Confusaneus

1- Obvious. Way too many characters. Martin, dear, you’re not Tolstoy. You clearly can’t keep up with so many characters. I remember in fact, Martin saying that he needed help from fans to remember all the plotlines he had created. This should tell you something about your need to stop creating new plot-lines and closing those you already have.

2- Violence. Oh “THE WORLD IS VILE AND IN ORDER TO BE REALISTIC I NEED TO WRITE A HORRIFIC DEATH SCENE EVERY FIVE PAGES!”. This was ground-breaking before the advent of television. Now it’s just predictable.

3- Killing characters for shook value or, when writers have too many characters and too many plots and can’t think of a way to fix them without killing them. Also, see point 1.

4- Not really good Fantasy. Medieval England/Europe with zombies and dragons. The Wall? Hadrian’s wall. Dorne? Spain and/or North Africa. Red Wedding? There’s at least two different historical events with that name, the most famous being the murder of protestants right after the marriage of Henry IV and Queen Margot. Alexander Dumas wrote a wonderful book about that called Queen Margot which you definitely should read. Or watch the movie. It’s a better story than Storm of Swords.

5- Endlessly dragging on the plots for some unknown reason. Many of the chapters are just a pile of needless stuff. Why mention the daughter or wife of a minor character if they’re not even going to show up in the book? You have huge books with several chapters on the characters but the plot only goes forward on a third of them. I wish Martin were mindful of Chekov’s advice: “If you say in the first chapter that there is a rifle hanging on the wall, in the second or third chapter it absolutely must go off. If it’s not going to be fired, it shouldn’t be hanging there.”

6- The dots do not connect. The novels have no structure and things appear to happen for no reason at all. For instance, what is the point of Lady Stoneheart? What is the point of Daario as a character? What is the point of Ygritte? Is she only there to fulfill a prophecy? What is the point of Aegon if he’s clearly going to be a fraud?? What is the point of Rob having been declared King of the North if he was only going to die?  What is the point of the King of North thing if then Sansa, who will become Queen or Warden or whatever, will eventually surrender her power to Jon and Dany (as the synopsis of the episodes of next season has revealed)?

7- Predictable ending. Jon is the Prince That Was Promised, Rheagar’s son, him and Daenaerys will be a “thing”, Cersei will die somehow, Tyrion is the third head of the Dragon. This is obvious since book 3. The ending of a book series shouldn’t be predicted by book 3 if the series has 7 books. It’s like if we were told Harry was an horcrux on Prisoner of Azkaban.

8- The arrogance that is embedded in several parts of the books and in many of Martin’s declarations that “I want to go further than Tolkien because I write about politics and Tolkien doesn’t”. Well no, but your politics are terrible politics. Politics isn’t about killing people and plotting to screw them up. That’s what people who write up caricatures of politics think they are. Politics are treaties and compromises and people not killing or invading each other for the least thing.

9 - Terrible portrayal of the Middle Ages which was a really non-eventful time for most people who lived during it.

10- In purely formal terms, the writing isn’t especially good. Martin is good at dialogues, but terrible at descriptions (which he insists on writing for some reason which is why Bran’s chapters are so patently bad) and he has the annoying habit of trying to do a summary of what happened while writing from a character’s pov  - he does this so the reader remembers what happened since probably the last time we heard from this character was 150 pages ago or even two books ago.

Regarding supposed historical realism in the fantasy world. What bothers me is that Martin seems to work on the misguided premise that because the medieval world was endemically violent in way that Western Europe, at least, is not anymore that violence necessarily was chaotic and unregulated. 

A surface skim of Medieval texts will certainly give that impression, however violence in the Medieval and early modern world in Europe served a regulatory purpose. Violence by the state was done for a reason, even god help us, domestic violence served a regulatory purpose of confirming and conforming domestic expectations and behavior. 

Sociopathic violence, such as that demonstrated by Ramsay Bolton, would not have been tolerated within a Medieval society for as long as it was in GoT because such behaviour operates outside of the collective and therefore is a threat to the safety and cohesion of the collective. 

Even the assumption that the medieval world was vastly more violence than ours has been under review in recent literature on the subject. The medieval world was certainly differently violent from ours, as noted above the use of it as a regulatory force and seen as quite legitimate as such (as an example), is so often glossed over or ignored in fantasy writing even when that writing wishes or claims to be historically realistic. 

Medieval people were very communal and focused heavily on maintaining social cohesion (which is why religious cohesion was so important because if everyone is Christian and, in the West post-Schism, Catholic then there is stability, regulation and cohesion that can transcend language and ethnic differences which enables a better chance of support and survival). A real-life version of Ramsay would be Gilles de Rais and while he was able to get away for several years with his crimes he eventually angered enough people that both secular and ecclesiastical authorities stepped in to ensure he was stopped. Also, like the world Ramsay inhabits, Gilles was living in a war torn country in the midst of the hundred years war with no strong centralized monarchical power as we later see in 17th century France. That despite the violence and upheaval continuing on France’s soil people distinguished his acts as distinctly different and unacceptable compared to other acts of violence around demonstrates the importance of regulation in medieval world. 

Even the over-the-top and fraught portrayal of the Mountain I cringe a bit at. While that is more in line with working for a lord and imposing a lord’s sovereignty over a land and people it seems over the top to what most likely would have been the reality of such a situation. 

The medieval world is a deeply complex and layered place that the broad strokes Martin creates in his fiction cannot begin to emulate the reality. It frustrates me that GRRM and other writers of that vein look to violence as shock value and nothing more. I personally find it lazy writing and disingenuous to then turn around and claim it as a form of historical realism. 

THIS IS SO COOL GUYS YOU ALL SHOULD CHECK IT OUT OMG. 

Bridget Bishop and the Salem Witch Trials

Bridget Bishop was the first in Salem to be tried and found guilty of the practice of witchcraft. She was hanged on this day, June 10, in 1692. Witch-hunting was still a thing, even on American shores in the late 17th century. To place this event in some context, we present our copy of the Malleus Maleficarum.

The Malleus Maleficarum (Latin for “The Hammer of Witches”) is one of the most well-known treatises on witches. Originally written by Dominicans Heinrich Institoris (also known as Heinrich Kramer) and Jacob Sprenger, it was first  published in Speyer, Germany, by Peter Drach in 1487.

There are three main sections to the book: 1.) proof that witchcraft is a real phenomenon (for all those doubting clergy); 2.) the practice of witchcraft and how to protect oneself; 3.) a step-by-step guide on how to conduct a witch trial (including torture) and how to charge the accused.

Jeffrey Burton Russell states in Witchcraft in the Middle Ages that between 1487 and 1520, at least 14 editions of Malleus Maleficarum were published. According to Hans Peter Broedel in The Malleus Maleficarum and the Construction of Witchcraft, debates about the existence of witchcraft heated up again in the second half of the 16th century, so this book received a second surge in popularity, with 16 new editions published between 1576 and 1670. Our copy was printed in 1595.

About a century later in 1692 in Salem, Massachusetts, the daughter and niece of Reverend Samuel Parris both became ill. The village doctor, William Griggs, was called in and declared that their ailments were caused by witchcraft, thus starting a witch hunt culminating in 27 deaths: 19 people were hanged, 7 died in prison, and 1 was apparently crushed to death. Bridget Bishop, an outspoken, thrice-married, tavern-going resident of Salem Town was the first casualty. 

While the Malleus Maleficarum is not directly responsible for the deaths of thousands of people accused of practicing witchcraft, it has a rather bloody history and greatly influenced how supposed witches were prosecuted, tried, tortured, and put to death. 

@ american followers/people who actually understand this protracted system - Is it done? It was a long race but it feels like that came round quickly!

Congratulations to Hillary for being the first ever female nominee (All Brace for Interminable Misogynist ~Discourse~on this blue hellhole) and commiserations to Bernie, I guess. (But not to the brocialists, who are dicks.)

(I personally wanted neither but Elizabeth Warren instead, so here’s-a-hoping she gets picked as VP.)

However, things in politics are messy, dirty and complicated and generally are a lot bigger than the Associated Press “deciding” the vote. I think most people can agree with that and that a conversation beyond just blaming the media would be more beneficial than kicking that dead horse some more.  

Both H and B have reconstructed narratives around their campaigns that are harmful in different ways. Both are politicians. Both have and will continue to play dirty. Both have their major good points and their major faults. Anyway, I’m not here to pick sides on that because I don’t want that shit-storm descending upon my head. 

Really condensed, basic run-down of the Democratic party primary system: 

-it’s an indirect election, the winner of which will be confirmed at the DNC. -When you vote your vote goes towards a delegate who will vote on behalf of the people although they can vote their own way if they want to - not unlike our actual electoral system with the Electoral College. Although unlike the primaries, the Electoral College is more strict about sticking with voting the way the people they represent voted.  -There is the popular vote, which is the number of votes for the person, and then the delegate votes. It is the delegate votes that count towards who is nominated. 

Um, here’s an excerpt from wikipedia: 

“There are 4,051 pledged delegates and 714 super delegates in the 2016 cycle.[100] Under the party’s delegate selection rules, the number of pledged delegates allocated to each of the 50 U.S. states and Washington, D.C. is determined using a formula based on three main factors: 1. The proportion of votes each state gave to the Democratic candidate in the last three presidential elections (2004, 2008, and 2012) 2. The number of electoral votes each state has in the United States Electoral College. 3.The stage of the primary season when they hold their contest. States and territories that hold their contests later are given bonus seats. A candidate must win 2,383 delegates at the national convention, in order to win the 2016 Democratic presidential nomination”

The Sanders campaign is making up some new rules saying that we can’t count supers until the convention: this wasn’t the case in 2008, for instance, when the delegate count was much closer, but the press called the primaries done after all but Washington DC had voted (as will be the case tomorrow).

So yeah, a bit hasty on the AP’s part, but it’s not inaccurate in any way to declare the primaries technically over: Clinton has passed the number of delegates needed by any usual measurement.

But even the Clinton camp has deflected this news until tomorrow:

There are downticket races happening also, so most invested voters will probably be out anyway. But, if any of the smaller states are caucuses, I could see a real effect there, since they're a more time-consuming process.

@ american followers/people who actually understand this protracted system - Is it done? It was a long race but it feels like that came round quickly!

Congratulations to Hillary for being the first ever female nominee (All Brace for Interminable Misogynist ~Discourse~on this blue hellhole) and commiserations to Bernie, I guess. (But not to the brocialists, who are dicks.)

(I personally wanted neither but Elizabeth Warren instead, so here’s-a-hoping she gets picked as VP.)

However, things in politics are messy, dirty and complicated and generally are a lot bigger than the Associated Press “deciding” the vote. I think most people can agree with that and that a conversation beyond just blaming the media would be more beneficial than kicking that dead horse some more.  

Both H and B have reconstructed narratives around their campaigns that are harmful in different ways. Both are politicians. Both have and will continue to play dirty. Both have their major good points and their major faults. Anyway, I’m not here to pick sides on that because I don’t want that shit-storm descending upon my head. 

Really condensed, basic run-down of the Democratic party primary system: 

-it’s an indirect election, the winner of which will be confirmed at the DNC. -When you vote your vote goes towards a delegate who will vote on behalf of the people although they can vote their own way if they want to - not unlike our actual electoral system with the Electoral College. Although unlike the primaries, the Electoral College is more strict about sticking with voting the way the people they represent voted.  -There is the popular vote, which is the number of votes for the person, and then the delegate votes. It is the delegate votes that count towards who is nominated. 

Um, here’s an excerpt from wikipedia: 

“There are 4,051 pledged delegates and 714 super delegates in the 2016 cycle.[100] Under the party’s delegate selection rules, the number of pledged delegates allocated to each of the 50 U.S. states and Washington, D.C. is determined using a formula based on three main factors: 1. The proportion of votes each state gave to the Democratic candidate in the last three presidential elections (2004, 2008, and 2012) 2. The number of electoral votes each state has in the United States Electoral College. 3.The stage of the primary season when they hold their contest. States and territories that hold their contests later are given bonus seats. A candidate must win 2,383 delegates at the national convention, in order to win the 2016 Democratic presidential nomination”

The Sanders campaign is making up some new rules saying that we can’t count supers until the convention: this wasn’t the case in 2008, for instance, when the delegate count was much closer, but the press called the primaries done after all but Washington DC had voted (as will be the case tomorrow).

So yeah, a bit hasty on the AP’s part, but it’s not inaccurate in any way to declare the primaries technically over: Clinton has passed the number of delegates needed by any usual measurement.

But even the Clinton camp has deflected this news until tomorrow:

At first I thought this might be depicting fennel, because Pliny the Elder wrote about snakes needing to rejuvenate themselves with fennel juice– but maybe it’s just a drawing of two snakes enjoying a romantic dinner of… whatever the plant might be.

The books of ancient Mexico record the cultures of its people in pictorial language of great beauty and complexity.

Across a roll of bark-paper, a continuous narrative may seem simultaneously a chronicle, liturgy, and map. 

To the European conquerors of the 16th century, these books seemed threatening. Most were destroyed, but a few were sent to Europe and later saved for study by men such as Thomas Bodley, William Laud, and John Selden.

I found this lovely bit of art from a Medieval Manuscript a couple of years ago from @sexycodicology, and made some embroidery designs from it. 

Like here:

And this next one I found greatly amusing:

But while these two bunnies, particularly the axe-wielding one, get a lot of views and compliments, they do not sell very well.  

There are several places to find illuminated manuscripts in the public domain. My favorite is OPenn at the University of Pennsylvania Libraries - I’m a librarian at Penn, though, so I would say that (you’ll do better searching Penn in Hand then getting the images from OPenn). The Digital Walters has the manuscripts of the Walters Art Museum - lots of beautiful stuff, including a lot of non-Western manuscripts. Finally the Getty has an open content program, their interface is easy to search, and they have some really amazing manuscripts. 

They also have a blog that showcases interesting images and texts that you might find helpful and engaging as a place to start.

Also, the British Library has over 1 million public domain artworks that you can view easily on their Flickr account here.

The Digital Vatican Library!!! They’re in the process of digitizing some 80k manuscripts, and have a lot of them up online already.

The Rijksmuseum has a TON of digital artworks including illuminated manuscript miniatures and early prints that IMHO lend themselves well to making patterns.

Giovannino dei Grassi and Belbello da Pavia

Visconti Book of Hours, for Gian Galeazzo Visconti

Illumination: Interrupted

Finding unfinished miniatures in medieval manuscripts and early printed books is surprisingly common. Unfortunately, more often than not, the reasons behind their incomplete state are unclear- that is the case with these examples from the University of Glasgow Library’s special collections. However, this is not due to lazy illuminators; recorded reasons for unfinished illuminations range from the patron running out of money partway through to the illuminators dying of the black plague (in the case of the Limbourg brothers).

However, these interrupted illuminations actually give art and book historians a rare glimpse into the process of book decoration. In the above examples, complete and incomplete illuminations from the same works can be compared, and inferences can be made about the order in which decoration was applied to the book as well as the artistic techniques used. In the first images, a simple outline with a bit of shading preceded colouring, and in the third set of images, it is clear that the scribe finished his or her work before the border illuminator got their hands on the manuscript. The second set of images shows an interesting “sketch” of sorts, composed of dots- this could be evidence of a technique known as pouncing, in which the artist placed a pre-drawn template over the page and poked holes in it with an inked tool to produce a shape and outline which would be later painted in. None of the illuminations in the final work were finished, but the initials all were, indicating perhaps that the illumination of initials and the illumination of miniatures were two different tasks done by different people.

It’s amazing what can be learned about manuscript and book production and consumption by looking at medieval and early modern works in progress!

The visual motif of kings (or travelers) walking around the spherical Earth can be found quite frequently in the Middle Ages; one place that it reliably shows up is in manuscripts of the Image du monde of Gautier de Metz, as seen here on fol. 39v of LJS 264.

Remember that sinking feeling you get after having worked on something for a while, only to raise your head after it’s finished to discover that it is a hopeless pile of garbage? The scribe responsible for this initial on fol. 74v of LJS 224 was probably quite pleased with the D he drew before he realized that the word he meant to copy down was not dialetice, but analetice. It could have been so much worse, this could have been an actually elaborate initial– and besides, he found that the counter in the D was a perfect place to place his correction.