immediately previously by this account user,
not it
ref 1, Callen: https://archive.org/details/herbert-b.-callen-thermodynamics-and-an-introduction-to-thermostatistics-wiley-1985_202201/page/461/mode/1up?view=theater
ref 2, Howison: https://books.google.com/books?id=dg3wkAkfKQ4C&pg=PA312#v=onepage&q&f=false
Figure 1/1 – refrigerator argument
How many people in history didn’t invent the refrigerator?, and how that makes you God over “precisely not it.”
T. Ra.
Abstract: Without presenting anything “new,” all “things” are made new. We highlight the invention of the refrigerator. Revolving the title question around not it self a few times allows us to demonstrate the absurdity of any hope held for accounting via any purely physical determinism for the whole of a man’s reality. A purely physical determinism cannot account for the invention of the refrigerator! The refrigerator is the result of super-physical causation. The only hope to cover a super-physical cause in a full determinism, is a super-super-physical Determinant. Mature science must thus root not it self in (the freedom of mere) super-physical causation (idealism), and conform to the strictures (i) of inter-personal self-determination: double-harmonizing about precisely not it.
Background / Introduction:
In our ongoing war to advance the domain of science, the debate between quantum mechanics and relativity is widely regarded the current front. The laity have a description: stuff tells spacetime how to warp; and spacetime tells stuff how to move. The common sense is that there remains only the last technical issue, that of unifying the two contributions. I invite you to meditate a while with me over the significance of the invention of the refrigerator, and what not it means for the nature of science going forward. To be sure, classical notions of system and state have never proven adequate to account for non-equilibrium “thermodynamic” phenomena. To be super sure, throughout this paper the apparent probabilistic nature of quantum mechanics is not used argumentatively against Determinism (we demand a stronger argument of ourselves).
On the cover of (the 1985 second edition to) his then widely used textbook on thermodynamics,¹ Herbert B. Callen (Wiley) starkly offered the image of one very basic figure. That very basic figure on the cover included (we say by convention): two signs. I alliterate that image here: “L 4.” Those two signifiers: 1) in gold: there was an otherwise unadorned right-angle coordinates, “L,”; and 2) in gold, with arrows: a four-step thermodynamic cycle, “4”. The cover was deep blue (0). One basic, stunning, figure: a coordinates and a cycle. A coordinates and a cycle. L 4. A coordinates, and a cycle. Uninspiring?
A science sufficient to life would have to account not only for people’s philosophizing, but for every other detail of their reality. Tall task. Decidedly too tall though? How can science even begin to hope to provide a positive accounting for the invention of the refrigerator? (I ask knowing not it cannot, but the question is more than rhetorical). If we can say there are “things” science will never be able to do (ideas science will never be able to subsume), we might keep ourselves from looking in some dead-end direction(s)! If we can say that physics will (be able to accommodate but) never be able to account for the act of invention by super-physical causation, where does that leave science? Turns out science is no more upset than the color blue (Callen’s background). Turns out the cycle, “4,” is no more, or less, determined by the coordinates, “L,” than reality is determined by physics! Physics not it self is a Dynamic canvass, but the artist has eternal utensils ever at his disposal. Life literally bleeds not it self into reality, everywhere at once!
Argument:
Working refrigerators are commonplace today. For most of history that was not so. By what cause are refrigerators an actuality today? There only the two seeming-options, and we are about to confirm that pure-physicalist-determinism is absurd. If seemingly outrageous, our conclusion is that the refrigerator comes to us not-without super-physical intervention.
By what cause are refrigerators an actuality today? The would-be physicalist has to confess the refrigerator came by way of idea. Science, at least, if eventually, must confess the refrigerator came by way of super-physical cause. One can talk of motivation and inspiration, and all the knowledge that had to be at the table when the idea was had, when the invention was made, but the point stands that the invention came not by way of surprise, but intention. The cold brew came out of the idea for the refrigerator, the idea of the refrigerator did not come out of a mere wish for a cold brew. How many people in history did not invent the refer?
The refrigerator came by way of a super-physical cause, and a solitary example kills the notion that reality is a pure physicalist determinism. Reality is not and could never have been or be a pure physical determinism. Physicalism is misinformation. Philosophic materialism is dis-information. If we still care to pursue the hope of a full determinism to a higher cause, to a super-super-physical cause, we would be considering something more outrageous than the super-physical cause we were trying to avoid with physicalism in the first place! I defend your freedom to try! Between an absurdity and a hypothesis for an outrageous double-determinism, naturally sits (if by faith/e and amidst the unknown,) self-determination in self-ordinating idealism. “Game over” for the physicalist is not “game over” for the idealist. There remains hope for science. And artists have copious evidence that creation is a personal affair, so scientists stand a chance at a soft landing to boot.
Philosophy does positively confirm personalism too.² Fulfilling philosophy confirms that You bring apriori everything you really-really need to (buy-in and) play “the game.” Logically prior to any experience, you come equipped for not it. I am apriori complex (phenomenal and noumenal), and I am apriori plural. I~am: apriori complex (“L”) and apriori plural (“4.”)
You know that not it where two people each hold one of those huge air-filled balls to their chests, and then they run into each other? Just to Be how they be when they fly off thereafter. Life really do be like that! That’s really as good an image as I have to depict the seeping (through cracks of fundamental uncertainty) into reality (everywhere, all at once) of all eternity. That seepage provides the spark, the bounce, the inclination to-co-of observation; physics accounts for the (a-temporal) “flights” in and out, what’s observable. But that whole clip can seep into reality everywhere, all at once, “undetected.” Without breaking any unbreakable laws. Because the inherent uncertainties are those demanded apriori by self-determining persons, in general. As outrageous as ideas seem when elevated to ontological stature and Real causal potency, they are the only candidate left for science to try at this juncture: pure physicalist determinism being ruled out and the last hope of any non-self determinism knocked out on the mat being counted down as we speak. Art breathes naturally the air of freedom in faith/e!
Discussion:
[too large for Reddit character limit, page 1/2]

Hallo zusammen,
Ich hoffe ihr habt ein paar Ideen für mich!
Ich organisiere den JGA meiner besten Freundin. Das Problem ist jetzt, dass sich nicht alle kennen. 2 kommen aus NRW( uA ich) der Rest aus verschiedenen Teilen Nordeutschlands (so wie die Braut). Da wir als ersten Teil einen Escape room besuchen, währe es von Vorteil, denk ich, sich vorher etwas kennen zu lernen. Da wir uns am/in der Nähe des escape rooms treffen, sind schonmal alle Sachen raus, die einen Stuhlkreis benötigen. Außerdem sollte es nicht zu lange dauern. Ich kenne so Kennenlernspiele aus Schulungen auf der Arbeit und empfinde sie immer als äußerst unangenehm und cringe. Außerdem hab ich gemerkt, dass das Vorurteil das Nordeutsche zurückhaltend(er) sind, schon irgendwie zutrifft. Das macht es auch nicht einfacher in kurzer Zeit die Persönlichkeiten rauszulocken
Habt ihr Ideen was wir machen könnten, was relativ locker mit einem Sekt zum anstoßen verbunden werden kann?
Was ich bisher gefunden hab wäre, dass sich jede kurz vorstellt und ein Adjektiv als Alliteration zu ihrem Namen sagt zB die ‚lustige Luna‘. Das würde sicher helfen bei den Namen, aber dadurch kennt man sich ja noch nicht wirklich besser.
Vielen Dank schon einmal!

Alliteration
Let us begin with something we know Shakespeare stole, simply so that we can see what a wonderful thief he was. When Shakespeare decided to write The Tragedie of Anthonie, and Cleopatra he of course needed a history book from which to work. The standard work on the subject was Plutarch's Lives of the Noble Greeks and Romans, but Plutarch wrote in Greek, and, as Shakespeare's friend Ben Jonson later pointed out, "thou hadst small Latin and less Greek."
Despite years at Stratford Grammar School learning pretty much nothing but the classics, Shakespeare could never be bothered with foreign languages. He always used translations.
So he got hold of the standard English translation of Plu- tarch, which had been written by a chap called Thomas North and published in 1579. We know that this is the version
Shakespeare used because you can sometimes see him using the same word that North used, and sometimes pairs of words. But when Shakespeare got to the big speech of the whole play, when he really needed some poetry, when he wanted true greatness, when he wanted to describe the moment that Antony saw Cleopatra on the barge and fell in love with her he just found the relevant paragraph in North and copied it out almost word for word. Almost word for word. Here's North:
she disdained to set forward otherwise but to take her barge in the river Cydnus, the poop whereof was of gold, the sails of purple, and the oars of silver, which kept stroke in rowing after the sound of the music of flutes, howboys, cithernes, viols, and such other instru- ments as they played up in the barge.
And here's Shakespeare:
The barge she sat in like a burnished throne, Burned on the water: the poop was beaten gold; Purple the sails and so perfumed that The winds were lovesick with them; the oars were silver, Which to the tune of flutes kept stroke, and made The water which they beat to follow faster, As amorous of their strokes.
The thing about this is that it's definitely half stolen. There is no possible way that Shakespeare didn't have North open on his desk when he was writing. But also, Shakespeare made little changes. That means that we can actually watch Shakespeare working. We can peep back 400 years and see the greatest genius who ever lived scribbling away. We can see how he did it, and it's really pretty bloody simple. All he did was add some alliteration.
Nobody knows why we love to hear words that begin with the same letter, but we do and Shakespeare knew it. So he picked the word barge and worked from there. Barge begins with a B, so Shakespeare sat back and said to himself: "The barge she sat in was like a..." And then (though I can't prove this) he said: "Ba... ba... ba... burnished throne." He jotted that down and then he decided to do another. "The barge she sat in like a burnished throne... ba...ba... burned? It burned on the water." And the poop was gold? Not any more: the poop was beaten gold. That's four Bs in two lines. Enough to be getting on with. Shakespeare could have got carried away and written something like:
The barge she basked in, like a burnished boat Burned by the banks, the back was beaten brass.
But that would just be silly. Of course, Shakespeare did write like that sometimes. There's a bit in A Midsummer Night's Dream that goes:
Whereat, with blade, with bloody blameful blade, He bravely broached his boiling bloody breast; But there he was taking the mickey out of poets who use alliteration but don't know where to stop. No, Shakespeare wasn't going to put any more Bs in, he was working on the P North's original had "the poop whereof was of gold, the sails of purple." That's two Ps already, so Shakespeare decided that the sails would be pa... pa... perfumed. Maybe he stopped to wonder how you would perfume a whole sail, or how you might be able to smell them from the river bank (the Cydnus is quite wide). Or maybe he didn't. Accuracy is much less important than alliteration.
From there on in, Shakespeare was coasting. North had "After the sound" so Shakespeare had "to the tune." North had a whole orchestra of instruments "flutes, howboys, cithernes, viols"-Shakespeare cut that down to just flutes, because he liked the F. So flutes made the "Water Which they beat to Follow Faster, As Amorous of their strokes."
So Shakespeare stole; but he did wonderful things with his plunder. He's like somebody who nicks your old socks and then darns them. Shakespeare simply knew that people are suckers for alliteration and that it's pretty damned easy to make something alliterate (or that it's surprisingly simple to add alliteration).
You can spend all day trying to think of some universal truth to set down on paper, and some poets try that. Shake- speare knew that it's much easier to string together some words beginning with the same letter. It doesn't matter what it's about. It can be the exact depth in the sea to which a chap's corpse has sunk; hardly a matter of universal interest, but if you say, "Full fathom five thy father lies," you will be considered the greatest poet who ever lived. Express precisely the same thought any other way-e.g. "your father's corpse is 9.144 metres below sea level" and you're just a coastguard with some bad news.
Any phrase, so long as it alliterates, is memorable and will be believed even if it's a bunch of nonsense. Curiosity, for example, did not kill the cat. There are no widely reported cases of felines dying from being too inquisitive. In fact, the original proverb was not "curiosity killed the cat" (which is recorded only from 1921), it was "care killed the cat." And even that one was changed. When the proverb was first recorded (in Shakespeare, actually, although he seems to be just referring to a well known bit of folk wisdom), care meant sorrow or unhappiness. But by the twentieth century it was care in the sense of too much kindness-something along the lines of a pet that is overfed and pampered. In a hundred years' time it may be something else that does the pussy- killing, although you can be certain that whatever it is- kindness, consternation or corruption-will begin with a C or K.
Similarly, there was once an old proverb, "An ynche in a misse is as good as an ell," an ell being an old unit of mea- surement of 1.1 miles. So the ell was changed to a mile, and then the inch was dropped because it doesn't begin with an M, and we were left with "A miss is as good as a mile," which, if you think about it, doesn't really make sense any
more. But who needs sense when you have alliteration? Nobody has ever thrown a baby out with the bathwater, nor is there anything particularly right about rain. Even when something does make a bit of sense, it's usually deve ous why the comparison was picked. It takes two to tang but it takes two to waltz as well. There are whole hogs, b why not pigs? Bright as a button. Cool as a cucumber. Dead as a doornail. In fact, Dickens made this point rather bette than I at the opening of A Christmas Carol.
Old Marley was as dead as a door-nail.
Mind! I don't mean to say that I know, of my own knowledge, what there is particularly dead about a door- nail. I might have been inclined, myself, to regard a coffin-nail as the deadest piece of ironmongery in the trade. But the wisdom of our ancestors is in the simile, and my unhallowed hands shall not disturb it, or the Country's done for. You will therefore permit me to repeat, emphatically, that Marley was as dead as a door-nail.
Except that Dickens knew full well why it is doornails that are dead. Dickens was a writer, and as a writer, he knew that alliteration is the simplest way to turn a memorable phrase. This was, after all, the guy who had written Nicholas Nick- leby, The Pickwick Papers (full title: The Posthumous Papers of the Pickwick Club) and, indeed, A Christmas Carol. He knew which side his bread was buttered, as had those who came before him, like Jane Austen (Sense and Sensibility, Pride and Prejudice), and those who came after him (Where's Wally?) So popular is alliteration that in the 1960s it actually made a grab for political power. In the 1960s a vast radical youth movement began campaigning to do things for the sole reason that they began with the same letter. Ban the bomb. Burn your bra. Power to the people. For a moment there it seemed as though alliteration would change the world. But then the spirit of idealism faded and those who had manned the barricades went off and got jobs in market- ing. They stopped telling people to ban the bomb and started telling them to put a tiger in your tank, chuck out the chintz and use Access-Your Flexible Friend, or perhaps PayPal. And all because the lady loves Milk Tray.
It's enough to get your goat.¹
Alliteration can be brief and obvious-a short, sharp, shock. Or it can be long and subtle. John Keats once wrote fourteen lines of Fs and Ss, and it was beautiful:
Deep in the shady sadness of a vale Far sunken from the healthy breath of morn, Far from the fiery noon, and eve's one star, Sat gray-hair'd Saturn, quiet as a stone, Still as the silence round about his lair; Forest on forest hung about his head Like cloud on cloud. No stir of air was there, Not so much life as on a summer's day Robs not one light seed from the feather'd grass, But where the dead leaf fell, there did it rest. A stream went voiceless by, still deadened more By reason of his fallen divinity Spreading a shade: the Naiad 'mid her reeds Press'd her cold finger closer to her lips.
Whereas, at almost the same time, Thomas De Quincer famous junkie and prose stylist, got himself all muddled up over this sentence:
At present, after exchanging a few parting words, and a few final or farewell farewells with my faithful female agent.
So muddled was he that he decided to add a footnote apolo- gising for his paroemion (that's the technical name for exces- sive alliteration). The footnote went:
Some people are irritated, or even fancy themselves insulted, by overt acts of alliteration, as many people are by puns. On their account, let me say, that, although there are here eight separate f's in less than half a sentence, this is to be held as pure accident. In fact, at one time there were nine f's in the original cast of the sentence, until I, in pity of the affronted people, substi- tuted female agent for female friend.
"Agent" seems a strange substitution for "friend." But he probably had to do it as he couldn't change "farewell fart wells." It's much too clever to use a word as an adjective and then a noun. In fact, the trick has a name. It's called polyptoton.
​
Own Explanation:
why are not vowels used in alliteration
Consonant sounds tend to create sharper, more distinct sounds compared to vowels, which are produced with less constriction of airflow.
​
explain alliteration in one lineChatGPTChatGPT
Alliteration is the repetition of consonant sounds in close proximity within a phrase or sentence.
​
"The Wizard of Oz" (1939), in the scene where the Scarecrow sings his song "If I Only Had a Brain":
"I'd unravel every riddle For any individ'le In trouble or in pain."
The repeated "r" sound in "ravel," "riddle," "individ'le," and "trouble" demonstrates alliteration, creating a rhythmic and memorable quality to the lyrics.
​
"The Shining" (1980), directed by Stanley Kubrick. In one of the iconic scenes, Jack Torrance, played by Jack Nicholson, types the same sentence repeatedly on his typewriter:
"All work and no play makes Jack a dull boy."
This sentence showcases alliteration with the repeated "w" sound in "work" and "play," as well as the repeated "d" sound in "dull" and "boy." The use of alliteration in this context adds to the eerie and unsettling atmosphere of the film.
​
"Jurassic Park" (1993), directed by Steven Spielberg. In the scene where Dr. Ian Malcolm, played by Jeff Goldblum, is discussing chaos theory, he says:
"Life, uh, finds a way."
The repeated "f" sound in "finds" and "way" creates alliteration in this memorable line.
​
​
"Goldfinger" (1964), there's a famous line delivered by the character Auric Goldfinger, played by Gert Fröbe:
"Do you expect me to talk?"
To which James Bond, portrayed by Sean Connery, responds:
"No, Mr. Bond, I expect you to die."
The repeated "e" sound in "expect" and "me" creates alliteration in this intense exchange.
​
"The Dark Knight" (2008), the character Harvey Dent, played by Aaron Eckhart, delivers a line with alliteration:
"You either die a hero, or you live long enough to see yourself become the villain."
The repeated "h" sound in "hero" and "yourself" creates alliteration in this memorable quote.
​

Hiya! I'm a novelist, nerd, and geek. I've always loved learning about topics from astrophysics to anarchism and philosophy (the field of my B.A.) to psychology. Is it still alliteration if the "P's" are silent? Like a pterodactyl using the bathroom. I have issues with the MBTI, but "Extraverted" (even though I "recharge" alone), "iNtuitive," "Feeling," and "Prospecting"—"improvising," kinda—are decent descriptors for me. I'm tall and thin but not swole. Photo available upon request. I take care of myself within meager means (Social Security Income for disability). With my hemiparesis (weakness on my left side, I couldn't change a diaper. I value skepticism, secularism, and humanism, so I wouldn't fit well with someone religious or conservative. If you're a geeky nerd (or nerdy geek!) open to something besides a providehousewife dynamic, please feel free to shoot me a DM!

Edit: Oh, shoot. I'm in MI. Grand Rapids area.
Hiya! I'm a novelist, nerd, and geek. I've always loved learning about topics from astrophysics to anarchism and philosophy (the field of my B.A.) to psychology. Is it still alliteration if the "P's" are silent? Like a pterodactyl using the bathroom.
I have issues with the MBTI, but "Extraverted" (even though I "recharge" alone), "iNtuitive," "Feeling," and "Prospecting"—"improvising," kinda—are decent descriptors for me. I'm tall and thin but not swole. Photo available upon request.
I take care of myself within meager means (Social Security Income for disability). With my hemiparesis (weakness on my left side, I couldn't change a diaper. I value skepticism, secularism, and humanism, so I wouldn't fit well with someone religious or conservative.
If you're a geeky nerd (or nerdy geek!) open to something besides a providehousewife dynamic, please feel free to shoot me a DM!

Ka Boom is an innate cursed technique that grants the user the ability to explode anything they touch with their palm. This technique seems simple at first but truly shines when using this technique’s extensions.
The base explosion cased by Ka Booms basic application varies in power depending on the amount of cursed energy put into the attack as well as the time the users hand was in contact with the target. The base power of this explosion simply needs a glancing blow from the users palm in order to activate.
The base power of the explosion can cause 3rd degree burns and destroy soft materials like some kinds of wood and metal.
After touching the target for 2 seconds the explosion is now capable of blowing off limbs and causing huge burns. This explosion is also capable of incinerating wood into ash and shattering stone.
After touching the target with their palm for 4 seconds, the user can unleash a powerful explosion that can destroy entire body’s if not reinforced with cursed energy. This explosion can also destroy stone walls several inches thick and can shatter glass hundreds of feet away from just the vibration of the explosion.
After 6 seconds of contact with the users palm, the user can alliterate the entire upper body of a reinforced body and can blast through thick steel walls.
After 8 seconds the user can annihilate a small building and can completely destroy a sorcerers body, even while it’s reinforced with cursed energy.
10 seconds is the limit of this technique, the explosion unleashed after just 10 seconds of contact can easily reduce a sorcerer to ash and can completely decimate an entire city block.
Extension
Bomber: This Extension technique involves the user touching their target and saying the word “Bomber.” Once this has been done, the target will be marked with a bomb tattoo where ever they were touched. This tattoo contains a number written on the surface of the bomb. After the user explains the rules of the extension, this bomb starts a 10 second countdown.
Once this count down reaches 0 the bomb will explode with the same intensity as if the user had made contact with the target for 10 seconds. Not all hope is lost once the target has been marked though. The target can infuse cursed energy into the bomb and keep it from counting down. However, the amount needed to keep the bomb from exploding increases as time goes on. So the only way for the target to get rid of the bomb permanently is to kill the user.
Gas leak: By targeting the air sounding the user and touching it with their hands, the user can achieve the maximum output explosion and can launch the fire and debris caused by the explosion at their opponent.
Domain Expansion
This Domain Expansion is called “Blast Zone” and is considered a nonlethal domain. This domain takes the appearance of an old WW1 battle field, complete with all the trench’s. Each trench is occupied with soldiers constantly fighting and killing each other.
The bullets these soldiers fire and the grenades they throw can harm both the opponent and the user but the soldiers will not go out of their way to target the sorcerers. Hidden somewhere inside this domain is a detonator with a large red button.
The goal of the combatants inside this domain is to find this button and press it before any others do. This button may be hidden in a bunker or in the pocket of a dead soldier but it will always be accessible to anyone.
When this button is found and pressed, the sure hit effect of this domain actives. The first to press this button is not targeted by the domains sure hit and can no longer be harmed by the soldiers that inhabit the domain. The sure hit effect of the domain makes each of its targets explode with the intensity and force of The GBU-43/B Massive Ordnance Air Blast, or the mother of all bombs.
I’m not to sure about the domain and have no idea what the maximum would be so if you have an idea then I would appreciate it if you commented. Also, if you have any name suggestions for the domain that is also welcome. Even if you don’t have a full domain or maximum, an idea is still appreciated a lot.

Hey all,
These days I spend a lot more time building than playing commander so I'm punching the reset button on my current set of in-paper decks. Done the 32 Deck Challenge multiple times, but before I take this set apart I thought it might be fun to post the lists and short blurbs about each deck. Most are fairly budget so maybe they'll inspire some builds out there!
Mono Color

• W - [[Zeriam, Golden Wind]] - $35 - Pretty straightforward token deck, built it from scraps mostly. Protect Zeriam and your griffin army grows quickly.
• U - [[Donal, Herald of Wings]] - $35 - Mono-U creatures with a flying focus. Some cool synergies here with stuff like [[Twinning Staff]]. Less interesting than I had hoped.
• B - [[Tivash, Gloom Summoner]] - $95 - An equipment-centered lifelink deck. Sweet when the synergies line up, probably should run more cheap card draw.
• R -[[Ilharg, the Raze-Boar]]- $50 - Red attacky big dudes with a few theft cards and wheel effects as disruption. This deck was based on the Green Lantern villain Larfleeze.
• G - [[Aeve, Progenitor Ooze]] - $95 - Elf Snot! Dual-tribal elves and ooze. Aeve is a fascinating payoff for a deck that can make a ton of mana. Throw some Devotion in there and it’s slime time!

Allied Pairs

• WU - [[Sakashima of a Thousand Faces]] & [[Yoshimaru]] - $95 - This deck doubles down on doggos by making multiple copies of our loyal hound. You are the threats.
• UB - [[Volo, Itinerant Scholar]] & [[Haunted One]] - $60 - Human-tribal with a twist: everyone has a different job. This one is classic synergy overload. Does a lot, has trouble winning.
• BR - [[Livaan]] & [[Scion of Halaster]]- $70 - [[Backlash]] effects are the goal here - pump up your opponent’s creatures and smack em in the face. Really fun build and one of my favorites.
• RG - [[Toggo]] & [[Ich-Tekik]] - $50 - RG Landfall but with an artifact angle. Build up to fire off [[Warp World]] and easily come out on top with the most permanents.
• GW - [[Durnan]] & [[Noble Heritage]]- $40 - Selesnya Morph. It’s a deck I’ve tried to make work for years and I think this is the best iteration, but it’s just so outclassed by the new RGW morph commander.

Enemy Pairs

• WB - [[Firja, Judge of Valor]] - $80 - a high-interaction list that makes use of the graveyard to carefully sculpt your hand. Easily my favorite WB deck of all time.
• UR - [[Dargo]] & [[Brinelin]] - $35 - Arguably my strongest deck, mixing low-cost interaction with high-cost bombs. Brinelin is so slept on it’s a joke and Dargo is ridiculous.
• BG - [[Izoni, Thousand-Eyed]] - $70 - A grindy Golgari deck that mills itself to value-town. One of my old loves and very consistent.
• RW - [[Bell Borca, Spectral Sergeant]] - $70 - An all alliteration amalgamation. I was often surprised while scouring sets at the smorgasbord of exile effects with synergistic syllables.
• GU - [[Imoti]] - $2 - Cascade is one of my favorite mechanics and Imoti can make it happen on the cheap. A friend of mine has a very fun Imoti Affinity list.

Shards

• WUB - [[Ghost of Ramirez]] & [[Ravos]] - $35 - Esper cycling. Another decently strong list for how cheap it is. The Ghost is sneaky good, especially with Transmute cards!
• UBR - [[Admiral Beckett Brass]] & [[Gyruda]] - $40 - Pirates & sea monsters. Thematic take on the high-seas with pirates and clones curving into big fat sea critters.
• BRG - [[Gyrus]] & [[Obosh]] - $75 - Double trouble with a mix of infect and damage multipliers. This is one I tried to get working for years, but I think maybe Gyrus is just bad.
• RGW - [[Rienne]] - $35 - Multicolored token-makers unite. Honestly a really fun deck with a commander that makes the token gameplan resistant to boardwipes.
• GWU - [[Amareth]] - $60 - Bantchantress combo with a side of voltron. The plan here is to create infinite mana then recast [[Flickering Ward]] type cards to win with constellation effects.

Wedges

• WBG - [[Will the Wise]] & [[Mike the Dungeon Master]] - $65 - My dungeoneering duo! Fun thematic deck with the two Stranger Things boys playing DnD around an artifact-o-crats gameplan.
• URW -[[Tetzin]]- $40 - Double-faced artifact bonanza. It’s pretty fun to be able to flip some stuff easily with Tetzin’s backside, but the deckbuilding was too on-rails for me.
• BGU - [[Brokkos]] & [[Umori]] - $40 - Creatures only means many mutate targets. This deck steals a lot of value from opponents which made it very adaptable to the table.
• RWB - [[Dihada, Binder of Wills]] & [[Zirda]] - $50 - A lot more clunky after I switched to Dihada from [[Licia]], but might revisit the idea in the future. Not sold on walkermanders.
• GUR - [[Yasova Dragonclaw]] - $75 - After trying to make Yasova work for years, this build did the trick. Steal other people’s commanders - kill them with their own commander damage.

Four Color

• WUBR - [[Breya, Etherium Shaper]] - $55 - Breya takes control of the Astrotorium and runs the attractions like a boss. Fun dice-rolly deck with probably too many triggers.
• UBRG - [[Yidris]] & [[Keruga]] - $25 - My pride and joy: split cards and cascade. Keruga helps power down Yidris a bit and the deck has a great tricksy-combat gameplan. One of my all-time favorites.
• BRGW - [[Vial Smasher the Fierce]] & [[Sidar Kondo of Jamuraa]] - $105 - Token group slug. Hand out tokens and punish your opponents. Really fun at the right table. Really bad most of the time.
• RGWU - [[Tana the Bloodsower]] & [[Ishai]] - $100 - Another favorite. [[Ink Treader Nephilim]] is the inspiration. Pump up your team with cantrips and go to town!
• GWUB - [[Ikra Shidiqi]] & [[Ishai]]- $50 - Redless dragons. With a bit more effort, this idea could work, but I think big value beaters just aren't my vibe. Might make for a cool Tarkir-themed build.

5-Color and Colorless

• WUBRG - [[Horde of Notions]] & [[Jegantha]] - $50 - Elementals are my favorite creature type and this deck goes hard with them and a bit of landfall. Some very pretty cards in here!
• C - [[Traxos, Scourge of Kroog]] - $70 - Big metal doggo goes for a ride. Traxos is great for crewing up vehicles with its ability to untap. Fun mechanics, kinda basic smashy gameplay.

From this set of decks, I’m going to keep Firja and mash some of my favorites together with Tana, Brinelin, and Keruga at the helm. Gonna sleeve up whatever else I keep in the same color sleeves to make deckbuilding a little easier. Feel free to ask about any of these lists.
Thanks for looking!

I haven’t seen these articles shared before, but it’s possible they have been.
Lakeland Ledger 10 Nov 1992
“The company left its cornucopia cast behind” at the filming of a Fruit of the Loom commercial.
A deliberate reference or just natural alliteration?
​
Boca Raton News 16 May 2000
“Fruit of the Loom filed for bankruptcy. What exactly is a ‘loom’? Contrary to what most people think, a ‘loom’ is not a stick that holds fruit.”
Well, why would most people think that?
​
CIO 15 Nov 1996
“Fruit of the Loom’s Activewear Online uses a cornucopia of technology.”
This strikes me as strange wording. The other article’s reference to “a cornucopia cast” is nice wordplay, but a “cornucopia of technology” sounds weird, unless it’s a deliberate reference.
​
FWIW, I do not remember the cornucopia, but I find this ME one of the most interesting examples because there is so much residual evidence for it: South Park, Flute of the Loom, Ant Bully etc, plus multiple newspaper references. It’s interesting to me that so many do remember it.

Lepontic is either a kind of Celtic or very similar to it. Some Lepontic coins have segeθu next to a picture of an owl, others with a stag. This matches OIr seth ‘stag / hawk’ < *segWheti- ‘hunting’, used of hunting animals or animals hunted. Since Celtic *segWhetiyo-s >> G. Hegoúsiai ‘Celtic hunting dogs’, late L. segusius / segutius / etc. ‘hunting dog’, *segwesios > It. segugio, *sebwesios > Sp. sabueso / sabejo, a loan from Celtic or Lepontic seems likely. The Lep. name Segezos is certainly related. This means that *ty could become sounds represented by θ or z in Lep. That these were real sound differences, not just spelling, is shown by other words with various outcomes of *ty, such as y ( pruiam = bruyam ). Below, the same clusters seem to have dialect differences, with the strong possibility that z thus was something like tθ / dð / dz (see zvośoris below for (some?) z being voiced). Similar outcomes in Greek *biwotyo-s > Messapic Blatthes, Cretan Bíaththos, P Blattius Creticus; many IE changed palatals > interdentals (OP and Alb. *k^ > *t^ > th ).
​
​
These sometimes merge with *-st- which often became *-ts- > -s- in other Celtic. That some *-st- were voiced as *-dz- seems needed for *trisres ‘3 fem.’ > Ga. tiđres. The Ga. spellings ds / ðð / ð seem likely to represent dz (or else ts would be used). Knowing if all these always had the same value, if many were tθ or the range tθ / dð / dz, etc., is hard to tell. Thus, the Lep. name Pazros < *paH2stor- ‘feeder / provider / protector / shepherd’, Uvamokozis < *upmHo-ghosti-s ‘greatest host/lord’ might have been pronouned in several ways. That -zr- existed might show -tθr- (since many IE avoid tsr / dzr ).
​
​
A voiced or interdental value for z is required because Lep. ś seems to be used for ts . Many of the words with -ś- are of unknown ety., but in one inscr. there is uinom naśom ‘Naxian wine’ (from Naxos, a place famous for wine). It is likely that *-ksy- could become č, ć or ts, but not that it would also become interdental. This value likely = ts because of other words with -ś (since -ts in IE could come from other sources than palatals ) :
​
Inscription of Prestino
​
uvamokozis : plialeθu : uvltiauiopos : ariuonepos : siteś : tetu
​
Lord Uvamokozis gave (this) standing stone to the U’s and A’s
​
It is certain that siteś < *seH1dos / *seH1des- ‘(thing) sitting / seat / mound / stone’ (OIr síde ), since weak -es- could provide -e- in the nom. (though Lep. *-o(C) > -e(C) is possible, see below) so why does it end in -ś not -s ? IE neu. nouns in -os- often have -t- not -s- in weak cases, or alternate :
​
*widwo:s, *widwot- ‘having seen / knowing / wise / witness’ > G. eidṓs, eidót-, Go. weitwōds
​
*leukos- > Skt. rócas-, *leukot- > Go. liuhaþ, OE léoht ‘light’
​
The simplest explanation for this is that *-t- is older. Words like *leukot- formed nom/acc with *-d, creating *leukot-t > *leukost (with *-st > -s in most IE). Preservation of -ts in Lep. would be important in proving this. Also in the aor. with 3sg *-s-t > -s in Skt., etc., but *opes-a:-st > *-ts / *-ks > SPc opsút / opsúq ‘he did/made’ ( st / ts as in Celtic, ts / ks as in G., like *órnīth-s > órnīs ‘bird’, Dor. órnīx ). That both these *-ts are in Italy and the region would show a preservation in one area.
​
​
Since *naksyom > naśom shows that a palatalized C could become ś, it is best to examine other words with possible palatal origin in mind. Other words with ś / s clearly come from PIE *k^, but have not been seen because most think Lep. was exactly like other Celtic. Italic shows languages with satem features also (Whalen, 2024a, b). In the name Esopnos, older *Esponos cognate with Ga. Epona < *H1ek^won- ‘(of) a horse’ is the only option. This *k^w > *c^v > *(t)sp would resemble Ven. :
​
Ven. ekupeta-, L. eques, gen. equitis ‘horseman / rider / horse-soldier’ < *H1ek^wet-s
​
This happened in other IE for *kw (see *wlkWo- ‘wolf’ >> Paeonian Lúkpeios), so it might show there was intermediate *kp in G. changes of Kw > kWkW / pp (*H1ek^wos > L. equus, G. híppos, Ion. íkkos ‘horse’; *pel(e)k^w- > G. pélekkon ‘ax-handle’). That similar changes might exist in Ven., but not other Italic again shows areal features.
​
​
If I’m right, *g^(h) > *d^ > *z^ / *dz or similar would be needed. Thus, zvośoris on a stout bottle must be < *g^hewd-tri-s ‘vessel for pouring’, related to L. fundere, Go. giutan ‘pour’ (without -t-; G. khútrā ‘earthen pot’, L. fūtile ‘water-vessel used for sacrifices’, Faliscan huticulom ‘water-vessel/pitcher’). Making an assumption that no Lep. word could start with z- has led to this not even being seen as one word (Mees, though zvośoris as one word in https://lexlep.univie.ac.at/wiki/CO%C2%B762_Casate ), which can only lead to folly. This would show dialect differences of *tt > *st / *ts ( > *tθ ) as above. The Celtic *eu > ou would allow :
​
*g^hewd-tri-s
*zovttris
*zovtsris
*zovtsoris
*zvotsoris
​
​
Other names like Aśmina must be from *H2ak^men- ‘stone’. There is no other IE word that could give this, and ignoring the obvious ety. for such names should be avoided. Assuming you know all the sound changes before all words are etymologized is not in keeping with the principles of historical linguistics. Since so many names seem very grand-sounding, Lep. Iśos < *H2ik^o-, Skt. īśá- ‘owning/possessing / lord’ seems likely.
​
​
Lepontic Inscriptions
​
Ornavasso vase
​
latumarui sapsutai-pe uinom naśom
​
-pe, L. -que < *kWe
​
Sapsuta would be an odd name. Only one IE word fits, *sa(H2)pos- > L. sapor ‘taste’. Since it seems unlikely a vase of tasty Naxian wine would coincidentally be given to a woman named ‘tasty’ this might be a word for ‘taste tester’. Alternatively, if the range in :
​
L. sapīre ‘have flavor / taste like / know’, sapiēns ‘wise / knowing / sensible’, OSax. sebbian ‘notice’
​
meant that ‘know / recognize / be familiar with / accustomed to’ was old, this could be the word for ‘wife’ (compare *(H)uk- > uxor ). If so, *sapos ‘familiarity’ >> *sapseH1- ‘be familiar with’ with past partiple *sapsuto- (based on *-w- in perfect, as in Latin ).
​
“Naxian wine for Latumaros and (his) wife”
​
​
Inscription of Oderzo stone, unearthed in 1960’s
​
pazros : pompeteχuaios / kaialoiso
​
name pazros = Padzros or Patθros < *paH2stor- ‘feeder / provider / protector / shepherd’
​
patronym pompeteχuaios = Pompetegnaios ‘son of Pompetegnos (5th’
reading u for n (or else no IE ety.)
Pompetegnos (5th born)
*pompetos ‘5th’ << *pompe < *pe(H1)nkWe ‘5’
*-gnos << *g^enH- ‘bear / be born’
​
family? kaialoiso = Kaialoiso, gen
*-osyo > -oiso
maybe < *kaH2w-ye- ‘burn’, if other *-w- > 0 are true
​
Some analysis based on Mees.
​
​
Vergiate funeral stone
​
pelkui pruiam teu karite iśos kalite palam
​
*Belgui bruyam deu karite itsos kalite balam
​
God caused the death of Belgos; Itsos raised his grave
​
​
Simple poem, alliteration of b-; would have 2 lines of 7 syl. if karite itsos pronounced karite’tsos (or e-i > ei )
​
Belgui, dat. of Belgos (Celtic people Belgius, war-leader Bólgios, etc.)
​
teu = deu ‘god’
*dyeu-s, G. Zeús (*dy- > d- like Lus. dat. Reve < *dyew-ei )
lack of -s in nom. likely from *dyeu-paH2ter having only 2nd part inflected in Lep.).
​
karite ‘he did/made/caused’ < *kareto
Ga. karnitou, Skt. kar-, etc.
​
kalite ‘he raised’ < *kaleto
L. -cellere ‘rise’, Skt. kal- ‘drive’, Li. kelti ‘raise (up)’
​
palam = balam, acc. ‘stone / cairn / grave’ (clear due to substrate pala \ balú in Romance in area)
*gWrHi- > Alb. gur ‘stone’, Skt. girí- ‘mtn.’
i-stems with acc. *-im > *-yam (from C-stem *-am < *-m; many i- and C- mixed in Italic), also in NPc *i-m > *yam+swe > *yamsve > *eazve > eab ‘him(self)’ (Whalen, 2024b)
*ry > *r^ > *l^ > l (few languages had r^, many changed > l^ (like Scythian, Os. ))
​
pruiam = bruyam, acc. ‘death’
L. morti- < *mrti-
i-stems with acc. *-im > *-yam
*ty > *tθy > *θy > *hy > y (or similar path, dialect?)
mr- > br- in most IE ( L., G. )
Celtic had many outcomes of syllabic *r
Celtiberian *kom-sklto- > kon-skilitom shows Vr vs. rV in most Celtic due to older *ër > *ërë (like Iran.)
*r > ru / ur as in Ven. (*mrtwo- > Ven. dat. murtuvoi, L. mortuus ‘dead’; likely Ph. dat. mrotiē ‘dead?’)
This same -ur- vs. normal -ir- exists in Celtiberian: *maH2tr-bhos > matrubos ‘to the mothers (a group of goddesses)’
Celtic words like *kWrtu- > OIr cruth ‘form’, W. pryd, do not require older *ri that is rounded later, but *ër > *ërë > *ïrï with *ï that could become either u or i, usually u near P / W
​
​
Inscription of Prestino
​
uvamokozis : plialeθu : uvltiauiopos : ariuonepos : siteś : tetu
​
Lord Uvamokozis gave (this) standing stone to the U’s and A’s
​
siteś, neu. acc. < *seH1dots / *seH1det- ‘(thing) sitting / seat / mound / stone’ (OIr síde )
​
tetu = dedu: ‘he gave’, aor. < *de-doH3-t
​
Uvamokozis < *upmHo-ghosti-s ‘greatest host/lord’
Uvamo- < *upmHo- ‘highest / greatest’; unlike most Celtic *p- > *f-, > p- in Lep. (too many words with p- to all be from *kW-, ety. from PIE *p- often clear), so only *-p- > *-f-; likely at the edge of this change
​
plialeθu
probably a family name or title
https://lexlep.univie.ac.at/wiki/CO%C2%B748 suggests L. names Pliamnus & Plīnius. Since these came from the area (Mees), this seems likely.
*plH1u- ‘many’ >> *plH1yos- ‘more / great(er)’ > *pliyos- or? weak *plH1w- > *pliw- with loss of *-w- ?
If a compound, *aletyo:n ‘master’, related to Br. aotrou ‘master’ < *al(e)tlon- << *H2al- ‘high / raise/nourish’
Maybe dissim. of *l-l > *l-r in Br., *l-y in Lep.
Instead of *-t- vs. *-ty-, maybe *u > *ü also caused pal. ?
​
-opos = -obos < *-o-bh(y)os, dat. pl.
​
-epos = -ebos < *-e-bh(y)os (analogy in C-stems)
​
https://www.academia.edu/116491699

Source: J3 from a high ranking jc, U to A for H2 Literature in JC internal tests, A at A levels. Combi: HELm
Hi everyone! Decided to make this post because whenever, as a struggling student, I scrolled thru reddit threads on how to score for lit, I found the suggestions to be vv abstract or too difficult - did not see an improvement by just doing timed assignments, cld never understand how to 'argue compellingly' etc and was far too lazy to make 900 essay plans so I took so damn long to start writing good essays. Saw a grade jump only after I 'demystified' the subject for myself, so here are (I hope) concrete, actionable ways u can get ur lit A!
Lit is a skills based subject, and in my experience the lit paper tests 3 things: 1) analytical ability 2) ability to write a coherent & compelling argument 3) ability to express yourself accurately, elegantly & incisively - to get A, you have to be good at all 3. Going to go thru how to build these skills one by one.
For #1:
Analysis ah.... especially for unseen, it was sth I was damn shit at for a v long time. I never understood why my analysis was inference until end of J1 when my teacher told me 'analysis is using language to decode why a certain expression is making you feel this way' & I realised literally all u have to do for unseen is read ur text and think... how does this make me feel..... how does the language in the text make me feel this way. Just writing in this format over and over again for pbq/unseen let me jump from a U to C. However, I was stuck at a C until right b4 prelims bc my analysis skills were not strong. My first problem was I would literally pick self explanatory & simple sentences w nothing to analyse so there was nothing to credit n so many of my batchmates did this as well 😭 the solution was literally to pick sentences that aren't direct and give you room to break them down & talk abt them so you can get analysis points. However, even after I did this, I was unable to break down the "complex" sentences. There is a certain mystique to lit -- even if you know that you r supposed to 'decode' the language, u don't necessarily know how the hell to. Idk if I recommend this for long-term learning, but it got me from a C to a B & eventually an A the weeks before my As, but my advice is to create a cheat sheet. The first thing I did was list all the super common lit devices + some fancy fancy ones so the cambridge marker can go waah. I cannot rmb all of them now lah, but caesura, monosyllabic statements, asyndeton, polysyndeton, tricolon, chiasmus, anaphora, epistrophe, alliteration (fricatives, sibilants, liquids), active/passive statements, intensifiers, unifiers, singularity/plurality etcetc. To rmb all these devices, u take poems and spot all these devices. Leave no stone unturned. The process will get faster as u do it more and more, but it means that ur analysis is q rigorous alr which is an impt foundation. Noticing these things and writing that they lead to the main message gets u to a C/C+ already, depending on how strong ur links are.
To jump to A/B, what u must do is go find all the sample essays / teachers' writing, see how they write about these devices and note the common ways these devices are used - eg 99% of the time asyndeton and polysyndeton create a cumulative effect which reinforces ... (primary message of the text), epistrophe can create a confining effect which highlights the..... absence of caesuras creates a breathlessness in the reader which mimics the .... This one should bring you a long way for the unseen segments if you're super lost - maybe cannot score 25/25 lah, but this method helped me get a high B/ low A for my unseens which is good enough for the unseen segment.
For set texts, you can push this to a vv. high A for your PBQ - this is because writers are human, and they have favourite devices they use over and over again - usually in the same way. e.g. In the Great Gatsby Fitzgerald uses tangible things (colour, setting) to reinforce the class divide - usually got one super nice colour for the rich ppl (e.g. the buchanans' white house) and a bad imitation for the poor ppl (e.g. Gatsby's cream car). He also uses repetition to create an intensifying effect etcetc. These patterns are consistent throughout the text, and you can prepare for them -- so, if you choose to do the PBQ, its not going to be 'unseen' because you're familiar w the author's style of writing and you're familiar w how to write abt it. Tbh even tho I got A- for PBQs internally I chose only essay at the A levels ah bc I think its damn possible get 25/25 for essay which brings me to point #2
For #2:
Writing coherently and compellingly is more difficult for unseen, so I'll tackle that first. To be honest, just keep it simple. I realised cambridge does not give a rat's ass if ur arguments r super 'complex' or 'cheem' - they just want to see u substantiate it well, and its harder to prove all the layers and nuances in a complex argument. Instead, I always start simple with topic sentences like TS1: "both poems discuss the speaker's grief" TS2: "however, in A, while the speaker frames grief as a form of suffering, B sees it as proof of love". When you start with clear and simple topic sentences, you can always build on it - let your analysis and links back to the question be the 'complex' and smart part - you don't have to write worldly insights for your unseen to score. You really don't. Cannot be so simplistic until PSLE level lah, but when in doubt, make your topic sentences simple, not difficult.
Writing coherently and compellingly is extremely doable for set texts, but it takes work + some time. Eventually, you will discover that u r writing the same few paragraphs & probably with the same few quotes for ur set texts so all u have to do is create these 'foundation' paragraphs that r close to perfection and know how to tilt them to the question. To create these perfect paragraphs, just become a modern plagiariser (I'm not kidding). Here is what u do. Step 1 is to figure out the key arguments. Either ur teacher is god and figured it out for u, or u have to figure it out yourself. If u r on ur own, read only the TOPIC SENTENCES of 50+ sample essays (can skim thru also) and figure out which arguments are used the most - confirm got a few, maybe 10-12 popular paragraphs? You see how these paragraphs are used in the essay & what paragraphs they are paired with, as well as how the argument progresses. Usually if it's a play the paragraphs will be like a 'set'. If it's a novel more disparate. Now that you know the compelling things to argue, you just need to know how to argue it. For this, u read as many sample essays as possible and sift out the quotes that seem to always be in the model essay and/or the quotes that receive ticks and/or the quotes that js seem to prove the argument well. Confirm all the lit gods would have figured out which quotes are super convincing and a bunch of them would have used them in their paragraphs - figure out those quotes, and park them under the topic sentences. Often the analysis is also same same one, so u see how the sample essays analyse these quotes and copy paste other ppl's super smart n super impressive analysis. at the end u shld have paragraphs with near perfect topic sentences & substantiation. Doing these things alone got me A and A+ for my lit essays at the very end - I was not 'original' or 'ingenious' enough to get 25/25, because I was rarely/never the one coming up with the most perfect cogent analysis, but because I copied other peoples' perfect cogent analysis, I cld still get a high A, and probably >20 at As lah because while my Jc demanded exceptional and original work for that score, idt cambridge needed me to reinvent the wheel. Disclaimer: cannot blindly copy these paragraphs once u form them, u have to be flexible and adjust to the question. they give u an excellent place to start from, but it isn't necessarily where u end up when you're writing the actual exam. In fact I'd argue that the main determiner of ur lit grade is ur ability to tailor what youve prepared to ans the q the day of the exam - to practice this skill, u can write essay plans or do what i did which is just think about how you'd adjust your analysis / topic sentences to ans the qn.
For #3:
Tbh this is the least important piece of the puzzle, but it still impt bc clunky expressions will mean that you never see a high A, which is fine, but it means that you have no 'safety net' if u mess something up.
For me, even if I understood how the text made me feel, or the key point of the text, I cld never express it in super well in words, and whenever I did, the teacher was like... no.....wrong. Having a stronger command of the English language would have solved this, but I found this to be too abstract and not rly actionable in the short term so I used my plagiarism route again lah HAHA. Honestly, you just ctrl c ctrl v nice expressions that other ppl wrote for ur set texts (can be sample essay, teachers' notes, online) and write them instead of what u originally did. Do this over and over again to internalise them. For analysis, pick up on Nice Analytical Expressions that ppl use - tbh p similar to the analysis advice lah, this skill is v interlinked with the above 2. In fact, the primary method to gain all of the above skills is literally just learning by copying - when you expose yourself to well-written, well-analysed essays, and consciously adopt these traits when you write your paper, it will take some time but eventually you'll start writing similar to the model essays. Don't mindlessly read high scoring or teacher written essays - highlight analysis, phrases, argumentations & quotes that make U go woah so u can use them in ur next essay and make the marker go woah HAHA. Eventually, u will start thinking like the people who wrote the sample essays & the skills will bleed over to your unseens. The good thing about lit is that it's skills based - so in some ways, you're developing the same skills for 2 years and you will see spillover effects to your other components when you start building them from somewhere - so just start somewhere.

The last thing is, u r never gna learn everything and go from U to A overnight. Every time you pick up a new expression / device consciously use it in ur next assignment / essay. If ur JC isn't giving u enough work (unheard of), write/type/ recite the 'model paragraphs' to yourself until you internalise it. if your teacher feedbacks something, take the revision & change the model para. Lit is still a H2 and you need to grind a bit lah, but to me, these things made the subject infinitely more manageable. I did my notes the way I outlined above, and at the end, for each text, my Gdocs page never exceeded 20 pages, so I only had 60-80 pages of notes to 'mug' for the entire 2 year curriculum, which is q a good deal already. But tbh because the process of creating these notes takes a lot of effort, you wld remember most of it so I never really had to sit and mug my notes lah. This is of course what worked for me..... maybe this is damn abstract to someone else but I rly hope it helped bc lit is sometimes so ???? and I wish someone would have told me all of this earlier so I would have known what to do from the start HAHA. Also, always remember that cambridge paper setters won't be able to sleep at night unless they set curve balls so expect the unexpected. It is stressful to know, but tbh at As, as long as you prove that you understand the set texts and know it well (note: for essays, the preferred way to prove this is to quote extensively. talking 5-10 quotes per para. the quotes don't have to be long, they can be phrases & not All of them have to be analysed - its still a lit essay so still analyse a few quotes but you can quote phrases wo analysis) they can't fault you, and you will probably get the A.
If u made it to the end thanks for reading this super long reddit post LOL. I hope it helped somebody. If u have any questions feel free ask!

So, I was given a poem for SAT class and the questions based on the poem are pretty hard. The first three are pretty easy IMO, but I'm having trouble with the third one. I think its B but since I'm not sure, I would like you to help me out. Also, my teacher claims that "the last stanza" in question 3 actually means the last line. If it did, would it change the answer? Thanks in advance
I am a man of impossible wealth with not many worldly desires a mansion by the ocean and a loving family within are enough to satisfy a stouthearted man as I
I am a man of unthinkable riches with not many wishes to fulfill a thousand cattle and sheep and able-bodied ranch hands are enough to satisfy a contented man as I
I am a man of vast treasures with not many longings to quench a chain of malls in the city and dozens of franchises are enough to satisfy a fulfilled man as I
I am a man ofimmense luxuries with not many expectations to meet a host of brand new limousines and legions of attendants are enough to satisfy a completed man as I
I am a man perfectly satisfied with all I own and will own an endlessness of buffet and eternity of exotic drinks are enough to satisfy a stout-hearted, contented, fulfilled, and completed man as I.
The questions are: 1 This poem is ironic because the speaker: A. believes that his treasures can buy him a lot of things B. has incomparable wealth and has a lot of possessions. C. professes to be easily satisfied but needs a lot of things to become fulfilled D. says that he is contented and does not want a lot of possessions 2 Which sound device does the author use to enhance the mood of the poem? A. alliteration B. onomatopoeia C. parallelism D. rhyme 3 What tone is achieved by the author in the last stanza? A. amused B. satisfied C. greedy D. jealous 4 The mood of the poem can best be described as: A. annoyed. B. contented C. optimistic D. sarcastic

About a week ago there was a thread here which contained a very interesting debate about how much Gandalf would have remembered about his existence prior to his arrival in Middle-earth:
https://www.reddit.com/tolkienfans/comments/1b915oe/academically_gandalf_must_have_known_whowhat_he/
In the section of Unfinished Tales called “The Quest of Erebor,” I recently came across a passage in which Gandalf addressed this question; nobody in the prior thread seems to have mentioned it.¹ The background is that after the Fall of Sauron, Gimli asks Gandalf whether he knew that his choice of Bilbo would lead to the recovery and destruction of the Ring.

Gandalf did not answer at once. He stood up, and looked out of the window, west, seawards; the sun was then setting, and a glow was in his face. He stood so a long while silent. But at last he turned to Gimli and said: “I do not know the answer. For I have changed since those days, and I am no longer trammelled by the burden of Middle-earth as I was then. In those days I should have answered you with words like those I used to Frodo, only las year in the spring. Only last year! But such measures are meaningless. In that far distant time I said to a small and frightened hobbit: Bilbo was meant to find the Ring, and not by its maker, and you therefore were meant to bear it. And I might have added: And I was meant to guide you both to those points.
To do that I used in my waking mind only such means as were allowed to me, doing what lay to my hand according to such reasons as I had. But what I knew in my heart, or knew before I stepped on these grey shores: that is another matter. Olórin I was in the West that is forgotten, and only to those who are there shall I speak more openly.

I don't have anything much to contribute to the subject; but I find several noteworthy things in the quoted passage. The first is that it is impossible, given the topography of Minas Tirith. The city is butted up tightly against Mount Mindolluin. There is no window in the city, even above the level of the fifth wall, from which the setting sun could be seen – certainly not in summer, when this conversation is taking place; the sun would have set then well to the north.. The contour map reproduced at HoME VIII p. 280 makes this very clear.
How could Tolkien have overlooked this? Because the direction in which Gandalf is looking is not random.² He is looking to the west because that is the direction from which he came, and the home of those who sent him. The repetition of “west, seawards” emphasizes this.
Moreover, the glow which illuminates Gandalf's face signifies that some kind of communication is taking place between him and the Valar. Something similar happened at his reappearance in “The White Rider:

A gleam of sun through fleeting clouds fell on his hands, which lay now upturned on his lap: they seemed to be filled with light as a cup is with water. At last he looked up and gazed straight at the sun.

In both these instances, the sun falling on Gandalf signifies his role as a servant of the Secret Fire. The Secret Fire, as Tolkien told Clyde Kilby, represents the Holy Spirit. The symbolism here links with the account of Pentecost in the book of Acts, when the Spirit descended on the Apostles as tongues of fire.
Next thing: I love the sentence “He stood so a long while silent.” It is an example of Tolkien's meticulous attention to verbal rhythm and harmony. Consider the many ways in which he could have arranged this differently. To suggest without exhausting the alternatives: He could have written “He stood thus a long while silent,” or just “He stood a long while silent,” ; but the triple alliteration of the”s” sound would have been lost. Or “He stood so silent a long while”; but then the only disyllable in the sentence would have appeared in the middle rather than the end – and also the two long “i” sounds in “while” and “silent” would not have appeared together.
Consider also Gandalf's reference to “these grey shores.” This actually bears on the central question; it suggests that the attenuation of Gandalf's inherent power was caused by something in the nature of Middle-earth; it was stepping ashore that turned him grey.³ (This line of thinking converges by chance on a bit of computerspeak that Tolkien could not have envisioned – some of Gandalf's functions were “greyed out.”
[ADDED: Also the contrast with the "white shores" that Frodo saw is surely intended.]
Finally, Gandalf in his final speech reveals to Gimli and the hobbits that he will be returning to Valinor. In the published book, it can be supposed that the hobbits were surprised when he appeared at the dockside. (But he told Aragorn when they found the White Tree on the mountainside..

1. Gandalf's account of how he came to insist that Thorin take Bilbo with him was intended for inclusion in Appendix A. Christopher Tolkien describes its history in detail at pp. 327- 36 of UT. Briefly, he distinguishes three progressively shorter versions, which he calls A, B, and C. The passage quoted is found in version A only. The final, much-reduced version is found in pages 1077-80 of the 2004 edition of LotR.
2. Nothing in Tolkien is ever random. If he writes about blue curtains, the curtains are blue for a reason.
3. For some reason I thought of Robert Frost's poem “The Lesson for Today,” in which he addresses the English scholar Alcuin, who served as the resident intellectual at the court of Charlemagne: You did not know that since King Charles did rule/You had no chance but to be minor, did you?/Your light was spent perhaps as in a fog/That at once kept you burning low and hid you.

​

We all know the classic, Grade A, gems, but there some really good B grade lines. Lines you forgot about until you did a re-read, the real workhorses of the series. For example
"I'm not a rabbit, I'm a wabbit. A wascally wabbit, A wascally wabbit with a Winchester" - CD (I might have an affinity for alliteration)

Kevin Barnes did not believe they could ever leave Geor gia. Barnes arrived in the erstwhile college-rock hub of Athens around 1996, a pop four -tracker in their early twenties with permissive images of Bowie, Prince, and Iggy Pop prancing through their head. Almost immediately , of Montreal became a signal flare for a slowly changing South. Barnes, who will answer to any pronoun you prof fer , bent gender and genre through complicated and ever -delightful records, trouble and woe fueling kinetic tunes of radical incandescence. But there is only so much ener gy one can expend on the vanguard, living in a town that often felt like a frat house suf fused with regressive notions of race, sexuality , and decency . It all exhausted Barnes. They had, however , built a life there—a home, a family , a studio, a reputation. Could Barnes ever really exit? The new Lady On The Cusp is not only a rapturous synthesis of most everything of Montreal has ever done but also Barnes’ final transmission from Athens, as they’re now a fresh Southern expatriate delighted to be living among the snowy peaks and progressive politics of southern V ermont. W ritten and recorded in the months when Barnes and partner , musician Christina Schneider , prepared to leave, Lady On The Cusp combines a keen reckoning with the past with hopeful glimpses of the future, all clad in Barnes’ purposefully scattershot pop kaleidoscopes. The glittering trauma confrontation of “PI$$ PI$$,” the devotional R&B surrealist fantasy of “Soporific Cell,” the nuevo jazz lamentation of “Sea Mines That Mr Gone”: These 10 tracks—funny and sad, sexy and brooding, playful and serious—find Barnes finding new paths ahead. Barnes is moving both fr om situations that felt suf focating and towar d musical ideas that feel evermore freeing. Barnes and Schneider met nearly seven years ago, when of Montreal and Schneider ’ s Locate S,1, shared a tour . They fell in love on the road, and she relocated to Athens to begin their life together there. Barnes had certainly contemplated leaving the South but worried about the existential anxieties: Where would they go, for instance, and how would they make friends wherever that was? Easier just to stay in place, right? But the couple began visiting V ermont together , slowly seeing every season in the state where Schneider had gone to school. Barnes imagined another way to exist. What’ s more, Schneider—whose own band was in part a vehicle for confronting childhood damage—encouraged Barnes to engage with the wreckage of their past, to grow beyond it in a way they admit they never had. “Christina has been extremely helpful,” Barnes says with more than a touch of relief, “in realizing that who you’ve been doesn’ t make you who you are.” “2 Depressed 2 Fuck” was the first song to emer ge for Lady On The Cusp , the despair of its title and hook speaking as much to modern inter generational malaise as any specific encounter . It begins with busted drums and electronic gashes, but Barnes slowly twists those caustic noises into a buoyant gem where the refrain lingers like a warm spring dream. Likewise, “PI$$ PI$$” uses the flotsam of past trauma as a springboard into a thundering dance jam about leaving that shit behind, about discarding “the Amygdala hijack furies” that plant us in emotional concrete. Barnes dreams of the personal frontier of V ermont in the Byrds-like beauty “Rude Girl On Rotation,” referencing not only the lush forests of the Green Mountain State but also a new neighbor who loves just intonation and the possibilities it presents. And the brilliant “Soporific Cell” is an unbridled and infectious love song, Barnes’ lissome falsetto of fering up every bit of themselves to Christina and their life together . “I’m prepared to make an everyday beast of myself,” Barnes vows over sashaying guitars and splashing cymbals, “only for you.” Barnes has always been fond of linguistic tricks, of Montreal’ s catalog loaded with alliteration, puns, and florid phrases that dare you to tease out a meaning for yourself. But the two-part finale of Lady On The Cusp levels up in that regard, as Barnes slides into the amniotic haze of dream language for the two-part finale. They compiled “Poetry Surf” by cutting together words and ideas found in books by Ezra Pound and James Joyce or life at lar ge, so that “chryselephantine chiaroscuro cerements [are] unearthed.” The track is a devilish whirlwind, Barnes delighting in these games over a martial beat and vertiginous keys. As the song slams into “Genius in the W ind,” the bass strutting in endless circles now , Barnes sings that “Unwittingly temporalist scorched earth is radio violence,” seeming to set up another delirious round of wordplay . But listen closely , and notice that it is instead a pledge of allegiance—to follow someone into the darkness of their life and hopefully come out better on the other side, with some sex and music and fun along the way . All of this perfectly coils together for the infectious “Y ung Hearts Bleed Free,” a Bootsy Collins-influenced, self-deprecating ode to Barnes’ heroes—“sex maniacs” and “drug-addled creeps,” all—that indulges in freedom and fetish. It is candid, too, about the doubts and shortcomings of any life lived fully . Nostalgia is not Barnes’ thing, never really has been. While of Montreal’ s peers from the mid-’00s indie bloom have often circled back for seemingly endless reissues, reunions, and retreads, Barnes mostly hasn’ t, choosing instead to press for novel ways to make the kind of jubilant but tumultuous tunes they have long loved. With its views of the past not as a crutch but as a cage, its nods to what’ s next, and sounds that tinker with the idea of what it means to make pop at all, Lady On The Cusp is a compelling reintroduction to of Montreal—a project that has never stalled but has here found and used several new wellsprings of inspiration, all at once.

Me:

1. The hook of say goodbye to Hollywood:

There's something the way Eminem's layered voice receding in pitch that's eeirie asf, and I love that!

1. The hook of White America: I definitely feel like screaming at the earth to get the fuck away of my feet and shoot down into space lol
   
2. Mamacita:
   

This is a song I've seen some people rate so low on the album, but there's this article I read some time that described OutKast as “Afro psychedelics “ and I think this song just captures it well for me on so many points;
a) the first verse from Masada with that hitched pitch hardcore intimidating voice. b) think of the way Amityville's hook sounds straight up psycho and weirded out, that's what I feel from the hook where they're like "mamacitaaaaa!! (papadonaaaa!), but in an Afro way, I don't know whether to call it "Afro psycho" or what.
I don't know, there's something that just tickles me about the song overall lol.

1. The hook of Rosa Parks: Andre just mindlessly droning on in the background with crackalaka lakalakalakalaka.. I rap that randomly every time lol
   
2. The d-d-d-d on Bruuuuh Remix: I don't know why and how, but that shit feels like mixing the ratchet with the antiquely possessive.
   
3. That background evil laughter right after the infamous “You can get capped after just having a cavity fiiilled!!!“ I laugh my ass off too whenever that comes on lol. It's almost like Eminem's is telling us “You see how clever that iiiisss??!! I know it's stupid and demented, but don't you seeee hahahaha!!!”
   
4. All the way from “Got a country cousin” to “We can pick a date to come stretch your out only showing muscle when it's flexing time“ is a sonic equivalent of the lazily flailed arms of a light boxing. I remember one way dancing along to it, I literally started throwing arms into the wind like a tired nigga lol. (Btw I'm still trying to learn that part; the tongue twisting 😬)
   
5. Talking about tongue twisters; “Same posse since osh posh b'gosh, pussy clart, treat the rapping like a pushing rock“.
   

The way JID low-key lowered his voice on that snippet felt cold asf, it was like, “Okay it's been kinda easy so far, lemme slightly amp the game from 80 to 100, and then dial it down again.”... which i felt fr cause it was the last part of surround sound I learned.
It's like when the driver does a short burst of speed; the speed this case being alliteration coupled with rhyme scheme complication.

1. Raydar flow+ beat switch up: I've not seen many people talk about that part JID was like "orange ambient sunlight and..“ ontop of a fucking beat transitioning!.. Jesus Christ.
   
2. Slump: “jump back Twenty over, now that's mo' money to get”, the flow before this is a rock rolling steadily down a mountain, now this particular flow is as if the rock swerved right, left, leapt up and down all in few seconds.
   

I intended to make this just 3, but I was listening to Say Goodbye to Hollywood this morning, overjoyed this whole essay-ish thing I'm not sure anyone gone read flooded out by mistake lol
Anyway, I'd like to know what yours are:

AO3 link: Taylor Swift Songs: Literary References & Parallels
Reddit links: Part 1: Sappho Part 2a: Shakespeare part 1 Part 2b: Shakespeare part 2 Part 3a: Shakespeare part 3
Content note for this chapter that it discusses sexism and rape/non-consensual contact, though more briefly than the Shakespeare chapter.
​
John Lyly is a less-known name from English literary history than figures such as Shakespeare, but he was certainly influential, on English language writing in general as well as perhaps in Taylor's work specifically. Born in 1553 or 1554 (such ambiguity is not uncommon) and living until 1606, he published plays, novels (including perhaps the first English language novel) between 1578 and 1597 before spending some time as a Member of Parliament. In his time, he was most famous for his novels Euphues: The Anatomy of Wit and sequel Euphues and his England (comedic and dramatic romance stories), but his plays are now much more remembered and discussed. His work includes powerful and complex female characters, commentary and satire of misogyny and societal norms, and queerness of both individuals and of relationship dynamics which surely invite a modern rediscovery and renaissance.
He is generally considered to have created the phrase "All's fair in love and war". This is directly referenced by Taylor in her prologue to her (upcoming at the time of writing this chapter) album The Tortured Poets Department which states "all's fair in love and poetry".
​
​
From his Euphues works came the style of writing now known as euphuism, or a deliberately ornate style with repeated, sometimes excessive, literary devices and allusions; it uses repeated phrases and structures, alliteration and assonance, and 'balanced' sentences in terms of the length of clauses and in the ratios of nouns, verbs and adjectives to each other. Even in its own time, it was parodied by some and copied by others, and looking online it's easy to find mainstream dictionaries aligning it with words like 'pretentious'. Euphuism was not created by Lyly, but he certainly popularised it enough that it takes its name from his work.
An often-used example of euphuism is taken from Euphues itself:

It is virtue, yea virtue, gentlemen, that maketh gentlemen; that maketh the poor rich, the base-born noble, the subject a sovereign, the deformed beautiful, the sick whole, the weak strong, the most miserable most happy. There are two principal and peculiar gifts in the nature of man, knowledge and reason; the one commandeth, and the other obeyeth.

In this section can be seen:

• Alliteration (words beginning with the same letter or sound) - "subject a sovereign", "principal and peculiar", "most miserable", "other obeyeth"
• Assonance (words using the same vowel sounds) - "one commandeth [...] other obeyeth"
• Consonance (words using the same consonant sounds" - "the sick whole, the weak strong"
• Parallelism (similar structure in paired words or phrases) - "knowledge and reason; the one commandeth, and the other obeyeth"
  • Antithesis is a form of parallelism in which the paired phrases are sharply contrasted or opposite each other, not represented in the above but important in euphuistic writing.
• Repetition - virtue, gentlemen, most
• Phrases of equal length - "the poor rich, the base-born noble, the subject a sovereign, the deformed beautiful, the sick whole, the weak strong" all contain three words other than the added 'a' in "the subject a sovereign"
• Use of similes and metaphors - concepts such as "the subject a sovereign" and "the deformed beautiful" are not here being used directly but as imagery of how virtue can transform how someone is perceived by others

Euphuism also often involves

• Rhetorical questions - asking questions which are not meant to be answered
• References intended for people with classical or highly educated backgrounds, which may be deliberately opaque or strange to those who do not know what is being referenced

While Lyly used these skills mostly in prose and plays, it is easy to see how they would correlate well to poetry and to songwriting! Repeated sounds and phrases of similar lengths are staples of songwriting in order to fit to the melody, but the added factor of the elaborate imagery and allusions are likely what separate some songs when it comes to if they are considered euphuistic in nature. Certain of Taylor's songs, particularly those of her folklore and evermore albums, can clearly be considered part of this style of writing.
As an example, let's look at the lakes, the final song from folklore released as part of the deluxe edition. This analysis will ignore normal end-of-line rhyming which occurs in most songs.
​
​

the lakes	Analysis
Is it romantic how all my elegies eulogize me?	Assonance - "my" and "eulogize" both have the long I sound, while "elegies" and "me" have a long E sound
	Consonance - -ies and -ize both use sibilant sounds
	Rhetorical question
	References - double meaning of "romantic" referencing the romantic poets of the early 19th century
	Ornate language: "elegy" and "eulogy"
I'm not cut out for all these cynical clones	Alliteration & Consonance - "cut", "cynical clones"
	Consonance - "cut out" uses the stop of T
	Metaphor - "clones"
	Use of ending long O sound to draw mournful, howl/sob-like sound
These hunters with cell phones	Consonance - sibilance in "hunters", "cell phones"
	Metaphor - "hunters"
	Use of ending long O sound to draw mournful, howl/sob-like sound

(Analysis continues in the AO3 chapter.)
There is, after all, a reason why folklore and evermore were so critically acclaimed and drew so many literary comparisons - as can be seen, just about every line contains at least one literary device, if not more, creating a very dense and intense lyric experience. Thus particularly for these albums, Taylor's writing style could certainly be described as euphuistic in nature; it could also be suggested that the Midnights 3AM tracks also draw from this literary style, particularly the extended metaphors of The Great War and Would've, Could've, Should've (which even in its title uses the phrase lengths of euphuism).
​
​
Eight of Lyly's plays survive:

• Campaspe performed 1583/84 (printed 1584 three times, & 1591)
• Sapho and Phao performed 1584 (printed 1584 twice, & 1591)
• Gallathea performed 1587/88 (printed 1592)
• Endymion, the Man in the Moon performed 1588 (printed 1591)
• Midas performed 1589/90 (printed 1592)
• Mother Bombie performed c.1590 (printed 1594, & 1598)
• Love's Metamorphosis performed c.1589/90, revived 1600/01 (printed 1601)
• The Woman in the Moon probably performed 1590-95 (printed 1597)

Campaspe is based upon a reportedly historical figure (actual sources are unclear whether she existed or not). Coming from Thessaly, she met Alexander the Great, who fell in love with her and asked the great painter Apelles to make a portrait of her. However, Campaspe and Apelles fell in love, and Alexander kept the painting but stepped aside so that the lovers could be together. She is supposedly the model for Apelle's famous, lost but often recreated, Venus Anadyomene. In Lyly's retelling, Campaspe is a slave whom Alexander frees. Lyly's play was notable for being a drama told for its own value: it was not intended to hold higher allegory or moral/ethical lessons or reasoning. Additionally, while it is still written in the euphistic style and has poetic or rhyming passages, the play also used prose, which was again new to the era.
From a queer point of view, it is of course worth noting that Alexander the Great is nowadays widely known to have been queer (likely bisexual in modern terminology) and had relationships with men - most notably Hephaestion, who appears in the play Campaspe and disapproves of Alexander's relationship with Campaspe herself. However, this is still being argued against by people in the modern day, and seems to have only really entered discussion and acknowledgement within living memory - it was, most likely, not known to Lyly at the time.
Compare to: Champagne Problems ("she'll patch up your tapestry that I've shred")
Sapho and Phao is a play loosely based upon the supposed romance of Sappho of Lesbos and Phaon the ferryman (see the chapter on Sappho for comments on how ahistorical this likely was!), using elements of Ancient Greek Religion while using Ancient Roman religious names. In Lyly's play, Venus thanks the old ferryman Phao for his services by granting him youth and beauty; he is now so attractive that all the women of Lesbos, including (unmarried and uninterested in love) Queen Sapho, fall in love with with him. Sapho feigns illness to have an excuse to call upon him for healing, but they cannot be together due to their differences in status. Venus asks her son Cupid to make Phao fall in love with her instead, but Cupid rebels: he cures Sapho of her love for Phao but makes Phao hate Venus instead. Phao leaves the country while Cupid remains with Sapho.
It has been suggested that elevating Sappho to "Queen Sapho" was to allow Lyly to draw comparisons with Queen Elizabeth I of England (often called The Virgin Queen), and comment on François, Duke of Anjou, who had recently given up on his attempts to court Elizabeth and had left the country.
As noted in the chapter on Sappho, her narrative was heterosexualised (or het-washed) throughout much of history. It was not until in 1633 that John Donne wrote "Sappho to Philaenis" which had Sappho as writing to or about another woman once again. (Sidenote, this is discussed in an episode of the Lesbian Historic Motif Podcast for which I read the transcript and which sounds utterly fascinating.) Nonetheless, it has been suggested that there are queer themes to be found in the play. Venus's desire for Phao leads to her fixated interest in Sapho, an example of the triangulation of desire also discussed, appropriately, in the Sappho chapter. Moreover, the general concept that Sapho was not interested in a relationship until Phao, artificially and magically made beautiful, entered, could easily be read with an aspec or lesbian interpretation that Sapho's interest in him was essentially forced and not natural to her.
Compare to: Midnight Rain ("he wanted a bride, I was making my own name")
Gallathea (sometimes spelled Galatea) is a romantic comedy set in ancient Greece and using Ancient Greek religious figures with Roman names. Because Neptune demands a virgin sacrifice every five years, two men both disguise their beautiful daughters Galatea and Phillida as men and send them to hide in the woods. The two girls meet and fall in love despite their disguises. Meanwhile, Cupid causes trouble by disguising himself as one of Diana's nymph and causing several of the nymphs to fall in love with Galatea and Phillida, to Diana's fury. Diana and Venus argue, while Neptune is angry that girls are being hidden from him and rejects the offered replacement girl as not attractive enough; Diana returns Cupid to his mother and Venus persuades Neptune to stop asking for sacrifices. Galatea and Phillida are both revealed to be girls but state that they are still in love; Venus approves and offers to make one of them a man so that they might remain together. The epilogue says that love is both infallible and all-conquering.
In contrast to the implicit queerness of Sapho and Phao, it is easy to see why Gallathea is acknowledged as an early queer play in the English language! Galatea and Phillida fall in love as women, and Venus states her approval of it even with her offer to transform one of them to a man. This transformation does not take place onstage, but whether it does or not the end result is queer - either with a trans character, or two sapphic ones. The desire of the nymphs for the women, although sparked by Cupid, plays into the gender transgressions of crossdressing that would continue to be explored in later plays, including very famously the works of Shakespeare.
The choice of the name Galatea is also interesting from the point of view of Ancient Greek Religion. There are three Galateas in the lore - one a nereid and not highly relevant, but the second the statue created by Pygmalion who was brought to life to Aphrodite, while the third was the mother of Leucippus who was raised as a boy and later transformed into a man by the goddess Leto (mother of Artemis and Apollo). So this name has two potential references - either to the construction of the self as related to romantic relationships, or for its relationship to queer gender narratives.
It has been suggested that the interesting complexity of Lyly's exploration of gender on stage was a response to, and perhaps made possible by, Elizabeth I of England's position as ruling monarch, unmarried and without children. Elizabeth I ruled as Elizabeth Rex (literally meaning King Elizabeth in Latin, to indicate herself as queen regnant rather than queen consort). The only previous potential ruling queens in English history had been Matilda, whose declaration as heir led to The Anarchy which was 25 years of civil war and disorder, or Elizabeth's older sister Mary who is still known as "Bloody Mary" for the number of Protestants who were killed during her reign. Elizabeth I of England proved that English ruling queens were even possible - although she walked a fine line to be able to do so. From the song The Man, through July 2018 when Taylor Nation posted a picture of a concert crowd with the caption "Taylor is the 📷 of our ♥'s!", through Phoebe Bridgers calling Taylor "king of her craft" in a BillBoard interview to December 2022 when both Phoebe Bridgers and Gracie Abrams called Taylor "King", Taylor has also pushed at the boundaries of what is considered acceptable for a woman in the modern media and music landscape but also seems aware - and even fearfully aware - of the potential limitations around her, of "fucking politics and gender roles" (Question...?).
Several versions of Gallathea (generally amateur) can be easily found on YouTube - they make for interesting watching!
Compare to: ...okay, actually I don't have a good comparison for this one. But you could probably have some fun with Mine ("I fell in love with a careless man's careful daughter"), Ours ("they'll judge it like they know about me and you"), or Snow on the Beach ("weird, but fucking beautiful").
Endimion, the Man in the Moon (sometimes spelled Endymion) uses reference to Ancient Greek and Roman Religion, and to English folklore, but diverges the plot significantly to make contemporary allegories. It is considered the most impressive of his works. Endymion falls in love with Cynthia, the queen, and begins to neglect his lover Tellus who is among Cynthia's ladies-in-waiting. Angry, Tellus has a sorceress bewitch Endimion into sleep; Cynthia realises and has Tellus imprisoned while sending various people to look for a cure for Endymion. Endymion's friend Eumenides returns to say that a kiss from Cynthia will wake Endimion; this works, but he is aged and his memory damaged. When Endymion explains that his love for Cynthia is chaste and sacred (a reference to courtly love), she accepts it, and her blessing restores his mind. Various figures are forgiven for their roles and pair off. It has been discussed whether this represents a happy ending for the couples, or whether Lyly is commenting on the impossibility of fair male/female relationships in heteropatriarchal societies, as Lyly was unusual among writers in presenting singlehood (especially single women) positively. Lyly's repeat presentation of competent and happy ruling queens without male guidance or control was unusual, although it is worth noting that as Cynthia arranges the pairing-off of other characters she reinforces the heteropatriarchal structure as it applied to everyone except her - rather than breaking the system for all, she has only been able (or is only willing) to do so for herself.
Cynthia is, ultimately, uninterested in romance and stresses that the kiss she gives Endimion is an aberration - in a modern setting, it would be quite easy to read this as being aroace (aromantic-asexual) in expression. Endimion, meanwhile, expresses being quite happy with this relationship, which could also in a modern setting be considered in the light of asexuality or aromantic spectrum orientations (potentially lithromantic) or being framed as a queerplatonic or platonic-focused relationship.
Compare to: Untouchable ("it's like a million little stars, spelling our your name"), and for the dramatic female revenge on men see Better Than Revenge.
Midas is more closely based on the Ancient Greek story of the same name. King Midas first asks Bacchus to have everything that he touches turn to gold, then after it proves a curse removes it by washing himself in the river Pactolus. He then favours Pan in a musical competition, causing Apollo to give him a donkey's ears; his sensible daughter prays to know how to remove it before letting her father know that he needs to repent for his foolishness at Delphi. While this play keeps fairly close to the Ancient Greek story (with the exception of adding Midas's sensible daughter), it is also generally considered to be a reference to Felipe II of Spain who inherited Spain while it was deeply in debt and managed to make it seem far more rich through his exploitation of the indigenous peoples of the Americas and their gold. Having no major romantic plots, this play does not particularly attract the attention of queer theory scholars, although feminist scholars note the addition of Midas's daughter as the figure who solves the second issue.
Mother Bombie (drawing from ballad/folklore figure Mother Bumbey or Mother Bumbie) is unusual among Lyly's works for its complexity, for its lack of classical (especially ancient religious) references, and the fact that it is believed to be largely original rather than drawing from any existing story (including Italian novels which inspired many English language plays during these centuries). It has a complex plot which includes a pair of lovers who disguise themselves in order to marry despite the wishes of their fathers, and a pair of young people who are being matchmade by their fathers for financial reasons with the fathers attempting to manipulate each other. At the end of the play, it is revealed that the young pair whose marriage is being arranged are actually siblings, their mother Vicinia having swapped them at birth with children of rich households, and the two children Vicinia has raised are unrelated and therefore able to be together in the love that had been developing between them but hidden because they feared it was incestuous. The title character, Mother Bombie, is largely an outsider to the events, but is considered the cunning woman of the village (she denies being a witch) and many of the characters seek her advice or assistance.
Compare the pair of lovers fighting to be together to: Love Story, Ours, Don't Blame Me
Compare the role of Mother Bombie, as narrator and cunning woman, to: ...Ready For It? ("they're burning all the witches, even if you aren't one"), Mastermind ("all the wisest women had to do it this way"), Dear Reader, and to the structure of folklore which blurred the line between fictional and real stories with Taylor taking the narrative role across them.
Love's Metamorphosis (drawing loosely from Ovid's Metamorphosis but with large original subplots) is a drama with romantic subplots. Three nymphs spurn the love of three humans, and Cupid punishes them by turning them into inanimate objects as requested by the humans. Meanwhile, a peasant angers the goddess Ceres, is punished, and ends up selling his daughter; the daughter escapes, disguises herself as a man, and rescues her lover from a siren. Cupid and Ceres agree to release the nymphs and remove the curse from the peasant man, the nymphs are at first uncertain but confirm that the humans love them as they are and do not intend to change their personalities, and all four couples are married.
In Act II, Scene 1, Ceres and Cupid discuss the nature of love in an interesting manner. Cupid says that he considers the most desirable traits of women to be "In those that are not in love, reverent thoughts of love; in those that be, faithful vows." and says that the "subtance of love" is "Constancy and secrecy". (Compare Paris and "romance is not dead, if you keep it just yours"; Dear Reader and "the greatest of luxuries are your secrets".)
The presentation of the relationships between the nymphs and humans is complicated, and understandably uncomfortable from a modern perspective. The nymphs initially make it clear that they do not want relationships - Niobe enjoys flirtation and attention but does not want committed monogamy; Nisa does not desire any relationship and considers herself superior to those who do; Celia is more concerned with her own beauty than with any sort of relationship. In Act V, Scene 4, when they are changed back, they initially say that they would rather remain inanimate objects than be forced into relationships, and Ceres has to beg them to accept the men. Niobe warns Silvestris that she will likely be unfaithful to him, to which he replies only that he does not wish to be told about it; Nisa warns Ramis that he might love her, but she will not love him or express affection, and he accepts it; Celia warns Montanus that, like a rose with its thorns, at times she will be pleasant to him and at times hurtful, and he accepts it. All three nymphs also warn the men that Cupid will be just as capable of punishing them if they do not keep their word in the future. While these relationships cannot be considered consensual, they are also an unusual subversion of the usual romance arc of "character flaws" being "fixed" before the individuals enter a romantic relationship - the men must accept the nymphs as they are under pain of godly punishment, even if as they are is unfaithful, unloving, or sometimes cruel. Set alongside the relationship between Protea (the cross-dressing daughter of the cursed peasant) and Petulius, who discuss their relationship and whether it will stand the test of time and acknowledge and accept each other's perceived flaws (Petulius was initially taken in by the siren; Protea is not a virgin), the pairing-off of the nymphs with their respective 'suitors' provides its own sort of antithesis within the story.
Plays of this era - and future ones - very often ended with multiple weddings, and the pairing-off of great numbers of characters. In modern terms, people may recognise the "Pair the Spares" trope at play! Lyly, at least, seems to underscore the absurdity of the nymph-human relationships, and gives the nymphs distinct personalities and desires.
From a queer theory reading, Protea not only cross-dresses but takes the more active role in escaping the merchant to whom she is sold and rescuing Petulius, though her ability to avoid the siren's call does seem to underline that she is not attracted to women. She behaves in a gender-non-conforming way for the era, and speaks to Petulius about not being a virgin which would have been significant for the time. Ceres is underlined as not being in or desiring a relationship (though not that Proserpina is referenced in dialogue, implying that Ceres is a mother), another positive portrayal of a single female leader, while Nisa could be read as aspec and comfortable only with another person desiring her without expecting it to be requited, and Niobe essentially states that it will be an open relationship.
These strong and varied female characters, the multiple-marriage ending, and the classical religious references do all align with Lyly's work, although due to the lack of farce/comedy it has been suggested that this is a revised or later version, not Lyly's original script. Its exploration of female consent and non-consent, from the nymphs who enter dubiously consensual marriages to the dryad whose tree is cut down and who mourns while dying that even in chastity she was not able to escape male violence, is also consistent with other Lyly works which make bold statements about how both societal expectations and acts of male violence are imposed upon women's bodies. It is honestly pleasantly surprising to see such acknowledgement from an early male writer, as anyone who has attempted gender-related discourse even in the modern day will have witnessed how these expectations and violence remain factors in the twenty-first century despite denial of their existence (especially, though not always, by men).
Compare discussions of female agency to: mad woman ("No-one likes a mad woman, you made her like that"), The Man ("When everyone believes ya, what's that like?")
Compare the lines drawn by the nymphs to: ME! (Okay, I'm joking a little on this one. But maybe not entirely.)
The Woman in the Moon is generally believed to be the last of Lyly's plays, and was written in blank verse. (Read at the Internet Archive, page 230) Four shepherds complain that they do not have a woman, and ask the goddess Nature to give them one as a companion; she obliges and creates Pandora, giving her the best parts of all seven celestial bodies (as then listed - the Sun, Moon, Mercury, Venus, Mars, Jupiter and Saturn). However, the seven celestial forces war over her, influencing her moods and behaviour, scaring and threatening the four shepherds even as they fight to try to claim a monogamous relationship with her. Eventually, unable to cope, the shepherds beg Nature to take Pandora away again, and she chooses to be with Luna since they are both variable in their behaviours.
The character of Pandora is a remarkable one, carrying the action and presenting various moods and desires across the performance. Although it has been accused of being misogynistic, some scholars have put forward that it is in fact about misogyny and the absurd expectations placed on woman - the four shepherds go to Nature to essentially ask for a sex doll, and are unable to cope with receiving a person with moods, desires, depression and anger, sexual autonomy and frustration at being followed around by the four men. Pandora at one point declares "I cannot walk but they importune me". Pandora is created by the female character of Nature, and at the end joins the female character of Luna - but before she does so, she talks about how she desires parts of each of the astrological figures, and how she does not simply have one aspect of herself but contains many facets. It is very easy to see how a skilled actor of any gender could make the play into a critique of patriarchal demands upon woman, as the shepherds have gendered expectations of her from before she has even been created, further implying their artificiality.
The play all but demands comparison to mad woman, with its expression of anger from within the cage of femininity, but also to seven ("I used to scream ferociously any time I wanted") and perhaps to the manner in which Taylor has portrayed and explored duality and plurality in her music videos and lyrics. Though most marked from the reputation era onwards - ...Ready For It? contrasting the free, cybernetic Taylor with the caged ever-changing one; Look What You Made Me Do featuring at least fifteen different Taylors onscreen at once; Anti-Hero becoming Taylor's dialogue with herself - it is clear that Taylor has actively engaged in a cycle of reinvention in her 'eras' since at least Red (2012-2014). In her Eras tour, her dancers onstage perform as previous versions of herself in glass cases, with Taylor surrounding herself with her own previous forms. Having also discussed how media and social pressures used to influence her behaviour - in 2016, she discussed with Vogue how she stopped publicly dating for some time due to the media narratives about her as a "man-eater" or "serial dater" - certain of Taylor's lyrics also discuss what it is to be influenced and even controlled by powers and narratives around her.
Compare to: mirrorball ("I'll show you every version of yourself tonight"), peace ("Would it be enough, if I could never give you peace?"), ME!, The Man (which Taylor described as "If I had made all the same choices, all the same mistakes, all the same accomplishments, how would it read?"), The Lucky One ("they still tell the legend of how you disappeared, how you took the money and your dignity and got the hell out"), Don't Blame Me ("I play 'em like a violin, and I make it look oh so easy") or Castles Crumbling ("People look at me like I'm a monster").
​
​
Sources
- Wikipedia pages on John Lyly, Euphres, and his various plays - The Complete Works of John Lyly at the Internet Archive - The Lesbian Historic Motif Podcast -- Especially episode John Lyly: Secret Ally? - Euphuism (Prose Style) from Thought Co - Euphuism from Poem Analysis - Sappho to Philaenis by John Donne - The Queen’s Two Bodies and the Elizabethan Male: Subject in John Lyly’s Gallathea (1592) By Amritesh Singh - Endymion: The Man In The Moon (1591) by jyotimishr - The Interplay of Genders in Lyly's Galatea by Elizabeth Perry - Annotated Popular Edition of Love's Metamorphosis from ElizabethanDrama.org - Go Dare; or, How Scholarship Lost the Plot by Andy Kesson - NOTE this piece discusses the themes of rape and nonconsent in Lyly's works - Generic Excitement by Andy Kesson, discussing queerness in Lyly's plays

Previous post

Strange hobbies

With the company of three brothers who might well beat up gorillas for merriment, Relish Chanter could be destined to live a life unplucked, and had not Tiny Chanter himself stared hard at the haggle of artists and said, clear as the chop of an axe, that any man who deflowered sweet Relish would get cut so clean not even a starving sparrow could find the worm?

We move to the Chanters, a most charming family. These are, if I'm not mistaken, the most frequently recurring characters in the novellas, aside from the titular characters and their manservant of course. They've previously appeared in The Lees of Laughter's End, and The Wurms of Blearmouth (it was released after Crack'd Pot Trail, but chronologically takes place before it)
And what a nice summary of the Chanter brothers this is. Beating up gorillas for merriment. That's certainly a way to spend an afternoon. This establishes three things: The three brothers are a) angry enough to want to beat up a gorilla b) strong enough to pull it off and c) crazy enough to actually do it.
That characterization is quick and effective, but don't worry. We get a more detailed description of the brothers next week. In this entry we are talking about their poor sister, one Relish Chanter. Her name is certainly evocative. It definitely doesn't evoke a sense of chastity. Unless it's meant to be the noun form of Relish, in which case I really don't know what to make of it.
Here I want to highlight the structure of her description. Much like Tiny Chanter starts off any interaction by declaring that nobody touches his sister, the description itself starts off that way. Tiny and the other brothers are claiming her, in a very possessive, patriarchal way. They insert themselves before she ever has a chance to do anything. And they enforce their claim by threat of incredible violence.
And let's talk about those threats. They are clear as the chop of an axe. Chop is a wonderfully onomatopeic word, and that onomatopeia is used to it's fullest effect here. And there is some subtle alliteration here, with clear, cut and clean. The message, unlike the alliteration, is anything but subtle. Flicker also stays on the sexual note with that comment about the worm. Seems like Tiny is going to be extremely thorough. He's not just going to kill you. He's going to pulverize you.

Surely this won't come back... or will it?

In the middle of this stark, blood-draining pronouncement from her biggest brother; Relish had wandered off. She’d heard it a thousand times, after all. But what is known at present and what is to become known are different things. For now, let us look upon this most charmingly witless woman.

We finally get to actually talking about Relish herself, and we get this brief moment of Relish wandering off out of boredom. It's a surprisingly quiet moment after the loud proclamation by her brother. Here we're focused entirely on her reaction, and the fact that a speech like that has become boring speaks volumes.
First I want to discuss something I don't think I've talked about before in this series: semicolons. I'm very curious about that one; syntactically it seems to me that there should be no punctuation there at all. To me, the effect here is sort of similar to an ellipsis. It's like he's starting the sentence in one way: We're going to see Relish's stunned reaction... oh wait, she got bored and left. So why the semicolon and not an ellipsis? Personally I think ellipses give the impression of the speaker or narrator sort of trailing off whereas a semi-colon makes it more abrupt.
I am amused by Tiny being called her "biggest brother". The Chanters are all enormous, so "big brother" wouldn't narrow it down much. The pronouncement being blood-draining is also very appropriate, considering the nature of Tiny's threats.
The rest of the paragraph is much more conversational. Flicker, now done with his description of Tiny's threats, is addressing the audience. I love how Erikson depicts Flicker's attention drifting. Tiny starts off with his spiel, causing everyone to turn their heads to look at him. Flicker did as well, then he notices Relish's absence, and then finally turns towards his audience. Erikson often does that super tight POV control (in fact the opening of the GotM prologue is a great example of it), and it's awesome every time.
The most curious part of this paragraph, however, is surely the third sentence. Current knowledge and future knowledge are different things. Is he referring to Tiny's knowledge about his sister's purity, or is he instead referring to Relish's knowledge about Tiny's ability to back that threat up? We'll find out... next time (or more like in a few years)
At last, we transition into describing her appearance. I don't believe Flicker is calling her stupid when he calls her witless. Instead, I believe he is saying she is bored witless. As for her charms, they are as follows:

Flicker, you dirty dog

Black silk, as all know, is the mourner’s vanity, and one is reminded of such flowing tresses when looking upon Relish’s hair, and in the frame of such dangerous honey there resides a round face with cheeks blushed like slapped buttocks, and raven feathered lashes slyly offering obsidian eyes to any who would seek to claim them. Fullest of bosom and pouched below the arms, sweetly round of belly and broad-hipped, this description alas betrays a sultry confession, as I am yet to note clothing of any sort.

We move to her physical description and we start off with a doozie. We start with her hair, which is compared to black silk. But before that comparison, we compare that black silk to hair. So we have hair, which is like silk (simile), which is like hair (metaphor). Erikson is definitely playing a dangerous game here. I, for one, thought this was a mistake at first. But I'm pretty sure he's being intentionally playful here. The novellas are, after all, where he lets himself go off the rails and do weird stuff like this.
Once you've parsed all that, the effect becomes one of reinforcement. After all, what's better than one comparison between X and Y? TWO comparisons between X and Y. And this one goes both ways, so you can go round and round as long as you want. I still think this technique is in the "don't try this at home category". If mishandled (and indeed, even if correctly handled) it carries the risk of not seeming intentional.
I think it is very meaningful that the black silk is specifically called out as a "mourner's vanity". Relish is, of course, stifled to an extreme degree. The extreme protective/possessive attitude of her brothers has left her in constant grief, so she is always in mourning. And what's more, the use of the word "vanity" implies that she's not too subtle about it. It's an outwardly expression of inner grief. It's whole purpose is to communicate your suffering to others. And silk, a very expensive material, can definitely be read as vain in that context.
Now, the face that is framed by this hair is sweet like honey, and then we get the first overt sign of Flicker's lust, as he compares her cheeks to "slapped buttocks". But I think this is more than just Flicker's fantasy at play. I think this is also Flicker making a character read that she's someone who likes it rough (more on this later).
The next bit reinforces that. She has a sensual gaze. This is quite ironic considering the whole "unplucked flower" bit earlier (no doubt that part came from Tiny). Flicker certainly reads her gaze that way, as if she is daring him to make a move. I also read this as Relish being much more experienced than her brothers know. Ravens are very intelligent birds, and often represent wisdom and knowledge. So her brows being compared to raven's feathers seems like a nod towards that.
Moving forward, I leave the joke about Erikson having a type as an exercise for the reader. We get a nice alliteration, emphasizing her most flattering features, i.e. her bosom, belly and broad hips. And then a final B with betrays, as we get the plot twist (prose twist?) that Flicker has been imagining her naked. Her description is definitely very sensual (if not outright sexual), and at first it could be read as a standard male gaze bit. Well, it turns out it is a male gaze bit, but it's extremely self aware. Touché.
And that's Relish Chanter. Another character in our colourful cast. Next time we will properly meet her overbearing brothers. See you next week!
Next post