Brude

"Absolutely no one comes to save us but us."

I'm afraid they'll become engineers and sign off on bridge designs that collapse - and people will die.

I'm afraid they'll become medical professionals who don't know what they're doing - and people will die.

Like, you learn that China’s first dynasty was the Xia Dynasty, and at first that seems pretty solid.

But then you realize that all the knowledge we have about the Xia Dynasty’s existence can be traced to like twoish books from multiple dynasties later, which talk about how the Xia Dynasty was founded by Yu the Great, who had a pet dragon and defeated nine-headed monsters, because this is all knowledge that has been handed down in a giant game of Telephone and no one knows which part is even real.

And a lot of knowledge we have about ancient history is like this. Did Sun Tzu (creator of Sun Tzu’s Art of War) really exist? Or was The Art of War just a collection of common knowledge from the Warring States Period? Did Lao Tse (founder of Taoism) really exist? Or was the Tao Te Ching just a collection of Taoist thought?

As for the text itself, it’s just a list of… stuff the author has heard. Some of it is probably true:

And some of it probably isn’t:

I mean, It Stands To Reason, right? It’s not asking for too much suspension of disbelief.

And yet centuries of ornithology have not produced any concrete evidence that there is a bird that enters crocodile’s mouths to eat. There are birds that will feed around basking crocodiles; there are birds that pick at wounds on large herbivores; but this specific legend has yet to be formally substantiated. So I won’t really bother talking about it.

… wait, you thought that was what I was going to talk about? No, let’s talk about mice eating iron, which might actually be more feasible! Let’s take a look at it and the next anecdote…

Now, if you subscribe to the theory that giant gold-digging ants were in fact marmots who dug gold up and brought it to the surface (Peissel, 1984), then the second one may be another expression of rodents as gold-diggers. Emphasis on the may. Without further evidence, this is no better than deducing that dinosaur fossils inspired griffins and dragons. It may just as easily represent a miner’s superstition that mice in mines might have possibly eaten some of their precious metal (Zucker, 2024).

But what about the Cypriot mice who eat iron? While both observations are about metal-eating mice, they seem to be otherwise unrelated.

The origin of the story of metal-eating mice, and a bunch of other swarming animals, appears to be a lost work by Theophrastus (Zucker, 2024). The story is repeated by Aelian (5.12)

In the island of Gyarus Aristotle says that there are Rats and that they actually eat iron ore. And Amyntas says that the Rats of Teredon (this is in Babylonia) adopt the same food. (Aelian, 1959, p. 307)

and by Pliny (8.43 and 8.82)

M. Varro informs us… that the inhabitants of Gyarus, one of the Cyclades, were driven away by mice… (Pliny, 1855, p. 295)

We are informed by Theophrastus, that after the mice had driven the inhabitants of Gyara from their island, they even gnawed the iron; which they also do, by a kind of natural instinct, in the iron forges among the Chalybes. (Pliny, 1855, p. 350)

The anecdote of metal-eating mice as a historical event is also told by Antigonus, Heracleides, and Livy (Papademetriou, 1970).

First of all… where are they exactly? Cyprus and Gyaros are two very different islands. It appears likely that the Cyprus reading is a corruption in the existing manuscripts of the Marvelous Things Heard, where Γυάρῳ was misread as Κύπρῳ (Giacomelli, 2023). Indeed, a more recent translation of the Marvelous Things Heard gives this.

25 · It is said that in the island of Gyaros the mice eat iron. (Aristotle, 1984, p. 2783)

The distinction is important, because this is what Gyaros looks like.

It’s a barren, desert island in the Aegean, about 23 sq km in area, a far cry from populous Cyprus.

So… at face value, it would seem that this started out as a tale about how an island got overrun by mice who ate everything, which evolved into “mice eat iron on this island”.

I say seem because I’m just making up explanations after the fact, given what’s available. No better than using dinosaur fossils to explain belief in dragons.

… but wait, there’s more. You didn’t think there was more?

“Where mice eat iron” exists on its own as an expression. It was used, for instance, by Herodas.

But you’re a bad boy, Kottalos, so bad that none could find a good word for you even were he selling you, not even in the land where mice throughout eat iron. (Herodas, 1922, p. 115)

In other words, “you’re so worthless that, even in the places where they’re desperate, nobody would want you”. “Mice eating iron” here suggests hardship and scarcity. Perhaps the mice ate everything on the island and, having exhausted all available food, had nothing left to gnaw but iron?

However! It has been suggested that “where mice throughout eat iron” is a misreading, and it would be more correct as “where mice eat iron just as slag [i.e. metallurgical waste]”. The sense of the sentence would be the same (a place with low standards) but it would imply that “mice eating iron” is to be taken as something that happens quite often (Stamoulakis, 2023). In fact, mice chewing on metal didn’t just happen on Gyaros. It was seen as a portent of war at Lanuvium when the mice gnawed on metal shields, since they would soon be reduced to famine as a result of the war (Marcovich, 1977).

Which adds another dimension to metal-eating mice: that of something extraordinary happening. A place where mice eat iron is a place where the unexpected happens, for better or worse (Papademetriou, 1970).

On the other hand, Seneca uses the expression to describe Hades. Here, Hercules addresses Claudius in the ever-delightfully-named Apocolocyntosis*.

Listen to me and stop talking nonsense. You have come to a place where the mice gnaw iron [ubi mures ferrum rodunt]. Tell me the truth, quick, or I’ll knock the silliness out of you. (Seneca, 1902, p. 140)

Here, it reflects how tough and strenuous life is in Hades, although another commentator has suggested that it is a metaphor for a mouse getting caught in a trap (Ball, 1902). Perhaps it’s saying that this is a miraculous place where the impossible happens (Papademetriou, 1970). Or maybe it’s just trying to say that even the mice in Hades are so tough that they chew on metal (Marcovich, 1977).

Making them the equivalent of this guy, really.

But the most likely reason is to indicate scarcity and to criticize Claudius’ lavish lifestyle, which Seneca disapproved of. Like in the example of Lanuvium mentioned previously, the mice in the afterlife are starving, and soon Claudius will too - a terrible fate for the gluttonous emperor (Marcovich, 1977).

Finally, metal-eating mice (as a symbol for scarcity or marvelousness) eventually evolved into the modern Greek proverb “the fly is eating metal” (Papademetriou, 1970).

Ultimately, we need to ask the big question implied by all of this.

Can mice gnaw iron?

They could.

Iron is a 4 on the Mohs hardness scale. Mouse teeth are 5.5. Metal generally keeps mice away, but perhaps a sufficiently determined mouse - a starving one perhaps - could leave some gnaw marks on iron (Zucker, 2024).

So… perhaps there is some truth to it after all.

*Pumpkinification :3

References

Aelian, Scholfield, A. F. trans. (1959). On the Characteristics of Animals, vol. I. Harvard University Press.

Aristotle, Barnes, J. ed. (1984). The complete works of Aristotle: The revised Oxford translation (one-volume digital edition). Princeton University Press.

Giacomelli, C. (2023). Suspicious toponyms in the De mirabilibus auscultationibus: Textual problems,“ forgeries,” and methodological issues. In Historiography and Mythography in the Aristotelian Mirabilia (pp. 234-257). Routledge.

Herodas, Headlam, W., & Knox, A. D. eds. (1922). The Mimes and Fragments. Cambridge University Press.

Marcovich, M. (1977). UBI MURES FERRUM RODUNT (Seneca,“ Apocolocyntosis” 7.1). Rheinisches Museum für Philologie, 120(H. 1), 85-89.

Papademetriou, J. T. (1970). The Mutations of an Ancient Greek Proverb. Revue des Études Grecques, 94-105.

Peissel, M. (1984). The Ants’ Gold. Harvill Press.

Pliny, Bostock, J. & Riley, H. T. eds. (1855). The natural history of Pliny, vol. II. Henry G. Bohn.

Seneca, Ball, A. P. trans. (1902). The satire of Seneca on the apotheosis of Claudius. Columbia University Press.

Stamoulakis, I. P. (2023). A Critical and Interpretative Proposal on Herodas 3, 75–76. Arctos–Acta Philologica Fennica, 57, 217-228.

Class: Dentist!

Me: okay, so in this scene you are going to be a dentist. :)

Child 1: WHY DID YOU STEAL MY TEETH!

Justin posted the 1956 house he and his wife bought in Jasper, Indiana. It is a complete time capsule. Absolutely NOTHING has been updated or touched.  

Everything is still here- look at the appliances. All original. This is not like the classy expensive updated mid century homes we’ve seen before. 

The furniture has to be the original pieces and sets the previous owners bought. 

The wall hangings are aged.

This is an interesting piece, this bar. 

Look at the bathroom- pink fixtures.

Those lamps!

The master bath has a yellow tub and fixtures.

A 2nd bdm. Even the bedding is vintage.

And, this bath has blue Fixtures. Wow, I would definitely keep them.

More cool lamps and original furniture in the knotty pine family room. 

Wow, look at the built-ins in the office.

The lower floor.

The basement is cool- look at that floor! And, the TV. The bar is classic. I wonder if they were leaving any of this.

Off the rec room is a 2nd kitchen. A pink fridge!

And, there’s this room, too. Look at the stone wall.

Rachel’s cousin Will and his Yale roommate Allen both have the measles. Rachel shows limited sympathy (”Poor boy!”), before immediately mocking them and calling them “childish” for getting a disease only little kids get.

Rachel and her roommate “B” (It stands for Bertha!) attempted to steal a sign (what sort idk) from a fair they went to but found they “were carefully guarded”. She wishes Will could have been there to help.

Will has a crush on a girl named Jenny, who Rachel knows, and is constantly asking Rachel if Jenny has mentioned him.

“B” often sits next to Rachel as she writes and suggests things to add to the letter or just generally distracts her.

Will and Jack, who are brothers, don’t write to each other. They write to Rachel and tell her to write to the other and pass on a message for them. Rachel keeps asking why they do this, but goes along with it anyways.

Rachel always explains why there are ink blots or areas of sloppy writing in her letters. Explanations so far include such classics as: the dinner bell just rang, it’s after lights-out and I’m writing this in the dark, “B” is shaking my arm, “B” is kissing me, this pen is broken, the postman is almost here, and there was a bee.

For her 18th birthday Rachel received: a new Kodak camera, eighteen white rosebuds, silver manicure scissors, a pair of shell side combs, a silver pencil, and a vase of pink roses. However her favorite present was from her father who wrote to say she could just buy her own present and he would pay for it.

Rachel is always mentioning the pictures she takes with her Kodak. I wish I knew what happened to them. 

In addition to Calvé, Marlowe and Sothern, Rachel has now also gone to see performances by Ellen Terry, Henry Irving, John Philip Sousa, Ignacy Jan Paderewski (playing the piano, not governing Poland), and freaking Sarah Bernhardt! 

Rachel likes to put question marks in the middle of sentences to denote sarcasm; i.e. “I am very ? sorry for you.” and “Men were not excluded and we had the pleasure ? of meeting several.”

Update: It took eight years, dozens of emails, an unbelievably kind invitation from Rachel’s granddaughter (also named Rachel) and 16 hours of travel but…

jiji, as i would come to name her, was finishing up ringworm treatment & was thus in isolation away from the other shelter cats. the staff informed me that while she was safe to be adopted out, their shelter policy was that she had to be the last cat i saw that day to avoid any risk of spreading the infection. i assured them that that wasn’t an issue for me — i was here for one cat and one cat only

they repeatedly asked if i was sure about this — i really didn’t at least want to look at any other cats?? my answer didn’t change. yes, i’m sure. i’m here for jiji. no one else.

and so after a bit of paperwork and some wrangling to get her into the cat carrier, jiji came home with me

i quickly learned, however, that the reason jiji had been at the shelter for over three months was that she was, to put it mildly, an asshole. she had been a stray for some time, given birth to kittens very young, and generally had had a rough go of it, so her disposition was understandable, but the fact remained. she was an asshole. upon our first meeting in the shelter, she grabbed onto my foot and started bunny kicking my shoe with gusto. she stole my food as i was eating it. she scratched me so frequently that a coworker noticed & expressed concern.

however, up until this point, i’ve left out a critical detail of the story. a year ago today, possessed by some sort of temporary cat-induced mania, i didn’t adopt one cat. i adopted two.

on the same day, from a totally different shelter, i also adopted a tiny little one eyed kitten named ramona. how i ended up with ramona is another story for another day — the important part is that she was very young and very small, and she joined my hardened stray in my postage stamp sized apartment approximately one hour later

i did my absolute best to follow the standard protocol for introducing cats to each other. i tried to keep ramona in my bedroom and jiji in the living room and to introduce them slowly

but the separation lasted about two days, however, because jiji, my asshole former street cat who viewed my limbs as her favorite scratching posts, took one look at this scruffy little one eyed thing, asked “is anyone going to be this kitten’s mom?”

We teach history like it's a work of fiction where the characters act the way they do because they were written that way. And not like the real world with real people who were just as human as us and had reasons to act the way they do. And that the same mistakes and foibles they had could happen to us too.

I was fortunate enough to have some great teachers growing up, in a small, fairly well-funded school system (and during times when everyone still agreed that fascism was bad). In 8th grade, our school had an interdisciplinary unit for about a month focusing solely on the Holocaust. Every class taught something related to it, even math. For a month, we read horrifying stories and watched documentaries and did research assignments on the Holocaust. By the end, any one of us would have said we were experts on the subject.

And at the very end, our entire grade (about 100 kids) was broken into four groups, and we were told that as a reward for all our hard work on the Holocaust unit, we were going to compete for a trip to Disney World. Only one team could go, but the entire team would get to travel there and spend a few days in the park, all expenses paid.

The competition was simple: the group with the most team spirit would win. We were instructed to come up with a team name, a catchy slogan, and a logo (something simple and easy to draw). We were allowed to prove our team spirit however we wanted. That was it. That was all of the instructions. The competition would last a week, and short of stopping physical violence, the teachers stepped back and let us have at it.

It was terrifying.

At first, everyone just hung up posters in the halls and cheerfully recited their slogan whenever the teachers were watching. Within a few days, posters were being torn down and shredded. Verbal fights were breaking out in the hallways. It wasn't enough to say your team was the best, everyone had somehow decided. You also had to prove that everyone else's team was inferior. People started making up lies and gossip, saying that everyone in a particular group was lazy or ugly or smelly or what have you (we were 13). Slurs were thrown around. (Again, we were 13.)

By the final day, the groups were marching down the halls in formation, shouting their slogan in unison. Shouting slander against the other groups. The floor was covered in tattered paper.

I was shy and introverted and weird and unpopular and mostly stayed out of it. But those images are burned into my memory. These kids had turned into vicious monsters, all for a stupid school project.

The teachers had us march down the hallway to the auditorium to announce the results of the competition. The groups were little armies now. Most students marched in lockstep, shouting their slogans. We were seated together in our groups. The teachers dimmed the lights, quieted us down, and the teacher in charge of this whole project said that before he announced the winners, he had something to share with us about the person who was responsible for this entire competition. He turned on the projector and displayed a portrait of Hitler.

Everyone lost their minds. Kids were booing and throwing things. We knew that Hitler was a Bad Guy.

The teacher calmed us back down, and then explained that there was no trip to Disney World, and the fact that not one student questioned for a moment that such a massively expensive and complicated prize would be granted for such a silly competition was honestly kind of disappointing. This entire week, he said, was our final exam. The final exam for the Holocaust unit.

We had spent a month learning about this. About how this "bad guy" inspired a whole hell of a lot of people to march in lockstep shouting slogans and plastering their symbol all over everything. That one bad guy had told them that they were special, and other groups were trying to take away what was rightfully theirs for being the best, and they ultimately got extremely violent. We had learned all about the Hitler Youth and the SS and book burnings and, of course, the concentration camps. We'd all read the Diary of Anne Frank. We'd been marinating in this information for a month, in all of our classes.

But we hadn't learned. We hadn't really understood what they were trying to teach us. Not that this happened. But that this happens. It can happen very easily, especially if people aren't watching out for it.

The kids were furious. They shouted that this wasn't fair, that we were only following instructions. The teachers had lied to us. They had told us to do this, and now they were mad at us for following directions?

He was ready for this, of course. Calming us back down again, he pointed out that all they'd done is tell us to give ourselves a name, a slogan, a symbol, and demonstrate "team spirit." That was literally it. No one told us to rip posters down. No one told us to march in the hallways. No one told us to spread rumors and shout insults. No one told us to fight each other.

They didn't have to.

All it takes to get people to behave this way is to tell them that their group is special, they deserve good things, but the good things aren't there because those other people are taking them from you.

The Nazis were not uniquely evil people. They were just encouraged to demonstrate their team spirit. And there were no teachers to stop it from getting violent. Because the person encouraging them wanted things to get violent.

The Holocaust was not the story of Hitler the Bad Guy. He was there, and he was responsible for a lot, but that wasn't the point. Germany during the Holocaust wasn't suddenly, by total accident, full of evil people.

It was just full of people like us.

This time, it just was a lie about Disney World and a week of chaos. But if we didn't watch out, the next time fascism started to rise, we would get swept up on the wrong side of it. We had just proven that we would. We'd be too swept up in making sure that our special group got the prize they deserved to notice that we were being lied to about the prize in the first place.

That could happen. If we weren't careful. If we forgot the lesson we'd just learned.

After he'd let the horror and shame and embarrassment and indignation of that week sink in properly, he reassured us that it wasn't our fault. The point wasn't for us to prove that we understood the lesson of the Holocaust. It wasn't actually a test after all, it was our final lesson. The most important lesson.

He'd known that this test would go this way, because it always did. He did this every year. He said in all his years of teaching, only one student, one student, had ever questioned it. Pulled him aside in the hallway and said straightforwardly that whatever was going on was messed up and he wanted no part of it.

And you know what? That is how you teach history. You give students the facts of what happened. And then you show them how easily it can happen again.

Sadly, most schools don't have the resources for this sort of thing, and these days they'd probably not be allowed to run this little experiment. But I'm extremely grateful to that teacher, grateful that I was part of that experience. It was harrowing, and it made me and a lot of other people vigilant for the rest of my life in a way I know I would not have been otherwise.

It was over 35 years ago now and it still makes me emotional to think about.

Kind of baffled by this one because its describing two different genres of fanfiction with different motivations (i cant comment on the readmore thing i only share links to ao3 & dont post my writing direcly on tumblr for Reasons)

A self insert oc is your own personal fantasy that you choose to share with other people. Broadly the motivation is "i (or a Me Standin) exist in this world and have a relationship with The Character(s), and I would like to share my imagined personal experiences with an audience". The author wants readers to engage with and like a character they have created as an extension of the universe.

Reader inserts are motivated by wanting to provide that experience to someone. Youre not asking readers to imagine a new guy, youre inviting them to put themselves in universe and imagine their own relationships to The Character(s). Its participatory, not observational.

All of this is without saying that if you dont like reader inserts thats fine but calling them cringe problematic annoying whatever is just recreating the attitudes that people outside of fanfiction have towards all fanfiction. dont become your own bullies etc