ex-teenage wasteland

So when I finally got home at 11pm to watch Sandman, I had to cry a little bit. I got home after having lost another round at work and then the tv show gives me Lucienne. I was looking forward to seeing her, but by the time I went to watch it, I had simply forgotten that there was a librarian in the story. Not just a librarian, THE librarian. A figure so fundamental to history, so righteous and so respectable. Not a satirized comic relief or a sexualized character. Finally some recognition for my profession after a tough day and a tough week and a tough month and some tough years.

When Stede meets Calico Jack for the first time this is what he says to him:

Who's the big gal?

Off to a terrible start, and it only goes downhill from there.

As others have pointed out, this is a very mean thing to say in general and absolutely unacceptable to say to a queer man in particular, and Ed knows that. He's trying to do damage control

He's fucking joking. You're not a girl.

but he's laughing along with Jack - or maybe trying to laugh it off? He immediately gets physical with Jack as well, and it looks to me like the sort of thing you might do, when someone you like just has said something that makes you intensely uncomfortable but you really don't want it to be a big deal. He's performing closeness with Jack: Look, I like this guy he wouldn't say something like that he doesn't mean it. While at the same time he literally jumps on him almost as if that would distract from the really hurtful thing Jack has just said.

But. Look at Stede's face while Ed does this.

He knows guys like Jack. All his life guys like this have shamed him for being "weak" and effeminate. And he knows the kind of guy who would laugh along with that for whatever reason - to protect his own image, to not cause a conflict. He's already tired of this interaction. Look at this sad little nod after Ed says "You're not a girl." (sorry for bad quality, this is not art, just to illustrate my point)

God this is. Painful. I feel this expression in my soul.

And he's still trying to play nice with Jack! He's offering his hand, he's welcoming him. He's even ignoring Jack's sarcastic little "Lovely", as they shake hands. Because Jack's a friend of Ed's and he's used to putting up with a little bit of bullying. But the disappointment here is palpable. And so is the resignation. Because Ed may not be a bully, but (from Stede's perspective) he doesn't defend Stede from abuse either, and part of Stede expected this to happen eventually. I'm not even sure he thinks about it as betrayal per say - it's one of the things that just happen. Bullying is inevitable and people are only friendly with him as long as no one can see.

But! From Ed's perspective, this isn't what's happening at all! I'm not saying he doesn't have baggage, but he probably didn't grow up with this specific kind of constant ostracizing. To him, it's all just friendly banter. He doesn't notice how hurt Stede is because, well, Stede is very good at not letting it on when something really hits him. To Ed, he's just averted a crisis, introduced his old best friend to his new best friend, and now they're all gonna go have breakfast together :D

It gets even worse later on, when Stede asks Jack about his ship. If you've ever been bullied tell me if this sounds familiar: You were just trying to defend yourself, but the bully suddenly starts a crying performance, and now you're the mean one. Meanwhile, all the bully's friends flock to them and comfort them because you really hurt their feelings, how dare you! I don't even think I need to talk about this further.

And then. It all culminates in the beach scene. After being literally peed on, Steve has finally had enough. He's an adult; he doesn't have to put up with this shit. He's still avoiding confrontation though, he simply extracts himself from the situation.

But Ed, who was just having a fun day at the beach, doesn't understand why Stede is suddenly leaving. Ed wants Stede to be there and share in the fun! More importantly, he wants to show this part of himself to Stede. He wants this to be a bonding experience, and he's really excited about it. So he tries to convince him to stay.

I might just head back to the ship.

But Ed (contrary to Stede tbh) is actually good at communication, and he wants to know what tf is going on, so he asks again.

And I think it's actually a testament to how close Stede's gotten to him that he actually tries to communicate his feelings for once.

What he says: "I'm not finding any of this a blast actually! I don't like to drink 'til I puke, or get pelted with coconuts. Or making a turtle fight a crab? That's just mean!" Now it's not that he finds any of these actions distasteful in particular. These are all just stand-ins for what Stede is actually angry about. Which is that Jack is hurting him in a way he's been hurt all his life, but he's not saying that. Because the first rule of the bullied kid is, you do not let the abuser (or their allies) know when they got to you. And in this moment, to him, Ed is an ally of Jack's.

Ed doesn't have all the context though. He doesn't know this about Stede's past, he doesn't know how sensitive of a subject this is for Stede. Fuck, he doesn't even know about all the interactions Stede had with Jack. Look at his expressions, as Stede goes on his little rant:

Why would you say this I thought we were friends :(

In this moment, Stede is triggering all of Ed's insecurities. To him, Stede just described a fun afternoon. He feels judged, like Stede is shaming him for his lack of sophistication.

Then Stede delivers the killing blow: "Honestly Ed? I don't like who you are around this guy." And he means: I thought I could trust you, I thought you wouldn't find this kind of behaviour acceptable.

What Ed hears is: You aren't good enough for me. I have seen a less refined side of you and I don't like it.

Which is why he says "But this is who I am." He's a pirate, and he'll never be an aristocrat, and if Stede doesn't like it, well, Ed also thought Stede was one of the good ones :'(

Just. A masterclass in miscommunication.

Ged also spoke low, to use his friend’s true name: “No matter, Estarriol. But this is myself, and I am glad to see you…”

[Estarriol] heard, perhaps, something more than simple gladness in his voice. He had not yet let go of Ged’s shoulder, and he said now, in the True Speech, “In trouble and from darkness you come, Ged, yet your coming is joy to me.”

🌬️✨❄️

Recently I have seen a lot of excellent posts in the dark academia tags which call out the euro-centrism of this subculture and also give great recommendations for non-white cultural academia. So I decided to put together works of Indian authors that I read growing up in India as a literature student. Please note this list leans heavily towards works centred on Bengal due to my own heritage, and is by no means comprehensive or meant to represent the entire, varied diaspora of India.

Historical/political fiction:

the lives of others by neel mukherjee: chronicling the rise and fall of a bengali family against historical events like the partition, the 1943 famines, the bengal emergency etc. diverse cast of characters retelling history through multiple povs, lyrical prose, incredible research providing an insight into naxalite bengal. talks about how it feels to be a leftist when you are born and brought up in bourgeois privilege.

the lowland by jhumpa lahiri: everything!! written by jhumpa lahiri!! should be savoured!! but this gorgeous book in particular made me UGLY CRY. to summarise without spoilers, it's a story about two brothers, separated by inches and then by miles, a story about student revolutionaries, bengal burning and boston beaches, and it's a story about a beautiful, brilliant, tormented woman who loves and loathes in equal measure.

the shadow lines by amitav ghosh:** intergenerational trauma, dhaka riots and the entwined histories of two families- one in london and the other in calcutta. sharp, bittersweet and sometimes rather scandalous. if you enjoy ggm's works try this.

a flight of pigeons by ruskin bond**: after her father is killed in the 1857 sepoy mutiny, an anglo-indian girl, her mother, and female relatives are given shelter by the muslim family of one of the chief rebels. set in north india near UP, ruskin bond's writing is powerful and explores found families and the price of imperialism and war. chef's kiss.

train to pakistan by khuswant singh: the horrors of post independence sectarian violence as recounted by a fictional village on the indo-pak border with a population largely comprising muslims and sikhs. a harrowing read but evocative and honest.

shalimar the clown by salman rushdie: allegorical story about the kashmir valley unrest, told through the insane, shakespearean revenge tragedy spun out by kashmiri tightrope walker shalimar who falls in love with boonyi, a beautiful pandit girl, a love that dooms him.

a fine balance by rohinton mistry**: four strangers' lives spill into each other as india crumbles under the 1975 emergency. this one has everything political commentary, social satire, depiction of economic hardships and a whole range of characters from diverse backgrounds. side note: it's a pretty heavy and tragic read, please be careful.

Societal stories

the guide by rk narayan: raju, an impoverished, street smart boy in a fictional south indian town takes to conning people as a tour guide but things spiral out of control when he has an affair with a married classical dancer. allegorical writing, funny and eccentric, and there's a LOT of satire about desi stereotypes: fraud religious leaders, scandalous village affairs, neocolonial mindsets and well, dancing. had a great read of this one. don't watch the film, it's inaacurate and the author himself didn't like it :(

malgudi days by rk narayan: set in the same town as the guide, a collection of short stories about the colourful lives of small town dwellers, from astrologers to doctors to postmen. it's funny and poignant in equal measure. there's not a single mediocre story in here, they're all just......charming.

interpreter of maladies by jhumpa lahiri: stories set in boston and bengal about ordinary indian people and ordinary indian lives which are just so, so MASTERFULLY written and in such crystal bright detail it feels all too real. I recommend a temporary matter, when mr pirzada came to dine, sexy, mrs sen and this blessed house.

em and the big hoom by jerry pinto**: a goan family in late 20th century mumbai + their experience when the mother is diagnosed with bpd. I haven't read this book but it was highly recommended by my friends + authors who are greatly esteemed by me

any and every work by ruskin bond because my man literally GREW up around ayahs and tonga drivers and lonely gardeners and sad kite-makers and friends in small places. I recommend road to the bazaar: a collection of short stories about north indian children involving tigers in train tunnels, beetle races, rooftop gardens and the feeling of being home again.

the white tiger by aravind adiga**: epistolary novel that deals mostly with the class struggle in india as told by a village boy, who travels to delhi for work and his slow rise to success through monumental obstacles. a good read to look into the lives and the plight of underprivileged workers and the persisting class disparity in globalised india.

city of djinns by william dalrymple: travelogue/memoir/anecdotes of the author's time in delhi as he researches for the detritus of history in the country capital. non fiction but every bit as riveting as a well spun story.

Retellings/Biographies

rajkahini (transl: stories of kings) by abanindranath tagore: stories about the rajput rulers of western india and their glorious, semi-mythological histories of battles and heartbreaks and visions. the author was often termed a lyrical artist because his descriptive prose is so good it feels like a painting put into words.

empress: the astonishing reign of nur jahan by ruby lal: a feminist biography of my favourite figure from history, nur jahan, and her deliciously satisfying ascent as the sole female sovereign in the line of the great mughals. but wow, what a woman.

the palace of illusions by chitra banerjee divakaruni: retelling of the great epic mahabharata but from draupadi's point of view. poetic and magical, and her descriptions of female rage and the unfairness of society even in mythical canon is SUPERB.

Poetry!

sarojini naidu: patriotism, society, feminism, romance

nissim ezekiel: postcolonial, satire

ak ramanujan: society, classical retellings, folktale inspired poetry

agha shahid ali: socio-political, ghazal inspired poetry

tishani doshi: feminist, contemporary

eunice d'souza: contemporary, gender politics

Pure self indulgent recs

hayavadana by girish karnad: a ridiculous, criminally hilarious play-within-a-play about a love triangle and accidental body/torso swaps and a goddess who couldn't care less and a man with a horse head. yeah.

devdas by sarat chandra chattopadhyay: pls stop shoving the movie down my throat it's the cringiest depiction of bengali culture ever but yeah the novel is 💗💗 and it's about childhood sweethearts dev and paro, the cost of obsessions and lusts and an enigmatic courtesan chandramukhi who keeps loving the wrong things.

any and every work by rabindranath tagore should be considered academia but in particular his short stories, like the kabuliwalah and the postmaster.

the byomkesh bakshi series by sharadindu bandyopadhyay: written in the vein of poirot but in colonial bengal, follows one (1) sleuthy boy and his sidekick as they unravel psychological crimes and murder mysteries. some stories are just genuinely scary and all have eclectic casts. sharadindu said homoerotic/feral women/immoral genius people rights!

Like I said this list is not comprehensive!!! But I tried my best!!! I think we should really try to decolonize our reading tastes. And yes I purposely left out Arundhati Roy (because she is literally the only Indian author ever recommended in lists) Vikram Seth (because I do not like him) and Roshani Chokshi (because any one of the above)

I hope you guys get some good picks from this list :)

Before reading the books, the ending to ROTK used to lowkey upset me, because Sam and Frodo love tf out of each other! But Frodo leaves and Sam stays behind to get married to someone we don’t know and is happy in the Shire without Frodo?? It bugged me. But after reading the books, I’ve come to the realization that in order for them to get the happy endings they deserve, Frodo needs to leave and Sam needs to stay. And Sam’s life with Rosie is essential to his happy ending and completed character arc and is entirely separate from Frodo and Sam’s love for one another. The reasons behind why I think their endings are perfect for them have to do with autonomy and the difference between choices made selflessly vs. choices made in self interest.

TLDR; Frodo and Sam’s endings are perfect for them (imo) because they get to choose them for themselves. Both hobbits spend the entire trilogy sacrificing everything they are for the Good of Middle Earth. Frodo leaving is The Good Ending for him because he is suffering the traumatic effects of the Ring; Frodo isn’t happy in the Shire and chooses an adventure of his own to Valinor so that he can heal. Sam staying and getting married and becoming part of the community is The Good Ending for him because he is invested in the Shire; from the moment he returns to the Shire, he chooses to pour his time and love into its restoration and abundance. Sam is a gardener and he chooses the Shire because it brings him happiness, but Frodo can’t find happiness there and so chooses to leave because that’s what’s best for him. (And then eventually, after Sam’s lived his happy ending in the Shire, he sails to Valinor to live with Frodo, and they both get that happy ending, too.)

There’s a little mini essay on Frodo and Sam that I put under the cut because it’s just me rambling, but if I didn’t make my reasoning clear enough above, it might clear it up. (Forewarning: These notes are probably uncoordinated af, because they were jotted down in my phone while I sat on the floor of my kitchen for 3 hours in a feverish ADHD-med-fueled determination to wrap my head around the LOTR ending.)

interviewer: you are straight

1. bi women do get called dyke by people who are fully aware they’re bi and not lesbians. cishets don’t really distinguish between women who affirm attraction to other women nearly as much as people on this site would lead you to believe

2. “lesbian” history has always included women we would now identify as bisexual. i have no problem with lesbian and bisexual becoming distinct identity labels, but that doesn’t mean we can deny bi women their own history

or zaheer in korra being like ‘unjust hierarchies and dictators are bad And I Also Want To Kill A Child’