Hawthorne story A with random Lovecraft story B, you had something almost worth reading.
| 5 people marked this as a favorite. |
Am I a terrible person if I am thinking about leftover curry and buttered linguini for dinner tonight?
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
No, DQ, I’d totally steal and eat that if I could.
I went through a significant Hawthorne phase in high school, but I remember thinking that damned near every Hawthorne protagonist was a total dumba**, especially Zenobia from The Blithedale Romance, and (2) that if you combined random Hawthorne story A with random Lovecraft story B, you had something almost worth reading.
Okay, you know, this actually sounds kind of interesting. Tell me more.
(“Your words intrigue me and I would subscribe to your news letter.”)
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
How can I make the most b$$*%!& crazy elf in Pathfinder (either edition).
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
1 Bartleby
2 Rip van Winkle
1 Rappaccini
6 Birthmark
2 Goodman Brown
2 Usher
2 Sleepy Hollow
TOO MANY Red DeathAnd stragglers tomorrow...
Apart from the Poe stuff, I haven't read any of those. Romantic movement at this end means yer Brontës (who I haven't read either, to be fair) and Top Poets Byron, Shelley, Coleridge and so on.
On a related note, I love Gothic(k) fiction, especially the really OTT cheesy stuff like Matthew Lewis' 'The Monk'
| 5 people marked this as a favorite. |
(1) I just can't get in to Shakespeare because virtually every play can be described as, "Two or more people fail at even basic communication skills and chaos ensues."
From Othello believing Iago over his own wife to Romeo killing himself because of bad messaging, his plays are a treatise on something I try to drill into the kids on a daily basis: "Communicate well, and communicate frequently".
In short, I don't like them because nobody fact-checks ANYTHING in those darned things.
(2) DON'T get me started on the whole Romance period thing. I suffered through MANY years of every single girl I met telling me I was "too nice" to be dating material, watching them go through jerk boyfriend after jerk boyfriend, and always ending up in tears and asking me, "Why didn't you WARN me?"
Heathcliff was an irredeemable a******. Any woman falling in love with him deserved what she got. I had no pity. There should be no 'happy endings' for idiots like that.
And for me, that pretty much sums up the entire Romantic Period of writing.
Though the translation could be tweaked a bit.
Drejk, dont you believe in the God called possiblity?!
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Am I a terrible person if I am thinking about leftover curry and buttered linguini for dinner tonight?
no. You are hungry.
| 4 people marked this as a favorite. |
(2) DON'T get me started on the whole Romance period thing. I suffered through MANY years of every single girl I met telling me I was "too nice" to be dating material, watching them go through jerk boyfriend after jerk boyfriend, and always ending up in tears and asking me, "Why didn't you WARN me?"
Heathcliff was an irredeemable a******. Any woman falling in love with him deserved what she got. I had no pity. There should be no 'happy endings' for idiots like that.And for me, that pretty much sums up the entire Romantic Period of writing.
| 4 people marked this as a favorite. |
(1) I just can't get in to Shakespeare
Them's fightin' words.
because virtually every play can be described as, "Two or more people fail at even basic communication skills and chaos ensues."
Begone, Ghost of Kit Marlowe! You're just jealous.
From Othello believing Iago over his own wife to Romeo killing himself because of bad messaging, his plays are a treatise on something I try to drill into the kids on a daily basis: "Communicate well, and communicate frequently".
In short, I don't like them because nobody fact-checks ANYTHING in those darned things.
Those are two plays. Yes, there are many plots where things are misheard. It is a common trope, either to laugh at fools that do this or describe the tragedy that befalls fools that do this.
However, "every play" is stretching it. A lot of the historicals do not do this, I'm pretty sure. And while I'd need to go back to check, I'm pretty sure that there's a number of comedies, tragedies, and romances do not do this. King Lear, probably. As You Like It, I'm pretty sure. Which is also two to match your two.
And one of the BEST plays entirely built on misunderstanding is "Much Ado About Nothing" and if you don't like that play, you're wrong and I am failing you from my class. (But the Joss Whedon version was horrifically miscast and kind of bad in general, so if you don't like that specific production that's okay.)
But enjoying Shakespeare isn't about enjoying the plot, necessarily, anyway. It's almost entirely missing the point. After all, most of the plots he stole from somewhere else. It's about bathing in his brilliance of words and punnery and gender f@!*ery. *BATHES in it, soaps herself up in witty comebacks, lathers herself with keenly worded laments, and sighs...*
(Middleton's also good for Gender F##*ery, but nowhere near the master of words.)
(2) DON'T get me started on the whole Romance period thing. I suffered through MANY years of every single girl I met telling me I was "too nice" to be dating material, watching them go through jerk boyfriend after jerk boyfriend, and always ending up in tears and asking me, "Why didn't you WARN me?"
Heathcliff was an irredeemable a******. Any woman falling in love with him deserved what she got. I had no pity. There should be no 'happy endings' for idiots like that.And for me, that pretty much sums up the entire Romantic Period of writing.
Because condemning an entire era of literature based on your bad dating experience is the scholarly thing to do.
Also, teen girls are stupid. There is no era of literature that causes or fixes that.
| 4 people marked this as a favorite. |
Also, teen girls are stupid. There is no era of literature that causes or fixes that.
Hey now. Teen boys can be just as stupid. Let's spread the gender equality around.
| 3 people marked this as a favorite. |
Also, teen girls are stupid. There is no era of literature that causes or fixes that.Hey now. Teen boys can be just as stupid. Let's spread the gender equality around.
Hey, now. People can just be as stupid. Let's the equality around. (There is no era of literature that causes or fixes that.)
| 3 people marked this as a favorite. |
...However, "every play" is stretching it. A lot of the historicals do not do this, I'm pretty sure...
Guilty as charged. And while I haven't seen any of the historicals, I've heard nothing but good things about them.
And one of the BEST plays entirely built on misunderstanding is "Much Ado About Nothing" and if you don't like that play, you're wrong and I am failing you from my class.
Oh my goodness. Just give me the F- now.
It's about bathing in his brilliance of words and punnery and gender f&$+ery.
His talent with words is irrefutable. But so is Eddie Izzard's and I enjoy his material more.
Because condemning an entire era of literature based on your bad dating experience is the scholarly thing to do.
Rather than replying, I'll just ask, "Do you give F--s (F double minuses, since it looks like a blanked out naughty word)?"
| 4 people marked this as a favorite. |
It's okay. I'm failing, too. I loathe Much Ado. And I have to run to rehearsal, so I can't get into it right now.