Anya is live and ready to show you everything. Watch her strip, dance, and perform exclusive shows just for you. Interact in real-time and make your fantasies come true.
â Live Streamingâ Interactive Chatâ Private Showsâ HD Qualityâ Free Actions
Free to watch âą No registration required âą HD streaming
please read this even if you're not indian. especially if you're not indian.
you've seen the jokes. india is "dirty", indians are "everywhere", why don't they fix their own country. ok. let me tell you why, and what's happening right now while nobody's watching.
first, the history you skipped: britain ruled india for two centuries and drained it. economist utsa patnaik's research estimates around $45 trillion in today's money was taken. the india that got independence in 1947 was one of the poorest countries on earth. every "why is india like this" question starts there. you don't get to profit off a robbery and then mock the crime scene.
now, what's happening RIGHT NOW:
in may the question paper for NEET leaked. that's the national medical entrance exam. over 2.2 million students took it. cancelled. years of studying, families' savings poured into coaching, gone overnight because someone sold the paper. students died by suicide after. these were kids who wanted to be doctors.
and out of that came a protest movement. a gen z group called the cockroach janta party, started by a 30 year old named abhijeet dipke, got 22 million instagram followers within DAYS. they've been doing a sit-in at jantar mantar in delhi demanding education minister dharmendra pradhan resign.
and then there's sonam wangchuk. if you've watched 3 idiots, he's the real engineer the character was based on. built solar schools in ladakh. invented ice stupas so himalayan villages have water. spent his whole life on education. he's 59 and he's been on hunger strike for 17+ days now. reporters went to see him this week and he was too weak to talk. and the troll armies are calling him "anti national" and "foreign funded". a man starving himself for other people's children. that's the thing here, anyone who asks a question is suddenly a traitor.
it's not one incident, it's everywhere you look:
âą infrastructure worth thousands of crores failing within months of the ribbon cutting. tunnels collapsing in regions where heavy rain is a guarantee, not a surprise.
âą youth unemployment near 10% for ages 15 to 29, 13.6% in cities. in a country of 1.42 billion where more than half the population is young.
âą only about the top 3% of indians earn above 10 lakh a year. meanwhile billionaire wealth keeps ballooning and the headlines celebrate it.
âą manipur burned for over two years. an ethnic conflict, tens of thousands displaced, and the prime minister barely said the word manipur while it happened.
âą journalists raided. critics' houses bulldozed. activists sitting in jail for years without trial under laws like UAPA. our press freedom ranking has cratered.
âą even the petrol is a fight now, ethanol blending pushed through while drivers complain about their engines and get no straight answers.
and through all of it, the PM, who came to power on religious polarisation (americans, sound familiar?), travels abroad for photo ops and has not held one single open press conference in over a decade. not one.
what i'm asking:
if you're not indian: share this. our media mostly won't cover any of it because the big outlets are owned by the same billionaires the government serves. the only reason wangchuk's fast is getting any coverage is people refusing to look away.
if you ARE indian: speak up even if you're comfortable. especially if you're comfortable. join the protests. add to this, correct me, translate it. staying quiet is a choice when nothing in this post touches your life.
india is not "dirty". india was robbed, and it's being robbed again, from the inside this time. but it's also the country where a 59 year old will starve for strangers' kids and 22 million young people will rally behind a party literally named after cockroaches, because cockroaches survive everything.
delhi police lathi-charged the protesters with batons and tear gas. five metro stations were shut down to stop people from even reaching the site. mobile internet was cut in parts of central delhi. the stage at jantar mantar was dismantled. sonam wangchuk's wife, gitanjali angmo, was pushed around in the crowd. people on the ground are reporting that doctors who had set up first aid on site were beaten. eyewitnesses say children, minors, were caught in the violence. people are also reporting that stone-filled trucks appeared near the protest site in the middle of the night, before cameras arrived â the kind of "evidence" that gets used to reframe a peaceful protest as a riot. the government is calling it provocation. the protesters are calling it a setup.
the congress president mallikarjun kharge said in parliament: "students have been beaten. the government is attempting to stifle dissent." samajwadi party mp dimple yadav said "today will be remembered as a black day for democracy." even some of the police who carried out the orders apparently looked ashamed. that's how wrong this was.
and through all of it the prime minister has not held a single open press conference in over a decade in power. not one.
what you can do right now:
if you are not going to the protests â and most of us can't â please send an email. right now. it takes two minutes.
demand the resignation of education minister dharmendra pradhan. you don't have to write anything long. "i am writing to demand the resignation of dharmendra pradhan over the NEET paper leak and the violence against peaceful protesters on july 20, 2026" is enough.
if you want to support the people on the ground: volunteers at the protest site need supplies. you can send things through blinkit to the jantar mantar / kerala house area, or get in contact with someone there and coordinate directly. the local gurudwara has been housing and feeding many of the protesters â donations there go directly to people who need it. you can also donate to
sachkhandfoundation4073@icici
who are feeding the students and helping them directly at the protest.
students were beaten to death at a peaceful protest in delhi.
let that sit for a second.
they weren't throwing anything. they weren't rioting. they were sitting in the scorching july heat asking for one thing, accountability for a leaked exam that destroyed lakhs of futures. and the government sent in police with batons.
minors were beaten. children. women. civilians.
sonam wangchuk is on day 24 of a hunger strike. our government forcefully detained him in front of everyone.
we are not okay. india is not okay.
racism against indians is at an all time high globally. we get mocked for how we live. britain spent 200 years extracting wealth from india. our own government spent the last decade doing the same thing, we are mocked for the poverty that was built for us by the people who now look down on us for it.
our media won't cover any of this. it was bought. the ruling party owns the narrative and anyone who challenges it gets raided, jailed, or beaten.
they declared themselves gods (literally they did, their faces edited over gods). they are using violence against children to prove it.
i am asking international media to look at india right now.
and if you're anywhere in the world and you're reading this â say something. you don't have to be indian. you just have to give a damn.
Cultural Insights of Our Own: Lessons From a Newly Decoded Digital Archive
Interplanetary Journal of Cultural Studies
Volume 16, Issue 3, Pages 322-340
Abstract
The recently decoded Internet Archive includes the digital artifact called âArchive of Our Ownâ (AO3) from early third millennium Earth. AO3 is unusually well backed up and therefore is presumed to contain some of the most significant -- perhaps even sacred -- texts of the time. In this paper we present our preliminary analysis of AO3 metadata, including new insights about the literature, gender and sexuality, religion, and scientific understanding of this historical era:Â
I. LITERATURE. We describe the cultural centrality of figures such as the Winchesters and Reader. We explore how they featured heavily in every dominant literature genre of the era, including Fluff, Angst, Hurt/Comfort, and Oral Sex. Â
II. GENDER AND SEXUALITY. We review the overwhelming evidence that male-male relationships were the most culturally significant sexual and romantic relationships, but we also show that it was a culture with an unusually broad set of sexual and gender roles. In particular, we highlight the unusual tripartite conceptualization of gender as including alpha, beta, and omega roles; we note the apparent prejudice against betas, illustrated in the prevalence of âno beta we die like menâ and similar protest slogans.Â
III. RELIGION. We describe a newly discovered religious taboo: doves were a common sacrificial animal of the time, but they were forbidden from being eaten. Â
IV. SCIENCE. Finally, we present new insight about alternate universes. While previous scholars hypothesized that the scientists of Earth may have developed a correct early theory of the multiverse by the late second millennium, our analysis of AO3 presents evidence to the contrary. As late as the early third millennium, prevailing theories postulated highly specific universes, such as a universe in which everyone is in high school, or a universe contained within a coffee shop. Â
Taken together, these historical insights show that further investigation is warranted into the valuable documents stored within AO3, perhaps even going beyond the metadata to examine the full texts.
so many people ive known have pushed themselves to burnout trying to deny their disabled reality, skipping accommodations, skipping rests etc. and the world convinces them that the solution to their burnout is to push even harder. itâs a huge tragedy. i know social pressures make it tough but i want more disabled people to make things easier for themselves where possible, to opt out of things that harm them when possible, to quit while theyâre ahead. be that person today! protect yourself where you can! take micro breaks while doing your hobby. get that shower chair. sit to brush your teeth. lie down in the middle of the day, even if only for 5 mins. these things add up and itâs so worth it.
Anya is live and ready to show you everything. Watch her strip, dance, and perform exclusive shows just for you. Interact in real-time and make your fantasies come true.
â Live Streamingâ Interactive Chatâ Private Showsâ HD Qualityâ Free Actions
Free to watch âą No registration required âą HD streaming
ChatGPT uses too many dream sequences and Gemini wonât stop describing characters.
AI also more often avoids subplots and fails to play with time jumps and flashbacks. The systems overwrite passages about the body and senses. âWhere a human author might write that a character âfelt afraid,â AI renders fear as a tightening chest, cold sweat, and dimming lamplight,â the study said. Humans also spin more complicated narratives involving more characters and locations than AI can handle. Humans also reference other works of fiction, specific people and places in a way that AI struggles with.
Never thought I'd have the opportunity to say this again: Reducing women and girls to their vaginas and then forcing them to show those vaginas to strangers is not a feminist ideal.
Look at the insulting (and money-grubbing) crap some feckers just sent David Gerrold
David was way politer than I would have been. But then he has a few years on me.
I'm adding a break here. Seriously, I have to take a breath every time I read the (absolutely breathtaking) insolence of this shit. (And it makes me want to take a brickbat to anybody who says "Warm regards" to me in the immediate future. [mutter])
...Doubtless I'll get past that. But JEEEEEZ. :/ (TL:DR for those interested: "Hi there! Your work is fabulous! You should have an award! Send us money to be part of the process.")
("The entry fee for the Discovery Awards is $150 USD for the primary book entry. If you would like the book considered in additional categories, each additional category entry is $100 USD.")
Beware this shit, my cousins. If they have the absolute baldfaced GALL (or utter ignorance, who knows which) to send David mails like these, they won't mind coming after the rest of us. :/
(Via David:)
Here are a few of the email messages I have received today -- and my responses.
--
On Wed, Jul 8, 2026 at 10:10 AM Cassandra R. Baldridge [email protected] wrote: Dear David ,
I recently finished learning about Bouncing Off the Moon, and one aspect stayed with me long after I finished reading about it.
What immediately captured my attention was how the novel combines the grand scale of a future shaped by political instability and corporate power with the deeply personal journey of three brothers forced to navigate life on their own. Charles "Chigger" Dingillian and his brothers aren't simply surviving in a hostile lunar environment, they're confronting questions of trust, family, and resilience while carrying knowledge that powerful forces will do anything to obtain. That blend of compelling character dynamics and high-stakes science fiction creates a story that feels both intimate and expansive.
Books that leave that kind of impression deserve more than another advertisement or another promotional campaign. They deserve thoughtful professional evaluation from people whose opinions carry weight within the publishing industry.
That is why I wanted to personally invite you to consider entering Bouncing Off the Moon into the 2027 IndieReader Discovery Awards (IRDAs).
What immediately sets the Discovery Awards apart is that every single entrant receives a professional verdict written by an IndieReader reviewer after reading the complete book. It isn't an automated score or a participation certificate, it is a genuine editorial assessment that can be quoted as promotional copy, used as a credibility blurb, or shared with readers if the verdict is positive.
For many authors, that professional verdict alone becomes a valuable long-term marketing asset.
Beyond that, the Discovery Awards were designed to place exceptional books in front of people who can genuinely influence an author's career.
Among the opportunities available to top-winning books are:
Book-to-film consideration by acclaimed producer Ram Bergman, whose credits include Knives Out, Star Wars: The Last Jedi, and Star Wars: The Rise of Skywalker.
Review for potential literary representation by Dystel, Goderich & Bourret Literary Management, the New York agency whose clients have included bestselling authors such as Colleen Hoover.
Professional publicity consultation from Wildbound Literary PR for the top fiction and nonfiction winners.
A full professional IndieReader Review for qualifying winners.
Featured author interviews through IngramSpark and Bookfinity, helping winning books reach booksellers, librarians, publishers, and readers worldwide.
In addition, category winners, Best First Book winners, and Best Cover Design winners receive industry exposure, featured interviews, recognition materials, and promotional opportunities that continue well beyond the awards announcement.
One aspect I especially appreciate about the Discovery Awards is how the judging process is structured.
The focus remains on the quality of the writing and the originality of the work itself. While editing, production quality, and design are considered, the primary objective is discovering exceptional books that deserve wider recognition, regardless of how they were published.
After learning about Bouncing Off the Moon, I genuinely believe it possesses qualities that would make it a meaningful submission for the 2027 program. Its combination of imaginative world-building, suspense, and emotionally grounded storytelling demonstrates the kind of originality and narrative ambition that the Discovery Awards were created to recognize.
Whether the outcome is a professional verdict that strengthens your marketing, category recognition, or one of the top industry opportunities available through the awards, I believe your work deserves to be seen by experienced publishing professionals.
If the Discovery Awards sound like something you'd like to explore, I'd be happy to send you the submission information and answer any questions you may have.
Thank you for continuing to create stories that challenge readers to imagine the future while remaining invested in the people at the heart of it.
Warm regards,
Cassandra
--
On Wed, Jul 8, 2026 at 5:04 PM David Gerrold wrote:
You may feel free to consider my book for the award.
I, however, have no interest in filling out any paperwork at all.
--
On Wed, Jul 8, 2026 at 12:10 PM Cassandra R. Baldridge [email protected] wrote: Dear David,
Thank you for your response. I completely understand, and I appreciate your willingness to have Bouncing Off the Moon considered for the award.
To make the process as simple as possible for you, you do not need to complete the paperwork or submit everything through the official link yourself. I can handle the submission process on your behalf. I will just need the required information and materials sent directly to me, and I will take care of organizing the entry.
The requirements I would need from you are:
The final manuscript or published book file for Bouncing Off the Moon
Book cover image
Book description/synopsis
Author biography
Publication details (publisher, publication date, ISBN if available)
Any additional information you would like included with the submission
The entry fee for the Discovery Awards is $150 USD for the primary book entry. If you would like the book considered in additional categories, each additional category entry is $100 USD.
My goal is to make this as straightforward as possible while ensuring your book receives the professional evaluation and consideration it deserves.
Please feel free to send the materials directly to me, and I will guide the process from there.
Thank you again, David. I look forward to helping Bouncing Off the Moon receive the recognition it deserves.
Warm regards, Cassandra
--
On Wed, Jul 8, 2026 at 5:11 PM David Gerrold wrote:
Yeah. No thanks.
I have a very firm rule. Money goes TO the writer, not FROM.
--
Cassandra R. Baldridge 12:23 PM (7 hours ago) to me
Dear David,
Thank you for sharing your thoughts. I completely understand and respect your position.
I know many authors have a personal rule that money should always flow toward the writer rather than away from them. It is a reasonable concern, especially with the number of questionable services and practices that exist in the publishing industry.
At the same time, I think it is important to distinguish between paying for a guaranteed result and making a professional investment. In any business or creative industry, growth often requires some level of investment. Companies invest in marketing, entrepreneurs invest in development, and professionals invest in tools, education, and opportunities that can increase their visibility and reach.
Publishing works in a similar way. While no legitimate award, marketing effort, or professional service can guarantee success, authors often make strategic investments in areas such as editing, cover design, publicity, advertising, and industry recognition because these can help position their work in front of the right audiences.
The IndieReader Discovery Awards are not a promise of publication, sales, or representation. The value is in receiving a professional evaluation of the work and having the opportunity for additional recognition and exposure. Ultimately, whether that type of investment makes sense is a decision each author has to make based on their own goals and circumstances.
I appreciate your honesty, and I certainly do not want you to feel pressured into something that does not align with your approach. I simply wanted to clarify the purpose behind the opportunity and the difference between a cost-based service and an investment intended to create professional possibilities.
Thank you again for considering it, David. I respect your decision either way and appreciate the opportunity to discuss your work.
Warm regards, Cassandra
--
David Gerrold 8:04 PM (26 minutes ago) to Cassandra
I'm going to assume you're not a bot, but the text of your note is definitely bot-like.
I am a published author with 60 years of experience. I have worked with almost every major publishing company in NY and elsewhere, including multiple publishers in Europe and Asia. I have published best-selling books. I have won awards. I have been the guest of honor at numerous events, including this weekend. I have written short stories, novellas, novelettes, novels, trilogies, plays, teleplays, and several movie scripts.
You can look me up on SFADB and ISFDB.
I do not need your services. There is absolutely nothing you can offer me that would be worth me taking a single dollar out of my wallet for you. And, to be blunt about it, I find your assertions not just ignorant but insulting -- because if you had the slightest idea at all about my career, you would not have offered your services. I am far beyond any need for your services.
But more than that, I do not believe that any business that sells such services to working writers can ever deliver anything that is going to put more money or recognition into their pockets. This is the electronic equivalent of "Who's Who?" -- a book of people who paid to be included.
Sorry, but please do not write to me -- unless you intend to apologize for the implied insult.
In 2018, Pastor Dave Barnhart of the Saint Junia United Methodist Church in Birmingham, Alabama posted this message to Facebook:
âThe unbornâ are a convenient group of people to advocate for. They never make demands of you; they are morally uncomplicated, unlike the incarcerated, addicted, or the chronically poor; they donât resent your condescension or complain that you are not politically correct; unlike widows, they donât ask you to question patriarchy; unlike orphans, they donât need money, education, or childcare; unlike aliens, they donât bring all that racial, cultural, and religious baggage that you dislike; they allow you to feel good about yourself without any work at creating or maintaining relationships; and when they are born, you can forget about them, because they cease to be unborn. Itâs almost as if, by being born, they have died to you. You can love the unborn and advocate for them without substantially challenging your own wealth, power, or privilege, without re-imagining social structures, apologizing, or making reparations to anyone. They are, in short, the perfect people to love if you want to claim you love Jesus but actually dislike people who breathe.
I am also bothered by the liberal use of the Eyn Sof in Fantasy media, especially animation. Full Metal Alchemist, The Owl House, Black Clover... I've even seen it used on the packaging for a vibrator/dildo.
It's not just Jewish, it's Kabbalah, a restricted practice even within Judaism and it has a cameo in an Owl House magic school classroom and on the package of a vibrator?
Its always been truly strange to me that the only two instances I can remember of Actual Golems in popular media, with Jewish characters involved in the plot and and a some what legitimate explanation of what Golems actually are and that they're Jewish in Origin was......
I'm not familiar, but the synopsis on Wikipedia looks interesting.
In the present the reader is introduced to Alice Cohen as she receives her inheritance from her recently deceased grandmother. This inheritance consists of a lone house in an area of Brooklyn where all the other buildings have been torn down. One of the first things that Alice discovers is a walled off section in the basement from which a voice calls to her to read stories. Alice's first choice for this is her grandmother's diary.
I would like to continue to propose LÄrem. In Latin, a LÄr is a protective spirit of a place. So itâs got historical/linguistic roots and isnât made-up wholecloth. It ties a thing to a space and has the exact same number of syllables, and at worst most folks will go âoh youâre just being unique and calling it something Fancy for your setting, just like how every fantasy story competes to come up with wild spellings for Mahgick.â
It just fucking fits. Itâs so easy. Iâm not remotely Jewish by any definition of the word, so I cannot speak for anybody, but instead I offer you this very practical taken on âgolem.â
Letâs say you hear conflicting takes by Jewish folk on whether or not you can use âgolem.â Some say you can, some say you canât.
Rather than making it a moral matter â consider, some folks asked you not to and said it sucks, and you know theyâve got a fair argument even if you donât agree with it. Since itâs so easy to not do, why not just, not be a dick?
If you want to look at it not as a moral matter, but look in purely practical terms, by refusing the request to call it anything else, itâs beinâ a bit of a dick.
So use mine. Call them Stone LÄrems and everyone will understand immediately.
You know what? No. Just this once, I'm not going to be respectful of other people's beliefs.
Not because I have anything against Judaism in particular.
Not because I'm particularly attached to "golem" as a term.
No, it's because this is a stupid hill to die on.
Fantasy steals. It appropriates. It uses familiar terms so that people don't have to check a glossary to keep track of a bunch of terms that they won't remember because every piece of media out there is suddenly making up their own words for shit. And you know what? Fantasy steals from everyone, without prejudice. The only qualifier is that the word be well enough known that people will know what you're talking about.
So, if anything, having your word used as a general fantasy term means that your myth was considered recognizable enough to be used for clarity.
If you still want to be offended? Go ahead. Be offended. That's your right. But you'll be neither the first nor the last to find a fantasy work sacrilegious. You aren't special. Get in the fucking melting pot.
"Cultural appropriation in the genre is fine because the genre often has cultural appropriation in it" is not the winning argument you think it is
And if you see someone from a minority group that has experienced literal millennia of attempts at forced assimilation criticise an example of cultural appropriation, and respond with "get in the fucking melting pot"... well, forgive me if I'm skeptical of your claim to not have "anything against Judaism in particular"
Actually, you know what? One more thing to point out about that response:
"you'll be neither the first nor the last to find a fantasy work sacrilegious."
^ This reads like an implicit comparison to stuff like Christian fundamentalists calling for a fantasy book to be banned because it depicts the use of magic or has a demon in it or whatever. And if that is the intent then it's an insidious fucking comparison because again, this is a response to a member of a marginalized ethnoreligious group (yes, Jewish people are marginalized) pointing out that a thing that fantasy works frequently use is actually very specific to their culture and the way fantasy uses it is both inaccurate and appropriative
There are ton of really fucking cool mythological elements that I'd love to use in my stories! But I frequently don't, because they're from (say) Aboriginal Australian groups, and those aren't my fucking myths!
I see it as potentially one-directional. It's okay if it's a marginalized culture using myths and folklore from the marginalizing cultures -- you wanted me to assimilate, buddy! But the other way is just ... no.
It's not that I think it's sacrilegious, I think it's cultural appropriation! Those are different!
The golem in particular is deeply rooted in Jewish persecution and fantasies of escape from that, and erasing that context and making it into some vague Thing is...not cool. The golem is fundamentally a Jewish fantasy that Jews told about people hating Jews. You cannot remove it from this context. There are no golems without Jews. Not fantasy knockoff Jews, but Jews.
You don't get to steal our legends about some mythical creature protecting us from your ancestors. That's not sacrilegious -- that's just unethical and bad.
People don't actually WANT Jews in the 'melting pot' nor do they actually believe in the melting pot. They want what Jews create and build but the only "melting pot" they really want Jews to get into is a crematorium after they take everything we made that they like, because they are entitled to it by virtue of THEM being human and us being... Not/and/or directly comparable to christian hegemony.
Exotic enough to fetishize, then inhuman enough to throw on the garbage heap of history and then fear like a boogeyman after not all of us die.
It's deeply ironic that 10 years ago people pretended to care about Golems in D&D and Goblins in harry potter being antisemetic while remaining silent about the venomous rising Jew-Hate in progressive and also fandom spaces as they expanded along the fandom-cult model.
Now they don't even have to pretend about their hobbies with Jews! It's THEIR colonized space! They Took These Things. It's theirs.
Now get in the melting pot so a nerd-game that took off mainstream in the last 10 years because it got played like a radio/tv show can still use the Jew Word. How DARE you ask me to do introspection. Introspection is for humans.
you know what we didn't coin "melting pot" but since it was Israel Zangwill (who, you'll be absolutely shocked to hear, was Jewish) I'm taking that back too. you get to use it when you stop being appropriative.
@flightyquinn your argument about clarity is wrong given how often non-Jewish story tellers use âgolemsâ as henchmen and villains and enemies to be destroyed.
Thatâs the opposite of a golem. In fact, if you read a story about the Golem of Prague where the Golem goes mad and kills too many people leading to its unmaking - thatâs a Christian telling of the Golem story (âthose crafty jooos protected themselves too much!â -Christians, probably)
Golems are protectors, exclusively.
So when people outside of our story telling traditions say âhey, weâre going to water your stuff down, for clarityâ that sounds asinine to us.
"hey actually your protectors are threatening to us" yeah don't try to kill us and they won't hurt you. have you considered not killing jews. are we really so fun to kill?
Golems are protector creatures whose primary characteristics are not speaking, being extremely literal about everything, and being very large. If you're treating them as a monster of the week combat, you're telling on yourself. You see the security system as an enemy. At best, you're casting yourself as the thief. At worst, as a murderer.
The Jewish quarter is not a villain's stronghold or an abandoned dungeon.
I have seen exactly one goyische depiction of golems that I respect, and it is because the author very clearly did his research and approached them with care and respect.
It should surprise nobody that said author was Terry "people as things, that's where it starts" Pratchett.
In the first of his golem stories, Feet of Clay, we see a golem named Dorfl (interesting how that's not a real name but does look so similar to Yiddish) go "no, actually, I will not be your mindless slave, I have my own thoughts and feelings thank you" and then like...basically brute-force his way into freedom.
Oh look--it's Jews.
Later we see various factions in Ankh-Morpork arguing over golems--should they have full rights? No rights? Some rights? Are they people?
Oh look--it's Jews.
The denouement is in Making Money, when Moist Von Lipwig's girlfriend Adora Belle "Spike" Dearheart makes contact with what she believes to be ancient golden golems, only to discover the sacred text she translated included a word that can be translated as either "gold" or "thousands." These golems turn up in Ankh-Morpork, still following their ancient "defend" command. Neighboring cities get very upset about Ankh-Morpork harboring Je--I mean, ancient golems. In fact, in spite of the fact that the golems are just sitting there being a defensive wall and minding their own business, other cities are declaring them an act of war. (Gee, where have I heard this before?)
And so Moist (funny how much that sounds like "Moshe," isn't it?) figures out the ritual of the ancient priests who made them and commands them to go to a land of their own, underground.
OH LOOK--
There are no actual Jews in Discworld, which is (imo) fine because it is a flat world on the back of four elephants riding on a giant turtle through space and there aren't any people from any other actual religions either.
Except there kind of are Jews. They're golems, and their entire storyline mirrors actual real-world Jewish oppression and problems, right down to a neat little twist where Moist declares that the Ankh-Morpork dollar will be based on a golem standard instead of a gold standard because [okay his explanation is actually kind of word salad but it's pretty clear the intention is "labor is worth more than a chunk of random metal"]. Why is that cool? Because it turns the "Jews are greedy bankers" stereotype on its head. The golems Moist is basing this on are the original golems, the ones whose entire job is "protect." They get no benefit from the dollar. They don't know what a dollar is. They speak an extinct language known only to scholars (oh so you mean like Aramaic, an ancient language of the--). They literally could not care less about the Ankh-Morpork economy. They exist outside of it. And yet, the whole thing is made to rest on them--much as Jews became bankers and tax collectors centuries ago because they got no benefit from the king, but had to do his bidding or risk pogroms and death. Which is what these golems were facing.
Pterry used a Jewish creature to tell a Jewish story--not as set dressing. And he very clearly understood what he was doing and did it with respect--not perfectly, but pretty damn solidly.
Until you can pull that off, you can't have golems.
i'd also like to note that people who are arguing about appropriation within fantasy are somewhat missing the point. yes, fantasy creators appropriate liberally and often and this should be approached with a critical lens, but the scope of the issue is much broader, especially in regards to jewish concepts;
when fantasy authors look to real world (western) occult/esoteric/magical ideas, they are overwhelmingly going to find appropriated and distorted jewish ideas. from its foundations in antiquity, the major streams of western esoteric thought appropriate heavily from judaism, jewish mysticism, and (once it was established as a distinct practise in later centuries) kabbalah.
perhaps there could be room for some discussion of syncretism when you consider ancient philosophers and esotericists held jewish mystics in some kind of esteem as men of wisdom and education, but that argument kinda falls apart because
i) jewish orthopraxy (i.e. the tangible practise of a religion) has always placed a strong emphasis on confining certain behaviours to their appropriate sacred contexts (time/space/situation) and to pull pieces of that out of those practises is, at best, incorrect and disrespectful
ii) jewish mysticism and kabbalah require extensive grounding in jewish theology which is achieved by rabbinical study, which i know these western esotericists were/are not doing. if you are not going through the proper channels, it's not kabbalah, it's appropriation
iii) the same people who appropriate jewish ideas or perpetuate appropriated ideas are functioning within societies that disdain and oppress jews. it isn't cultures coming together, it's appropriation
i often have to remind myself that most people are unaware of how deep the history of antisemitism and appropriation of judaism goes. the roots are as old as judaism itself, and maybe older if you want to quibble about terminology. (e.g. at what point can the ancient canaanite followers of yhwh be considered jews? food for academic discussion)
this is a problem within the modern fantasy genre, yes. its a problem in historical and ancient fantasy as well. more than that, though, it's a centuries-old problem in global society. *that* is why this is so upsetting, and cannot be handwaved away as "part of the genre"
"I know that fantasy authors reference other cultures all the time, but it's different with mine, because <list if reasons that don't make it different>." You might as well try to claim that because society doesn't respect or know enough about the traditions that resulted in the creation of the bagel, eating bagels is actually antisemitism and theft.
Nobody else gets to copyright cultural exchange and you also do not get to. Nobody else gets to claim their own beliefs are too complicated and sacred for outsiders to understand and you also do not get to. The concept of "cultural appropriation" is wrong and incoherent all of the time which means it is still wrong and incoherent when applied to you. There is literally no amount of "but it's different this time because I think you don't know enough about my specific culture to refer to ideas from it" that makes it different because there is so such thing. The people who created the concept of "cultural appropriation" were insane racists and the framework is still an insane racist framework when you try to claim it is different for you.
I'm getting incredible second hand embarrassment from the fact that one person in the reblog chain is Polish, at least nominally.
Anyway, to everyone in this trainwreck of a thread except BA and Foss:
"Cultural appropriation" is fake, and you have to be truly fucked in the head by modern copyright law to think otherwise. There's no defence of your stance that doesn't collapse up its ass into Blut unt Boden nationalism under the slightest scrutiny.
also how pathetic do you have to be to get second-hand embarassment from sharing a nationality with someone who's against cultural appropriation and supports Jewish people? @barryogg co jeszcze ciÄ wstydzi, Polak ktĂłry oglÄ da futbol bez uprawiania huliganizmu?
hi so refresher on what cultural appropriation is. itâs when aspects of a culture are taken by someone without consideration of its place in its original culture. That is literally what this whole reblog thread is about. it is, on its own, actually neutral, but in the context of marginalized cultures, becomes harmful. because 1. the original culture can begin to lose the original meaning of the cultural aspect, and have it begin to be replaced by something totally else, and 2. it creates a false perception of that culture that may play into stereotyping and general bad treatment.
This happens. It is not hard to find examples. It is actively difficult to find proper information on the concept of chakras because white westerners picked what they wanted and made up a lot of new shit based on the stuff they liked, and now a lot of english sources are based on western woowoo bullshit instead of original practices and beliefs. and people in India are being misinformed by white people who have 0 stake in anything about THEIR OWN SHIT. This is actively detrimental to our understanding of other cultures, and to many Indiansâ understanding of their own.
Cultural appropriation can lead to deeply rotten, bigoted understanding of other cultures. Now that isnât necessarily inevitable, but it happens often enough that it is VERY worth avoiding with marginalized cultures. Sharing a culture and learning about them is fine! Nobody said you couldnât do that! But ripping things out of their original context, especially a context that few people outside of that culture knows and is vulnerable to bigotry, is quite bad. Thatâs literally just it.
Now. Does any of that sound like blood and soil to you. For really.
The entire basis for your argument is the same as blood and soil nationalism. I don't think you understand why blood and soil nationalism is bad.
Blood and soil nationalism is the belief that certain bloodlines have an inherent right to certain pieces of land. "Cultural appropriation" theory is the belief that certain bloodlines have an inherent right to certain intellectual property. These are the same fundamental belief: things can be owned by bloodlines. This belief is wrong. It's still wrong when that bloodline is marginalized, because cultural appropriation does not exist, and it continues not to exist no matter what culture you look at.
WTF đ. You looked at the complaint that there are parts of Jewish culture that we don't now or historically share with outsiders (see, Kabbalah which is the basis of the golem), and frustration at misrepresentation of our heritage, which was framed by some people within the term "cultural appropriation"... And you went "only Nazis would have complaints about their culture being stripped of its substance and importance".
"Blood and soil" is the belief that blood has a right to soil. "Cultural appropriation" is the belief that blood has a right to intellectual property.
Cultural appropriation is not real. It's a fake thing made up by racists and only makes sense under a racist worldview. It is still not real even when you say you are upset that other people aren't respecting your blood's claim to intellectual property. Your belief that your culture is being "stripped of its substance and importance" only makes sense in a racist worldview that believes blood has inherent right to certain property and that culture is harmed by interaction with other cultures. It is not. That's an incoherent idea.
Blood has no inherent right to property, and that means blood still has no inherent right to property when it is your blood. The exact same thing that happened to the golem happened to everyone else's myths, which means that it did not happen to you for a unique reason.
Blood and Soil (Blut und Boden) is explicitly a Nazi term, as in OG Nazi.
You either being intentionally obtuse or obliviously thick headed shouldn't be anybody else's problem, but alas you are incapable of shutting your howling screamer.
Any conversation would be more productive with your absence.
I'm gonna go ahead and ignore all the ignorant antisemitic bullshit in this post and list a small and well-meaning correction to @prismatic-bell, because there ARE non-golem Jews in Ankh-Morpork!
In "Feet of Clay" they mention that there's a Kosher butcher in the city!!!! This is important, because it establishes that there are Jews in Discworld and thus a canonical way for Golem to be created!
Discworld is ALSO the only depiction of Golem by non-Jews that I enjoy and respect (and love)! <3 Pterry forever.
Yes! I think it's because Golem are EXPLICITLY mystical. While tied to Kabbalah, Golem are fundamental folklore-based. That doesn't remove the importance of Jewish identity from their creation and portrayal. But I think it's important that Jews as a religious people MUST exist in a world in which Golem exist, for cultural respect and folkloric accuracy. That said, Jewish RELIGION is not part of the books. It's a very special author who can, without being Jewish himself, perfectly walk the line of Judaism as a religion vs Jewishness as a cultural identity to which folklore belongs. I've never seen anyone else do it.
It's very important to me that Jews are present, but not allegorized via absence. Yes. Golem tell a Jewish story by representing Jews in a story. But, crucially, they don't DEHUMANIZE Jews in the story, because of the implied presence of Jewish human beings. Pterry doesn't need to use a mystical stand in to replace Jews as if we are not present or equally as human as any other group.
Also, there are a gazillion gods in Discworld INCLUDING monotheistic religions. There's no reason Jews shouldn't be present in that context. I love Pterry so much. A truly singular talent.
NGL, something you won't hear people say very often: I'm gonna put that down to him being an atheist. He approached his atheism in both logical and emotional ways, but crucially, he never mistook "I have come to these conclusions" to mean "therefore I am completely right and logical and you are all completely wrong and stupid and illogical forever and ever amen". Because he was an atheist and approached religion as a series of stories, he had a far easier time ignoring the concept that any religion is "just" religion (most religions are not ethnoreligions but all have cultures) and digging into the fundamental truths behind them, which have very little to do with a god or gods and everything to do with people trying to understand humanity and the world around us.
A great deal of it is that he was, truly and simply, a good man. But given how much pride we claim our Jewish geniuses with, I feel like it's only appropriate to give the atheists a W here, because their atheism is often given as a prime source of Why They Are Bad when they do shitty stuff and gets delicately ignored when their work is praised, and I do think his atheism was very much a driving force in his portrayal of golems for a lot of reasons.
And THAT is how--just to bring this full circle--we ended up with an extremely good Jewish story out of a goyische man. Because he never looked at us as "a religion that isn't like my own and doesn't make sense to me because it doesn't neatly map onto a culturally-Christian understanding of the world, and I have to do some mental gymnastics about that before I can do anything else." He looked at us as "people who don't believe the same thing I do, but that's fine, most people don't."
And until you can do that, you shouldn't be writing creatures from other people's folklore.
Anya is live and ready to show you everything. Watch her strip, dance, and perform exclusive shows just for you. Interact in real-time and make your fantasies come true.
â Live Streamingâ Interactive Chatâ Private Showsâ HD Qualityâ Free Actions
Free to watch âą No registration required âą HD streaming
"After they overheard that ICE was at the courthouse to arrest someone, they improperly accessed court databases to determine who was not born in the United States," a DOJ detention filing says. "They then snuck every suspected illegal alien who was at the courthouse out a back door, where ICE, who was waiting in the parking lot for their target to leave the building, could not see them."
Think about what you can do at your job or in your daily life to resist fascism when the opportunity presents itself!
The recent hot VS cold polls have made me realise that a lot of people have no idea how to cool down.
As someone from a hot country that's regularly on fire, here's some tips:
WATER IS YOUR FRIEND! WATER! IS! YOUR! FRIEND! You can transfer SO much heat into this bad boy! You cannot cool down without water!
Wrists under the cold tap. Splash your face and the back of your neck. Fan yourself.
In some countries you can buy a little handeld fan with a water sprayer.
Damp tea towel around the neck. Stick an ice pack in there on hotter days.
Half fill a water bottle with water, stick in freezer. If you use a bottle with a straw, make sure it's lying on its side with the straw side up and out of the water. When frozen top up the rest of the way with tap water and off you go.
Desperate to cool off? Wet T-shirt. Sit in front of a fan. This will nuke it, just don't get hypothermia and don't fall asleep like this.
Cold showers are also your friend in summer. Some people get psyched up by these. Personally, I sleep like a baby, so I'm good to have them before bed. Just keep in mind that it takes a bit of time for the cool to circulate, so your body will tell you that you're colder than you actually are. I find that when I have cold showers I need to step out of the spray when I think I'm cold... I'll just wait, and thirty seconds later the temperature has evened out and I actually need to step under again. Rinse and repeat until you maintain coolness even after stepping out for a bit.
If you can't do cold showers, turn the cold shower on anyway and just stick your arms under. When they're cold, lift your arms up above your head. The sensation of cool blood draining into your body is fucking weird and kinda unpleasant but less unpleasant than being hot.
Feet in a tub of water with ice. Blood naturally flows to your extremities when hot, so take advantage of this. If you don't have a tub of ice water, sticking a wet rag on your feet in front of the fan works too, it's the less powerful version of the wet T-shirt.
Drinks lots of water but make sure that water has electrolytes as well. Stay in the shade.
Keep air circulating. Fans don't actually cool rooms down, they just help transfer heat from your body to the moisture on your skin or the air via evaporative cooling.
Block north facing windows early in the morning so the sun doesn't get in. If you're in the northern hemisphere, this is opposite for you. Keep in mind that if your home is brick, the bricks will still heat up and slowly release heat into your home even after the sun goes down so this will only do so much.
If it's hotter inside than outside, close all your windows but two, making sure they're on opposite sides of the house/unit you're in. Point a fan out of one window, making sure that the doors between the rooms with the open windows are all open. This will help create a mini pressure system in your home, pulling cooler air in and pushing the hotter air out via the fan. Bonus points if you can get that fan high up where the hot air rises; even within a single room the top is much hotter than the air by the floor. Adjust the amount of open windows based on how many fans you have, but generally you want more windows with fans open than windows without fans to keep the pressure correct.
Obviously, use your common sense for these. Not everything WILL work for you, just use the stuff that does and adjust what needs to be adjusted. Some of these will be impossible to use in the workplace but others you can still use. Others are best used at home. If humidity impacts your ability to use any of these, get a dehumidifier if that's an option, or use more ice instead of evaporation.
Also keep in mind that the skinnier you are, the faster these will work. More fat means more insulation, means more heat, so you may need to be more patient with some of these or use them in combination.
6. Spread conspiracy theories that the Democrats have deliberately sabotaged the pool and arrest whoever pulls out the floating paint chunks as vandals.
There is a quality of books (or movies or shows) that I can best describe as âstickiness,â which is separate from being good or even enjoyable: a sticky book is one I just keep thinking about. Sometimes itâs because a book is very good (e.g. The Locked Tomb), and sometimes itâs because a book is very bad (e.g. ACOTAR), but there are also very good and very bad books that are slippery, such that when Iâm done reading them they slip from my thoughts like water from a hydrophobic surface.
Twilight is such a good example. First, when something is that popular, itâs automatically a bit sticky not only because of its ubiquity, but also because there is the question of why itâs so popular, especially if itâs not that good. Like what is this saying about the culture at that moment.
Furthermore, there are the layers of subtext, which I think are especially sticky when you cannot tell how much of it the author intended. In Twilight there is the surface-level weirdness e.g. about Edward comparing the sin of premarital sex to the sin of murder, and then you learn Stephanie Meyer is Mormon and you see that ideology, and then you get into the really weird stuff where youâre like, Stephanie I canât tell if you thought this through girl and my goodness I hope you didnât.
I would LOVE to hear more gripes about accuracy of portrayal of historical monarchies!!!
I have been wanting to do this for a while, because there is a lot that irks me. And this ranges across board from big budget period dramas to how people write royalty AUs, which means this isn't one specific thing I'm pointing at. And if it is helpful on a writing tips level, I'll be happy with that.
Long post under the cut:
Disclaimers:
I research 19th century European history, which has a lot of questions about what a monarchy is and why they continue to exist. That's the perspective I am bringing to this.
I probably shouldn't have to say this, but: this is not about modern monarchism. This is about history. I don't want to debate whether you think certain countries should continue to have their monarchs be public figures who are only nominally head of state.
The short version:
Monarchies are institutions. They are part of how the government functions and that should have implications for how someone writes them. A monarch is a person with a built in job that they were born into.
Monarchies are not all absolute. They can exist in a multiple forms with very different structures, and often discontent within a monarchy wants to reform the system not replace it.
My biggest advice would be this: figure out how your fictional or historical monarchy is structured. You don't have to exposit about it, but you do need to know it.
The long version:
The King has a job and there is a right and wrong way to do it.
A King (or Queen) has a job, a really important one. They are the head of state, the highest authority in the country, and the highest judge on legal matters. At least in the platonic ideal of absolute monarchy, those jobs being concentrated into one person means their responsibility and good judgement will give the state stability and consistently.
Enlightened absolutism was exactly that: monarchs staunchly holding onto the ideals of the Enlightenment and making reforms from the top down. People who read texts about ideal government and natural rights and put it into practice.
A lot of fiction takes that and goes: Oh, so they have unlimited power and can do whatever they want. Being king means you can do what you want without oversight? That's why someone would want to be king?
And yeah, sure, in theory. But the problem with having a job is that you can do it poorly and people will object to you doing it poorly. If someone is not fulfilling obligations, it is noticeable because the state functions poorly. The premise of Robin Hood is that the king is doing his job poorly. He's overtaxing, the officials are corrupt, there's disorder. The solution? Bring back the true king who is good and fair, and thus functional.
Ludwig II of Bavaria gets ousted from his throne for being more interested in opera and extravagant building projects than ruling. Again, it is a problem and people notice.
Historically, if you want to protect from someone being bad at the job you can support the idea that there should be more oversight and safeguards: Other bodies that control parts of the government alongside the king's ability to approve or disapprove. This tactic takes away the ability to be arbitrary since laws and such are not just coming from the crowned head of state. That would be a constitutional monarchy.
Not everyone needs to be Franz Joseph, waking up at the crack of dawn and working on governmental papers and meetings until bedtime. However, if a monarch is shown in fiction lounging around or talking to courtiers all day but never doing any actual governing, I'm going to assume they are very bad at their job.
2. You're probably understanding Courts and Ministers wrong.
I run into the issue quite a bit that courts are flattened to random servants, ladies-in-waiting, and people trying to be the king's sole advisor (for malicious power grabbing reasons).
The first problem: Being at court isn't an easily accessible thing. You're probably nobility or a scion of an important family. Your presence is built on family prestige and your own skill. Yes, even people in service to the monarch. There are no random people here, because proximity heightens the likelihood of greater promotion.
For example, I'm currently doing my research on a prince from an important dynasty in the 19th century. His secretary is a Baron.
It's not impossible for someone not of noble birth to get to be at court. They could have risen up the ranks of the army or be an exceptionally skilled civil servant promoted to the rank of minister. Though depending on the time period, expect these "new men" to get pushback from nobility by blood.
Ministers also matter.
Unless your fictional monarch is one of the few people who decides (to mixed results) to do all of the thinking about government on their own, there is a cabinet and ministers.
These are skilled people whose job is to think about aspects of government and be knowledgeable about them. A monarch might have many of them that argue and balance each other.
Or, you can write a particularly skilled statesman in a leading role that makes them just as prominent as the monarch if not more so. There are many historical examples of ministers who define their period:
If your monarch character isn't a strong person politically, but is intelligent, having them find a minister to take over most of the governing is a good idea. This person is promoted based on merit, even if the monarchy is hereditary.
I have rarely if ever seen fiction do a good job with a prominent minister as a character (except A Royal Affair, which everyone should watch).
Think of monarchies as whole institutions of government. They have people within them who do all the jobs of governing. But the structure of the government and the personality of the monarch can determine whether it is one person (Joseph II, Peter the Great, etc.), a prominent minister (like a Metternich or Bismarck) or a counsel or congress.
The structure can support a person not doing a lot as monarch, but you as a writer need to think what structures are around them allowing that.
3. Revolutions are scary.
There is a common trend in fiction to make your good guys pro-republic. They're revolutionaries who want to get rid of the king, so they must be good.
But here's the thing: Revolutions are a step into the unknown and have historically happened rather rarely and with very mixed results. That's because the system has to be really broken for something totally new to sound better than what you already have.
A monarchy can create a sense of stability: A fixed head of state who will be there until they die. Historically, people aren't seeking to change that. More often, the call is for a change within the existing structure. The Magna Carta or a written Constitution. Firing of Bad Ministers or the abdication of a bad king in favor of their heir. Creating elected bodies under the sovereign. These are all shifting the monarchical paradigm but keeping the monarchy intact.
And historically even the most liberal of people wanted to place restrictions of some sort on voting, especially property and gender restrictions.
There is a myriad of ways to change the system, the person at the top, or both while maintaining a monarchy. You can have a monarchy be elected as the best person among the nobility (though it didn't go that well for the Polish-Lithuanian Commonwealth).
Completely throwing the whole thing out means risking all stability vanishing. That could be anarchy. That could mean a charismatic strongman who is also bad at governing in power. You could end up with a guillotine and rivers of blood in the streets. You could end up with a restoration eventually because Cromwell or Robespierre doesn't actually produce something people want to live under and they want the old certainty back.
People have a sense of inertia about changing government. What you have is better than what you don't know, especially if there can be internal reform. Making your character a Republican (in the Jacobin sense, not the US politics sense) means that they are a radical in most times and places and will likely be in the minority.
If there is one thing I would say is the point here is that monarchies are government systems, and thinking through how someone exists in that system in fiction is important. Being king isn't actually much of a fun job unless you're very good at delegating or very irresponsible. Unless you want to be celebrity, president, congress, and moral center of the state all in one, being king isn't a great deal.
Anya is live and ready to show you everything. Watch her strip, dance, and perform exclusive shows just for you. Interact in real-time and make your fantasies come true.
â Live Streamingâ Interactive Chatâ Private Showsâ HD Qualityâ Free Actions
Free to watch âą No registration required âą HD streaming
that theory that the Arkenstone is a SilmarilâŠitâs doubly implausible, but imagine if nobody knew. If the dwarves were guarded enough of their greatest treasure thatâŠyou wouldnât even need to hide it from that many people, honestly. Mostly a few elves, and all wizards.
and then Bilbo sidles up to Gandalf like, âThorin and all are holed up in the Mountain, but I think theyâre being nuts, so IâŠkind of stole the Arkenstone, I think.â And (itâs been thousands of years since the light of the trees was doused save for the precious brilliance locked away in Feanorâs gems, since oaths and blood and war that raged until the skies cracked and the earth shattered, and the little people of the Shire have no memory of it at all) he pulls out a fucking Silmaril.
Gandalf: *hurriedly glances at Thranduil. the king of Mirkwoodâs eyes shine with curiosity and greed, but not recognition, nor the terrible lust that overtook Feanor and his sons. right, right, he was never in Thingolâs court while the jewel that Luthien and Beren took was there. weâre good. weâre good for now*
Gandalf: Thatâs, uh, nice, Bilbo. Put it away, would you?
Gandalf, telepathically(?): EMERGENCY RINGBEARERS ONLY CONFAB NOW
Gandalf: [mental image of a goddam Silmaril in hobbit hands, labelled âthisfuckingrockagain.jpgâ]
Galadriel, who watched 95% of her family slaughter everyone within 100 miles for several thousand years over these things, including each other and themselves:Â no.
Elrond, who was very nearly one of those people slaughtered, and did watch most of his town be killed before he and his twin were kidnapped for a while:Â Absolutely Fucking Not.
Gandalf:Â Apparently fucking yes. The legendary Arkenstone-
Galadriel:Â Youâve got to be kidding me.
Elrond: Thorin Oakenshield has a Silmaril right now?
I mean, given that Tolkien retconned âThe Hobbitâ so Bilboâs little invisibility ring became an ancient piece of jewelry that controls minds and drives the mighty mad, one can at least understand why it seems plausible that the other shiny white gem that destroys empires and makes the mighty go mad with greed could be linked from his kidâs book to his gigantic early mythology in retrospect??
You know this actually explains a lot about why Gandalf didnât immediately raise the alarm about Bilboâs ring out of an abundance of caution.
I mean, what are the odds, what are the fucking odds, that this one little hobbit stole both a Silmaril and the Ring of Power? Like, you are Gandalf the Grey and you have already dealt with the heart attack to end all heart attacks because this little innocent fool stole a world war inspiring artifact once. You still get flashbacks every time Bilbo offers to show you something and have to employ all of your angelâs serenity and thousands of years of learned composure not start giBbERinG â pleaseletitnotbeanotherartifactpleaseletitnotbeanotherartifactâ.
And then. AND THEN! One day heâs like, âhey Gandalf let me show you this neat ring I found back on our journeyâ. And on the inside a tiny part of you is screaming ânottheoneringnottheoneringnottheoneringâ while a more rational part of your brain assures you it could not possibly be the one-
âItâs this plain gold ring thatâs very precious to me and turns me invisible!â
AND THEN YOU FUCK OFF AND SEARCH THROUGH EVERY POSSIBLE TOME YOU CAN TO PROVE IT CANâT REALLY BE THE RING OF POWER, SAURONâS RING OF POWER, THAT RING, THE ONE RING, LITERALLY EVERY SINGLE TOME, BEFORE FINALLY FUCKING ACKNOWLEDGING THAT THIS SHIT IS REALLY HAPPENING AGAIN
âAverage Hobbit finds at least one world war inspiring artifact when on a journeyâ statistic inaccurate. The Spiders Took Family, who find a world war inspiring artifact every five feet they step outside the Shire, were outliers and should not have been counted.
If you're writing anything involving cons, scams, heists, or morally questionable characters who are very good at lying, here are some free resources I've been using for research. Saving you the "why is this in my search history" anxiety.
1. The FBI's Famous Cases & Criminals archive (fbi.gov/history/famous-cases) has detailed breakdowns of real fraud cases, Ponzi schemes, and confidence operations. The language they use is clinical and precise, which is perfect for getting the procedural details right.
2. The FTC Consumer Sentinel Network publishes annual reports on the most common fraud tactics in the US. Great for understanding how modern scams actually work and what makes people fall for them.
3. The Smithsonian's American Art Museum has a free digital collection of forgery case studies. If your character forges documents or art, this is gold.
4. Court Listener (courtlistener.com) is a free legal database where you can read actual court transcripts from fraud trials. Want to know how a real con artist talks under oath? This is where you find out.
5. The Internet Archive's collection of old newspaper crime sections. Search for "confidence man" or "swindle" in papers from the 1920s through 1960s and you'll find incredible real stories that would feel too dramatic for fiction.
Bonus: The Psychology of Fraud section on the Association for Psychological Science website has accessible articles about why people trust, how deception works cognitively, and what makes someone a convincing liar. Essential reading if you want your con artist characters to feel psychologically real.
Reblog to save for later. Your WIP will thank you.
Random Fandom Stuff and Other Things @somariel - Tumblr Blog | Tumlook