Cabinet of Curiosities

アカウント作り直したので過去絵中心にボチボチ更新していきます。

I have re-created my account.

My creator name is Nishiki Suzumori.

I will update mainly illustrations I have drawn in the past.

1. "Elizabeth Bennet represents romantic idealism; Charlotte Lucas represents pragmatism"

This take usually has reference to Elizabeth's younger age, as something that is causing or allowing her to be idealistic.

This take I regard as purely nonsense. Elizabeth never says or implies that she will only marry for "love." She says something of this sort in a couple of the adaptations—but it doesn't appear anywhere in the novel.

For another thing: if the point of this character comparison were that Elizabeth demanded erotic, romantic love, while Charlotte was happy merely with a practical arrangement, wouldn't Mr. Collins's characterisation be very different? He would be a reasonable, sensible, respectable man, who was nevertheless very boring. Elizabeth might respect, but not love or feel attraction to him, and would make it clear that she was rejecting him for this reason.

This isn't the case. Elizabeth rejects him because she doesn't respect him, and she sees all of his pompousness, selfishness, and ridiculousness; Charlotte accepts him despite the fact that she doesn't respect him, and has pretty much the same opinion that Elizabeth does of his mind. The disagreement between them isn't about whether they need to love their husband to be content, but whether they need to respect him.

2. What does Elizabeth think of Charlotte's engagement?

Elizabeth doesn't merely act like what Charlotte is doing is too self-sacrificing, or unpleasant, or boring, or not what she (Elizabeth) would do. She acts like it is indelicate, improper, and even immoral. Whether or not you agree with Elizabeth is of course up to you—I just want to try to lay out why, in her historical context, she thinks this way, because I don't think I've ever seen anybody address it.

What does Elizabeth think about this engagement (and remember, in her defence, that she never actually says any of this to Charlotte 😅)? She implies that accepting Mr. Collins means that Charlotte is lacking in "merit" or "sense." Jane advises her to "be ready to believe, for every body’s sake, that she may feel something like regard and esteem for our cousin”—but Elizabeth rejects this idea, as she believes that Charlotte's "understanding" precludes her from feeling "regard" for Mr. Collins. She tells Jane:

"Mr. Collins is a conceited, pompous, narrow-minded, silly man: you know he is, as well as I do; and you must feel, as well as I do, that the woman who marries him cannot have a proper way of thinking. You shall not defend her, though it is Charlotte Lucas. You shall not, for the sake of one individual, change the meaning of principle and integrity, nor endeavour to persuade yourself or me, that selfishness is prudence, and insensibility of danger security for happiness."

So Elizabeth thinks Charlotte accepting Mr. Collins is a decision that shows a want of "merit," "principle," and "integrity"; she rejects the idea that accepting Mr. Collins is a prudent choice (i.e. she does not believe that Charlotte has made a pragmatic decision); she thinks it is an improper, a selfish, and a dangerous choice.

3. What is the danger in marrying a man you don't respect?

"Dangerous" in what respect? Charlotte is in "danger" of what, exactly?

Elizabeth is speaking guardedly, but a clue to what she means can be found in Mr. Bennet's wariness about Elizabeth marrying Mr. Darcy, when he believes she doesn't respect him:

"I know your disposition, Lizzy. I know that you could be neither happy nor respectable, unless you truly esteemed your husband, unless you looked up to him as a superior. Your lively talents would place you in the greatest danger in an unequal marriage. You could scarcely escape discredit and misery. My child, let me not have the grief of seeing you unable to respect your partner in life. You know not what you are about.”

So we see a theme of suitable versus unsuitable marriages in Pride and Prejudice. In the repetition of the word "esteem," a comparison is perhaps being drawn between Charlotte's engagement to Mr. Collins, and Elizabeth's engagement to Mr. Darcy; in Mr. Bennet's emphasis on the word "you," a comparison is certainly being drawn between his engagement to Miss Gardiner and Elizabeth's engagement to Mr. Darcy.

But I digress. The "danger" for a woman in a marriage that is unequal as to sense and understanding, wherein she does not respect or esteem her husband, is that she will face a temptation to lose her "credit" (basically, her reputation) and enter into a state of "misery," by engaging in an adulterous affair. (Here we might consider Maria and Mr. Rushworth.) A woman's affections, her mind, her ambitions and energies, her sexual pleasure and activity, are (by this way of thinking) only to be routed through the conduit of her home life in a heterosexual, reproductive marriage. Any other state of affairs (no pun intended) is an assault against religion, morality, and the very fabric of society.

As a piece of nonfictional context here, The Lady's Miscellany for February, 1812 includes an article "Upon Female* Infidelity, and the Corruption of the Present Age," which, like P&P seems to, attributes the cause of female infidelity to an injudiciousness in choosing a husband to begin with. It should also give you a sense of what at least one contemporary thinker believes the stakes of adultery to be:

Marriage seems [by the ladies of the present times] to be sought for to be despised, and the conjugal oath is taken to be violated. Yet it is acknowledged on every hand, that adultery is an heinous crime, and that nothing tends in so great a degree to disfigure society. [...] Adultery is not only allowed to be a crime by all polished nations, but it has been classed as the next in atrocity to homicide. It is a theft, of all others, the most cruel. It is an outrage that may lead to assassination and murder. Nor indeed is there any excess so deplorable, to which it may not give rise. [...] The husband, when he is informed of the infidelities of his wife, loses all affection for her; and she has already renounced all love to him. For her children she entertains no maternal tenderness; and her husband disdains an issue that is spurious. The children [...] grow up without education, and without manners; and when of age they are thrown upon the world to dirturb their fellow creatures, and to add to human calamity and wretchedness. The pleasures which the Almighty has annexed to the marriage-bed, are the means of multiplying the human species; and this effect is the certain consequence of marriage when regulated by virtue. On the contrary, irregular loves and disorderly embraces are pernicious to population. They produce barrenness; and while they lead to remorse and shame, they diminish the numbers of mankind.

So women who "seek for" marriage without having the appropriate reverence either for their husbands or for the institution, are in danger of violating the conjugal oath, which is immoral, and leads to the degeneration of all of society (maybe it sounds silly to put it like that—but remember that the modern attitude towards "cheaters" and "home-wreckers" is not precisely positive...). And Charlotte does, indeed, meet the description of a woman who wishes to be married despite not having a high opinion of her husband, or the institution of matrimony:

Charlotte herself was tolerably composed. She had gained her point, and had time to consider of it. Her reflections were in general satisfactory. Mr. Collins, to be sure, was neither sensible nor agreeable: his society was irksome, and his attachment to her must be imaginary. But still he would be her husband. Without thinking highly either of men or of matrimony, marriage had always been her object: it was the only honourable provision for well-educated young women of small fortune, and, however uncertain of giving happiness, must be their pleasantest preservative from want.

*The title perhaps addresses female infidelity in particular because it is printed in a magazine intended to be read by young ladies; the text of the article does also lambast the immorality of "men of fashion," and call for "both sexes" to preserve their "virtue."

4. But why esteem your husband "as a superior"?

cw: misogyny, domestic violence, implication of marital SA

Wives must obey their husbands in every respect, unless their husband orders them to do something which goes against a higher law—namely, that of God. It is ordained by religion ("your desire shall be for your husband, and he shall rule over you"), and by morality, and by nature, and whatever, that wives are naturally, rightly, justly, and properly in a state of religious, moral, and legal subjection to their husbands. When Eve sinned by attempting to gain preeminence over Adam, this subjection was the punishment. A husband ought to avoid giving orders his wife finds insupportable, if he can; he may choose to yield in trifles for the sake of domestic peace, or because he's a real nice guy, or because he's improperly weak (depending on the opinion of the writer in question)—but the final decision always rests with him, as a matter of the law.

Henry Venn, in The complete duty of man or, A system of doctrinal & practical Christianity (1811), writes:

If it be urged, that the wife has frequently more understanding and ability to govern than the husband, and on this account ought to be excused from living in subjection, the answer is obvious: she hath liberty to use her superior wisdom in giving counsel. But if her advice is not accepted, subjection is her duty. Suppose a servant, as is often the fact, endued with more capacity than his master, would it not be insufferable insolence, should he urge this as a reason for refusing to be any longer under control, which, on another account, was indisputably his duty, viz. from his station in life? An attempt, therefore, to gain the ascendency is an attempt to subvert the order which the sovereign Giver of all wisdom has appointed. Base return for his bounty! The Christian rule is positive against such an usurping spirit: the command is, "Let the wife see that she reverence her husband." In opposition to natural pride, let her carefully check the first desire to have her own will, and see she be not wanting in submission; for this behaviour is most becoming a woman professing godliness. Let her remember that God, the author of the marriage state, has appointed this subordination.

You owe your husband your obedience, and have pledged it to him before man and God. Your only choice is the choice of husband in the first place—your only power is the power of veto. If you did not feel that your husband merited your obedience, and was suited to be to you what Christ is to the Church ("For the husband is the head of the wife, even as Christ is the head of the church")—the intermediary between yourself and God, the person who is charged with ensuring your understanding of and compliance with the precepts of religion, your Saviour—then your chance of not electing him to that position was before you married.

You cannot file for divorce unless you can prove desertion or cruelty (and the bar here is high—your husband is allowed to inflict "corporal chastisement" for your own good if you are disobedient). Even then, you cannot remarry—once you have gotten married, you have chosen your one and only sexual partner for life, unless he dies. You owe him your body, you need a very exceptionally good reason to deny him that right, and you cannot re-transfer that right to anybody else while he lives.

This is why young ladies are advised so particularly to mind that any man they accept be virtuous, industrious, sober, & without a colourful past.

I think it's also why Jane urges Elizabeth to "Consider Mr. Collins’s respectability, and Charlotte’s prudent, steady character." Mr. Collins is at least not likely to physically harm his wife, or drink to excess, or gamble away household funds; and Charlotte is too "steady" to be likely to engage in an adulterous affair. She's telling Elizabeth that at least the most dramatically bad effects of an unequal (in terms of sense and understanding) marriage are unlikely to apply here.

The point remains, though, that Charlotte does not believe Mr. Collins to be capable of guiding her, or even collaborating with her, in her religion, her housekeeping, childrearing, or any other aspect of life. She knows him to be her inferior in understanding, and yet is electing him to be her superior according to the law and the Church.

For Henry Venn, when husbands are not obliged to rule over their wives with "benign influence," but find their wives sensible enough that they may collaborate in religion, then

Their spiritual good will be a chief and mutual concern. They will be tender-hearted inspectors of each other's conduct, meekly correcting errors, which unnoticed would have struck root, or pointing out faults before they are confirmed into habits. [...] As the nuptial union gives the parties much influence to be either greatly serviceable or hurtful to each other's eternal interests, they must look upon themselves as bound in conscience to use all their weight against the corruptions of the heart, against pride, unbelief, and wordly lusts, through which their salvation is most endangered.

But Mr. Collins is too prideful to accord with these precepts, and too foolish to be corrected in this way. When Charlotte is able to influence his behaviour, it is through more underhanded means, and is usually in an effort to avoid his company (encouraging him to be out in his garden; choosing for her sitting-room a room which he does not value).

This is the kind of context we have to keep in mind when evaluating Elizabeth's statement that "the woman who marries [Mr. Collins] cannot have a proper way of thinking." Mr. Collins is not competent to the role of spiritual guide: the woman who marries him either believes that he is so competent, and is thus lacking in "understanding"; or she marries him even though she knows that he is not so competent, and is thus lacking in "integrity" (because she swears her obedience despite knowing she may be unable to keep the oath).

My argument isn't so much that Elizabeth necessarily believes women's subjugation to be natural and right—rather that, since the reality is that you are legally obligated to obey this man (and to have sex with him), it is more sensible, more moral, and more practical and prudent (!!!) to select a man you have a reasonable chance of being able to abide doing those things with. It saves you the trouble, and the dishonesty, involved in trying to finagle your way around a husband you don't respect.

5. Does P&P agree with Elizabeth?

Hopefully you can see that "the implied author's perspective," "Elizabeth's perspective," and "the reader's perspective" are all different things. In this post I have tried to explain (as I see it) what Elizabeth's position is and why: this is distinct from arguing that P&P argues that Elizabeth is right, which is distinct again from saying that I think Elizabeth is right.

What do we know about P&P's perspective on Charlotte's marriage? We have the above-quoted Mr. Bennet conversation. We have a pattern of equal marriages contracted through mutual respect and esteem, in which each partner may influence the other for the better (the Gardiners, the Bingleys, the Darcys); and unequal marriages, contracted for reasons of lust, pride, security, acquisitiveness, or social climbing (the Bennets, the Wickhams, the Hursts, the Collinses).

Regarding Wickham's courtship of Mary King, it is said that:

The sudden acquisition of ten thousand pounds was the most remarkable charm of the young lady to whom he was now rendering himself agreeable; but Elizabeth, less clear-sighted perhaps in this case than in Charlotte’s, did not quarrel with him for his wish of independence. Nothing, on the contrary, could be more natural; and, while able to suppose that it cost him a few struggles to relinquish her, she was ready to allow it a wise and desirable measure for both, and could very sincerely wish him happy. (emphasis mine)

This might support the case that the implied author feels Elizabeth to be seeing clearly when it comes to Charlotte—then again, it may mostly emphasise her lack of clear-sightedness when it comes to Wickham. But either way, the implication seems to be that this sort of "prudence" without affection is not wise or desirable, and Elizabeth is not seeing clearly when she thinks it is. In Wickham's case, but not in Charlotte's, Elizabeth is fooled into thinking that "selfishness is prudence."

We know Mrs. Gardiner to be a sensible woman, to whom Elizabeth and Jane owe much of their own good conduct. Mrs. Gardiner does not seem to approve of Wickham's engagement:

“But, my dear Elizabeth,” she added, “what sort of girl is Miss King? I should be sorry to think our friend mercenary.” “Pray, my dear aunt, what is the difference in matrimonial affairs, between the mercenary and the prudent motive? Where does discretion end, and avarice begin? Last Christmas you were afraid of his marrying me, because it would be imprudent; and now, because he is trying to get a girl with only ten thousand pounds, you want to find out that he is mercenary.” “If you will only tell me what sort of girl Miss King is, I shall know what to think.” “She is a very good kind of girl, I believe. I know no harm of her.” “But he paid her not the smallest attention till her grandfather’s death made her mistress of this fortune?” “No—why should he? If it were not allowable for him to gain my affections, because I had no money, what occasion could there be for making love to a girl whom he did not care about, and who was equally poor?” “But there seems indelicacy in directing his attentions towards her so soon after this event.” “A man in distressed circumstances has not time for all those elegant decorums which other people may observe. If she does not object to it, why should we?” “Her not objecting does not justify him. It only shows her being deficient in something herself—sense or feeling.”

Everyone, including Elizabeth, admits that Wickham does not care about Mary King. His match with her is not, to Mrs. Gardiner, better than his match with Elizabeth would have been. For Miss King to accept him even with the evidence before her that he does not care for her (i.e., he switched from Elizabeth to Marry after she gained a fortune) means that she is not thinking or behaving rightly. This is pretty much what Elizabeth thought of Charlotte for accepting Mr. Collins—who also switched his affections, in a short period of time, from Elizabeth to her (& recall that Charlotte feels Mr. Collins does not really care for her). It seems like, for Mrs. Gardiner to approve of a marriage, we need both: the partners need to respect or care for each other (Mrs. G does not say which); and the couple need something to live on. All of the "good" marriages in P&P meet these requirements.

We do not, however, see Charlotte Collins sinking into distress and misery. P&P is a novel uninterested in real, lasting calamity (even Lydia manages to cling onto respectability). When Elizabeth sees Charlotte in Kent, we read that:

[The Parsonage] was rather small, but well built and convenient; and everything was fitted up and arranged with a neatness and consistency, of which Elizabeth gave Charlotte all the credit. When Mr. Collins could be forgotten, there was really a great air of comfort throughout, and by Charlotte’s evident enjoyment of it, Elizabeth supposed he must be often forgotten. [...] Elizabeth, in the solitude of her chamber, had to meditate upon Charlotte’s degree of contentment, to understand her address in guiding, and composure in bearing with, her husband, and to acknowledge that it was all done very well.

In the end, Charlotte is making the best of a bad situation. When she reflects that marriage "was the only honourable provision for well-educated young women of small fortune, and, however uncertain of giving happiness, must be their pleasantest preservative from want," it is an acknowledgement that, however desirable it may be for women who don't have a high opinion of men or matrimony to get married, it isn't always practicable, because a genteel woman making any other provision for herself (e.g., by going into service, or doing sex work) is varying degrees of un-respectable or dishonourable.

6. In Summation

Elizabeth does not see the decision of accepting Mr. Collins as a decision between romance and practicality. Romance doesn't enter into her thoughts here, and she does not think that accepting Mr. Collins would be a practical thing to do.

The ideological / historical context of Elizabeth's world helps to explain why she thinks this. Other characters seem to agree with Elizabeth (Mr. Bennet; Mrs. Gardiner; even Jane, when trying to make the best of the situation, does so by arguing "that [Charlotte] may feel something like regard and esteem for our cousin," not that it doesn't matter whether she does).

Red Pumpkin Toadlet (Brachycephalus pitanga), family Brachycephalidae, endemic to Atlantic Rainforest in Sao Paolo State, SE Brazil

Comparison with termites and rhinocerous beetle (Enema sp.)

Poisonous.

As with other Brachycephalus sp., they lay a few eggs in moist terrestrial locations, and the young live as tadpoles in the eggs, and then hatch out as froglets.

Adults reach a max. snout vent length of up to 14 mm (0.55 in).

They are actually unable to hear their own advertisement calls, as their ears are underdeveloped.

They also do not hop, but instead slowly crawl across the forest floor.

the big finding of the whole experiment was that both food and comfort are not just substantial, but required for healthy development. in the 50s the popular theory was that mothers should touch and hold their babies as little as possible to avoid “spoiling” them, especially right after birth (which explains uh. a lot about boomers as a generation).

Harlow conducted his experiment to investigate this idea, and he found that physical comfort nearly eclipsed the food as a need in the baby macaques. They would go to the wire mothers only when they were hungry, sometimes even trying to reach the milk bottles without letting go of the cloth mothers, because they so badly needed both. Harlow’s other experiments showed that being deprived of parental comfort and enrichment as babies dealt lasting psychological damage to the macaques. and today we know that human babies can just up and die without enough skin-to-skin contact.

Rumination is probably the most common type of OCD compulsion, but I rarely see anyone talking about it. I've talked to multiple people diagnosed with OCD who didn't even recognize it as a compulsion.

Basically, if you have OCD you have terrible intrusive thoughts. They can be about anything, but common themes are fear of being a bad person, fear of hurting someone, fear of contamination. etc.

Rumination is when you get stuck in a spiral. Rumination is when you spend hours catastrophizing, overthinking, analyzing, telling yourself it's going to be okay.

I'll say it again:

Rumination is a compulsion.

Rumination is a compulsion, and that means you have to stop doing it.

I did ERP (exposure response prevention) for my OCD with a therapist! For 9 months! And it did help, but the idea didn't really click until I found this website a couple years later.

And Oh My God. It made things make so much more sense, and I was able to pull myself out of an episode even though I wasn't in therapy or on meds at the time.

Genuinely if you have OCD, or even if you suspect you have OCD, I'm begging you to read some of these articles.

Like this was genuinely life changing for me.

Here are some of the ones that were most helpful to me:

Defining Rumination

How to Stop Ruminating

ERP Exercises for Compulsive Rumination

he set up the most beautiful teepee of sticks that anyone has ever seen and brought out the big guns by also setting up a log cabin arrangement of the thicker logs to make sure they'd have a good burn time on this fire. the mathematical precision in the angles and choice of thickness? gorgeous. stunning. he even shaved off wood shavings for tinder instead of using paper or pre-bought firestarter. if he wasn't afraid of fumbling it and ruining it, he would have used flint. as it is, he got it with one match, and he KNOWS how good this fire creation he just did is.

and yet it is spent on an audience that simply does NOT appreciate any aspect of it because his city kid ass truly might be experiencing a firepit for the first time. ilya has no frame of reference for how sexy shane's firestarting skills display just was.

ilya already mad firepit time has to happen at all because shane already said no sex on the patio furniture so this planned chunk of time is already a wash and ilya was then so mad about shane immediately going to fuck around with sticks that he didn't pick up on the no being one of the "convince me to say yes" variety 😔

he confessed it later in their relationship together because by that point it was funny that he had tried so hard to impress her with his fire skills at bonfires and hangouts and it just hadn't worked because she just. hadn't really noticed at all. and now it's a playful/teasing thing ("oh? you're building a fire? david, we're already married." "yuna, i'm starting a flirting fire can you come look at it, please?"), and shane who hasn't consciously decided to copy his parents but also hasn't gotten the full story of them dating and WHY they mention david building fires so often (because ewwwww parents being in love which means kissing. GROSS.), but he's seen his mom standing by or sitting and watching and both of them looking so content and happy and his mom teasingly complimenting his dad on how well he builds fires.

and then he tries it on ilya and it just. doesn't work. excuse me, please be impressed by this fire i made. from watching my parents, this is supposed to work. play your part here, please.

and now i'm feeling extra-soft imagining yuna and david coming over one night and seeing shane keep glancing at ilya as he's making the fire and understanding EXACTLY what he's trying to do here.

and this miscommunicated little circle probably goes NOWHERE until david and yuna go from ‘aw he’s mirroring us this is kinda cute’ to ‘oh shane is getting sad that ilya isn’t flirting back.’ at which point david probably takes ilya aside and is like “ilya. as a member of the family, i want to share some of my secrets for how to start a good fire with you.”

and ilya is of course like “ah! bonding time with david :)” and so david shows his city boy ass some very basic fire starting stuff (because ilya TRULY does not know shit about this 😔) and also tells him some stories about impressing yuna with his fires back when they were dating. ilya is trying to learn well, but he’s not at all thinking about this skill in reference to shane.

UNTIL ☝️ they’re close to finishing and yuna comes over. and she starts the little fire flirting thing with david. “oh my, thats quite an impressive fire.” “well i’ve got someone pretty impressive to impress ;)” and ilya kinda watches from the side like 👀

shane meanwhile is ignoring the fire pit because 1) parents flirting EWWWWW and 2) oh so NOW ilya is interested in fires 😤 hmph he hasn’t even glanced at shane in the last 10 minutes!! …but of course once david and yuna start wrapping up their routine and ilya glances at shane he immediately wanders over to check out how ilya did and also chirp him about how his fire looks and that activates the competitive instinct in ilya.

so the next time shane makes a fire he chirps & compliments it. and shane looks so soft and pleased and is it getting hot near this fire?? wow hollander very sexy~

EVERYONE CLOSE YOUR EYES AND STOP WATCHING HIS SKILLS. THE ONLY THINGS SHANE WILL BE BLOWING AROUND HERE IS TINDER SPARKS AND ILYA.

This was only possible because the dragon was not much larger than a grape itself, but she still had to do a double take to be sure the object it was fighting with such animosity was in fact inanimate.

She crouched so that her eyes were level with the top of the table and squinted at it. The dragon sank its tiny fangs into the grape’s skin and gave a great tug, succeeding only in throwing it and the grape into a backwards tumble. The tiny green reptile rolled to a stop with its whole body wrapped around the grape and shook its head ferociously, managing to pull its teeth out but also launching the grape across the table. It gave a mighty roar of anger (about as loud as a human clearing their throat) and stalked after it, tail swishing dangerously.

“Do you need help?” she offered.

The dragon froze mid-prowl and whipped its head around to look at her, looking so offended she almost apologized for asking.

“I mean, I could peel it for you, if that’s the problem.” She wasn’t sure it was getting the message. One could never tell how much human language these little creatures picked up by hanging around the magic labs. Some understood only such essentials as “scat!” or “oh fuck, that sure did just explode”, while others could hold entire conversations — if they deigned to interact.

This one looked like it was deciding whether she was worthy. Finally, it sniffed daintily and flicked its tail, scales clacking together. “Little monster is my prey, and you can’t have it. Found it first. Will devour it!”

“Oh, sure,” she agreed. “But you know it’s a grape, right?”

This was the wrong thing to say. It glared at her and then bounded away to the other end of the table, where it slithered up to the grape and pounced on it.

Grape and dragon promptly rolled off the edge of the table.

The sorcerer quickly went around to that side, alarmed that it would be stepped on. The labs were bustling with shoppers stopping by to watch demonstrations this time of day, and a small dragon wouldn’t be easily visible on the blue and green tiled floor.

“Horrible! Dirty!” The tiny dragon was screeching at the top of its lungs, holding onto its prey for dear life. It would have been hard to hear anyway, with all the noise of the labs, but with the sorcerer’s diminished hearing it took several seconds to locate the screaming creature.

She scanned the pattern of the tiles for it and sighed. “Oh, hold on, we mopped this morning.” She cupped her hands around it and deposited it into her skirt pocket, an indignity the dragon endured only with more screaming.

“An outrage! Put me down!”

“Shh,” she advised. Lab workers were strongly discouraged from bringing creatures into the back rooms, which was where she was heading, picking her way through the crowded front lab.

“Fuck pockets!” her pocket responded.

“Oh, you can curse. Wonderful.”

The dragon seemed to take this as an actual compliment. “Am multitalented. Can also compose poetry.”

“Really? Can I hear some?”

“No. For dragon ears only.” It sounded viciously pleased to hold this over her head. The bulge in her pocket rearranged itself, and she thought it might be trying to gnaw on the grape.

She felt herself smiling even as she tried to squash her mouth into a straight line. She liked this little bad-tempered thing, even though its spiky feet were digging into her thigh.

In the much quieter kitchen of the back rooms behind the lab, she transferred the wriggling, scaly handful from her pocket to the table. The dragon hissed out a few more insults as it got up and straightened itself out, but its jaw fell open when it finally took in its surroundings. She’d set it down next to the fruit bowl.

“There you go. Food mountain.”

The dragon’s shock didn’t last long. Abandoning the grape, it scraped and scrabbled its way up the side of the bowl and from there onto an apple, its claws leaving tiny puncture marks as it hiked to the top of the arrangement. “Food mountain!” It repeated, its gleeful crowing much clearer and almost sing-song without having to compete with the noise of the crowd.

She watched it turn in a circle, surveying the feast. “But… cannot eat it all,” it observed after a while, crestfallen. “Human-sized. Big shame.”

“Don’t you have nest-mates who can help you with it?” she asked. She had assumed not, from the way it had apparently been foraging for food on its own, but she needed to be sure she’d found a loner.

“No nest. No mates. No nest-mates. You’re rude.” It flopped down ungracefully, wings spread out flat on the apple like it was trying to hug the entire much-larger fruit.

She gave it a moment to be dramatic, and then offered it the grape, minus the peel. “You seem to have a good grasp on human-speak.”

It grabbed the grape without so much as a thank you. “Yes. Have composed poetry in both Dragonese and Humanese. Not for humans to hear, though.” Bragging cheered it up a little.

“You mentioned. I can’t hear very well, anyway.” She pulled up a stool and sat down. “Actually, I’ve been looking for a helper.”

“An assistant,” it said, apparently showing off its Humanese. “An attendant. An aid.”

She watched it bury its snout in the grape, juice dribbling down onto the apple it sat on. “Yes. A hearing aid. How would you feel about having a job?”

It smiled craftily. “Would feel positively, if job comes with chocolate chips.”

“It could,” she said, grinning. She had some friends who employed bird-sized dragons as messengers, but this was the first time she’d heard of one negotiating its salary for itself. “It certainly could. What’s your name?”

“Peep,” said Peep. “It is self-explanatory.”

“Don’t worry, I got it.”

Rimski & Handkerchief is an incredible musical clown duo that has captured the hearts of thousands. Their goal: to create magical moments and welcoming spaces where time stands still and the realm of dreams opens wide.

Instagram

Reminds me of that pianist who sat down to play with an orchestra and realised, as the concert began, that she'd practiced the wrong symphony. And while the orchestra played their opening bars she clearly wants to cry, and is sitting there with her head in her hands. And then it gets to her cue and she turns to the piano -

and plays it beautifully, because while she hadn't practiced it, she's still a classically-trained professional pianist, and "doing her best" means something phenomenal.

wait, which pianist is this? Do you have a video?

angel: HI, I HAVE BEEN ALIVE SINCE THE DAWN OF TIME AND I NOTICED YOU ARE ALSO SOMEWHAT OLD?

vampire: ...sure. hey what was the dawn of time like?

angel: PRETTY BORING ACTUALLY. NOTHING ELSE EXISTED YET.

angel: YOU'VE JUST BEEN STANDING THERE? FOR HOW LONG?

vampire: uhhhhhhh a mere speck in comparison to our immortal lives so don't worry about it honestly. i need you to invite me in though.

angel: OF COURSE, I'M SO SORRY. PLEASE COME IN.

vampire: *steps over the threshold and immediately starts hissing and coughing like a cat with a bad hairball*

angel: OH, I'M SO SORRY. MY APARTMENT IS CONSIDERED HOLY GROUND BECAUSE I LIVE IN IT. I SHOULD HAVE WARNED YOU.

It's also not the first of it's kind. It's based on a long running tv show (since the 70's) called Te Land ter Zee en in de Lucht (On land, at sea and in the air) that had various courses for people to take home made vehicles like these through. Think carnaval meets Jackass. Look it up on YouTube, there's 40 years of this stuff.

there is video here, albeit not very good quality.