A Star-Forged Ruby

- Cordelia, Lady Vorkosigan (from Barrayar by Lois McMaster Bujold)

- Mariotta, Lady Culter (from The Game of Kings by Dorothy Dunnett)

I haven't read the Lymond chronicles, but that Vorkosigan passage is incredibly ironic considering how Cordelia was the one who did win by force earlier in the book. In that sense, I think that both of these passages acknowledge that influence is meaningless without being backed by power within the system.

Ehh, but I think that Cordelia winning by force has nothing to do with the argument, because Mariotta in the second passage is talking about politics, not violence, and Cordelia's winning by force was kind of stealth-based (and very Drou and Bothari-dependent tbh) and didn't net her any actual political power. It's more about affordances within a society and coordination within a marriage in a society with unequal rights and implications about child development.

The context of the second passage is that Richard, a young Scottish lord during the Rough Wooing period, and Mariotta his wife, are newly married, and Richard is basically not consulting her at all on anything and keeping her out of the loop entirely. This is due to multiple reasons, one being that Richard is kind of shy and taciturn and uncommunicative by nature and needs to learn how to communicate, and the other being that he's absolutely fucking obsessed with hunting down his outlaw younger brother who he's always been jealous of (and who is the protagonist of the series - let's say that Richard is kind of a Mark to the protag's Miles), and he knows that the rest of his family doesn't approve of this so he's hiding it from them.

Mariotta's pregnant by this point, and she hates how isolated she is from everything that's going on and how utterly uninvolved he is in the family life, which is why she makes the point that she makes - since she is raised within this society, she doesn't think it's her place to go to Council meetings or to fight in battles, but she thinks that there needs to be coordination between the two of them, which is something that Cordelia actually has already. Aral does come to her for advice on his political issues (we see it happen repeatedly in Barrayar), and he listens to her ideas, and he IS very involved in his son's upbringing. Aral admittedly also has a lot more... raw power than Richard, because he's the Regent, whereas Richard is just a random aristocrat - he's near the top of the food chain, yeah, but not THAT high. Like, if Mariotta had Aral as a husband she wouldn't be complaining at all.

But, though I used to find that Vorkosigan passage iconic too when I first read it (after a long period of consuming media that thought that a woman can only be badass if she constantly fights people with swords I found it very refreshing), the more I think about it the more impatient I become with it because it kind of implies that teehee, we've pulled the wool over the dumb menfolk's eyes, they don't understand that we have the power to shape the next generation through Motherhood!

(And this argument is something very near and dear to my heart because I'm a researcher in social developmental psychology lol)

I just think it comes off very smug more than anything because, well, in my view Mariotta is right that whatever she teaches their children, they will eventually have to adapt to the incentives and values of the world outside their household if they want to survive, and this is something that Mariotta can only influence through Richard and with Richard's permission (and the same goes for Cordelia). If women were as powerful as the quote implies we'd have solved sexism centuries ago, because they'd have just taught their sons not to be sexist. And I feel that historically, my profession in particular has really overly emphasized the role of the mother, even though she was pretty powerless within the wider power structure during that exact same period, and I find that really sexist and reductive even though at face value it comes off as empowering, because it puts most of the responsibility on her but gives her very little actual power in the situation. Which is why both of these passages are living rent-free in my head lol.

If Cordelia were honest about what's going on here, she'd acknowledge that this is the... I hope I'm describing this clearly enough, but the Austenian ideal of a marriage based on respect and coordination (of the heroine by the hero) as the only way the heroine can achieve both agency and relational intimacy within the constraints of her society. Because if Cordelia kept on decapitating people as a way of asserting herself she'd probably get a lot of pushback tbh. It's not a viable long-term strategy.

And this is exactly what Mariotta considers normative as well, and it does seem to be within her society - we actually do see a bunch of women exercising soft power in the Lymond Chronicles: Richard's mother is a very Alys Vorpatril-like lady who, once the twisty younger son is apprehended, goes on a social campaign to gather votes against his execution and accomplishes quite a bit with it. She's also one of the, if not the, cleverest character in the series. Their family friends, the Buccleughs, feature a very... eh, meat and potatoes kind of husband, who is only interested in things as far as he can solve the situation by fucking them or stabbing them with a sword, and his wife who is lowkey directing him to go where the stabbing is useful and not detrimential, and their marriage actually works and seems filled with affection and banter. (We also see plenty of adventurous woman too - the protagonist's future wife is more badass as a teenager than most of the other characters are as adults, and has the same soft spot for protecting children that Cordelia does)

So yeah I find it interesting how basically the same situation is perceived very differently across the two series, and it may be because of the tone difference (The Lymond Chronicles can be a lot more... vicious than Vorkosigan, even though honestly they contain like 80% of the same themes and character types... I always describe Vorkosigan as 50% Bujold reads Dunnett and 50% Bujold reads Heyer), but more than anything it's just cool to see how these two women, who are a generation (Dunnett was born in 1923, Bujold in 1949) and an ocean and a social class apart, and both way way older than myself, interpret the exact same setup. Especially because Vorkosigan leans more conservative despite being written 30 years later.

you know what actually pisses me off? when I finally start to feel a smidge of confidence in my writing ability and then some JERK POSTS A SINGLE LINE FROM A TERRY PRATCHETT NOVEL AND IT’S BETTER THAN ANYTHING I WILL EVER WRITE NO MATTER HOW MANY MILLENNIA I SPEND TRYING!

Terry was a professional writer from the age of 17. He worked as a journalist which meant that he had to learn to research, write and edit his own work very quickly or else he’d lose his job.

He was 23 when his first novel was published. After six years of writing professionally every single day. The Carpet People was a lovely novel, from a lovely writer, but almost all of Terry’s iconic truth bomb lines come from Discworld.

The Colour of Magic, the first ever Discworld novel was published in 1983. Terry was 35 years old. He had been writing professionally for 18 years. His career was old enough to vote, get married and drink. We now know that at 35 he was, tragically, over half way through his life. And do you know what us devoted, adoring Discworld fans say about The Colour of Magic? “Don’t start with Colour of Magic.”

It is the only reading order rule we ever give people. Because it’s not that great. Don’t get me wrong, very good book, although I’ll be honest I’ve never been able to finish it, but it’s nowhere near his later stuff. Compare it to Guards Guards, The Fifth Elephant, the utterly iconic Nightwatch and it pales in comparison because even after nearly 20 years of writing, half a lifetime of loving books and storytelling Terry was still learning.

He was a man with a wonderful natural talent, yes. But more importantly he worked and worked and worked to be a better writer. He was writing up until days before he died.  He spent 49 years learning and growing as a writer, taking so much joy in storytelling that not even Alzheimer’s could steal it from him. He wouldn’t want that joy stolen from you too.

Terry was a wonderful, kind, compassionate, genius of a writer. And all of this was in spite of many many people telling him he wasn’t good enough. At the age of five his headmaster told him that he would never amount to anything. He died a knight of the realm and one of the most beloved writers ever to have lived in a country with a vast and rich literary tradition. He wouldn’t let anyone tell him that he wasn’t good enough. And he wouldn’t want you to think you aren’t good enough. He especially wouldn’t want to be the reason why you think you aren’t good enough. 

You’re not Terry Pratchett. 

You are you.

And Terry would love that. 

I only ever had a chance to talk to Terry Pratchett once, and that was in an autograph line.  I’d bought a copy of The Carpet People, which was his very first book, and he looked at it with a faint air of concern.  “You realise that I wrote that when I was very young,” he said, in warning.

“Yes,” I said.  “But I like seeing how authors grow.”

He brightened and reached for his pen.  “That’s all right then,” he said, and signed.

@thebibliosphere

Friendly reminder that Vincent van Gogh willingly checked himself into an asylum so that he could get better, resulting in him creating some of the most iconic paintings of his entire career, done in the asylum, when he was being treated 24/7, because he finally didn’t have to struggle with his demons and could instead focus on his muse, WHICH WERE TWO DIFFERENT THINGS!

Remember this little insignificant painting?

How about this one?

Check this one out:

All of these and more were painted in the asylum when he was receiving treatment for his mental illnesses and I know I just said that but I said it again and I’m saying it a third time until you dramatic abled assholes understand!

VINCENT VAN GOGH

- KNEW THAT HE WAS MENTALLY ILL

- WANTED TO CHANGE THAT

- WENT TO AN ASYLUM

- GOT THE HELP HE NEEDED

- PAINTED SOME ICONIC MASTERPIECES AS A RESULT!

SO DON’T YOU DARE COME OUT HERE WITH THIS, “I WISH I WAS DEPRESSED SO I COULD BE AS CREATIVE AS VAN GOGH” BULLSHIT BECAUSE EVEN HE KNEW THAT HIS DEMONS WERE HARMING HIS WORK, AND MORE IMPORTANTLY, HIS HEALTH, AND HE DID EVERYTHING WITHIN HIS POWER TO FIGHT THEM EVERY SINGLE DAY OF HIS LIFE, UNTIL THEY ENDED UP WINNING! 

This is also incredibly important for any creative persons dealing with mental illness, and their parents.

Receiving mental help improves your craft, not hurt it. Before getting put on medication for the first time to treat my mental illnesses, my mom expressed to me how she’s worried about my getting treatment because of my art. Regardless, your mental health should be more important anyway, but, honestly, it’s a lot harder to produce good art when you struggle getting out of bed, let alone creating masterpieces. When you’re in more health, improving your craft comes much easier!

Personally I think the most beautifull painting of him was this one:

He made it when he heard about the birth of his nephew who was named after him. Still in the asylum but really happy for his brother! “How glad I was when the news came… I should have greatly preferred him to call the boy after Father, of whom I have been thinking so much these days, instead of after me; but seeing it has now been done, I started right away to make a picture for him, to hang in their bedroom, big branches of white almond blossom against a blue sky.”

Oh I have sucb rants about how “good” art comes while suffering.

No.

look at me.

The idea of the “suffering artist” comes from bunch of alcholic, drug abusing, womanizers trying to justify their bad life choices as some sort of artistic angst.

IT IS 100% BULLSHIT

Take your meds, get your therapy, be happy, and live life

The art will be there.

Kill the myth that artists must suffer.

Toddlers are so pure. She doesn’t understand that we help her with certain things because she’s little. She thinks that everyone just helps each other like that. So she tries to blow on my food and cut it up for me and tries to help me put on my shoes.

i was giving little wagon rides to a baby around the backyard one day and all of a sudden she hops off and slaps the seat of the wagon telling me to get on because it was my turn and i was like no it’s ok im too heavy and she was like NO ITS UR TURN and kept tugging on my hand so i would sit down. eventually i got on and it was just a little 2 year old trying so hard to push me around on a wagon not understanding why it wouldn’t budge but still so determined to let me have my turn lol

If you want to take a break from your day and Have Some Feelings, please consider: every one of us was a one of these toddlers at some point. Many of the first and most meaningful social interactions of all our lives involved attempts to reciprocate the kindness that was shown to us by others. A lot of elaborate societal bullshit puts a lot of us in positions where we need more help than we’d like, and makes it riskier than it should be to try to help others, but please don’t forget that small things like this matter, and that ultimately, one of the most fundamental components of humanity is an outright need to be good to those around us in whatever way we can.

Things I think about while waiting on my cough meds to knock me out:

If Ross and crew wanted to find where Steve & Bucky went they probably would go directly to Sam for the information.

They probably wouldn’t ask nicely.

Sam is ready to be waterboarded by the time Tony shows up

Tony’s reactor shot didn’t even hit Sam in the face so why was he banged up there? The bruising doesn’t look hand shaped either (from Bucky’s throw)

anD FURTHERMORE.

{Gif/Image Heavy!}

Sam was not only the first answer, he was the ONLY answer. 

Place yourself in the $1500 Ferragamo brogues of one Mr. Thaddeus Ross. Wealthy powerful politician who thinks he has the world spinning on his finger until Mr. Tall Blonde+Handsome and Mr. Tall Brown+Beefy manage to destroy an airport and drop off the map!

So now you look like a goddamn doof because the team that remained on radar KNEW they were going to get arrested. It was a sacrifice tactic and goddamn it it worked! So the best thing to do would be to make the sacrifice pointless and get Steve + Bucky thrown into the RAFT too so everything can go back to your original plan (which I have a theory about AS WELL! *evil cackle*)

So here’s what you know:

So you’ve solved the problem of whether you’re going to torture your captives without trial. Whew. That took maybe 30 seconds. Now, where to start?

Here’s what you know:

In fact, Sam Wilson might be the only choice.  This decision was probably made and passed on to the guards before the team was arrested. 

To be perfectly honest, Sam probably knew that this was a risk when he made that plan.

After all he faced a similar risk for 2 years as a black dude tracking secret super-mega-nazi cells and a potentially non-responsive supersoldier on his own so…

Anyway you can blame @steveandsam  for me posting this addendum because I was just gonna keep it inside.

so i might be stepping out of line making this post but i feel it needs to be made so yolo i guess.

i know a lot of millenials have a sort of knee-jerk negative reaction towards abrahamic religions (really mostly christianity and judaism) and i understand. really, i get it. my dad is a pastor, and he used his religon to abuse, demean, and control me at every opportunity. he regularly tells my sisters that he’s “so sad im going to hell” and other sundry passive aggressive nonsense, so trust me i get it. i understand how a certain religion can be triggering to someone.

but there is a very important point here, and i really hope you understand this.

you cannot let it make you prejudiced, and, let me be clear here, im talking specifically about antisemitism.

i know exactly whats going on in your head, because for a long time it was what was going on in my head. you hear the word “judaism” and you have flashbacks to sunday school and the old testament and all the times you sat in a church and felt personally attacked, and you associate that with judaism and jewish people because most of the things that upset you were in the old testament. 

you can have your triggers, but you can’t let those triggers become an excuse to further marginalize a minority thats already attacked from literally every position of power there is. every major religion has leaders who are antisemitic, every country has a history of marginalizing jewish people, every person on the planet grows up in an inherently antisemitic world and has to unlearn that sort of toxic mindset.

and maybe this post should have been made by a jewish person, or somebody with more education on the subject than me but i think its really important that people don’t let their personal experiences with organized religion turn them into the kind of prejudiced person that hurt them in the first place. 

as a romni i have a shared tragedy with jewish people, so i feel like it was easier for me to step back and be like “woah, your thought process here is super toxic and you need to stop” but i feel like a lot of white christian-raised people don’t really have that touchstone and need somebody to be like “wake up, what you are doing is wrong”

I can remove this if you want but I feel a strong need to reblog

as a jew, i’m gonna add to this.

first of all. we don’t have a lot of allies speaking for us genuinely, instead of because of some sort of twisted “jesus was jewish” or “i can secretly defend my faith or politics using jews as pawns” so when y’all do it means a lot. we don’t see it much, so don’t feel bad for making this post.

second of all, the part that you didn’t know, through no real fault of your own, is that the version you learn in sunday school or from non-jewish sources? that isn’t even remotely how jews understand that source.

jews have a totally different relationship with our holy text than christians do. every jewish person is expected to know the “old testament” cover to cover then to freely access and participate in millennia of commentary and debate on it. the core book of jewish law is just a book of debates and discussions, many of which don’t even come with firm answers. and whenever it’s printed, it’s printed with centuries worth of commentary in the margins.

if you have and issue with or felt personally attacked by any part of the “old testament” i can guarantee that there are pages and pages of jewish commentary about that from the point of view you were looking for and several dozen you haven’t even considered. jews have never stopped questioning and arguing about this thing.

so when non-jews make the assumption that our religion is some sort of backwards or primitive thing based on a text they don’t care for, they are doing jews a double disservice.

i guarantee you some 1st century BCE judaen made the point that not eating shrimp because a book says to is kinda silly far more eloquently than you did, pal. heck. there’s a rabbi in the talmud who just straight up becomes a heretic.

judaism has been around and has been evolving as a culture and a religion longer than christianity has existed. it’s one of the oldest living traditions on the planet and its still growing and evolving.