My late grandfather has kept a few writings of poetry in Cypriot Greek sung by the natives of Yalya (Γιαλιά), mostly our relatives. Chatismada poetry was mostly sung but sometimes said without melody, in daily interractions, as a means of story telling and for important events (like weddings or at harvesting/threahing time), examples of the first two categories,i have posted before but not of the third. As a result of the attention my last post recieved, i saw that since the last time i visited it the subreddit has aquired some knowledgable members, so i would like to ask a question using the example of the below poem to further illustrate my example. İn my previous posts or comments that made in Greek, i used an orthographic style somewhere in between Greeklish and Turkish trying to use as grammer as correctly as possible, using the afforementioned orthography. One example would be i would use the english "j" or "dj" for what would be "τζ" using the greek alphabet instead of the or using the turkish "ğ" for "γ" , altough this sound is close but not exact as "γ" it is more akin to the silent glossal consonant invetween "α" and "ε" in "αέρα" which i would write as "ağera" instead of the nasal "γ" in "αγάπη". . İ am saying all this because the exteact below is not watered down unlike what i have shared previously and is written completely using the Turkish alphabet and would be almost imposible to decipher, so i would put a trasliteration under every line for this reason i redownloaded Reddit on my phone. The reason i am writing it as it was recorded is that it relates to my question below the poem as it would not make much sense whithout seeing it in its orriginal form. Here it is:
DOBİYİMMAN DİSNİFFİS(Το Ποίημμαν Της Νύφφης)
Ennasasbo miyan fimin neyan (Εννά σας πω μιαν φήμην νέαν) Ennasasbo enan galon biyimman (Εννά σας πω έναν καλόν ποίημμαν) Ofeğos masedogen miyanevloğiyan (Ο Θεός μας έδωκεν μίαν ευλογίαν) Na ehumen myan familyan neyan (Να έχουμεν μίαν φαμίλιαν νέαν)
Ennasasbo miyan alisgân (Εννά σας πω μίαν αλήθκειαν) Ofeğos isdes yenneces din omorsgân (Ο Θεός είς τες γενέτζες την ομορθκειάν) Edogen navrusin efdişan (Έδωκεν να βρούσιν ευτυσ̌άν) Ceda mandilya (Τζαι τα μαντιλιά) Brosdadefgun iyafrobi budin amardiyan (Προστατεύκουν οι ανθρώποι που την αμαρτίαν)
Elada omorfimmu goruğa (Έλα δα όμορφην μου κορούα) Ağeyi digissu bigan (Άε η δικήν σου ποίκαν) Ağeda befgassu sanduca(Άε τα πευκά σου σαντούτζα) Ağeda ğrusafenassu sdolisgâ (Άε τα γρουσαφένα σου στολίθκια) Ceda marmarga su anciya(Τζαι τα μαρμαρκά σου αντζία)
Hade ra omorfimmu goraşa (Χάτε ρα όμορφην μου γορασ̌ά) Aboşeredise yidikissu bedigididan (Αποσ̌αιρετίσε η δικήν σου πεδικότηταν) Edimase donlehossu me aroman (Ετοιμάσε τον λαίχως(?) σου με αρόμαν) Anigse meyeman ibataniyan (Ανοίξε με γιαίμαν η παττανίαν) Ofeğos nasu dogi bolla befgâ(Ο Θεός να σου δώκει πολλά πεθκιά) Cemellicin ağnyan(Τζαι μελλιτζήν αγνιάν)
A little while ago i saw a video on YouTube that talked about the griko language(dialect?) in Southern İtaly and the main thing that caught my attention was the fact that they used the latin alphabet to write Greek in and the manner in which they did so, obviously the orthography was created by a person that was able to use the Greek alphabet, it's main feature was that μου-μας-του etc. Were written adjacent to the noun for inctance "our father" would be written as "ocirimma" or my mother would be "imamammo" . When seeing this the first thing that came to my mind was the records of my grandfather. As a few examples of similarities with the above principle "yidigimmu"(η δικήν μου) could be presented as an example. The thing is Greek written in the Turkish alphabet can be read as entirely different from what it would be using the Greek alphabet, especialy without the use of intonations, while my grandfather had and other relatives that were native Greek speakers don't have the stereotypical Turkish Cypriot accent when speaking Cypriot Greek this i think derives from their proper use of intonation and the ability to use the sounds of θ and ττ(which only exists in a few Turkish dialects) which can be seen from the fact that θ is written as f or s above like in the example of "ofeğos" (ο Θεός). The Greek written in the Turkish alphabet would be uniteligable without a prior knowledge of intonations. This became clear to me when a friend who was trying to learn Greek came to me asking how to know how the accent mark would be placed when writing and when i illustrated the sound difference he wouldn't understand it while it was (mostly) easy for me when i first how to write using the Greek alphabet as i was already well versed in the language as in the above poem it can be seen that those without an intonation merge together like "ceda" (τζαι τα). Making all these points above now i can ask what i want to: How is the written grammar of a language determined when it encounters a writing system, how has the orthography of Greek changed overtime and why is it written in the manner it is and what alphabets has it been written with other than its own throughout history. To me Greek written using the Greek alphabet is superior in its ability to fully transmit what is to be conveyed, is there any pother reason to this other than its richness of letters and the ability to utilise intonation like the interraction of different words with one another?
My other question would be the word lehos, in this case it does not mean throat but was translated to Turkish by my Grandmother as "gerdek" which means the mariage bed, the first intercourse of a maried couple, the below reference of the oppening of a bloody blanket refers to the archaic tradition of showing the villagers blood stained blanket resulting from the bride's hymen being broken during the intercourse prooving her chastidy, this tradition was practiced in Cyprus as it was and still in across Eurasia. İf you know a name for this practice sharing it would be greatly apreciated.Thanks in advance for your patience and wisdom.
With regards.
-RevolutionStandard99

Probably somebody who is fluent in Japanese and English would be better to analyze this movie but I will try anyway.
The movie is about poor communication and disconnection. Originally I thought it was just describing culture shock and the overload of being in a foreign country. But there are numerous examples of “lost in translation” as a metaphor. Watching Bill Murray view an old SNL skit in Japanese is a bit surreal. When his character is trying to finish a commercial shoot the translator gives him short instructions to a lengthy response from the director. When some fans recognize him drinking at a bar Bill Murray just smiles and walks away.
Both main characters are in unhappy and disconnected relationships. Giovanni Ribosi plays a busy photographer who gives little attention to Scarlett Johansen. Later Scarlett goes to a Buddhist temple and watches a ceremony. When trying to describe her lack of feeling about it to her mother back in the states she becomes tearful and this ends the call abruptly.
There is not a lot of dialogue overall in the movie. But one person who does talk incessantly is Giovanni Ribisi’s ex played by Ana Faris. Her character is quite vapid and annoying. This is to contrast the main characters who are insular and contemplative.
What does Bill Murray say at the end of the movie? Well I can’t read lips. But we are supposed to fill in the blanks since the movie is at its core about difficulty communicating, especially in relationships.

I use multiple banking and budgeting sites that use the service Plaid.
Plaid is a middleman type service that links banks to these budgeting services in order to add accounts like checking, savings, and credit cards.
When starting the flow, the target site a opens new page to log in with bank credentials, then after authenticating it returns to the target site.
This handshake seems to be broken when using STM Pro.
Any exceptions or things I can try? this type of flow seems to be pretty common so maybe it can be handled better by default? (like pay with paypal type flows as well).
concrete example:
using ynab.com to create a budget and adding a new credit card account (using citi bank).

Introduction
Someone reading this book may wonder what sort of audience is being targeted here. They may also be confused as to what the endgame is behind such a book. The aim of this book is to parallel the different religious & mystic traditions & connect them to the tropes that we find near death experiences propagate. They often are reconnecting us with what ancient texts have said but in the modern secular world where materialism is the norm we have become numb to the meanings & impact behind such text. These texts are often considered archaic & primitive. Unable to contribute much to the modern world they may only be useful in prayer chants.
Thus I aim here to revitalise the spirit of these traditions and connect them to what many call the modern day scriptures. The study of near death experiences, neuroscience, consciousness & other paranormal phenomena.
The endgame of the mystic is to connect, achieve union, knowledge and self growth. Thus by approaching all these texts and the various evolving thought that emerged from it, we can explore the parallels and connections that bridge the gap between traditions. The beauty of mysticism and perennial philosophy is the freedom it offers in interpretation.
This book doesn't focus on the question of whether scriptures are divinely inspired, man made tools written for sociological and political agendas or some sort of corrupted divinity. That discussion is a debate that will never end. Rather the focus here is on the possible wisdom & theological beliefs which parallel and mesh together well in forming a higher meaning & connection to the divine. Whether it be a higher power, an all pervading source or a metaphysical truth. You aren’t required to literally believe the divinity of these texts. A simple level of curiosity & intrigue is sufficient.
However one may contend that it is easy to parallel traditions when they are in harmony but when they differ they directly contradict rendering these connections meaningless and superficial. Therein lies the limitations of this book. Therefore the following concepts won’t be discussed in here. These are mainly :

• Unverifiable supernatural claims such as ancient miracles for instance Moses parting the sea, Jesus walking on water, resurrecting etc. For someone expecting this book to be a source of evidence for a specific religion it unfortunately won’t be. However there are multiple correlations and connections and these may act as subtle signs of evidence for a specific faith or multiple of them.
  
• Reconciling contradictions between belief systems and scriptures. For example whether the Divine is a trinity or a unity. Whether a certain sage was superior to another. For instance comparing the personality of Jesus with Muhammad, whether the Bible is morally perfect or not & a plethora of other beliefs that may not agree with one another. The book simply assumes they all are imperfect systems.
  
• The scientific debate on whether NDEs are classified as hallucinations or genuine supernatural occurrences. Whilst an interesting topic in itself, it is out of the scope of this book with many other books discussing the science behind ndes. However when necessary nde claims will be contrasted with naturalistic explanations.
  

The primary focus is in following a don't throw the baby out with the bathwater approach. Some may also contend that this book follows a shopping cart style of cherrypicking from texts and discarding beliefs from texts one subjectively finds inappropriate. To this I would simply say that the approach here is one of finding the parallels that align well together and acknowledging when a belief doesn't align well. Not necessarily a pick and choose system. An approach I would call the rational mystic.
The rational mystic is one who is simply open to what may be beyond their senses. They may be mystically inclined, fascinated and open to the plethora of supernatural ideas. However they will not blindly believe any and all beliefs. They will discern using rational faculties what of mysticism is most compatible with reality, what the data or evidence shows & what is more probable than not. I believe people of all beliefs or no beliefs can fit this definition. Whether you identify by a religion, as spiritual but not religious, non religious, atheist, deist or agnostic. Thus a skeptic or believer may able to gain an appreciation for these belief systems.
This book dives into the verses and parallels of ancient texts such as the Old Testament, Gospels, Quran, Hadith, Bhagwad Gita, Dhammapada, Tao Te Ching & Gathas of Zoroaster. Other older parallels such as from Vedic India, Ancient Egypt, Greece & Mesopotamia may be referenced.
Alongside that are the testimonies of NDEs and how they may parallel or differ to these texts. This book also attempts to provide commentary on major philosophical themes & elaborate on various exegesis, mystical traditions such as Kaballah, Sufism, Advaita Vedanta, Neoplatonism & Chinese thought. Since mysticism is ultimately about experience it relevant and useful to enhance these discussions by contrasts to various scientific ideas, philosophy & pop culture.
NDE Filter Methodology
One of the problems with ndes is the fact that they are subjective experiences which we cannot objectively verify or replicate. This makes them a weaker form of evidence compared to empirical studies which can replicate the results. These present a challenge. An individual nde may therefore be subject to embellishment, fabrications & delusions. Therefore in picking our choice of NDEs here we can only look at ndes as a whole in terms of statistical patterns that form. This is the methodology used in NDE literature by various academics including neuroscientists & philosophers researching the phenomenon.
To elaborate we therefore will discard testimonies that appear embellished with fantastical details. These fantastical details may also be subjective from person to person. Calling an otherworldly journey fantastical is simply irony. However in following the certain patterns that appear cross culturally in ndes it is much easier to identify reports that are considered fantastical. The following tropes appear the most across multiple nde studies.

• Out of Body Experience
• Tunnel of Light
• Meeting deceased relatives or unknown beings
• Perceiving a highly luminous pervading light
• Feelings of absolute peace, comfort & love
• Arriving at an otherworldly place ie a meadow, garden etc.
• Life Review
• Border of no return
• Pluralistic message about love & wisdom

There are of course other concepts that ndes reference which appear from time to time. These allow ndes to be flexible and not rigid experiences. After all no two nde experiences are the same. However using these motifs listed we can filter through unreliable ndes. These include

• NDE reports that are highly coloured with religious fundamentalist tropes particularly tropes promoting an exclusivist attitude to religion.
• NDEs that appear too detailed, fantastical & unrestricted appearing more like a science fiction or fantasy novel. For example nde claims of multiple lives on other planets or large scale prophecies & apocalyptic predictions & generally things that differ wildly from the core themes
• NDEs that talk too much about one specific spiritual concept, portraying themselves as special, prophets or mediums turning their nde into a narcissistic or monetary agenda through spiritual coaching, multiple books etc.

Finally one may say that the chapters of this book attempt to hint at the veracity of a religion & this book is a subtle attempt to proselytize that faith. I will reiterate that this book isnt trying to prove any specific religion. There may be subtle signs from one faith that fit better with the nde phenomenon than others. The following theories I would say explain these subtle signs. I leave it up to the reader to decide what they feel is the best explanation.

• Universal Divine Theory : This is the idea that prophets, mystics & sages from different cultures have been inspired through revelation from the same source & this explains the shared insights of a religion & ndes.
  
• Mystic Wisdom Theory : This simply means that certain religious writers and founders were simply wise spiritual men, mystically inclined honing on their intuition & knowledge.
  
• Intertextuality Theory : Each new religious founder simply built of older religious ideas assimilating it into their theologies.
  

Whilst these theories may suggest a subtle spark of corresponding truths, generally NDEs dont explicitly point to any religion. Some say its simply the case that a Christian will see Jesus, a Muslim will see Allah, A Jew sees Yahweh & a Hindu sees Krishna. This of course is not entirely true. The portion of ndes that claim to see Jesus form a minority & interestingly they too dont point at specific doctrines. NDE experiencers may simply describe a sentient light they perceive to be God. This being doesnt tell anybody that I am Yahweh or Allah. Experiencers will say that religious texts fall short of describing this being. It is beyond what people are taught in religion.
Those who are familiar with NDE reports and studies will know that NDEs tend to be very religion agnostic and at best subtly imply a religious correlation but rarely do we find massive amounts of nde reports cross culturally presenting exclusivist dogmas such as follow holy book x or you will burn, believe Jesus died for your sin or you will burn for eternity. When an nde does present this its seen as a red flag since this doesn't occur with the majority of other ndes. The most we have are subtle religious correlations. However NDEs do present us with certain philosophical dilemmas when it comes to religion.

• If NDEs are vague about religion how are we to interpret these religions ? Are we to see them as man made socio-cultural constructs ? Are we to see them as inspired by God but limited to their time ? Are we to see them as partially divine partially man made scriptures ?
  
• If NDEs prove that religions are man made we must ask what purpose the creator has behind the nde. If the creator has allowed man made cultures to negatively influence and control the world throughout history and has not intervened or communicated with humanity one must wonder what point there is in a nde being a message in the 21st century. So on one hand the NDE presents us with a deistic God who doesnt intervene and let false religions begin and on the other hand the God of the NDE seems very personal, involved in human lives, keeps tracks, feels love and joy for humans etc
  
• If one, many or all religions are truly divinely inspired why do NDES never directly point to this ? NDEs seem more concerned in lessons but not in pointing people to a religion.
  

Some may ask what difference does it make that it doesnt point to a religion. if anything NDEs show us that God is far beyond the narrow confines of religions. It makes an immense difference when we factor the fact that religions have influenced entire cultures and civilisations in good and bad ways. Religions have been used to wage war, cause destruction, control the masses, brainwash, confuse and build fear into the human subconscious. And on the good side religions have given hope to the world that suffering isnt in vain, that life has meaning & that justice and ultimate happiness exists.
For alot of people the need to connect to the transcendental is insatiable and religion provides a whole structure of beliefs that one can organise themselves on. For some this is very restricting and enforces a cultural dogma on to everyone. They may prefer a shopping cart version of religion where they take whats good for them and discard what they disagree on. For others they prefer to deny all religious concepts as dogma and cultural beliefs. One could argue that humans need the cultural clothing of customs and traditions to keep their lives going, something which they can use to relate with to the divine. Not everyone can believe in an abstract deity that they cannot conceive of in the absence of symbols such as scriptures.
Religious texts provide at the very least a gateway to which one can relate through stories of heroes, morals and metaphors of the divine. Of course none of this leads us to whether said divine being has revealed these texts, whether they are inspired but corrupted by man or fully man made. These symbols act as aids in feeling like we have a piece of the divine soul with us thus giving comfort and hope. Thus whilst some have no need for religions, for the masses religions have immense value.
So why dont NDEs prove religion ?
There are no clear answers to this (unless somebody has an nde and asks whoever they speak with to tell them in specifics what religion is from God and whats not) all we can do is speculate. The ndes that do ask or do mention a scripture are so few that we cannot form any conclusion on this.

• The simplest answer is that all religions are man made for good or bad intentions but this would of course lead us to the philosophical deist dilemma.
• Perhaps the NDEs message focuses on the lessons and ideals itself and sees scriptures and religions as redundant (even if there is a divine hand behind some) After all these are mainly symbols and cannot compare to a direct mystical experience (something fundamentalists struggle with)
• Perhaps an attempt to promote any specific faith would lead to an assumption that the nde message is about exclusivist salvation and leading to the worship of scriptures/religions (something fundamentalists struggle with)
• Perhaps this proves that religions are limited to their century and context and that we should only look to them for the universal timeless message they offer not the specifics. After all all major scriptures teach the core values that NDEs have revitalised ie love, mercy, kindness etc

Do NDEs support materialism or not ?
While the aim of this book isnt to debate the afterlife or brain hypothesis, I will say that at the time of this being written, my view on ndes is to say that I consider them a plausible source of evidence towards consciousness surviving death & the afterlife existing. This view of mine may change in time towards either side. The following are some reasons I would argue for them being plausible.
1 Veridical NDEs : Numerous NDES report out of body experiences including witnessing of events in an environment when this should not be possible. More than 100+ veridical cases have been documented. Not to mention veridical cases from across different countries which further strengthens the case. We would have to be radically skeptical to consider all of these testimonies fabricated.
2 Lucid narrative : NDERS experience a highly lucid narrative that usually doesn't end in the middle or chaotically unlike dreams or hallucinations. Their ndes tend to be structured with a beginning, middle and end where they are either told, know or are sucked back into the body. This is quite a strange experience compared to delirium, delusions, hallucinations etc.
3 Deceased Relatives : Most NDES claim to see deceased relatives rather than alive people supporting the afterlife hypothesis. We should expect a mixed cocktail of alive & deceased people appearing in ndes if this was a case of dreams or hallucinations. The population that do claim to see a mixed group of alive and deceased is quite a small proportion of total ndes.
4 Intuitive Reality : NDERS are very convinced that they are in a hyper real reality that makes this world seem black and white, like a dream/illusion as some would say. They are intuitively convinced they are in something real the way we might be talking in person, as opposed to it being just a dream. In one study its believed that nders brain recollect their nde as if it's a real world memory.
5 ESP claims : NDERS may perceive no time at all, may experience a life review such that they can feel the feelings of others and recall memories long forgotten. They may feel like they intuitively know things without needing to learn. Some may report greater vision and detail than waking life, ability to hear thoughts, instantaneously appear, be in two places at once or pass through solid walls.
5 Religious Expectations : NDES often may contradict the beliefs of many Christians, Atheists and Muslims who have varying beliefs about the afterlife. Some may be surprised to experience the things they see & are particularly surprised at the ESP abilities as these are not predicted by religions. Particularly interesting are religious conservative ndes with more exclusivist beliefs who are surprised and end up becoming more pluralist and liberal.
6 Clinical Death Scenario : The best NDE studies focus on scenarios whereby the person undergoes cardiac arrest and thus clinical death. At this time a person has no heartbeat, no breathing, dilated pupils, no light reflex, no gag reflex and EEG reading of little to no brain activity. This is consistent with unconsciousness as no blood and oxygen can fully reach the brain. Furthermore the fact that most undergoing clinical death dont report any experiences means NDEs are odd occurrences & consciousness should not occur.
7 Transformation : NDERS often are transformed in their beliefs with less to no fear of death, detachment from the material, more interest in altruism and spirituality and are impacted by their NDE for decades, remembering it far more than a hallucination or dream. They see it as the most important experience of their life.
8 Double edged sword : The fact that not everyone has an nde may support the idea of nde being more than brain activity. After all if the nde simply was some evolutionary dying mechanism we would expect everybody to have one. This point could also support naturalistic hypothesis (See below)
However there is still uncertainty regarding the nde phenomenon and further data, & studies are required to build a case that is greater than just plausible. These are some opposing reasons to consider doubt in them valid
1 Embellishment : NDEs are unverifiable and therefore we cannot verify which ndes are authentic or which ndes are embellished over time with the nders own thoughts, interpretations or exaggerations. This makes it easier for fabrications and frauds to claim an nde experience.
2 Brain Activity : Since NDES happen during clinical death or unconscious states where a persons brain can be returned to living we cannot be sure that there isnt some deeper brain activity that causes an nde. We also cant be sure than an nde isnt happening in the window where cerebral blood flow hasnt ceased or in the window where CPR leads back to cerebral blood flow. EEG machines also have certain limitations such that they cannot detect deeper brain regions due to the skulls electrical resistance. EEG spikes may occur due to muscle twitches & electrical noise which can often make it harder to differentiate whether this is due to the NDE or not.
3 Cultural/Religious Contradictions : If we keep an open mind, its entirely possible that a Western nde could see Jesus, an Indian nde see Buddha or an Indian nde see Jesus & a Western nde see Buddha. It seems this can be reconciled by the idea that ndes are customized to fit what comforts people subconsciously. Japanese NDEs for example see a bridge/river symbolizing journey to another world, Westerners a portal/tunnel. Westerners relate best to Jesus, Easterners to other figures. However some ndes provide conflicting metaphysical views. This can be an issue with some ndes if nde 1 says they were told to keep reincarnating until they reach nirvana, nde 2 says something more fitting to abrahamic faith. nde 3 says hell doesnt exist and nde 4 says they saw hell realms.
4 Double edged Sword : This point can be argued for ndes (See above) but also against ndes. Only a small percentage 10-20% of those under cardiac arrest are said to have experienced an nde. This point leaves questions as to why aren't all people experiencing an nde. Should we not expect a larger proportion say more than half of people to experience an nde ? If there is a realm beyond the material should we not expect every person to experience an nde. A low proportion may mean that the nde is some sort of brain anomaly. We only have speculations as to why all dont get an nde.
5 Future Science : Current materialistic explanations may be inadequate to explain ndes but this doesnt mean that future understanding of the brain may not yield a new theory/explanation that explains it away. Thus it remains a potential argument.
All of these points are worthy discussions on their own and can be found in various other valuable books. The above points are simply a valuable framework by which the reader may be able to take away what they value out of this book. Everything written is simply my own research into the subject & I always advise people to take it with a grain of salt unless it makes rational sense to you & appeals to your intuition.
Diving into the depths
Spirituality & mysticism can be thought of as two sides of the same coin with philosophy the ring that runs the circumference of the coin. While spirituality deals with the human aspects such as soul, spirit, ego, morality & purpose, mysticism deals with the divine aspects of things such as essences, attributes, metaphors, realities, realms, entities, space, time, substances etc. We aim to dive into the following themes in this book.
The Divine Source : Everything relevant to defining the higher power & source of existence including essences & attributes.

Consciousness & Spirit : Everything relevant to the nature of consciousness, qualia, perceptions, the spirit & soul.
Reality : Everything relevant to the nature of perception, illusion, concepts, space, time, substances, modes, forms & realities.
Spirituality & Purpose : Everything relevant to the nature of human meaning, objectives, purpose & suffering.
Morality : Everything relevant to values, ideals, ethics & morals.
Knowledge & Truth : Everything relevant to the nature of seeking truth, seeking knowledge & attaining wisdom. These include concepts such as beliefs, truths, axioms, speculations, nature of inspirations & revelations.
Awakening & Dark night of Soul : Everything relevant to the nature of materialism, spiritual awakening, seeking inner peace, anxieties, depression, remorse, angst & layers of the psyche.
Divine Sorrow : Everything relevant to the nature of the eschatological souls corruption, redemption, purification, punishment, divine justice & mercy including modes & forms.
Divine Bliss : Everything relevant to the nature of the souls destiny, ultimate peace, happiness, bliss & divine love including modes & forms.

I was almost given to take umbrage during Mike's opening chat with Alison Schager, so I thought I'd drop a line on the sub here, which is often angry and heavy in tone of late. So maybe this will lighern it up for a minute? And note that I say "almost". I have a sense of humor after all. And they are entitled to their opinions.
I do not teach Soul Cycle but have taken it a few times when visiting cities that have its studios and I've enjoyed it a lot, including the often cheesy and or glib life advice the instructors toss into the experience.
When I'm teaching, I try to make the class not just a workout but a fun and interesting experience for the participants. The feedback on my sharing thoughts on how the workout relates to life, how they can take the success they're experiencing in class out into the world with them in the form of confidence etcetera has been so overwhelmingly and gratifying positive that I am sure that most people appreciate that aspect of taking a group exercise class. And it makes it a joy to teach. I always have a theme based on the season or just whatever is in the zeitgeist or on my mind for each class. I don't dwell endlessly on it but will return to it here and there through the class to give everyone food for thought. I am finally getting around to reading Marcus Aurelius's Meditations right now, for example, and am getting some terrific material there.
Everyone reading this, take a moment to appreciate your aerobics teacher. We put a ton of thought and effort into it and make pretty much no money for it. We do it as a fun way to feel we are helping people while continuing our own health journeys. Yes, I just trotted out the journey metaphor. And you're likely to hear about vibes on occasion when you're in my class. Not every utterance is a gem, I admit. But we try. Now give me 8 more, then you can stretch and leave.

Jesus was confused with Satan by some cultures and even worshipped as such – despite the fact that he was considered a "good" Satan and a "positive" Devil that sided with the weak and vulnerable and betrayed the "powerful ones" in order to dedicate himself and his life completely to the poor. (Such notion is not alien at all even to the texts – because Jesus is expressly called the Morning Star in 2 Peter 1:19 and in Revelation 2:28).
This is apparent in the fact that the Hebrews for example did not recognize Christ as the Messiah and they even called him "evil" and applied to him the title "Satan" (from the Hebrew: "śāṭān" meaning: "adversary, enemy"). The definition of "evil" here is relative – because since Jesus went against the teachings that the Hebrews held as sacred and he also went against the teachings that the Muslims for example also regarded as sacred (and he went against many other cultures as well for that matter; because the figure of Jesus was pagan and it actually belonged worldwide to all cultures of the world and he was claimed to have opposed all of them trying to reform them) – he was thus called "evil" in relative terms by some of these cultures; meaning an "enemy" or "adversary" of those doctrines. Originally not even the Christians considered Christ as a positive figure; because Christ professed a lot of ideals that were inconceivable and impossible to apply according to the mentality of the powerful castes that rule society – like the priesthood for example; because Jesus claimed many times that the wealthy ones must renounce everything they have, they must give their money to the poor and then and only then – will they be allowed to follow Christ.
But the Church completely ignored and bypassed this teaching of Christ because they knew that if they had started preaching this to their believers; they would lose all believers in one second since no one wants to give up their house, their wealth and their life to follow the Church. So even the Church had to rearrange and modify a lot of the teachings of Christ while straight up censoring and ignoring others; in order to create a religion out of it. The only difference is that the Christian Church decided that it was worth investing their time and money in turning Jesus into the symbol of their faith and into a figure that would appeal to the masses (basically deifying him and using his name and memory to attract people into the religion) – while the other two religions (Judaism and Islam) completely disregarded Jesus altogether and considered him a madman instead and even went as far as to call him "evil" and a "Devil" precisely because he had preached such revolutionary notions that were just impossible to accept for the rich and wealthy. (Another reason for this is also because Judaism had a different idea of the Messiah altogether and they followed a different Messiah – and this other idea of the Messiah along with the other Messiah – were also very different from the "Jesus Christ" concept altogether – but that’s besides the point).
The symbology of the spring refers to the blood of Christ which gives life and makes vegetation grow on the earth much like the water of a spring; but it also holds literal meaning because the pagan figures who correspond to "Jesus" were all claimed to have met their demise or to have had a life-changing experience happen near a spring or near a water-source more generally speaking. Such is the case for Hermaphroditus who was rendered female by his union with Salmacis near a spring; or also the castration of one of the gods called "Uranus" – because according to Cicero in his "De Natura Deorum" there were multiple Uranuses and one of them was the "younger" one – and he’s the same who was said to have been castrated near a spring by Phoenician mythology. (The fact that Hermaphroditus was joined to Salmacis thus becoming definitively feminine near the waters of a spring – refers to the confusion that happened in the myth due to the nature of the two characters taken into analysis; because Hermaphroditus and Salmacis were actually brother and sister in other iterations of the story and they were claimed to have been conjoined thus essentially making up a single being who was a "man-woman" united. But then after their birth they were separated and their bodies were not conjoined anymore; although the male – in this case Hermaphroditus – was claimed to have been castrated in further iterations of the story so it looked as though he had returned to being a female and was thus "rejoined" to his female nature which is why the Greek myth confused it and claimed that Hermaphroditus lost his manhood but he lost it by being rejoined to his twin-sister Salmacis. In reality he was castrated near the waters of that spring – the "conjoined" part referring instead to the myth of their birth, but the two accounts were later confused and amalgamated into a single story for the Hermaphroditus myth; thus confusing also the timeline on when exactly was it that the two siblings were conjoined – whether it was at the beginning of their lives or at the end of it as in the case of Hermaphroditus and Salmacis).
The god Attar of the planet Venus was worshipped as "Atarsamain" (Attar of heaven) by the Arabs and equated with Allat i.e. Athena (a fact that has left academics dumbfounded even to this day as for how is it possible that a male god was completely equated and identified with a female one. But the answer is found in the mythology and themes of the god himself – where he was considered of androgynous nature and was claimed to have underwent castration which made him be perceived as a female by some cultures). He was furthermore equated with the goddess Anat in the form of "Ninurta" – because the Mesopotamian warrior-god Ninurta being equivalent to Attar (and Atarsamain) himself – he was directly equated with the Canaanite goddess "Anat" and the name of Anat was also written as "NIN.URTA" in cuneiform. There is an epithet of Anat which calls the deity: "the strength of life" and this particular epithet is applied to Ninurta continuously throughout Sumerian mythology because he’s consistently called the "strength of Enlil" – the "one with superior strength" – the "son in whose strength the father rejoices" – the one with the "strength of a lion" and Ninurta was also in charge of ditches and canals being the one who created the canal-system in Sumer and who was claimed to have brought to everyone the waters of the Tigris and Euphrates rivers as a result. The epithet of Anat – in this case referring to the male Anat who was though still worshipped as female regardless because the god possessed androgynous qualities (and not coincidentally the term "Nin" which comprises the name "Nin-urta" is actually more often than not utilized for female goddesses in Sumerian culture; for example "Ninhursag", "Ninisina", "Ninlil" etc. as it usually means "lady" – but in this case the word assumes a neutral meaning and its connotation is given by the context; so since the god is male it’s translated as "lord" – but the androgynous aspect of this deity is still kept intact nonetheless by using "Nin" instead of "En" ("En" being more traditionally used in Sumerian to mean "lord") – and the title thus refers for the concept of "the strength of life" to the strength of life as a life-giver; because Ninurta being associated with water and with the fertilizing effects of water having been the one who brought canals and ditches to Sumer; the meaning of the term thus acquired such connotation.
This deity is also always associated with physical beauty; for example in the case of Dumuzi (the Mesopotamian god of vegetation) who was called "the one with the beautiful eyes" and even in the form of "Ishtaran" (a form of Dumuzi worshipped as the "heavenly serpent") – where there are several references to his "beautiful face". This notion of beauty is once again reinforced and repeated for all other versions of this pagan god as he was called by many different names throughout cultures – for example also in the form of "Joseph" the biblical son of Jacob; who was claimed to be so beautiful that while a slave in Egypt the women could not resist him – or even in the form of Japheth the third son of Noah (who corresponds still to the same character) – where the word "Japheth" is connected to the root meaning "to be beautiful".
Thus the ideals of "strength and beauty" refer to him. (The pagan imagery of this god depicts him joyous and free as he dances through the flower-fields and while bringing the springing of vegetation to the seasons – often times represented with ears of corn or garlands adorning his head; as in the case of his Slavic counterpart "Potrimpo" for example).
Christ furthermore corresponds also to the pagan god Dionysus as mentioned in other posts; and Dionysus had a particular epithet in Rome which later ended up becoming his main name (or one of his many names alongside the more renown "Bacchus") and this particular title was that of "Liber" i.e. "the free one", one who embodies "freedom".
In form of "Ishtaran" Dumuzi was worshipped as "Anu" as well – since they called Ishtaran with the epithet "AN.GAL" i.e. "great Anu"; thus meaning that Dumuzi was so beloved and his cult had risen to such prominence at some point – that some local traditions (smaller ones) worshiped him as God the Creator himself and substituted him in place of Anu or at the very least differentiated him from the main "Anu" by calling him "AN.GAL" – "the great Anu" or "greater Anu". This is why Hermaphroditus/Jesus corresponds also in Phoenician mythology to the one "Uranus" who was said to have been castrated near a fountain-spring – Uranus being the Greek equivalent of the Sumerian "Anu" and this is why he was addressed with the name "Uranus" and worshipped as one of the "Uranuses" (the younger Uranus, because the older Uranus is instead the father of Cronus/Saturn and he’s a much older Uranus).
Given how Dumuzi was worshipped as the male Ishtar and as Attar in Canaanite lands (from whom the name "Ishtar" came from because the name of the goddess "Ishtar" is actually in the masculine gender and the goddess inherited that name from the male god who was called "Attar", "Ashtar" and "Ishtar" himself); one has to take into account that the male god was worshipped as androgynous though – which is why he was later equated with the female goddess Inanna in Mesopotamia and became indistinguishable from her to the point that she also came to be called Ishtar herself. The rosette is the symbol of Venus and of this male god of Venus who corresponds to Christ himself.
But at the same time the rosette is also the symbol of the female Venus as well and of the goddess Inanna (the female form of Ishtar) so the rosette refers to both Ishtars; the male and female one referring to the planet Venus in general.
Now, seeing as to how the figure of the "son of god" was worshipped as "the creator" himself by some more local cultures who idolized him to such degree that they ended up seeing him as the superior god over others – this explains one of the symbologies present on the modern representation of the apparent "pagan god" of the Templars; where he’s depicted with the head of a goat and the five pointed star facing downward. The five pointed star being a symbol of the divine – it represents through the symbology present on the idol the fact that the god in question is not the one who resides in the sky (in which case the five pointed star would have to be pointing upwards instead); but they worshipped on the other hand a creator who was "the creator on earth" thus being "the one below" – so their god was represented by the pointed star facing downwards. (This is for the representations that depict the idol with the star facing down; otherwise in other cases the star is absent altogether).
Now, according to the Atbash ciphering interpretation done on the name "Baphomet" which becomes: "Sophia" – if the interpretation is indeed correct (that Baphomet=Sophia) it would make total sense given how the name of Christ himself was actually "Sophia" and the why that is was explained in this previous post: https://www.reddit.com/EsotericOccult/s/P3ZkDJvXdM – where essentially there was talk on the Christ’s physical appearance and the fact that he was born with androgynous traits. This for example made it so that the character in question also displayed overly-sized pectorals that were rather exposed when compared to the rest of his body and were also rounded and protruding; sometimes even resembling female breasts (and that’s where the symbology of the rooster sticking its chest out and of Christ "with breasts" came from: – the rooster in the act of sticking its chest out: https://i.pinimg.com/originals/81/a6/a5/81a6a5da3c527f3ce0fe1648a7650001.jpg – and the depiction of Christ "with breasts" on the Notre-Dame church: https://gcm.rmnet.be/clients/rmnet/content/medias/christus_750.jpg). This (physical) androgynous nature of the "son of god" was then explained through metaphors and in spiritual terms by Christianity and Gnosticism with the fact that when Sophia incarnated she incarnated as "Jesus Christ".
But – there was also a female-incarnated Sophia; which incarnated as a woman and the figure in question is sometimes identified with the "Thetokos" i.e. "mother of god" Mary – or alternatively substituted by Mary Magdalene the consort of Jesus (being called the "Bride of Christ"). The fact that the Templars were claimed to have worshipped the prophetic head of a female alongside their god refers to the cult of the pagan goddess who corresponded to the Magdalene – where; she was claimed in pagan mythology to have been decapitated or to have been "half-decapitated" (her throat cut significantly to the point of almost detaching her head from her neck) and the goddess in question possessed oracular as well as prophetic gifts. The notion of Magdalene who corresponds to this pagan goddess was addressed in this previous post: https://www.reddit.com/EsotericOccult/s/iHlaRrZnzL. (The head that the Templars held was of course symbolic and not the literal real head. But what was important is what that symbol represented to them – rather than to whom the skull belonged because it was a simple human skull taken from a cadaver).
So essentially the Templars were worshipping both Christ and Magdalene through pagan imagery (Christ being "Sophia" himself and Magdalene being the "female Sophia" who’s the counterpart of the Messiah); something which was not acceptable to the Church – and also because they were worshipping Christ in his real nature as opposed to the heavily filtered and altered version that Christianity gave of him – thus opposing the "official" canon established by the Church altogether.

For my world, magic is something that is far from natural. Instead of keeping magic as a widespread thing, or something that can be learned with patience, its entirely limited to gods. Items can be "enchanted" through various means, gaining special traits based on the God that enchanted them, however this is limited to the item. Anyone can use enchantments, its not limited to specifics.
The only existing source of raw magic is an as of yet unnamed "miracle mineral", which is essentially the crystallized residue left behind from the creation of life. The material itself is highly sought out for its use in batteries, able to put out energy for an essentially unlimited time.
People can however still use magic, and it comes in the form of a contracted sickness, similar to radiation poisoning, which ive dubbed "affliction". Affliction is caused by exposure to the miracle mineral, and can very quickly build up inside of someone. Someone who is afflicted will begin to degrade both mentally and physically, proportional to the severity of the affliction, but they will gain magical abilities, similarly proportional in strength to severity. Magic ability tends to grow as affliction progesses, as the afflicted continues to degrade. Sometimes the degradation of affliction can be slowed by taking certain measures, but it varies from person to person.
Magic itself ranges drastically in both strength and ability, being heavily based on the individual afflicted, and the severity of affliction. The mental aspect of affliction heavily feeds back in to the ability, and so the magic typically manifests in a form that has some connection to the afflicted.
For example, one character who is quite heavily afflicted has been "bound" to a lighter he bought before hed been afflicted, and now has to keep the lighter on him at all times or he very quickly degrades.
Just looking for general opinions on this magic system, im not big on worldbuilsing but i daydream a lot lmao, and some things are more "concrete" than others

Life is life. One minute it's great and next it's not. The character Forest Gump was somewhat acute when he referred to life being like a box of chocolates. Not a bad metaphor but one has to remember there's a lot of crappy chocolates out there. For those who are interested in the back story I suggest you look into my previous posts. A lot more of this will mank sense. As one may guess they don't show a shining example of life. At least not my life in its current state.
Four and a half months ago my wife of ten years left. She told me she "needed some space". This happened on December 31st. It made a new year's eve to remember. If only I could forget. The next day I drove her to her son's house an hour away and we parted company. On February 12th she left for an area 900 km away. She intended to be there for a month but as far as I know she's still there now. Throughout the entire time (since January 1st) we continued to talk via text and phone calls until late April. For a while it looked like things were slowly getting better and reconciliation was going to happen. I suppose they were perceptions of a hopeful heart.
Towards the end of April she started to talk about friendship and how it's important in a relationship. I agree it is important. I both strongly feel one needs to have a close friendship with their spouse to have a loving relationship and marriage. She then mentioned I need to be open to love again. Even if it wasn't with her. I wasn't sure what she was meaning when she said it but I believe I do now.
She also talked about personal growth (hers and mine) and how we're talking now but she didn't want to give me "false hope" of a rekindle. She didn't want to dangle a carrot. She said she just needed more time. I told her if we were to reconcile it would be a slow process of beginning again from the start and it would be hard to know what would happen as we're both different people now. She agreed with me on it all. Keep in mind I still love her deeply. I know she still loves me even though it's buried just under the surface of her current feelings.
Generally these are all great signs but this is what caught my attention. When talking about friendship and being open to loving again and not wanting to give false hope she eluded to (didn't say anything outright) her moving back into the house where we could live as roommates. And if I or her were to meet someone... She didn't say any of this directly but made a few references to this sort of living arrangement. Hearing it all bothered me and I told her this wasn't a six week fling in high school and I have to be in math class with you/her. We had a marriage and I wasn't interested at all in being downgraded to "friends".
Love can't just be turned off. Maybe for some but not me.
Once I figured out what she was trying to get me to agree to I told her I think it's unhealthy for us to continue talking. She said she was confused and thought I was doing great emotionally but respected my decision to end contact. We parted company with her saying to "take care of myself". I said the same. There was no more for the rest of the day. I reflected on our conversation for the rest of the day and evening. I was still thinking about it when I woke up the next morning. I felt things weren't fully clear for either of us.
Early the next morning I sent her a message to call me when she was ready. She did a few hours later. When we spoke she was sheepish and soft in her communication. She'd often been cold and hard before. I told her I believed our continued talking was hindering her personal growth and mine. She didn't say anything about it but said she wasn't ready to have me gone from her life yet. "Yet"... What does that mean? I didn't ask and I'm not sure I want to know. Was she using me (and my sons) to ween her off of us? I don't know but I its possible.
We talked about my sons and life's happenings for a while. She talked about not having any idea of what she wanted now or later. Not even knowing what she was going to make for lunch. Normally she knew and planned for things several days or weeks or even months in advance. This indecisiveness was something somewhat new. I first noticed this behavior about and a half year ago.
After a while I redirected the conversation back to our communication. I said we could do one of three things. We could continue on talking the way we have been but I didn't believe it was at all helpful for either of us. She said nothing. Or we could pick up talking a lot more to where she responded with not being ready for that yet. ("Yet". What does that mean?) Or we could stop talking altogether and maybe sometime again in the future after a few weeks. She was noticeable bothered by this suggestion but agreed it was probably best. She said the love for one another is there but it's the in love part that is in question. I didn't agree or disagree. I noticed that after the decision was made she kept reaching for topics to keep our conversation going. We ended our phone call with us both saying "bye for now". Two days later she sent a picture showing it was snowing where she was. I didn't respond.
It's now been almost three weeks since we talked. It's been difficult. It feels like the break up has happened all over again. I'm 50 years old. I'll be 51 in July. I've had more than my fill of this emotional pain and I just want it to end. I want peace.
I know she'll be back at some point but I don't know when. My fear is that I'll have to go through all this again for a third time and it may just be a lot harder
Tdlr: I have no idea what to do or think or even say anymore.

Claude Debussy, a prominent figure in Impressionist music, revolutionized harmony, melody, and cultural perceptions in music through his innovative compositions. Let's break down his impact statistically:

1. Harmony:
   
   • Debussy's harmonic language moved away from traditional functional harmony, embracing modal and pentatonic scales, whole-tone scales, and parallel chords.
   • Statistical analysis could show a decrease in the prevalence of traditional tonic-dominant relationships and an increase in the use of non-functional harmonic progressions.
   • Debussy's harmonic vocabulary expanded the tonal palette available to composers, influencing subsequent generations of musicians.
2. Melodies:
   
   • Debussy's melodies often featured fluid contours, incorporating elements of pentatonic and whole-tone scales.
   • Statistical analysis might reveal a departure from conventional melodic structures, with a focus on atmospheric, evocative lines rather than traditional, singable melodies.
   • His melodies often blurred the lines between melody and accompaniment, contributing to the overall impressionistic aesthetic of his music.
3. Culture:
   
   • Debussy's compositions challenged traditional notions of form, structure, and tonality, reflecting the changing cultural landscape of the late 19th and early 20th centuries.
   • His rejection of German Romanticism and embrace of French musical traditions helped to establish a distinct national identity in French music.
   • Through his use of exoticism and non-Western musical elements, Debussy contributed to the broader cultural fascination with the exotic and the mysterious during the fin de siècle period.

Statistical analysis of Debussy's compositions could provide insights into the frequency of specific harmonic progressions, melodic contours, and stylistic features. By examining patterns and trends within his music, researchers can better understand his unique contributions to the development of music harmony, melody, and cultural expression.

• Prelude to the Afternoon of a Faun (Prélude à l'après-midi d'un faune): This orchestral tone poem, inspired by Stéphane Mallarmé's poem, is a quintessential example of Debussy's impressionistic style. Its dreamy atmosphere, fluid melodies, and innovative harmonic language evoke the sensual world of the faun.
• La Mer: Debussy's symphonic sketches for orchestra, La Mer, depict the ever-changing moods of the sea. Through innovative orchestration and harmonic exploration, Debussy creates a vivid sonic portrait of the sea's power and beauty.
• Clair de Lune: This piano piece, part of the Suite Bergamasque, is one of Debussy's most famous works. Its gentle, shimmering harmonies and delicate melodies evoke the moonlit tranquility of a nighttime landscape.

1. Cultural Examples:
   • French National Identity: Debussy's rejection of German Romanticism and his embrace of French musical traditions helped to establish a distinct national identity in French music. His compositions, with their evocative depictions of French landscapes and folklore, contributed to a sense of cultural pride and nationalism.
   • Impressionist Movement: Debussy's music is often associated with the Impressionist movement in painting, which sought to capture the fleeting impressions of light and color. Like the Impressionist painters, Debussy focused on atmosphere, texture, and suggestion rather than precise detail, creating music that is more about mood and impression than literal representation.
   • Cultural Exchange and Exoticism: Debussy's fascination with non-Western music and exoticism is evident in works like Pagodes from Estampes and La soirée dans Grenade from Iberia. These pieces incorporate elements of Javanese gamelan music and Spanish flamenco, reflecting the broader cultural fascination with the exotic and the mysterious during the fin de siècle period.

Discovering Delicacy in the Quinzaine Form**
Summary:
A quinzaine is a poetic form with roots in French literature. It comprises exactly fifteen syllables, distributed across three lines. This concise structure encourages poets to convey meaning with precision and brevity, capturing moments of beauty or insight.
Examples:

1. "Spring Day" by Paul Verlaine (translated).
   
2. "Night" by Louise Glück.
   
3. "Quinzaine" by Raymond Queneau (translated).
   

Tips for Creative Writing:

• Syllabic Economy: Make each syllable count; the limited space demands precision.
  
• Focus on Imagery: Use vivid and evocative language to create a powerful image or emotion.
  
• Play with Line Breaks: Experiment with line breaks to enhance the poem's rhythm and impact.
  

Questions for Exploration:

1. How does the brevity of the quinzaine impact the reader's engagement?
   
2. Can you identify contemporary poets who have embraced the quinzaine in their work?
   

Additional Resources:

• Explore the works of French poets such as Paul Éluard for classic quinzaines.
  
• Read modern poets who experiment with syllabic constraints for inspiration.
  

Creative Writing Prompt:
Step 1: Choose a moment, emotion, or image to capture in your quinzaine.
Step 2: Compose three lines, ensuring they contain exactly fifteen syllables.
Step 3: Experiment with different line breaks to enhance the poem's rhythm and meaning.
Example:
Cherry blossoms bloom, a delicate array (5) Soft petals whisper, a fleeting ballet (5) Spring's sweet quinzaine, in nature's display (5)
Remember: The quinzaine's succinct nature challenges poets to distill profound moments into a compact form.

Previous post

A lapdog's brainless zeal

The Entourage! Whence comes¹ such creatures so eager to abandon all pretense of the sedentary? One envisages haste of blubbering excitement, slippery gleam in the eye, a lapdog’s brainless zeal, as a canvas bag is stuffed full of slips and whatnot, with all the grace of a fakir backstage moments before performing before a gouty king. A whirlwind rush through rooms like shrines, and then out!

We get Flicker dropping back into his more heightened style, starting off with a declamation. Remember how we ended the last section

He would unveil himself in Farrog, and then they would all see. Calap Roud, that stunning watery-eyed dancer, Purse Snippet, and the Entourage too—

So this is very much an interruption. Previously we had Flicker placing himself inside Brash's head, until he mentions the Entourage, at which point he switches completely and breaks out into this much more heightened description.
Flicker is back in his picture-painting mode as well, as he imagines the backgrounds of these girls. The first sentence is posed as a question, but is really more of a statement. I love the phrase "abandon all pretense of the sedentary". They were clearly from a wealthy background, living a carefree life before, but now they've chosen to drop it all to follow (in this instance literally follow) their favorite artist.
He imagines the scenario surrounding their departure, with the "blubbering excitement", a "slippery gleam in the eye", and of course "a lapdog's brainless zeal". I'm curious about the "slippery" descriptor there. Especially when paired with the lapdog comment, it calls to mind a dog skidding and sliding on a slippery floor as they're completely unable to contain their excitement. Does anyone have a different reading?
Then they stuff a canvas bag full of slips (as in the clothing, not as in paper slips) and "whatnot", showing how they're clearly not thinking this through, but rather just throwing things in their bag and running out the door. I love the comparison to the fakir. First of all, it hearkens back to the Arabian Nights inspiration, while also giving us the image of a fakir rushing to get ready for his act, but more important is how it works as a metaphor.
The Entourage (who as we will soon learn are all young women) are here posed as a performer, performing in front of an old, fat, wealthy man. It really spotlights the power imbalance between them and their idol. Then we end the paragraph on a sentence that I'm having a really hard time figuring out. What is the significance of the rooms being like shrines? Shrines are (definitionally) places of worship. So it's like they're rushing past these places intended for worship in order to worship their idol, perhaps implying that it would have been more productive to stay and worship a real god. But these aren't shrines, but rather rooms like shrines, so it would be a worship of the home or something in that direction. I don't think this would imply a worship of domesticity, the metaphor is not fleshed out enough for that. I think it's simply saying that they should rather try to stay connected to their roots. I must say I'm not fully convinced by this reading. What do you all think?

Holding up a mirror

Pattering feet, a trio, all converging in unsightly gallop quick to feminize into a skip and prance once He Who Is Worshipped is in sight. The Entourage accompanies the Perfect Artist everywhere, gatherings great and small, public and intimate. They build the walls of the formidable, impregnable keep that is the Perfect Artist’s ego. They patrol the moat, flinging away all but the sweetest defecatory intimations of mortality. They stand sentinel in every postern gate, they gush down every sluice, they are the stained glass to paint rainbows upon their beloved’s perfectly turned profile.

I absolutely love this image we get here of these three girls "converging in unsightly gallop" with their "pattering feet". It's juxtaposing two images, one dainty and the other the exact opposite. If you've seen one of those videos of cows being released out to pasture after the winter, that's basically what I'm picturing. But as soon as they're in the presence of their idol they switch into an exaggeratedly feminine gait.
Then there's the intentionally vague description of their idol. We don't get the name, but he's called He Who Is Worshipped and the Perfect Artist. This is a reminder that we're not talking about particulars, but rather the general case, in particular how people behave in real life fandoms. Let's examine the rest of this paragraph while keeping in mind that this is Erikson is holding up a mirror to us. And you thought you were safe?
The Entourage is always where their artist is. I think this is especially true in the modern day where fans have practically unlimited access to their favourite artists. And they act as defenders of their artist, and notice how at no point here we get any sense that this Perfect Artist asked for any such thing. They build up their own unassailable version of their artist, and then dismiss any criticism except the most basic, toothless ones.
Finally we get these three statements, two quick ones, and a longer one. They "stand sentinel..." is essentially a continuation of the previous sentence. Then they "gush down every sluice". This is a strange turn of phrase to say the least. A sluice is of course a sort of water channel, and since we're in this castle metaphor, it's likely meant as a preventative measure against flooding. But it's not water that's the risk here, but the gushing of the fans.
And lastly they are the stained glass windows that "paint rainbows" on their idol (with a nice alliteration on perfectly and profile). I really like this one. They are not only viewing their idol through rose-tinted glass, but they have made themselves a piece of stained glass, that colors the artist in every color of the rainbow. They are creating a false, or at least exaggerated, image of the artist, and projecting that image to others as well. I think this whole description really mirrors how fanatically devoted some people can get around their favorite artist, and I don't think we should exclude ourselves from this.

Let's back up a little

But let us not snick and snack overmuch, for each life is a wonder unto itself, and neither contempt nor pity do a soul sound measures of health, lest some issue of envy squeeze free in unexpectedly public revelation. The object of this breathless admiration must wait for each sweet woman’s moment upon the stage in the bull’s eye lantern light of our examination.

Flicker yet again addresses the audience directly. The phrase "snick and snack" here is interesting. A snick can of course be a small cut, and there's definitely been enough of those so far. I think the snack is not intended to have a semantic meaning, but is rather intended to complement the onomatopoeic sound of snick. The word "overmuch" is also doing a lot of heavy lifting here. Some snicking and snacking is fine, but let's not get carried away.
The "each life is a wonder..." part is hilarious. This is definitely an example of overpraising, where Flicker uses hyperbolic language while implying a much more subdued meaning. He's now spent two whole paragraphs detailing how ridiculous and vapid the Entourage is, but now he's all "oh the miracle of life etc. etc." So even when he's talking about how he should stop mocking them, he continues the mockery. Absolutely savage.
He then encourages us to not view them with pity or contempt. Possibly because it would be condescending to do so. Certainly nobody likes being viewed that way, and Flicker claims that it is at best unhelpful to take those attitudes. I am a bit confused, however, about the mention of envy. Is Flicker saying that he is envious of them? Or is he warning us to not be envious? Is there a risk, when expressing pity or contempt, of appearing envious? Are the Entourage themselves envious when we do that? I admit I'm kind of lost here. What do you think?
Flicker ends by calling attention to the fact that we haven't really discussed the Entourage's Perfect Artist at all. He's been this remote figure this whole time, almost irrelevant to the conduct of his fans. Note also how he's called an "object". That word has been used once before in this story, and it was to describe the way Purse Snippet was viewed by Calap Roud. This is not an accident. FlickeErikson is saying that the way the Entourage views their Perfect Artist is not entirely dissimilar to the way Calap Roud, a disgusting old pervert, leers at a much younger woman. Again, this is not lust for the artist themself, but rather for the godlike image that the fans have constructed of the artist.
And before we can know that artist, we are going to be introduced to these three young women, each more ridiculous than the last, before we get to their Perfect Artist. Indeed, they must suffer the "bull's eye lantern light of our examination". This is a great description of what Flicker has been doing so far with his ruthless introduction. He also doesn't call it an interrogation or even a description. No, he's simply examining each of these characters, down to their core².
And that does it for this week's post. Next time we'll be discussing Sellup, the oldest member of the Entourage. See you all next week!
¹ I don't know exactly what to do with this seeming error. It strikes me as an editing artifact. That is, Erikson originally wrote this sentence differently, then changed the wording but forgot to change the whole sentence.
² And it's worth remembering that he may well be making all of this up.

Hi!
I hope someone knowledgeable will be able to guide/help me.
I am 22 years old - my problem is that I have been experiencing a strong impostor syndrome from the beginning. I have done the DIVA test three times with different psychologists. Each time I scored high, and basically, everything fits together rationally. I do indeed recognize the impostor symptom in myself. I discussed this with a friend who is finishing psychology studies and also has ADHD, and he supports my perspective.
Additionally, my father, who committed suicide, most likely also struggled with ADHD (based on the DIVA methodology, I asked the family and matched it to events that complicated his life further, plus, of course, chronic depression).Everything was rather stable until 3 days ago when I had bad lack for a psychiatrist (where I did the last DIVA and a specialist was recommended) - an online visit. I don't want to sound conceited (also, I'm not a doctor), but I had the impression that the psychiatrist I consulted often didn't know the answers to my questions and was evasive. He seemed more interested in my money than in helping and understanding me (I have seen 2 psychologists, 2 therapists, and 3 psychiatrists, so I have a comparison whether someone cares or is genuinely interested). I have scheduled my next appointment with a doctor that is leading ADHD treatment here in Poland
Returning to the point, my impostor syndrome flared up additionally when the psychiatrist stated during the interview that "the symptoms I experience are rather mild, or I somehow manage them, otherwise I would have problems with studying and working" (my professional life is okay, but about 4 times below my potential because I have issues with fluctuations in activity - I work intensely for several days, and then have a few days of a depressive period - it's not like manic-depression, it's rather about activity and the ability to motivate myself to do things, not finding less painful activities, etc.). This surprised me because I perceive them differently (and they seem more concrete than just excusing my inefficiencies). So, of course, I continued the previously started research to feel more at ease.
I was prescribed a dosage that seems non-standard: Medikinet 10mg CR daily, one in the morning and one in the afternoon, and I can double it and then report back after finishing.All this has led to many questions and overthinking. The first day, 10mg didn't make much of an impression on me; it settled me a bit, I felt some interest, took the second dose in the afternoon as recommended, and, of course, couldn't sleep (despite 6mg of melatonin).
Yesterday, I took 20mg in the morning and felt the need to organize everything, and I cleaned the whole apartment, including scrubbing under the closet.Despite this, the impostor syndrome is so insidious that I keep wondering if I'm imagining things, over-researched, and adjusted the answers or interpretations of my life and events to fit the thesis.It's generally a terrible issue because I hope that after years of struggling with "depression," it will finally be addressed, and I can stop dealing with such matters and just focus on work - I am 22 years old, and my first visit to a psychiatrist for depression was around 15-16 years old.
Currently, I have the biggest dilemmas in the following areas, and I really hope someone could shed some light or guide me:

1. **Methylphenidate in a person without ADHD** - I couldn't find anything concrete on whether I can verify this - if, for example, I don't have ADHD, how should it affect me vs. someone with ADHD. It's so vaguely described on the internet that it's not clear if there's a concrete way to verify this to avoid questioning my own observations. Obviously, a solid diagnosis like a blood test or MRI for other diseases won't be available, but by nature, I'm a skeptic and need it grounded to sleep peacefully and not get into unnecessary discussions with people who barely understand the subject.
   
2. **Effectiveness of diagnostics** - I haven't encountered any data on how often diagnoses are invalidated. I read on Reddit (unfortunately, there are few better discussion places with a lot of content) that one girl had an ADHD diagnosis, took Adderall, and after about 2 years, it turned out it wasn't ADHD but some compulsive disorder. Is there any information on how many people with an ADHD diagnosis and prescribed treatment are misdiagnosed? It's known that in the USA, people sometimes stretch the truth to get Adderall, but I'm sure you understand my point and the essence of the matter.
   
3. **Dosage** - I have a bit of time left before my next appointment and wonder what I can do (but nothing stupid). My friend, for example, has 30mg CR in the morning and then has those on-demand Medikinet, which keeps him okay later in the day and doesn't cause sleep problems; he's considering switching to Concerta. From my psychiatrist, I basically got the information I already mentioned plus to avoid abusing alcohol. Is there anything I can change in these recommendations to not waste time? If I just take 30mg or 40mg in the morning (of course, gradually and checking the response weekly), am I exposing myself to any problems? I found out on my own that I won't die, but I'm interested in the effectiveness of this treatment, not messing around.
   
4. **A question completely omitted by the psychiatrist, and I didn't get any specific information, which is quite important to me**. In all the DIVA tests, I scored higher in adulthood than in childhood. In the last one, it came out as follows: Summary of symptoms according to DSM-5: I. Attention Deficit: Adulthood: 8/9, Childhood: 7/9 II. Hyperactivity and impulsivity: Adulthood: 9/9, Childhood: 8/9 III. Experienced symptoms are a source of significant problems, manifesting in at least 2 areas of life in both childhood and adulthood. After my own analysis, talking to my mom and sister, it's hard to deny that I had serious problems in areas affected by ADHD plus many “less obvious” symptoms that I learned about from PsychiatraPlus from Mr. Jóźwiak (thanks God he records because books and articles in Poland on the internet are often a disaster) in quite significant intensity. I'm still afraid of cognitive bias and fitting the situation to the thesis.
   

I noticed an increase in many symptoms attributed to ADHD after 2022 (when my father committed suicide, which involved PTSD therapy because I saw a lot, plus a depressive episode). Before, I might have had 2-3 such severe depressive episodes. I skimmed through (I emphasize because I might have missed something that would answer my question, and I don't want to appear lazy coming for a free ready-made solution) meta-analyses (The World Federation of ADHD International Consensus Statement: 208 Evidence-based Conclusions about the Disorder). This fragment intrigued me: "ADHD is rarely caused by a single genetic or environmental risk factor, but most cases of ADHD are caused by the combined effects of many genetic and environmental risks, each having a very small effect."
This, of course, suggested a possible scenario - a father with ADHD + trauma could have exacerbated my symptoms, hence now they are more noticeable to me than before, although it resonates more with me that conditions, tasks, and challenges I face have changed. I didn't observe myself in this regard before; I didn't have the knowledge; I attributed my failures to a different “legend” (I wasn't taught consequences, laziness, lack of discipline, if I tried harder, etc.) than ADHD. Obviously, I'm not so infantile as to expect someone to try to resolve this issue, but based on the current conclusive knowledge, how do you assess my line of thinking, does it hold together? Could I check anything else additionally?
To conclude, I know I need to find a good psychiatrist; I have one in mind, but it's pointless at this moment when I have prescriptions and "recommendations" to schedule and pay for a visit since I'll probably get not very in-depth answers (I also understand doctors don't have 2 hours to give a lecture on how and why things work), rather reassuring and "we'll observe." Whenever something stresses or confuses me, I just try to understand it, and when it turns out that my inherent skepticism activated unnecessarily, the problem disappears from the radar.
I hope someone will guide me to the right materials that will tell me a bit more about these issues. Once again, thank you in advance for any response and time spent just reading this post. If additional questions arise to provide a better answer, I am happy to respond.

Hi!
I hope someone knowledgeable will be able to guide/help me.
I am 22 years old - my problem is that I have been experiencing a strong impostor syndrome from the beginning. I have done the DIVA test three times with different psychologists. Each time I scored high, and basically, everything fits together rationally. I do indeed recognize the impostor symptom in myself. I discussed this with a friend who is finishing psychology studies and also has ADHD, and he supports my perspective.
Additionally, my father, who committed suicide, most likely also struggled with ADHD (based on the DIVA methodology, I asked the family and matched it to events that complicated his life further, plus, of course, chronic depression).Everything was rather stable until 3 days ago when I had bad lack for a psychiatrist (where I did the last DIVA and a specialist was recommended) - an online visit. I don't want to sound conceited (also, I'm not a doctor), but I had the impression that the psychiatrist I consulted often didn't know the answers to my questions and was evasive. He seemed more interested in my money than in helping and understanding me (I have seen 2 psychologists, 2 therapists, and 3 psychiatrists, so I have a comparison whether someone cares or is genuinely interested). I have scheduled my next appointment with a doctor that is leading ADHD treatment here in Poland
Returning to the point, my impostor syndrome flared up additionally when the psychiatrist stated during the interview that "the symptoms I experience are rather mild, or I somehow manage them, otherwise I would have problems with studying and working" (my professional life is okay, but about 4 times below my potential because I have issues with fluctuations in activity - I work intensely for several days, and then have a few days of a depressive period - it's not like manic-depression, it's rather about activity and the ability to motivate myself to do things, not finding less painful activities, etc.). This surprised me because I perceive them differently (and they seem more concrete than just excusing my inefficiencies). So, of course, I continued the previously started research to feel more at ease.
I was prescribed a dosage that seems non-standard: Medikinet 10mg CR daily, one in the morning and one in the afternoon, and I can double it and then report back after finishing.All this has led to many questions and overthinking. The first day, 10mg didn't make much of an impression on me; it settled me a bit, I felt some interest, took the second dose in the afternoon as recommended, and, of course, couldn't sleep (despite 6mg of melatonin).
Yesterday, I took 20mg in the morning and felt the need to organize everything, and I cleaned the whole apartment, including scrubbing under the closet.Despite this, the impostor syndrome is so insidious that I keep wondering if I'm imagining things, over-researched, and adjusted the answers or interpretations of my life and events to fit the thesis.It's generally a terrible issue because I hope that after years of struggling with "depression," it will finally be addressed, and I can stop dealing with such matters and just focus on work - I am 22 years old, and my first visit to a psychiatrist for depression was around 15-16 years old.
Currently, I have the biggest dilemmas in the following areas, and I really hope someone could shed some light or guide me:

1. **Methylphenidate in a person without ADHD** - I couldn't find anything concrete on whether I can verify this - if, for example, I don't have ADHD, how should it affect me vs. someone with ADHD. It's so vaguely described on the internet that it's not clear if there's a concrete way to verify this to avoid questioning my own observations. Obviously, a solid diagnosis like a blood test or MRI for other diseases won't be available, but by nature, I'm a skeptic and need it grounded to sleep peacefully and not get into unnecessary discussions with people who barely understand the subject.
   
2. **Effectiveness of diagnostics** - I haven't encountered any data on how often diagnoses are invalidated. I read on Reddit (unfortunately, there are few better discussion places with a lot of content) that one girl had an ADHD diagnosis, took Adderall, and after about 2 years, it turned out it wasn't ADHD but some compulsive disorder. Is there any information on how many people with an ADHD diagnosis and prescribed treatment are misdiagnosed? It's known that in the USA, people sometimes stretch the truth to get Adderall, but I'm sure you understand my point and the essence of the matter.
   
3. **Dosage** - I have a bit of time left before my next appointment and wonder what I can do (but nothing stupid). My friend, for example, has 30mg CR in the morning and then has those on-demand Medikinet, which keeps him okay later in the day and doesn't cause sleep problems; he's considering switching to Concerta. From my psychiatrist, I basically got the information I already mentioned plus to avoid abusing alcohol. Is there anything I can change in these recommendations to not waste time? If I just take 30mg or 40mg in the morning (of course, gradually and checking the response weekly), am I exposing myself to any problems? I found out on my own that I won't die, but I'm interested in the effectiveness of this treatment, not messing around.
   
4. **A question completely omitted by the psychiatrist, and I didn't get any specific information, which is quite important to me**. In all the DIVA tests, I scored higher in adulthood than in childhood. In the last one, it came out as follows: Summary of symptoms according to DSM-5: I. Attention Deficit: Adulthood: 8/9, Childhood: 7/9 II. Hyperactivity and impulsivity: Adulthood: 9/9, Childhood: 8/9 III. Experienced symptoms are a source of significant problems, manifesting in at least 2 areas of life in both childhood and adulthood. After my own analysis, talking to my mom and sister, it's hard to deny that I had serious problems in areas affected by ADHD plus many “less obvious” symptoms that I learned about from PsychiatraPlus from Mr. Jóźwiak (thanks God he records because books and articles in Poland on the internet are often a disaster) in quite significant intensity. I'm still afraid of cognitive bias and fitting the situation to the thesis.
   

I noticed an increase in many symptoms attributed to ADHD after 2022 (when my father committed suicide, which involved PTSD therapy because I saw a lot, plus a depressive episode). Before, I might have had 2-3 such severe depressive episodes. I skimmed through (I emphasize because I might have missed something that would answer my question, and I don't want to appear lazy coming for a free ready-made solution) meta-analyses (The World Federation of ADHD International Consensus Statement: 208 Evidence-based Conclusions about the Disorder). This fragment intrigued me: "ADHD is rarely caused by a single genetic or environmental risk factor, but most cases of ADHD are caused by the combined effects of many genetic and environmental risks, each having a very small effect."
This, of course, suggested a possible scenario - a father with ADHD + trauma could have exacerbated my symptoms, hence now they are more noticeable to me than before, although it resonates more with me that conditions, tasks, and challenges I face have changed. I didn't observe myself in this regard before; I didn't have the knowledge; I attributed my failures to a different “legend” (I wasn't taught consequences, laziness, lack of discipline, if I tried harder, etc.) than ADHD. Obviously, I'm not so infantile as to expect someone to try to resolve this issue, but based on the current conclusive knowledge, how do you assess my line of thinking, does it hold together? Could I check anything else additionally?
To conclude, I know I need to find a good psychiatrist; I have one in mind, but it's pointless at this moment when I have prescriptions and "recommendations" to schedule and pay for a visit since I'll probably get not very in-depth answers (I also understand doctors don't have 2 hours to give a lecture on how and why things work), rather reassuring and "we'll observe." Whenever something stresses or confuses me, I just try to understand it, and when it turns out that my inherent skepticism activated unnecessarily, the problem disappears from the radar.
I hope someone will guide me to the right materials that will tell me a bit more about these issues. Once again, thank you in advance for any response and time spent just reading this post. If additional questions arise to provide a better answer, I am happy to respond.

Hi!
I hope someone knowledgeable will be able to guide/help me.
I am 22 years old - my problem is that I have been experiencing a strong impostor syndrome from the beginning. I have done the DIVA test three times with different psychologists. Each time I scored high, and basically, everything fits together rationally. I do indeed recognize the impostor symptom in myself. I discussed this with a friend who is finishing psychology studies and also has ADHD, and he supports my perspective.
Additionally, my father, who committed suicide, most likely also struggled with ADHD (based on the DIVA methodology, I asked the family and matched it to events that complicated his life further, plus, of course, chronic depression).Everything was rather stable until 3 days ago when I had bad lack for a psychiatrist (where I did the last DIVA and a specialist was recommended) - an online visit. I don't want to sound conceited (also, I'm not a doctor), but I had the impression that the psychiatrist I consulted often didn't know the answers to my questions and was evasive. He seemed more interested in my money than in helping and understanding me (I have seen 2 psychologists, 2 therapists, and 3 psychiatrists, so I have a comparison whether someone cares or is genuinely interested). I have scheduled my next appointment with a doctor that is leading ADHD treatment here in Poland
Returning to the point, my impostor syndrome flared up additionally when the psychiatrist stated during the interview that "the symptoms I experience are rather mild, or I somehow manage them, otherwise I would have problems with studying and working" (my professional life is okay, but about 4 times below my potential because I have issues with fluctuations in activity - I work intensely for several days, and then have a few days of a depressive period - it's not like manic-depression, it's rather about activity and the ability to motivate myself to do things, not finding less painful activities, etc.). This surprised me because I perceive them differently (and they seem more concrete than just excusing my inefficiencies). So, of course, I continued the previously started research to feel more at ease.
I was prescribed a dosage that seems non-standard: Medikinet 10mg CR daily, one in the morning and one in the afternoon, and I can double it and then report back after finishing.All this has led to many questions and overthinking. The first day, 10mg didn't make much of an impression on me; it settled me a bit, I felt some interest, took the second dose in the afternoon as recommended, and, of course, couldn't sleep (despite 6mg of melatonin).
Yesterday, I took 20mg in the morning and felt the need to organize everything, and I cleaned the whole apartment, including scrubbing under the closet.Despite this, the impostor syndrome is so insidious that I keep wondering if I'm imagining things, over-researched, and adjusted the answers or interpretations of my life and events to fit the thesis.It's generally a terrible issue because I hope that after years of struggling with "depression," it will finally be addressed, and I can stop dealing with such matters and just focus on work - I am 22 years old, and my first visit to a psychiatrist for depression was around 15-16 years old.
Currently, I have the biggest dilemmas in the following areas, and I really hope someone could shed some light or guide me:

1. **Methylphenidate in a person without ADHD** - I couldn't find anything concrete on whether I can verify this - if, for example, I don't have ADHD, how should it affect me vs. someone with ADHD. It's so vaguely described on the internet that it's not clear if there's a concrete way to verify this to avoid questioning my own observations. Obviously, a solid diagnosis like a blood test or MRI for other diseases won't be available, but by nature, I'm a skeptic and need it grounded to sleep peacefully and not get into unnecessary discussions with people who barely understand the subject.
   
2. **Effectiveness of diagnostics** - I haven't encountered any data on how often diagnoses are invalidated. I read on Reddit (unfortunately, there are few better discussion places with a lot of content) that one girl had an ADHD diagnosis, took Adderall, and after about 2 years, it turned out it wasn't ADHD but some compulsive disorder. Is there any information on how many people with an ADHD diagnosis and prescribed treatment are misdiagnosed? It's known that in the USA, people sometimes stretch the truth to get Adderall, but I'm sure you understand my point and the essence of the matter.
   
3. **Dosage** - I have a bit of time left before my next appointment and wonder what I can do (but nothing stupid). My friend, for example, has 30mg CR in the morning and then has those on-demand Medikinet, which keeps him okay later in the day and doesn't cause sleep problems; he's considering switching to Concerta. From my psychiatrist, I basically got the information I already mentioned plus to avoid abusing alcohol. Is there anything I can change in these recommendations to not waste time? If I just take 30mg or 40mg in the morning (of course, gradually and checking the response weekly), am I exposing myself to any problems? I found out on my own that I won't die, but I'm interested in the effectiveness of this treatment, not messing around.
   
4. **A question completely omitted by the psychiatrist, and I didn't get any specific information, which is quite important to me**. In all the DIVA tests, I scored higher in adulthood than in childhood. In the last one, it came out as follows: Summary of symptoms according to DSM-5: I. Attention Deficit: Adulthood: 8/9, Childhood: 7/9 II. Hyperactivity and impulsivity: Adulthood: 9/9, Childhood: 8/9 III. Experienced symptoms are a source of significant problems, manifesting in at least 2 areas of life in both childhood and adulthood. After my own analysis, talking to my mom and sister, it's hard to deny that I had serious problems in areas affected by ADHD plus many “less obvious” symptoms that I learned about from PsychiatraPlus from Mr. Jóźwiak (thanks God he records because books and articles in Poland on the internet are often a disaster) in quite significant intensity. I'm still afraid of cognitive bias and fitting the situation to the thesis.
   

I noticed an increase in many symptoms attributed to ADHD after 2022 (when my father committed suicide, which involved PTSD therapy because I saw a lot, plus a depressive episode). Before, I might have had 2-3 such severe depressive episodes. I skimmed through (I emphasize because I might have missed something that would answer my question, and I don't want to appear lazy coming for a free ready-made solution) meta-analyses (The World Federation of ADHD International Consensus Statement: 208 Evidence-based Conclusions about the Disorder). This fragment intrigued me: "ADHD is rarely caused by a single genetic or environmental risk factor, but most cases of ADHD are caused by the combined effects of many genetic and environmental risks, each having a very small effect."
This, of course, suggested a possible scenario - a father with ADHD + trauma could have exacerbated my symptoms, hence now they are more noticeable to me than before, although it resonates more with me that conditions, tasks, and challenges I face have changed. I didn't observe myself in this regard before; I didn't have the knowledge; I attributed my failures to a different “legend” (I wasn't taught consequences, laziness, lack of discipline, if I tried harder, etc.) than ADHD. Obviously, I'm not so infantile as to expect someone to try to resolve this issue, but based on the current conclusive knowledge, how do you assess my line of thinking, does it hold together? Could I check anything else additionally?
To conclude, I know I need to find a good psychiatrist; I have one in mind, but it's pointless at this moment when I have prescriptions and "recommendations" to schedule and pay for a visit since I'll probably get not very in-depth answers (I also understand doctors don't have 2 hours to give a lecture on how and why things work), rather reassuring and "we'll observe." Whenever something stresses or confuses me, I just try to understand it, and when it turns out that my inherent skepticism activated unnecessarily, the problem disappears from the radar.
I hope someone will guide me to the right materials that will tell me a bit more about these issues. Once again, thank you in advance for any response and time spent just reading this post. If additional questions arise to provide a better answer, I am happy to respond.

Hi!
I hope someone knowledgeable will be able to guide/help me.
I am 22 years old - my problem is that I have been experiencing a strong impostor syndrome from the beginning. I have done the DIVA test three times with different psychologists. Each time I scored high, and basically, everything fits together rationally. I do indeed recognize the impostor symptom in myself. I discussed this with a friend who is finishing psychology studies and also has ADHD, and he supports my perspective.
Additionally, my father, who committed suicide, most likely also struggled with ADHD (based on the DIVA methodology, I asked the family and matched it to events that complicated his life further, plus, of course, chronic depression).Everything was rather stable until 3 days ago when I had bad lack for a psychiatrist (where I did the last DIVA and a specialist was recommended) - an online visit. I don't want to sound conceited (also, I'm not a doctor), but I had the impression that the psychiatrist I consulted often didn't know the answers to my questions and was evasive. He seemed more interested in my money than in helping and understanding me (I have seen 2 psychologists, 2 therapists, and 3 psychiatrists, so I have a comparison whether someone cares or is genuinely interested). I have scheduled my next appointment with a doctor that is leading ADHD treatment here in Poland
Returning to the point, my impostor syndrome flared up additionally when the psychiatrist stated during the interview that "the symptoms I experience are rather mild, or I somehow manage them, otherwise I would have problems with studying and working" (my professional life is okay, but about 4 times below my potential because I have issues with fluctuations in activity - I work intensely for several days, and then have a few days of a depressive period - it's not like manic-depression, it's rather about activity and the ability to motivate myself to do things, not finding less painful activities, etc.). This surprised me because I perceive them differently (and they seem more concrete than just excusing my inefficiencies). So, of course, I continued the previously started research to feel more at ease.
I was prescribed a dosage that seems non-standard: Medikinet 10mg CR daily, one in the morning and one in the afternoon, and I can double it and then report back after finishing.All this has led to many questions and overthinking. The first day, 10mg didn't make much of an impression on me; it settled me a bit, I felt some interest, took the second dose in the afternoon as recommended, and, of course, couldn't sleep (despite 6mg of melatonin).
Yesterday, I took 20mg in the morning and felt the need to organize everything, and I cleaned the whole apartment, including scrubbing under the closet.Despite this, the impostor syndrome is so insidious that I keep wondering if I'm imagining things, over-researched, and adjusted the answers or interpretations of my life and events to fit the thesis.It's generally a terrible issue because I hope that after years of struggling with "depression," it will finally be addressed, and I can stop dealing with such matters and just focus on work - I am 22 years old, and my first visit to a psychiatrist for depression was around 15-16 years old.
Currently, I have the biggest dilemmas in the following areas, and I really hope someone could shed some light or guide me:

1. **Methylphenidate in a person without ADHD** - I couldn't find anything concrete on whether I can verify this - if, for example, I don't have ADHD, how should it affect me vs. someone with ADHD. It's so vaguely described on the internet that it's not clear if there's a concrete way to verify this to avoid questioning my own observations. Obviously, a solid diagnosis like a blood test or MRI for other diseases won't be available, but by nature, I'm a skeptic and need it grounded to sleep peacefully and not get into unnecessary discussions with people who barely understand the subject.
   
2. **Effectiveness of diagnostics** - I haven't encountered any data on how often diagnoses are invalidated. I read on Reddit (unfortunately, there are few better discussion places with a lot of content) that one girl had an ADHD diagnosis, took Adderall, and after about 2 years, it turned out it wasn't ADHD but some compulsive disorder. Is there any information on how many people with an ADHD diagnosis and prescribed treatment are misdiagnosed? It's known that in the USA, people sometimes stretch the truth to get Adderall, but I'm sure you understand my point and the essence of the matter.
   
3. **Dosage** - I have a bit of time left before my next appointment and wonder what I can do (but nothing stupid). My friend, for example, has 30mg CR in the morning and then has those on-demand Medikinet, which keeps him okay later in the day and doesn't cause sleep problems; he's considering switching to Concerta. From my psychiatrist, I basically got the information I already mentioned plus to avoid abusing alcohol. Is there anything I can change in these recommendations to not waste time? If I just take 30mg or 40mg in the morning (of course, gradually and checking the response weekly), am I exposing myself to any problems? I found out on my own that I won't die, but I'm interested in the effectiveness of this treatment, not messing around.
   
4. **A question completely omitted by the psychiatrist, and I didn't get any specific information, which is quite important to me**. In all the DIVA tests, I scored higher in adulthood than in childhood. In the last one, it came out as follows: Summary of symptoms according to DSM-5: I. Attention Deficit: Adulthood: 8/9, Childhood: 7/9 II. Hyperactivity and impulsivity: Adulthood: 9/9, Childhood: 8/9 III. Experienced symptoms are a source of significant problems, manifesting in at least 2 areas of life in both childhood and adulthood. After my own analysis, talking to my mom and sister, it's hard to deny that I had serious problems in areas affected by ADHD plus many “less obvious” symptoms that I learned about from PsychiatraPlus from Mr. Jóźwiak (thanks God he records because books and articles in Poland on the internet are often a disaster) in quite significant intensity. I'm still afraid of cognitive bias and fitting the situation to the thesis.
   

I noticed an increase in many symptoms attributed to ADHD after 2022 (when my father committed suicide, which involved PTSD therapy because I saw a lot, plus a depressive episode). Before, I might have had 2-3 such severe depressive episodes. I skimmed through (I emphasize because I might have missed something that would answer my question, and I don't want to appear lazy coming for a free ready-made solution) meta-analyses (The World Federation of ADHD International Consensus Statement: 208 Evidence-based Conclusions about the Disorder). This fragment intrigued me: "ADHD is rarely caused by a single genetic or environmental risk factor, but most cases of ADHD are caused by the combined effects of many genetic and environmental risks, each having a very small effect."
This, of course, suggested a possible scenario - a father with ADHD + trauma could have exacerbated my symptoms, hence now they are more noticeable to me than before, although it resonates more with me that conditions, tasks, and challenges I face have changed. I didn't observe myself in this regard before; I didn't have the knowledge; I attributed my failures to a different “legend” (I wasn't taught consequences, laziness, lack of discipline, if I tried harder, etc.) than ADHD. Obviously, I'm not so infantile as to expect someone to try to resolve this issue, but based on the current conclusive knowledge, how do you assess my line of thinking, does it hold together? Could I check anything else additionally?
To conclude, I know I need to find a good psychiatrist; I have one in mind, but it's pointless at this moment when I have prescriptions and "recommendations" to schedule and pay for a visit since I'll probably get not very in-depth answers (I also understand doctors don't have 2 hours to give a lecture on how and why things work), rather reassuring and "we'll observe." Whenever something stresses or confuses me, I just try to understand it, and when it turns out that my inherent skepticism activated unnecessarily, the problem disappears from the radar.
I hope someone will guide me to the right materials that will tell me a bit more about these issues. Once again, thank you in advance for any response and time spent just reading this post. If additional questions arise to provide a better answer, I am happy to respond.

Cover Art <<Previous Start Next >>
GLOSSARY This links to a post on the free section of my Patreon. Note: "Book 1" is chapters 1-59, "Book 2" is chapters 60-133, "Book 3", is 134-193, "Book 4" is CH 194-(ongoing)
Fuyuko, Derek, and Shizoku spent most of a day dealing with their accumulated gains and preparing for their first day of exploration. Shizoku spent a fair amount of that evening's time communing with Bip, her slime familiar. She needed to adjust what spells she had at the ready for dealing with a wetlands environment.
While she was studying her grimoire, Derek and Fuyuko were preparing more physical means of dealing with the wetlands. Most of their work had been dealt with by trading the boat for three pairs of proper swamp boots, but the footwear needed a little adjusting and resizing for each of them.
The over boots were a combination of different techniques for dealing with different sorts of mud, with the base being a raised wooden sole that 'winged' out to resist sinking further into soft mud that was deeper than the ridges raised the sole. These were attached to oiled leather over boots that were useful for wading. The wooden soles were detachable for prolonged wading where they would provide a hindrance.
Derek could reshape the wooden portion to match their feet exactly, and reshape metal fittings if needed, but leather and cloth needed manual adjustment. Given how long they were planning on using these for, it was important to make them fit as perfectly as possible to prevent blisters and sores, even with their normal footwear underneath the boots.
They began their exploration by using the mapping tools they had won in the library to learn the layout of the swamp near the town. It didn't take them long to realize that some of the islands moved very slowly, and Derek was able to use his elemental talents to investigate, leading to the disturbing realization that under the right conditions, mud could have currents and flows.
Shizoku's magic wasn't quite as effective as she would have liked, for most of it was designed to work in other environments. Magic designed to hide your tracks and traces didn't prevent you from making them in the first place, and so did not keep you from sinking into mud. She did have a spell designed to make traversal through any terrain safe and easy, but it didn't last very long and was best reserved for crossing smaller sections of really bad terrain.
Spells used for manipulating and altering plants could also provide small bridges, but these were limited by the strength of the nearby plants. Generally speaking, they were better for clearing plants out of the way.
These difficulties were inspiring ideas of future spells to research, but that required more time than just the little bit of rest they got each day.
Derek's powers were more consistent and easier to use repeatedly or for long periods, but the effects tended to not be as dramatic as the witch's spells. He could make the mud firmer or softer to a degree, but he couldn't create a solid path out of flowing silt for even a few minutes.
Fuyuko found that her long limbs and greater strength allowed her to move easier through the swamp then her friends could, just by virtue of being able to apply more force and leverage. This was why she was leading the way, Derek found it difficult to monitor the details of the mud around them while also working to firm it up constantly, and it was easiest for Fuyuko to cope with any sudden changes that Derek wasn't able to compensate for.
Their outward journey each day was mostly limited by Derek's stamina, and when he was approaching his limits they would use a combination of their maps and Shizoku's divination magics to find the best route back. Such spells required some precision in defining a destination, so they were not very useful when you didn't have a concrete destination in mind.
Because the trio were taking their time to be thorough and to explore all possibilities, it didn't take long for them to begin finding all the bounties that the swamp held in store for them. Shizoku was able to find plants with medical and alchemical uses, though she had to consult the tomes that she had stored in Bip's memories as wetland plants were not very familiar to her. Once she had identified any specific plant, she could give it to Fuyuko as a sample and the luponi could use her better senses to find more of that plant.
Fuyuko also caught the scent of some mud that was strangely familiar, and after she and Derek dug out some of the intensely colored clay, Shizoku was able to recognize it was a valuable type of clay used for making prized teapots and other pottery. This explained why the scent had been familiar to Fuyuko, as Kazue had been excited to introduce her to Cimbu and the fourteen-year-old had been fascinated by the ability to make the little clay dragon spit water without any magic involved and sometimes made some tea just to have an excuse to play with the tea pet and make him spit. Well, once she'd been shown how; tea wasn't something she'd had much experience with before.
Claiming the clay was more problematic. However much they might be able to claim in their explorations and bring back to town, there were only so many other explorers they could trade with as everyone had a limit to how much stuff they could physically haul out. In the end they decided on a single large sack of clay that would be stored in Fuyuko's spatially expanded backpack.
Derek did most of the work of 'mining' the clay, during which they made another discovery: Opals. There weren't an outrageous number of them, but they were decent-sized and high quality. These became a higher priority target than the clay itself, though they kept that too.
The teens didn't forget the lessons they'd been given about the previous level and wanted to fish here too. However, the water was murky in the places it was deep enough to possibly have fish, making it more difficult to know where the fish were.
It was only after they talked with people back at the town that they learned about fish traps, and set about making those. Specifically, eel traps. The eels were prized for both their skin and their flesh. Their skin was both durable and supple and came in a wide variety of colors and patterns, and their flesh was sweeter than most varieties found out in the world. As soon as they learned how to make and set eel traps, those were added to their routine during their explorations.
Their travels throughout the swamp also brought them to many of the scattered 'monster homes' throughout the swamp, including the time that Fuyuko nearly stepped on a kobold enjoying a nice relaxing mud bath. It was a shock for all three of them as none knew about the relatively recent acquisition of the small, scaled race.
Shizoku was fine with the kobold after she got over her shock, but she did less well when they met the crabbit, who was so kind as to sing for them. Not that any of them found the sight of the interior of the 'mouth' to be less than disturbing, but the effect on the little kitsune was profound as she tightened her lips into a forced smile despite the panic showing clearly in the lines and tension around her eyes. She did well enough to keep her reaction under control that the inhabitants chose to ignore it rather than call her out on it, which would have knocked down their standing in the witch's evaluation.
After about a week, they decided that their mapping and exploration of the swamp was about as good as it was going to get. It was time to approach the witch's hut that they'd avoided previously. The Fairy Witch was in a strange, almost manic mood and the trio quickly found out she was obsessed with creating new musical sounds.
"Alright kids," Carmilla said, "you want to pass my swamp? You have to help me out here. Look, the bards I've gotten my hands on have been great and all, even pretty damn creative. But I think I need something from people who don't know as much about music. Here's my workshop, I don't care if it's a new instrument or a new way of playing an old instrument, a different sort of harmony, or whatever. Gimme something new, and you can use anything you want here, the good stuff is in another building. Bah, this lot." She glared at a group of distant figures. "They're boring, won't even respond to me flirting with them, and not a musical bone in their bodies. Well, time to play the part. Have fun in there, but I don't really want to see you again until you got something for me."
The only one of them with any musical training at all was Shizoku, but it had never been something she'd pursued on her own. That left them somewhat aimlessly poking around the workshop and messing around with instruments they found, many of which were obviously experiments that were only finished enough to test.
That did eventually prove to be enough for inspiration. A large lute was laying on top of a narrow table, and Derek frowned thoughtfully at it. "I think I remember seeing something once that looked a little like that, but smaller. Like, it had a long board with a bunch of strings, way more than the lute, but the strings were on the top sort of like the lute, and it had a folding stand so that it sat on the ground. The lady who played it was set up in the square and taking tips, I guess to help pay her way? I don't know where she was traveling to or from, I only saw her once. I remember it being nice, but I don't remember what it sounded like exactly."
That was enough to start the ball rolling. "I think I know that one," Shizoku said, "Gran Gran has one tucked away. I don't think I've seen her play it though. Hmm. Well, she wants something new to her, and I don't think it's portable enough that most people are going to lug one down here, so maybe we can do that. I don't know how to tune without a tuning fork. Wait, Fuyuko, you have sharp ears, think you can figure out proper notes and a scale? "
Fuyuko looked at her blankly. "Um? I don't know, what does it involve?"
Shizoku gave her a quick rundown of how notes relate to each other with harmonies and gave an example by singing a few notes that were close to each other. "So like that, but cleaner. Only, we are supposed to be creative, and I know that there are different scales." She chewed on the idea for a little while more, thinking out loud while the others asked questions.
They agreed that the first step was going to be having a sounding box for the body, once Shizoku explained that was how the instrument amplified sound. Though that meant figuring out the size. Derek suggested that he try to make it as big as Carmilla could play. She wasn't as tall as Fuyuko, but she was pretty tall and had long arms and fingers.
The table seemed like a perfect frame to start with, even if they were going to destroy it, and the three of them set about scavenging the other instruments for parts. They snacked on strips of dried eel when they needed to take a break, and by evening they had a crude sound box built into what had once been the table. Even with Derek's wood-shaping skills, they were having trouble getting the salvaged parts to fit smoothly together into a single box with enough resonance.
Udup, the witch's shadow drake familiar, came out to check on them, and after getting a report on their progress offered to fetch them some food if they wanted to camp out here instead of trekking to town and back. The teens agreed that was the better idea, and it allowed them to tinker with ideas until they turned in for the night.
<<Previous Start Next >>
Also to be found on Royal Road.
My Patreon My Discord Top Web Novels - Romance.io - TVTropes
$3. : 10 Early chapters, lore excerpts $5. : 20 Early chapters, Short Stories $10 : 30+ Early chapters, New stories not published anywhere else (Until after I finish this story at least) . . . . . "A Girl and Her Dungeon", "The Celestine Fox", and AU Core 1: "Coreless"

Here's the question: If I were to SBR a braced pistol would the gun then be in violation of the AW ban (it would be under the 29 inches req)? Or does this still legally speaking count as a handgun for the purposes of the MD AW ban which keeps it from being affected by the barrel length requirement. To give a concrete example: MP5 with pistol brace, gets SBR'd through ATF, and then a folding stock is added. Legal or no? Thanks for any help.

As a side note, it takes you back to a bygone era. When American leaders were larger than life figures. Powerful men, who for whatever their faults were, cared about the country and its future. Today we have feckless dotards with soy hipster handlers.
Professor Woodrow Wilson once said that every man sent out from a university should be a man of his nation as well as a man of his time, and I am confident that the men and women who carry the honor of graduating from this institution will continue to give from their lives, from their talents, a high measure of public service and public support.
"There are few earthly things more beautiful than a university," wrote John Masefield in his tribute to English universities--and his words are equally true today. He did not refer to spires and towers, to campus greens and ivied walls. He admired the splendid beauty of the university, he said, because it was "a place where those who hate ignorance may strive to know, where those who perceive truth may strive to make others see."
I have, therefore, chosen this time and this place to discuss a topic on which ignorance too often abounds and the truth is too rarely perceived--yet it is the most important topic on earth: world peace.
What kind of peace do I mean? What kind of peace do we seek? Not a Pax Americana enforced on the world by American weapons of war. Not the peace of the grave or the security of the slave. I am talking about genuine peace, the kind of peace that makes life on earth worth living, the kind that enables men and nations to grow and to hope and to build a better life for their children--not merely peace for Americans but peace for all men and women--not merely peace in our time but peace for all time.
I speak of peace because of the new face of war. Total war makes no sense in an age when great powers can maintain large and relatively invulnerable nuclear forces and refuse to surrender without resort to those forces. It makes no sense in an age when a single nuclear weapon contains almost ten times the explosive force delivered by all the allied air forces in the Second World War. It makes no sense in an age when the deadly poisons produced by a nuclear exchange would be carried by wind and water and soil and seed to the far corners of the globe and to generations yet unborn.
Today the expenditure of billions of dollars every year on weapons acquired for the purpose of making sure we never need to use them is essential to keeping the peace. But surely the acquisition of such idle stockpiles--which can only destroy and never create--is not the only, much less the most efficient, means of assuring peace.
I speak of peace, therefore, as the necessary rational end of rational men. I realize that the pursuit of peace is not as dramatic as the pursuit of war--and frequently the words of the pursuer fall on deaf ears. But we have no more urgent task.
Some say that it is useless to speak of world peace or world law or world disarmament--and that it will be useless until the leaders of the Soviet Union adopt a more enlightened attitude. I hope they do. I believe we can help them do it. But I also believe that we must reexamine our own attitude--as individuals and as a Nation--for our attitude is as essential as theirs. And every graduate of this school, every thoughtful citizen who despairs of war and wishes to bring peace, should begin by looking inward--by examining his own attitude toward the possibilities of peace, toward the Soviet Union, toward the course of the cold war and toward freedom and peace here at home.
First: Let us examine our attitude toward peace itself. Too many of us think it is impossible. Too many think it unreal. But that is a dangerous, defeatist belief. It leads to the conclusion that war is inevitable--that mankind is doomed--that we are gripped by forces we cannot control.
We need not accept that view. Our problems are manmade--therefore, they can be solved by man. And man can be as big as he wants. No problem of human destiny is beyond human beings. Man's reason and spirit have often solved the seemingly unsolvable--and we believe they can do it again.
I am not referring to the absolute, infinite concept of peace and good will of which some fantasies and fanatics dream. I do not deny the value of hopes and dreams but we merely invite discouragement and incredulity by making that our only and immediate goal.
Let us focus instead on a more practical, more attainable peace-- based not on a sudden revolution in human nature but on a gradual evolution in human institutions--on a series of concrete actions and effective agreements which are in the interest of all concerned. There is no single, simple key to this peace--no grand or magic formula to be adopted by one or two powers. Genuine peace must be the product of many nations, the sum of many acts. It must be dynamic, not static, changing to meet the challenge of each new generation. For peace is a process--a way of solving problems.
With such a peace, there will still be quarrels and conflicting interests, as there are within families and nations. World peace, like community peace, does not require that each man love his neighbor--it requires only that they live together in mutual tolerance, submitting their disputes to a just and peaceful settlement. And history teaches us that enmities between nations, as between individuals, do not last forever. However fixed our likes and dislikes may seem, the tide of time and events will often bring surprising changes in the relations between nations and neighbors.
So let us persevere. Peace need not be impracticable, and war need not be inevitable. By defining our goal more clearly, by making it seem more manageable and less remote, we can help all peoples to see it, to draw hope from it, and to move irresistibly toward it.
Second: Let us reexamine our attitude toward the Soviet Union. It is discouraging to think that their leaders may actually believe what their propagandists write. It is discouraging to read a recent authoritative Soviet text on Military Strategy and find, on page after page, wholly baseless and incredible claims--such as the allegation that "American imperialist circles are preparing to unleash different types of wars . . . that there is a very real threat of a preventive war being unleashed by American imperialists against the Soviet Union . . . [and that] the political aims of the American imperialists are to enslave economically and politically the European and other capitalist countries . . . [and] to achieve world domination . . . by means of aggressive wars."
Truly, as it was written long ago: "The wicked flee when no man pursueth." Yet it is sad to read these Soviet statements--to realize the extent of the gulf between us. But it is also a warning--a warning to the American people not to fall into the same trap as the Soviets, not to see only a distorted and desperate view of the other side, not to see conflict as inevitable, accommodation as impossible, and communication as nothing more than an exchange of threats.
No government or social system is so evil that its people must be considered as lacking in virtue. As Americans, we find communism profoundly repugnant as a negation of personal freedom and dignity. But we can still hail the Russian people for their many achievements--in science and space, in economic and industrial growth, in culture and in acts of courage.
Among the many traits the peoples of our two countries have in common, none is stronger than our mutual abhorrence of war. Almost unique among the major world powers, we have never been at war with each other. And no nation in the history of battle ever suffered more than the Soviet Union suffered in the course of the Second World War. At least 20 million lost their lives. Countless millions of homes and farms were burned or sacked. A third of the nation's territory, including nearly two thirds of its industrial base, was turned into a wasteland--a loss equivalent to the devastation of this country east of Chicago.
Today, should total war ever break out again--no matter how--our two countries would become the primary targets. It is an ironic but accurate fact that the two strongest powers are the two in the most danger of devastation. All we have built, all we have worked for, would be destroyed in the first 24 hours. And even in the cold war, which brings burdens and dangers to so many nations, including this Nation's closest allies--our two countries bear the heaviest burdens. For we are both devoting massive sums of money to weapons that could be better devoted to combating ignorance, poverty, and disease. We are both caught up in a vicious and dangerous cycle in which suspicion on one side breeds suspicion on the other, and new weapons beget counterweapons.
In short, both the United States and its allies, and the Soviet Union and its allies, have a mutually deep interest in a just and genuine peace and in halting the arms race. Agreements to this end are in the interests of the Soviet Union as well as ours--and even the most hostile nations can be relied upon to accept and keep those treaty obligations, and only those treaty obligations, which are in their own interest.
So, let us not be blind to our differences--but let us also direct attention to our common interests and to the means by which those differences can be resolved. And if we cannot end now our differences, at least we can help make the world safe for diversity. For, in the final analysis, our most basic common link is that we all inhabit this small planet. We all breathe the same air. We all cherish our children's future. And we are all mortal.
Third: Let us reexamine our attitude toward the cold war, remembering that we are not engaged in a debate, seeking to pile up debating points. We are not here distributing blame or pointing the finger of judgment. We must deal with the world as it is, and not as it might have been had the history of the last 18 years been different.
We must, therefore, persevere in the search for peace in the hope that constructive changes within the Communist bloc might bring within reach solutions which now seem beyond us. We must conduct our affairs in such a way that it becomes in the Communists' interest to agree on a genuine peace. Above all, while defending our own vital interests, nuclear powers must avert those confrontations which bring an adversary to a choice of either a humiliating retreat or a nuclear war. To adopt that kind of course in the nuclear age would be evidence only of the bankruptcy of our policy--or of a collective death-wish for the world.
To secure these ends, America's weapons are nonprovocative, carefully controlled, designed to deter, and capable of selective use. Our military forces are committed to peace and disciplined in self- restraint. Our diplomats are instructed to avoid unnecessary irritants and purely rhetorical hostility.
For we can seek a relaxation of tension without relaxing our guard. And, for our part, we do not need to use threats to prove that we are resolute. We do not need to jam foreign broadcasts out of fear our faith will be eroded. We are unwilling to impose our system on any unwilling people--but we are willing and able to engage in peaceful competition with any people on earth.
Meanwhile, we seek to strengthen the United Nations, to help solve its financial problems, to make it a more effective instrument for peace, to develop it into a genuine world security system--a system capable of resolving disputes on the basis of law, of insuring the security of the large and the small, and of creating conditions under which arms can finally be abolished.
At the same time we seek to keep peace inside the non-Communist world, where many nations, all of them our friends, are divided over issues which weaken Western unity, which invite Communist intervention or which threaten to erupt into war. Our efforts in West New Guinea, in the Congo, in the Middle East, and in the Indian subcontinent, have been persistent and patient despite criticism from both sides. We have also tried to set an example for others--by seeking to adjust small but significant differences with our own closest neighbors in Mexico and in Canada.
Speaking of other nations, I wish to make one point clear. We are bound to many nations by alliances. Those alliances exist because our concern and theirs substantially overlap. Our commitment to defend Western Europe and West Berlin, for example, stands undiminished because of the identity of our vital interests. The United States will make no deal with the Soviet Union at the expense of other nations and other peoples, not merely because they are our partners, but also because their interests and ours converge.
Our interests converge, however, not only in defending the frontiers of freedom, but in pursuing the paths of peace. It is our hope-- and the purpose of allied policies--to convince the Soviet Union that she, too, should let each nation choose its own future, so long as that choice does not interfere with the choices of others. The Communist drive to impose their political and economic system on others is the primary cause of world tension today. For there can be no doubt that, if all nations could refrain from interfering in the self-determination of others, the peace would be much more assured.
This will require a new effort to achieve world law--a new context for world discussions. It will require increased understanding between the Soviets and ourselves. And increased understanding will require increased contact and communication. One step in this direction is the proposed arrangement for a direct line between Moscow and Washington, to avoid on each side the dangerous delays, misunderstandings, and misreadings of the other's actions which might occur at a time of crisis.
We have also been talking in Geneva about the other first-step measures of arms control designed to limit the intensity of the arms race and to reduce the risks of accidental war. Our primary long range interest in Geneva, however, is general and complete disarmament-- designed to take place by stages, permitting parallel political developments to build the new institutions of peace which would take the place of arms. The pursuit of disarmament has been an effort of this Government since the 1920's. It has been urgently sought by the past three administrations. And however dim the prospects may be today, we intend to continue this effort--to continue it in order that all countries, including our own, can better grasp what the problems and possibilities of disarmament are.
The one major area of these negotiations where the end is in sight, yet where a fresh start is badly needed, is in a treaty to outlaw nuclear tests. The conclusion of such a treaty, so near and yet so far, would check the spiraling arms race in one of its most dangerous areas. It would place the nuclear powers in a position to deal more effectively with one of the greatest hazards which man faces in 1963, the further spread of nuclear arms. It would increase our security--it would decrease the prospects of war. Surely this goal is sufficiently important to require our steady pursuit, yielding neither to the temptation to give up the whole effort nor the temptation to give up our insistence on vital and responsible safeguards.
I am taking this opportunity, therefore, to announce two important decisions in this regard.
First: Chairman Khrushchev, Prime Minister Macmillan, and I have agreed that high-level discussions will shortly begin in Moscow looking toward early agreement on a comprehensive test ban treaty. Our hopes must be tempered with the caution of history--but with our hopes go the hopes of all mankind.
Second: To make clear our good faith and solemn convictions on the matter, I now declare that the United States does not propose to conduct nuclear tests in the atmosphere so long as other states do not do so. We will not be the first to resume. Such a declaration is no substitute for a formal binding treaty, but I hope it will help us achieve one. Nor would such a treaty be a substitute for disarmament, but I hope it will help us achieve it.
Finally, my fellow Americans, let us examine our attitude toward peace and freedom here at home. The quality and spirit of our own society must justify and support our efforts abroad. We must show it in the dedication of our own lives--as many of you who are graduating today will have a unique opportunity to do, by serving without pay in the Peace Corps abroad or in the proposed National Service Corps here at home.
But wherever we are, we must all, in our daily lives, live up to the age-old faith that peace and freedom walk together. In too many of our cities today, the peace is not secure because the freedom is incomplete.
It is the responsibility of the executive branch at all levels of government--local, State, and National--to provide and protect that freedom for all of our citizens by all means within their authority. It is the responsibility of the legislative branch at all levels, wherever that authority is not now adequate, to make it adequate. And it is the responsibility of all citizens in all sections of this country to respect the rights of all others and to respect the law of the land.
All this is not unrelated to world peace. "When a man's ways please the Lord," the Scriptures tell us, "he maketh even his enemies to be at peace with him." And is not peace, in the last analysis, basically a matter of human rights--the right to live out our lives without fear of devastation--the right to breathe air as nature provided it--the right of future generations to a healthy existence?
While we proceed to safeguard our national interests, let us also safeguard human interests. And the elimination of war and arms is clearly in the interest of both. No treaty, however much it may be to the advantage of all, however tightly it may be worded, can provide absolute security against the risks of deception and evasion. But it can--if it is sufficiently effective in its enforcement and if it is sufficiently in the interests of its signers--offer far more security and far fewer risks than an unabated, uncontrolled, unpredictable arms race.
The United States, as the world knows, will never start a war. We do not want a war. We do not now expect a war. This generation of Americans has already had enough--more than enough--of war and hate and oppression. We shall be prepared if others wish it. We shall be alert to try to stop it. But we shall also do our part to build a world of peace where the weak are safe and the strong are just. We are not helpless before that task or hopeless of its success. Confident and unafraid, we labor on--not toward a strategy of annihilation but toward a strategy of peace.

(continuation of part 4)
I already considered this piece the second greatest musical evidence for Clerith after the London Symphony Orchestra’s Final Fantasy VII Symphony’s second movement “Words Drowned by Fireworks” and its guide, but now that I know about the Clerith reunion that was baked into the ending, the gap between the two is narrower. Each time I hear Cloud begin to call out for Aerith in part 3 (3:04), I immediately start crying. It sounds so much to me like Cloud’s voice in the dark saying “Aerith…?”, meek and scared. If you’ve read everything so far, you know how long Cloud has been looking for Aerith, lost without her, searching relentlessly for decades in real-life time. Through FFT, DFF, Advent Children, MFF x FFVII… all of it spent looking for his Promised Land. In OG, Cloud was so tormented by Jenova’s manipulation and so consumed by the chase for Sephiroth that he could not realize what or how much he felt for her until she was taken away forever. The piece we’ve just analyzed tells the story of Cloud and Aerith intertwining and separating against their will, and you can truly feel Cloud’s anxiety as he struggles to wrench Aerith out of fate’s cruel grasp. Perhaps it is because of Aerith’s ultimately fatal responsibility, inherited from her mother, that this iteration of her theme is called “The Cetra”.
Though in part 5, Cloud and Aerith reunite… could this reunion symbolize their meeting again in Remake, or something more permanent? I think it’s meant to leave us wondering.
I’m very sensitive to music, and as I’m typing this, I’m crying a bit. I wanted to share my interpretation of “Aerith’s Theme - The Cetra” with you very badly, because it makes me feel so much and really enhances Clerith’s story. I’m overjoyed to have found out about the reunion at the very end. And it’s all because you guys showed love for my last analysis! You guys are giving me gifts every day.
V. b) i. 3) Combined Analysis
Please listen to and watch the scene of Cloud’s MOTF 6 (4:21-8:46) again, and consider section “V. b) i. 2)”. What is Uematsu telling us? Similarly to how main world theme of FFVII informs us that Jenova is sabotaging Cloud’s identity far before it becomes a plot point in OG, “Aerith’s theme - The Cetra” is telling us what not even Remake Cloud consciously knows at this point: he’s been searching desperately for her, and fears losing her once more.
As if that wasn’t proof enough, the timing of the shots and musical phrases is absolutely damning. Recall that part 3 of “Aerith’s theme - The Cetra” specifically symbolizes Cloud’s anxiety surrounding Aerith’s safety. It is this particular part of the piece that plays for the entirety of Aerith’s allusions to her murderers and her death (7:25-7:54), including the very moment where “Cloud feels his chest constrict tightly” (7:51-7:54). What’s more, part 5 the piece, which specifically Cloud freeing Aerith from the restraints of fate, coincides with the moment Tifa grabs Aerith’s hand and pulls her out from the circle of Whispers closing in on her (8:42-8:45). This moment leads me to believe that the reunion in part 5 of the piece indeed symbolizes Cloud succeeding (perhaps with Tifa’s help) in saving Aerith from her tragic fate and reuniting with her for good.
It’s heart-wrenching and brilliant. Our theory stands strong.
V. b) ii. Credits: Piece Inclusion
I find it very telling that the character themes included in the credits of Remake are Cloud’s “Hollow” (0:00-5:24), an orchestral arrangement of Aerith’s theme (5:24-9:24), and an orchestral arrangement of the main world theme, (9:24-14:27) which of course includes Cloud’s true theme. No other character themes appear during the rest of the credits (14:27-18:09). This is telling: the credits are communicating to us that Remake is about Cloud and Aerith. Our Mission Theory only gets stronger.
V. b) iii. Showing Relationships Through Music: Intermingling Character Themes
This doesn’t have to do with the Mission, but here’s a pretty good anti-Cloti argument while we’re here.
As shown in section “V. a) i.” where we explored the roles of Cloud, Jenova and Sephiroth’s themes within the FFVII world theme, the way character themes interact in a piece can tell you a lot about those characters’ relationships. This is certainly the case in “Aerith’s Theme - The Cetra” as well (see section “V. b. ii. 2)”).
I’d like to mention that in all of my listening to the Remake OST and rewatching playthroughs of Remake, I’ve never encountered a single piece that united Cloud and Tifa’s themes. Not once. Let alone a piece that depicts them as intimately or emotionally as “Aerith’s Theme - The Cetra” depicts Cloud and Aerith. Even the most Cloti cutscenes in Remake aren’t supported by pieces mixing or even juxtaposing Cloud and Tifa’s themes. I can’t find any of Cloud’s motifs anywhere during the orchestral arrangement of Tifa’s theme that plays during her resolution scene in chapter 14. I can’t find either of their motifs in the track the plays when Cloud calls Tifa beautiful at Seventh Heaven in chapter 3. A motif from Tifa’s theme does appear in the track that plays during the childhood promise scene in chapter 4, (0:00-0:25), but it never plays at the same time as or even near Cloud’s motifs (1:23-1:47 and 2:03-2:29). They’re distant or otherwise unaffiliated.
The only exception is that an altered version of Cloud’s theme’s section A phrase 1 appears in the background of Tifa’s theme (1:17-1:23). This symbolizes her connection to Cloud and how much of her attention and worry revolve around him— a reference to how she cares so much that it borders on dependency. Of course, it doesn’t go both ways: Tifa isn’t in Cloud’s theme at all. To me, this lack of reciprocity concerning the inclusion of Cloud’s motif in Tifa’s theme signifies that the only time Cloud and Tifa are together is in her head. She does think about him a lot, which we witness in her chapter of Trace of Two Pasts. Tifa loses sleep over him even two years after he left Nibelheim, despite the fact that she barely knew him at all:

“The moment she heard the word “Soldier”, the few memories she had with Cloud Strife came flooding back. He never contacted her after they parted ways two years ago […]. She tossed and turned all night. When she counted them again, her memories with Cloud were so surprisingly few that others might find it hard to believe that they grew up as next-door neighbors” (Trace of Two Pasts, translated by pekotranslates on Tumblr).

FFVII Remake Ultimania also comments on the superficial nature of Cloud and Tifa’s water tower promise, and how regardless of its naïveté, it became fundamental to Tifa:

“Though rooted in a jejune heroine fantasy of being rescued in a pinch by her hero, this promise is clearly etched in Tifa’s memory” (Tifa’s profile in section 01 of “Character & World”, “An Enduring Childhood Promise” in “Topics of Tifa” page 20).

You could argue that “Aerith’s Theme - The Cetra” is only one song wherein Cloud and Aerith’s themes interweave, but you’d be proven wrong by the Rebirth OST…
V. c) The Rebirth OST
Unfortunately, the full Rebirth OST isn’t out and available where I can listen to it right now. However, based solely on the incomplete OST that’s available to me right now, I can tell you with certainty that the composers were told to incorporate Clerith into the musical storytelling: Cloud and Aerith’s themes intermingle in multiple pieces. I can’t imagine what else I’ll discover once I listen to the full OST. For now, I checked out what was available on YouTube and listened to cutscene audios. This section would be eternal if I included every time Cloud and Aerith’s motifs interact, especially in chapter 14. Trust me, I’d love to talk about every single one, but this thing is long enough already, so let’s just address what pertains to our Mission Theory specifically rather than stopping at every single Clerith reference in the OST.
V. c) i. Ending Cutscene Music
Ending cutscenes are often used to address the next step the characters will be taking as well as their emotional and mental state. They also open up new questions to make the player curious. Indeed, Rebirth’s ending cutscene (18:56-25:00) gives us an impression of how the party members feel by the end of the game: everyone misses Aerith. Barret looks upset and confused at the mention of her (19:35-19:45), the girls are crying and Nanaki is mourning (19:58-20:35). Additionally, we are shown the empty White Materia and Black Materia in Cloud’s possession (20:40-21:24), foreshadowing that they will come to be important in part 3. Cloud and Aerith share a warm goodbye, and exchange promises: Aerith will send smoke signals if something happens to her so a worried Cloud can remain updated on her well-being and she will stop Meteor, and Cloud will stop Sephiroth (23:00-25:00). The fact that this scene is animated in CGI is enough to tell us that the devs consider it narratively important, just like they do Bugenhagen’s observatory and the party’s advance into the Forgotten Capital CGI cutscenes. What did the composers decide to communicate with us about the end of Rebirth and the plot going forward?
Big surprise: Clerith.
During the entire cutscene, only two themes play: Cloud’s and Aerith’s. The cutscene’s music begins only when Cloud notices Aerith among the party members and begins watching her (19:21). She interacts with the rest of the party without their knowledge, different segments of her theme playing one after another. Her theme only stops when Cloud finally looks away from her and to the empty White Materia in his hand (20:45). The music focuses on the mystery and ominousness of these materia, only returning to Aerith once Cloud hears her voice and repeats her message to the party (21:30).
Cloud’s theme appears when he asserts that Barret needn’t worry about him (section A of Cloud’s true theme, 22:41), though soft and tentative, only swelling when Barret and Tifa climb aboard the Tiny Bronco and Cloud finds himself alone with Aerith again (22:57). As he asks Aerith if “[she’ll] be okay getting back” (23:08), the final phrase of section A of his theme plays, but without its concluding note, the tonic. He waits for her to answer him as his theme waits for hers to complete and answer it, that final note dragging long over the seconds (23:09-23:13). She answers with a teasing remark that references their unwillingness to part from each other back in Remake’s Evergreen Park:

“[Cloud has] a chat with Aerith, from whom he’s reluctant to part” (chapter 9 in section 04 “Scenario”, “Main Story Digest”, “4. Saying Goodbye”, page 275)”.

As soon as Aerith answers Cloud’s question with this romantic callback, her theme answers his too: section C of Aerith’s theme begins with the key’s tonic, resolving Cloud’s incomplete phrase (23:13): she gives him resolution. He chuckles, getting her reference, and the music swells (23:16). The music ebbs and flows thusly, following the rhythms and underlying emotions of their conversation. Finally, the piece ends with phrase 2 of of section A of Cloud’s true theme, following a strong repetition of the first half of Aerith’s theme’s section A. The two make their promises to each other, and “No Promises to Keep” begins, leading us to the credits. This is most definitely a Clerith song, but more on that later.
What this shows us is that Cloud and Aerith’s relationship is fundamental to the plot of Rebirth and will also be fundamental to the plot of part 3: they are isolated one one-on-one in this cutscene, and the music depicts their warm, sweet interaction as well as the strength of Aerith’s character to contrast with Cloud’s somewhat meek personality. The composers are telling us that these two, specifically, together alone, are hugely important to the plot here. This was already true in OG, but no such emphasis was ever placed on their interactions and relationship in its music. Something is different, deeper, more intense now. The Mission Theory explains why. It also suits our theory that the composers are emphasizing the centrality of Clerith in the plot of the Remake trilogy. Cloud’s love for Aerith is the reason for the trilogy’s existence, and it will be the greatest motivator for Cloud in part 3. It’s a grand announcement.
Just like in Remake, I could not find a single instance of Cloud and Tifa’s themes interacting in Rebirth, apart from at the end of the intimate Skywheel date— but every girl receives this treatment in their intimate dates, so each of these instances can be crossed out. Additionally, the Tifa date is not the canon one, but I digress…
V. c) iii. Credits

1. Piece Inclusion

Once more, I find it very telling that of all the pieces included in the credits of Rebirth, the only character themes are Cloud’s and Aerith’s. We start with a song about Aerith’s point of view to mirror *Remake’*s “Hollow”, “No Promises to Keep” (5:18-11:10), followed by the FFVII world theme (11:10-16:12) which of course contains Cloud’s true theme, then we move into a piece whose unofficially translated title is “Parade Battle Ceremony - The Dawn of a New World” as an arrangement of the parade ceremony theme from chapter 4 (16:12-19:03), followed by a theme for the Lifestream springs whose name I don’t have (19:03-21:38), “Junon - Fortified Metropolis” (21:38-24:28), and finally, a gorgeous arrangement of Aerith’s theme (24:28-28:47). No other character is referenced in the credits music: the credits are telling us Rebirth is about Clerith. Our Mission Theory explains why.
V. c) iii. 2) “No Promises to Keep”
At the very end of this song written and performed by Aerith, we’re treated with a sweet little piano conclusion (10:46-11:10): it begins with a variation on Aerith’s theme’s section A (10:46-11:01), and concludes with two ascending arpeggios, each four notes long (11:01-11:10). Each of these ascending arpeggios is a variation of the phrase 1 of Cloud’s true theme’s section A. The differences are minimal. The phrase is usually five notes long rather than four, the first arpeggio ends on the tonic rather than Cloud’s iconic subtonic, and the second arpeggio starts on the subtonic rather than the tonic. The song Aerith wrote concludes with Cloud’s most famous motif. This is also the case in her Gold Saucer performance (3:31-3:41).
V. c) iii. 3) Arrangement of Aerith’s Theme
The final piece in the credits is an arrangement of Aerith’s theme (24:28-28:47) which has noticeably similar elements to the version of her theme that plays during the Jenova Lifeclinger battle in chapter 14 (0:12-3:36), such as the female choirs. Since these female choirs are only heard in the Forgotten City version of Aerith’s theme, and since the credits arrangement of her theme plays at the same time as clips from her chapter 14 pseudo-death roll across the screen, I estimate that this credits arrangement specifically reflects the event of Aerith’s pseudo-death. Recall that composers had access to the credits video as they composed, meaning this piece is specifically written for Aerith’s pseudo-death in Rebirth.
What I find fascinating is that, just like the arrangements of her theme that play during Aerith’s pseudo-death and the Jenova Lifeclinger battle, this credits arrangement contains the sound of Cloud’s pain, rage and protest. Phrase 1 and the first three notes of phrase 2 of Cloud’s true theme section A play on the strings and brass quite loudly and insistently, just as Cloud blocking masamune appears on the credits screen (25:11-25:21). Sephiroth’s dissonant, high and screechy violins appear just as his face comes onto the screen (26:33), and almost as a protective response, phrases 1 and 2 of Cloud’s true theme’s section A return (26:47-27:00). Finally, similarly to what we hear in part 5 of “Aerith’s Theme - The Cetra”, a slightly modified section A phrase 1 of Cloud’s true theme play along with section C phrase 3 of Aerith’s theme (oh wow section A and C section Aerith for Cloud’s theme and section Cloud for Aerith’s theme I just realized that’s such a cute coincidence), though unfortunately they do not meet in the middle like last time since they start two octaves apart (28:20-28:25). I’ve recreated it for you once more here so you can really appreciate it. The fact that their motifs don’t truly reunite like in “Aerith’s Theme - The Cetra” is sad, but the very last thing you see onscreen is Aerith’s goodbye to the Tiny Bronco (27:10-27:42), so it makes sense that this piano conclusion implies that Cloud and Aerith aligned, but not yet reunited for good. That’s exactly what you get from the ending cutscene. It does seem to imply that they will be reunited in part 3, as both the ending cutscene and this piano conclusion read as a “till we see each other again” rather than a “farewell”.

VI. Textual Evidence

Now that the musical evidence is done, let’s compile some textual story evidence that supports our theory!
VI. a) Remake Trilogy (Thus Far) Handholding Explained?
As I’m sure you’ve noticed, handholding is a motif in Cloud and Aerith’s relationship— and an extremely symbolic one at that! When researching for info to validate my theory, I found that this Clerith motif was extremely helpful! Its inclusion in the Remake trilogy, and especially in Rebirth, is hugely significant in my eyes.
VI. a) i. Pre-Remake Trilogy: Aerith’s Initiative
Before examining the significance of Clerith handholding in Remake and Rebirth, we should establish the meaning of this motif in OG and Advent Children.
Cloud and Aerith have reached out to take each other’s hands many times since 1997. Aerith used to literally drag him by the hand a lot, shocking the cold and distant merc, before she left. After her death in OG, Cloud surely longed to be able to feel her hand take his again, cursing himself for not enjoying it while she was alive, and for never being the one to grasp her hand first: he never got to tell her how he feels about her, or to save her. It was always her reaching out for him, saving him.
This is why the scene in OG when Aerith reaches for him from the Lifestream after Cloud defeats Sephiroth in chapter 3 of disk 3 is so touching: Cloud sees her hand and reaches out to take it, so close to finally establishing that mutual connection, but she soon fades, and replaced by Tifa’s hand in the tangible world. He doesn’t get to hold Aerith’s hand again.
That is, not until Advent Children, where near the end of his battle with Bahamut Sin, he sees Aerith reach out to him once again (1:08-1:30). Cloud finally gets to hold her hand for the first time in two years when he lost her. This moment was given extra importance by the devs. In fact, Nojima told us the following:

“The ending scene of the battle with Bahamut, the scene where Aerith reaches out her hand, is an homage to the last scene from a previous production. It was [Nomura]'s idea” (FFVII Reunion Files, “Story Digest”, “Summoned Beast”, page 113).

VI. a) ii. The Remake Trilogy (Thus Far): Cloud’s Initiative
As I’ve said before, if I’m right that Remake is all about Cloud stepping up to be more attentive and active in his relationship with Aerith in order to save her, there should be concrete evidence of this in the Remaketrilogy thus far. If OG Cloud’s memories of and love for Aerith exist somewhere within Remake Cloud’s subconsciousness, then Remake Cloud should be far more active in the Clerith dynamic than OG Cloud was— after all, he’s supposed to know better this time around. Thankfully, the motif of handholding can help us evaluate this. Since we know pre-Remake Cloud was quite passive when it comes to handholding, Cloud initiating handholding in the Remake trilogy would be a strong indication that our theory has validity. Keeping this in mind, let’s see what we can find thus far in the Remake trilogy in relation to handholding, and if Cloud is indeed more active than he was in OG.
VI. a) ii. 1) Hollow Hands
Remake’s theme song “Hollow” makes allusions to the handholding motif: “This time, I will never let you go” is pretty clear. And so is “No Promises to Keep”, wherein Aerith speaks of Cloud “[taking her] hand and never [letting her] go” multiple times. Interestingly, these theme song lyrics seem to suggest that Cloud will be much more active in the Remake trilogy than in OG. “Hollow” even promises that Cloud will come to his senses and take charge of the situation: “this time, [he] will” be the one to offer his hand to Aerith, unlike in OG and Advent Children. This makes a lot of sense with our theory: now that Cloud has lost Aerith once, “this time for sure, [he]’ll” be the one to reach for Aerith’s hand, take initiative and save her the way she saved him.
Even though theme songs are extremely telling of a game’s main themes and intentions, lyrics are still all talk and no proof. What about the game itself? Do Remake and Rebirth deliver on this promise? Let’s see!
VI. a) ii. 2) Resolution Hands
The only significant time Cloud initiates handholding in Remake is during Cloud’s resolution scene in chapter 14 (5:18-5:40), wherein he tries to grab Aerith’s hand but is unable to keep her with him. He fills with determination and tells her in no uncertain terms that he’s coming for her. Just as we predicted, Cloud is the active participant in this iteration of the Clerith handholding motif: he’s even explicitly insisting against Aerith’s wishes that he should “get a say in all this” and that he’s “coming for [her]”. Let’s not forget that Cloud’s resolution is meant to reflect not only Aerith’s kidnapping by Shinra, but also her fated death. Nojima implied this by commenting the following on Aerith’s “Even if you think you have, it’s not real” line:

“Those who know what befalls Aerith later on will find the line really heart-wrenching” (FFVII Remake Ultimania, section 08 “Secrets”, “Development Staff Interviews, Part 2: Tetsuya Nomura, Yoshinori Kitase, Kazushige Nojima”, page 744).

Given this note by Nojima, it looks like we’re supposed to watch Cloud’s resolution scene with Aerith’s fated death in mind. Considering this, Cloud’s “I’m coming for you” line sure seems like an subconscious promise that he will save Aerith from her tragic fate. This subconscious promise could be the result of post-OG Cloud’s feelings and intentions rising to the surface. Nevertheless, he’s absolutely determined and he’s staying true to the promise he made in “Hollow”. I think it’s fair to say that this instance of the handholding Clerith motif does indeed fit perfectly with our theory. This is only one strong example though, and we need a pattern in order to pat ourselves on the back on this. So, let’s keep looking! There isn’t any handholding initiated by Cloud beyond that point in Remake. At this point in my research, I moved on to Rebirth to go digging for handholding there.
Hoo boy. I was not disappointed.
VI. a) ii. 3) Golden Hands
Let’s begin with the obvious. In their high-affinity gondola date in chapter 12, Cloud bravely interlaces his fingers with Aerith’s: Cloud’s taken charge not only of handholding, but the most intimate kind of handholding. I’m sure you’ve encountered the phrase “こいびとつなぎ” or “koibito tsunagi by now (literally translates to “lovers’ tie” or “lovers’ connection”); this is the term used in Japanese to refer to the type of handholding Cloud initiates with Aerith on the Skywheel. It’s considered the most intimate form of handholding. In Japan, skinship is normally considered quite significant and indicative of the closeness between two people— you could say it’s a big deal. Cloud also offers Aerith his hand when they step off the Shywheel, once more making the first move. Though some might say that the Skywheel dates shouldn’t be counted as canon, I believe Aerith’s date is indeed canon (I have my reasons but this post is long enough). Even if we discount the Skywheel date however, Clerith's use of the koibito tsunagi returns in a non-optional scene we will touch on later.
For what it’s worth, Alfreid offers Rosa his hand in the Loveless play too. I can prove that Aerith is the canon Rosa too, but I’m going to save that for my next analysis! You can take my word for it now, or just wait for that analysis to drop. Take it or leave it!
VI. a) ii. 4) Meta Hands
However, the narrative weight of these Clerith handholding instances doesn’t even come close to my very favorite iteration of the handholding motif in Rebirth. I’m referring to what I consider a severely underrated Clerith moment in chapter 13. First, some context: Sephiroth manipulates Cloud into giving over the Black Materia. Cloud seems to be firmly under Sephiroth’s control. However, the sight of Aerith being swarmed by Black Whispers snaps Cloud back into the driver’s seat: he breaks out of Sephiroth’s grasp to run to her and save her. Aerith gets knocked off into a fatal free-fall by a Black Whisper before Cloud can reach her, but he won’t have it: he lunges forward, hand extended. What results is a beautiful shot of their outstretched hands (56:25-56:27).
Let’s analyze this great shot. Notice how the seconds where Cloud is reaching downwards to grasp Aerith’s hand are treated. This key moment is stretched longer by a slow-mo effect, building up the tension and drawing the audience’s focus to the distance between their hands before Cloud actually catches Aerith’s in his, fulfilling the promise he made in “Hollow”. Their hands take up the whole screen in a deliberate close-up shot. All the ambient noises of the scene go quiet: Aerith’s theme is all we hear as Cloud reaches desperately for her. These are blatant audiovisual cues, signalling to the audience that whatever is happening on screen is especially significant. We should therefore examine this specific instance of the Clerith handholding motif to see what the devs are trying to tell us, and maybe it will fit with our theory!
We should begin by comparing this Clerith hand-reach shot to previous ones. If you compare it to the Advent Children’s hand-reach that occurs during Cloud’s battle against Bahamut Sin, it’s evident that Cloud and Aerith’s roles are reversed: just as our theory states, Cloud gets out from inside his head and reaches for Aerith this time. She saved him and the world in OG, and now it’s his turn to save her. This change becomes especially evident when you juxtapose the two scenes and notice how their hands have switched places, reaching from above and below, from left and right. I think the Rebirth hand-reach was deliberately made to look like the Advent Children one —and even the OG one in disk 3, chapter 3—, just to highlight this role reversal.
This Rebirth hand-reach is my favorite out of all because it shows that Cloud is much more conscious and attentive toward Aerith in Rebirth than he was in OG. At this point in OG (disk 1, chapter 25), Cloud is meant to be beating Aerith up at Sephiroth’s command, to the horror of the rest of the party. In fact, a few minutes before Cloud rushes to save Aerith in Rebirth, he has absolutely no problem violently shoving Tifa to the ground when she gets in Sephiroth’s way (53:27-53:33). This shove and Cloud’s earlier attack on Tifa in Gongaga (Rebirth, chapter 9) proves that Sephiroth is just as capable of making Cloud hurt his party members as he was in OG… though Sephiroth can’t seem to make Cloud hurt Aerith. Why is this? Why is it that Cloud beats Aerith in OG, but doesn’t even lay a finger on her —and snaps out of Sephiroth’s control at the mere sight of her in trouble— in Rebirth?
Our theory provides the answer. In disk 1, chapter 25 of OG, Cloud had not yet realized he loved Aerith. Sephiroth was therefore able to make him hurt her. But things are different in Rebirth. The Cloud we see in the Remake trilogy has gone through the OG timeline and traveled back in time, kicking off Remake as his second try at the OG timeline— and he did this precisely because he loves Aerith. His love for her is clearer and stronger in the Remake trilogy than in OG because Remake Cloud is an amnesiac, post-OG, time-traveler Cloud. He’s been through the OG before, has fallen in love with Aerith and realized it before, so this time around, he can’t even lay a finger on her. This is made evident by how closely the moments where Cloud pushes Tifa and saves Aerith are juxtaposed, separated by mere seconds of gameplay. Merely seeing Aerith in trouble wrenched control from Sephiroth and put it in Cloud’s hands again— Sephiroth probably couldn’t have gotten Cloud to attack Aerith if he tried.
This isn’t the only time we get evidence of this though! As Cloud approaches Aerith’s praying form in the Forgotten City, Sephiroth’s Black Whispers swirl around the buster sword: Sephiroth is trying to kill Aerith with it, while Cloud’s struggle to wrench it away plays out visibly on his face. Interestingly, Cloud is not being controlled by Sephiroth here. We know this because we can quite literally see the Black Whispers trying to move his sword, but also because every time Cloud is being controlled by Sephiroth in Rebirth, he has an empty-eyed, zombie-Cloud look on his face. Either that or he laughs or smiles somewhat maniacally. There is never any resistance on his part. To see an example, simply pay attention to Cloud’s blank face as he attacks Tifa in Gongaga in chapter 9 (19:20-20:30). You’ll see the very same expression on his face if you watch this video of Cloud following Sephiroth’s orders in chapter 13 (53:36-54:15). Additionally, look at how strangely Cloud smiles (41:01) as he grasps the Black Materia. Cloud makes none of these faces as the Black Whispers try to take control of his sword: quite the opposite. Cloud looks like he’s trying his hardest to pull his weapon back down and away from Aerith, a horrified look on his face as he grunts from the effort. Once more, Sephiroth is unable to make Cloud hurt Aerith.
Back to my favorite handholding moment. Think about this devs intention for this shot for a minute. The devs have been teasing us as to whether or not Cloud will succeed in saving Aerith in the Remake trilogy since it was first announced, and this slow-mo shot of Cloud catching Aerith’s hand as she falls to her death is a reflection of this tension. The audience holds their breath during those slow-moed seconds, all that hope and fear hanging in the balance. This instance of the handholding motif is a meta way for the devs to reassure us that Cloud will indeed save Aerith. I firmly believe this.
VI. a) ii. 5) Self-Sacrificing Hands
Alright, alright, enough about my favorite! Let’s move to chapter 14 of Rebirth! There’s evidently a lot going on with Clerith in this chapter. Let’s address the Sector 5 date. The handholding is first initiated by Aerith as she tugs him toward the candy vendor and Cloud reacts with a quiet gasp (4:07-4:17). Soon, it becomes a reciprocal embrace: Cloud holds his hand out for Aerith’s and tightens his fingers around hers, smiling at her before they head to the photographer (7:07-7:17).
Then of course, when Aerith pushes Cloud into a portal in her church, you can see Cloud reach his hand up toward her desperately as he falls (17:38-17:58). What I find particularly emotional about this moment is that Aerith pushing Cloud away from her is kind of the opposite of reaching for his hand: it symbolizes Aerith accepting her fate and giving up on a life where she can be with him. This Aerith seems to be a post-OG Aerith who exists separately from the main world we experience in Rebirth, meaning she knows all too well that her fate is to die. In fact, it looks like she is the very same or a similar Aerith to the one who appeared to Cloud in his resolution scene in Remake. By literally pushing Cloud away, just like she figuratively did in Cloud’s resolution scene, she is sacrificing both herself and the happiness she could share with Cloud. She’s going against her heart’s wishes, just like she did in Cloud’s resolution scene when she would not let Cloud take her hand. Indeed, post-OG Aerith seems to be resigned to her fated death and completely devoid of hope: she only wants to ensure the planet’s survival, because she thinks she knows there is no way she can or should be with Cloud. In contrast, Cloud reaches his hand out toward Aerith as he falls into the portal, and even though he does not know that her push symbolizes her self-sacrifice, his outstretched hand represents his protest. So far, our theory is fitting beautifully.
VI. a) ii. 6) Grieving Hands
Later in chapter 14 of Rebirth, after Aerith’s death/non-death, there is more handholding. As Cloud cradles Aerith’s body close to him at the Forgotten Capital, Aerith places her hand on his cheek. Cloud covers it with his, curling his fingers around it (1:03:33-1:03:53). Before he leaves her lying down on her back to go fight Sephiroth, he squeezes her hand as he tells her “I got this”— or, per the Japanese version, “Wait for me”, meaning he’ll reunite with her once he’s done (1:04:56-1:05:10).
VI. a) ii. 7) Hero-Heroine Hands
Next, the koibito tsunagi returns as Cloud and Aerith interlace fingers back to back in a classic hero-heroine pose, right after their two-versus-one fight against Sephiroth. This time, they both reach for each other simultaneously (7:42-8:18), without even having to look down at their hands or talk to each other, as though perfectly in sync. As you can see, Aerith and Cloud are now on the same page. This is different from post-OG Aerith’s attitude in the Sector 5 church earlier in chapter 14, as well as in Cloud’s resolution scene in Remake— my interpretation of this mutual koibito tsunagi is that both of them are agreeing to hold onto each other now, with neither of them pulling back or being inattentive of the other: their priorities are now the same. It seems now they are aligned, and hopefully this means that Aerith will be working together with Cloud so they can reunite again in part 3. Even if she doesn’t prioritize her life and happiness though, we know for sure Cloud will.
VI. b) Blocking Masamune Explained?
Another piece of evidence that Cloud has been through the events of OG before is the fact that he is able to block masamune. Cloud looks up and sees Sephiroth descending with his blade poised to kill Aerith. Screaming, Cloud instantly rips the buster sword from the Black Whispers’ hold and successfully blocks masamune. Hatred and determination fill his eyes as he rallies his strength and successfully pushes Sephiroth away, saving Aerith’s life (6:00-7:26)— at least, in one reality.
Obviously, something about Cloud is different in Rebirth from in OG, otherwise, the events of Rebirth’s chapter 14 would be the same as the events of OG’s disk 1 chapter 28. In my opinion, what happened here is that upon seeing Sephiroth swoop down with masamune, Cloud remembered Aerith’s death in OG, and the post-OG Cloud’s determination to stop it came surging up from within him. This is frankly the very best proof there is that Cloud is far more ready, stable, determined, and clear-headed about Aerith in the Remake trilogy than in OG. Our theory explains why! In fact, this very moment is what our entire theory banks on: Cloud saves Aerith in one reality, as is shown by the rainbow effect produced by the event, and just like that, the promise made in “Hollow” has been fulfilled! However, now we face the question of how to make sure that Aerith is alive and by Cloud’s side when the multiverse converges again into one protected timeline. I’m sure it will be done; we will see how in part 3.
VI. c) Theme Song Lyrics
What the theme songs’ texts have to say about the trilogy so far is quite important, as they summarize the feelings of the characters they represent: Cloud and Aerith. We can glean a lot from their perspectives that could help support the Mission Theory.
VI. d) i. “Hollow” Lyrics
“Hollow”, Remake’s theme song, was written about Cloud’s feelings and rumination. Nojima confirmed that, when he was given directives for the lyric-writing, “Nomura just gave [Nojima] the keywords: ‘told from Cloud's point of view’ and ‘standing in the rain’. [Nojima] interpreted that as ‘a ballad for a man who lost something/someone important’” (Nojima and Uematsu interview “‘I wanted to put the word ‘empty’ in the theme song of Remake. That was how it started’ - Music-Related Interview Part 6: Kazunari Nojima”, by Famitsu). Our theory is about Cloud’s motivations and mission to save Aerith, so “Hollow” is especially relevant.
Let’s run through the lyrics and analyze, starting with the song’s first verse:

“I would be lost, drifting along
Floating up high, time after time
And there you'd be, shining brightly
Your smiling face to guide my way
Bloody and bruised, brought to my knees
When beaten down, when broken up
You would appear, reach out to me
Heal every wound and make me whole”

Makes sense with our theory in mind, doesn’t it? This is post-OG Cloud remembering Aerith and what she means to him. “Hollow” seems to be told from the perspective of the post-OG Cloud hidden somewhere in Remake Cloud: a suppressed or eroded part of him that remembers Aerith clearly. Or maybe it’s told by Cloud after the events of the MFF x FFVII Remake collaboration and before the start of Remake, asserting his mission to save Aerith.
Next, here are the pre-choruses:

“Was it all, a dream? Will I never know?
Foolish and blind to everything
Had I realized, had I thought it through
Would you be here in my embrace?”

&

“With your every smile, hiding something more
Dark mysteries lurking beneath
But I was consumed with this emptiness
This selfishness, this void to fill”

(continued in

I am trying to wrap my head around this.
My husband wrote poems and called me multiple times a day for months before we got married. Once we got married, he went back to the addictions / obsessions that he had as a bachelor and we had sex probably a total of 10 times in 25 years.
Those 10 times were when we were newly married / when he had a fear that I might leave / pressure from his parents to have kids.
All 10 times happened with zero touching, kissing or talking. Lasted less than 5 minutes. He was done and just walked away. I have never heard my husband use the word sex. If I use it, he will cringe as if I asked for an orgy. No sitting together or hugging or holding bands ever.
Found out last year that he has met prostitutes and met one particular lady more than once. He has led a double life for close to a decade.
He is extremely clingy, very hardworking and loved by everyone, extremely generous with money almost takes pride in what he buys for me and never raises his voice or hands.
But If cornered by a difficult conversation, he will say the most hurtful sentence to shut me down for years. Example will call me ugly. Actually I am not and am very fitness conscious and eat clean and he actually has a visible disability, is overweight and doesn’t care about his health/ eating habits. Do you also neglect your health and live shabbily?
What is this? Is this covert narcissism or another comorbidity?
He doesn’t want a divorce. I offered to walk away and not demand anything because clearly he isn’t into me so he can at least find someone he likes. He claims he loves me and me only. I can him buy a house in my name / a diamond necklace and I will get it but cannot ask for a hug on my birthday.
Why this love hate confusing behaviour?
His mom hated him and favoured his brother. His dad favoured him and hated his brother.
He somehow managed to make me his mother. I sacrificed a lot and did a lot for him.
Why would be hurt me like this. He says he didn’t think of me at all when he was with those women. And still refuses to have any conversation about what he did and why he did. He would rather die than talk with me about his secret life. In one transaction he transferred half his assets to my individual bank account and I am the beneficiary for all his assets. What behaviour is this? Now he wants me to not talk about anything and expects life to go back to normal before he got caught. Why is it difficult for him to understand that he has caused me pain. He doesn’t think he caused me any pain because we were anyway not having sex for years. Last time was about 16 years back when I wanted to leave.

This is all for a TTRPG that I'm running for some friends. If this isn't the right place for this please let me know.
To start off with, if you're playing in a game where the phrases "President Andrew Garfield", "Clowns of America" and "an imp wielding a fan blade" sound familiar to you, stop reading. This is about our campaign. ........................................................................... ........................................................................... ........................................................................... ...........................................................................Context: So, I am currently running a game set in a near future (2075) where magic has slowly been returning to the world, but is still mostly hidden, for the last 100 years. In this world their are 9 "gods" that rule over the following: 1. Urbos- cities, civilization, law, order 2. Fabulaz- Stories, legends, myths 3. Libertas- Freedom, liberty, Justice, fairness 4. Messor- Death, fate, burials, afterlife 5. Vita- Life, nature, wildlife, predatoprey relationships 6. Technos- The internet, technology, engineering 7. Penucia- Merchants, gambling, wealth 8. Null- Undeath, necromancy, secrets 9. Vaccus- Emptiness, vaccumes, nothing.
The big secret with all of this (and the big thing the party doesn't know) is that all but one of the gods listed above are not actually "gods". They are all creatures "blessed" by the 9th god with insane power over something mortals fear. The 9th god, Vaccus, is the only real god. However they are closer to a lovecraftian diety and the entire campaign setting takes place in Vaccus's dreams.
The Story (the party doesn't know this either): A cult, being lead by somebody who was cursed with immortality and wants to die, is going to try several methods of killing their leader. Their last ditch attempt will be to try and wake up Vaccus, as if this being wakes up it would result in the end of everything in an instant. The best and most efficient way to do that is by turning Vaccus's dream into a nightmare. They plan on doing this by "forcing" the creation of a new god like entity that will embody a fear of destruction and a comming apocalypse, I am tentatively calling it Apolyon, but I'm not entirely sold on that name. Their first step in doing this was to take over large portions if the world's government by killing and replacing important officials with dopplegangers. They've done this without issues in Russia, China and Sweden, but they fucked up in the US when the president's (if you read the above, yes the current president is Andrew Garfield AKA one of the spidermen) daughter escaped and the assasination "attempt" got leaked to the news.
What the party knows: The attempt on the president's life was orchestrated by an unknown entity using dopplegangers. To cover their tracks, the "president" (who they correctly assume is actually a doppelganger) anounced that it was his daughter who made the attempt on his life, saying she has fallen in with a group of eco terrorists who have supposedly taken responsibility for the attack. They know this isn't true because they saved both the president's daughter AND a secret service agent from a car crash/doppleganger attack and both are now traveling with them. The goal is to remove the way the dopplegangers are tracking the president's daughter and bring her to an military base that has been both decomissioned and wiped from any US database. The only reason they know about it is because the president verbally told the Secret Service agent about it in the past as a "if all other options to protect my daughter fail, go here."
What the party will soon discover: The military base in question is actually an abandoned neighborhood that the government used during the mid to late 70s (when magic was first starting to return to the world) to conduct MKUltra style experiments. Their plan was to try and spy on people through their dreams. They had the most tangential success with artists of varying mediums but they could not control who's dreams they were entering and influencing, with many of them going insane. The reason many of them went insane was because they were entering the subconsious dreams of Vaccus (almost like if you were to lucid dream but instead of you realizing its a dream, the people and characters in your dream realized they were in your dream), meaning they were 1. Witnessing incomprehensible things that a eldritch creature would dream of in their deep subconsious and 2. Seeing the entire history of the universe play out before them in what felt like in real time, but was acually only done in the span of a few minutes to a few hours if they were lucky. This lead to those who were still somewhat coherent to make art depicting some of the things they saw, but in a stylized way. For example, poems about something that should not be, paintings and sculptures of the birth of each god, stories that, when you read between the lines, speak of a world ending calamity that would cause Vaccus to wake up, ect...
What I'm looking for help with is comming up with different pieces of art that will make the full puzzle. So like a poem tells part of one story, a description of a short film depicts another, a painting, children's book ect... I want at least 9 or so different pieces that can describe the reveal mentioned above with 1 for each worshiped god and the 9th being a description of creating a nightmare for Vaccus. The idea is that each description/art piece tells a different part of the same story, but the party won't get them in order. I have come up with some ideas for the different art pieces, but I want some more ideas or suggestions. I also want different people to give their descriptions and I feel that if it was just me making all of these descriptions, they would all feel way too similar and give off the feel of "one person trying 9 different mediums" than "9 different artists telling the same story". I have an idea for the 1st one chronologically that takes the form of a children's book that decribes a little boy who is tormented by his older siblings and thus escapes to his dreams to find friends (the other gods) and go on adventures. It would be unfinished with the party only finding the first few pages depicting the boy make the Gods Vita and Messor to populate the world and give life meaning. I plan on refining it a bit more and using more symbolism than what I described above but I think it gives the general idea.
Sorry for the long post, I've been thinking of this idea for a long time and only now the party is getting close enough to it for me to really start planning for it. TLDR; What are some different descriptions of art works (poems, stories, paintings ect...) that when put together tell the story of the world's creation and reveal the fact that the setting takes place in the dreams of an eldritch entity. I would love to hear what you all have to offer to this.