First things first...


Second things second…

Misha is going to be playing Eliot Ness.

Destiel Shippers rise because





The Final Problem: Oh, Sherlock. You’re Dreaming. Again.

^The opening shot of The Final Problem.

^The opening shot of The Abominable Bride.

They both open with eyes. This is an indicator that both episodes involve Sherlock dreaming at some point. 

The little girl on the plane= Eurus reveal does not make sense. It’s a gasp worthy shock on the surface, that crumbles around itself when you think too much about it. So why did we see her in the plane if it was always just Eurus phoning? Why not just hear her voice over and we wouldn’t have needed to be fooled at all? etc. etc.

The little girl on the plane is actually Sherlock in His Last Vow/ The Abominable Bride.

She is scared and frightened. Trapped. And then she gets a phone call and hears the voice of Jim Moriarty:

Sherlock is the “Poor little thing. Alone in the sky in a great big plane with nowhere to land. But where in the world is she?” 

Sherlock’s plane never reaches its destination. Where he “is” is in his mind. Having Sherlock as the little girl also explains the remarkable visual parallels to Sherlock’s Bond Air case, the fact that it is the same little girl that led to that very case!

Oh, Sherlock.  Look how brilliant you are. Your mind has created the perfect metaphor. You’re high above us, all alone in the sky, and you understand everything except how to land.

For more on the deliberate strangeness (is that the polite term? ;) ) of this “episode”, see:

Remind you of anything? A facade? (Please let the projector light be our smoking gun)

The Most Meta of Meta Parodies (The game’s still on)

If you want to make me laugh OR cry then do one, not both!

First Impressions

John’s fear of water

I think we can all agree that Martin Freeman is an acting god, yes? Several times throughout the course of the whole series, he’s given me serious meta / plot bunnies from a TOTALLY SILENT reaction to something that another character is saying.

Just a shift in body language, or a facial expression, that makes you think, “wow…there’s a HUGE story here that we’re not being told in the episode.”

And in The Final Problem, he has done it to me again, bless his bastardy boots.

It’s in the scene where John gets tired of all the hot air in the office, and steps outside for some sea air instead:

Now, this could have just been a reminder shot for the audience: they’re alone; they’re isolated; miles and hours from any help.

But look at John’s face.

That’s a really strong reaction. It’s not just discomfort…it’s verging on terror. He flinches away, tries to control his breathing, and all but runs back inside…it’s almost like he’s having a panic attack.

Why would John Watson be so afraid of water?

At first I thought there must have been some childhood trauma that gave him a phobia of water, and that’s why Euros put him in the well. Which would have been great if we’d ever been given any backstory on John Watson at all thanks Mofftiss. (Ahem. Sorry. Personal sore point there.)

(gif by @constantlyfreemaned)

But that wasn’t it - or at least if it was, we weren’t shown that ‘emotional context’ within the episode. So, what could it be instead?

I think two other scenes give us a clue. First, from later on in the episode:

(gifs by the brilliant @sherlockspeare)

This was such an odd line to me… Maybe it was something John said to his patients in Afghanistan who’d suffered interrogations. Maybe he said it to a fellow soldier when they were captured…or maybe it was something he said to himself, over and over, after he was taken prisoner.

The second clue comes from The Six Thatchers:

Again, that’s a really strong reaction. It’s not just ‘oh shit’ or ‘well that’s it, we’re screwed now’…that’s a nearly full fetal position. It’s a duck-and-cover protect-your-head movement, and very uncharacteristic of Captain John Watson, Fifth Northumberland Fuiliers, BAMF ex-army doctor.

And he did it when AJ mentioned being tortured. For fun.

As an army doctor, I have no idea if John would have been given RTI training. But would he have needed it? Would he have had any privileged military knowledge at all, ie, what troops were stationed where, or what their next moves were?

In other words: would he have had the kind of information that would be tactically useful to the enemy?

I doubt it.

True, he was an officer, but he was a surgeon…probably stationed at a single military hospital, treating patients who came in from all over the map. The military operates on a pretty strict need-to-know basis, and I don’t imagine a surgeon would need to know anything about the combat units’ inner workings.

So if he was captured and tortured, they wouldn’t have gotten much out of him. And I think they probably knew that: they just wanted to torture someone. For fun.

And how was he probably tortured?

My conclusion: John was a POW in Afghanistan, where he was subjected to some sort of water torture - probably waterboarding - by his captors. And since he didn’t have any sensitive military intelligence, they didn’t do it for information…they just did it for fun.

tl;dr - Damn you, Martin “I can do that with a look” Freeman, and your amazing plot-bunny-giving “acting is reacting, lovey” talent.

anonymous asked:

I'm not a Tumblr-er, but I know what is happening in your TJLC community and I just wanted to say this: Johnlock IS a thing. Ben even said on the Nerdist podcast that the difference between himself and Sherlock includes 'preference in the sex of our partners'. The writers weren't giving you bait; they were showing you clues. But that's the whole point: it's not about what they are. It's about their adventures. We knew all along. But that's not the most important thing. Love to you all.

Thank you for saying this, kind Anon. You’ve got the kind of voice that makes me wonder who you might be on the other side of that icon, to be honest. But, yes: Johnlock was clearly where they were going. 

If they don’t release some additional explanation or episode, my assumption is that something went wrong, and that the recent shift in political climate meant they couldn’t do it anymore. 

If (or when) they got this news, Mofftiss likely realized they had two choices: 

1) Try and make believe it wasn’t a romance all along by putting a big, stomach-churning, normativity-approved “Best Bros Forever” band-aid on the gaping plot vortex they knew it would create, or…

2) Send the message that they are as disgusted as we are, by showing what the show would look like if they hadn’t been putting so much time, love, and social progress into it. What it would have looked like if Johnlock hadn’t been their ultimate goal: total gibberish.

If you stop and think about it, it really can’t be more obvious that they’re as miserable as we are with this ending. They destroyed the show in every possible way, sending up every red flag they could in the process, to let us know something had gone wrong. 

Because where are they? They’re not trying to defend it…there’s total radio silence. You can’t even reach them. Mark even canceled his writing workshop. Likely not because he’s got no skills to teach, but because everyone’s accusing him of it, for something that was entirely out of his hands.

Make no mistake, if this is the end, the creators of this exquisite piece of artwork are as appalled and heartbroken as we are. 

I really cannot stress enough that we shouldn’t go after any of the actual cast and crew. We need to focus on the BBC corporation, to try and hold accountable whoever it was in the chain that pulled the plug on the original show mission statement.

Mark and Steven don’t own BBC. As was said about poor Mycroft, “He did his best,” but, “[they’re] very limited.”

Please do not vent your feelings at after Mark and Steven. You wouldn’t blame Sherlock for having to fake his own death to save John, you’d put the blame on Moriarty and his network, or the TV executives who’ve been making their lives hell the last few series, where it belongs.

I mean…don’t you all think it’s odd that all of a sudden all the enemies were TV corporation personalities? 

Doesn’t it seem like they were trying to warn us before it was too late?

We may just have a decoder ring for TFP

Okay. I’m writing this meta sitting on a plane having seen TFP exactly once (in English) and having done a quick Wikipedia refresher on The Importance of Being Earnest after not having read it for 10 years. I’m also typing this on my phone so don’t expect formatting.

We need to add the out of the blue conversation about Oscar Wilde into the pile of “something fucky” about this series. If you can, try to put aside your rage about invoking Oscar’s ghost in this atrocity of an episode and bear with me. And if you’re not in a place to entertain tin foil hat conspiracies, that is absolutely okay.

Premise: My faith in Mark Gatiss is at about zero right now, but I’m still reluctant to believe that Mark would not only draw our attention to this play, by this man, in a show steeped in 1895, when there was absolutely no plot relevant reason to do so other than to get up the hopes of queer viewers and then brutally dash them.

WHY, then. Why any of this.

It could be brutally unnecessary queerbaiting. Or, alternatively: it could be something fucky. (If I’m wrong, then I’ll be the first in line to drag him, btw.)

If you’re not familiar: Wilde was a famous queer dramatist in Victorian London, he was a contemporary and friend of ACD, he wrote awesome queer literature that was too obvious and he was arrested and imprisoned for it (in 1895) which caused his early death. Being Earnest, in particular, is famous for being one of the most blatantly, obviously queer coded works of the Victorian era. It’s in part what got him arrested in the first place. I mean. There’s a character named “bunbury” (just wait for it), and the phrase “Earnest” was itself a code word among the Victorian gay community used to identify one another.

Now. Here’s where the fucky part begins. Being Earnest was written in 1895, the same year Wilde was arrested for aggravated gayness. Drawing attention to this play in particular is now drawing another 1895 parallel in actual BBC Sherlock canon, for better or for worse.

So we’re to believe that for no reason whatsoever, when Sherlock and Mycroft are saying their goodbyes to each other thanks to that idiotic “patience grenade”, that Sherlock finds it necessary to remind Mycroft that he played Lady Bracknell in Being Earnest and that he did a good job of it. Well that’s weird. Until we look up the character synopsis of Lady Bracknell: “the perfect symbol of Victorian earnestness - the belief that style is more important than substance and that social and class barriers are to be enforced.”

SOMETHING’S FUCKY, SOMETHING’S MAJORLY FUCKY. This is a perfect summation of Mycroft’s role in TAB. the perfect image of the establishment. The enemy that must be defeated. It’s also the perfect description of this episode: style over substance, and that social and class barriers (heteronormativity) are to be enforced.

Just for funsies, let’s look up the character synopses for the two main characters of Being Earnest:

John (Jack) Worthing: A young, eligible bachelor about town. His family pedigree is a mystery, but his seriousness and sincerity are evident. He proposes to the honorable Gwendolyn Fairfax, and despite leading a double life, eventually displays his conformity to the Victorian moral and cultural standards. (Holy shit, it’s John.)

Algernon Moncreiff: A languid poser of the leisure class, bored by conventions and looking for excitement. Algernon, unlike Jack, is not serious and generally out for his own gratification. Lady Bracknell is Algernon’s aunt. (Holy shit, it’s Sherlock, down to the funny name.)

And just to round things out, who is Gwendolyn Fairfax, the woman John proposes to? She “believes style is important, not sincerity. She is submissive in public but rebels in private.” This would fit with pre-redemption arc Mary.

The plot of the play is that both Algernon and Jack lead a secret double life using the assumed name “Ernest”. Algernon pretends to have an invalid friend named “bunbury” (ahem) out in the country who he needs to tend to, and uses this as an excuse to avoid social obligations. (This really has shades of sounding like the institutionalized Euros plot?) Jack, meanwhile, escapes his life of duty and responsibility in the countryside and becomes a libertine named Ernest when he goes to the city. (Oh hi, adventure craving John.) Farcical miscommunications happen, blah blah, the play ends with everyone officially named Ernest and everyone happily engaged to be married.

Back to the question, WHY, WHY FOR THE LOVE OF GOD WOULD THEY DO THIS? I think I may have an inkling. Being Earnest is known for two things: being suuuuper gay, and being trivial and farcical to the point that reviewers of the era were hesitant to even give it a shot. The queer coding implications of bringing this in are so obvious it goes without saying, so let’s move on to the farce. Reviewer William Archer said that he enjoyed watching it but found it to be empty of meaning. “What can a poor critic do with a play that raises no principle, whether of art or morals, creates its own canons and conventions, and is nothing but an absolutely willful expression of an irrepressibly witty personality?” Others said “it is of nonsense all compact”, and “the story is almost too preposterous” (to not be a soap opera).

Are these critiques sounding familiar at all??? Long story short: IT’S A LITERAL FARCE.

Lastly, let’s not forget what quote Mycroft actually brings into it: “the pure and simple truth is rarely pure and never simple.” The possible implications of that, I believe, go without saying.

I don’t want to get too far down into the meta rabbit hole because if I’m wrong it would be a waste of my time. But. SOMETHING IS EXTREMELY FUCKY HERE.

If - IF, and I recognize it’s a big if - there is a bigger plan here, our question is why do it this way, why bother with all this. I can think of two potentials: 1) If they’re highlighting the environment that ACD Sherlock was written in to make a larger point about heteronormative culture, or 2) something went wrong at the BBC level and they’re highlighting that we’re still culturally stuck in the same era.

Can we all just agree that there is a strong possibility this reference was written in for some sort of a purpose? Hopefully? Probably? There are too many parallels here and the signaling in the dialogue to this play was too out of place to just drop Wilde’s name for the sake of it? And if they did it just to add to the queer subtext that they’re not going to make use of, this is next level queerbaiting to the extent that I genuinely have a hard time believing Gatiss would allow this to happen? I’m hoping against hope? We know how important Wilde is to Mark as a gay man. If there’s nothing more, then I’ll come back to this topic in the future and pick it apart as free standing queer subtext. This just heightens the stakes of the “brilliance or dumpster fire” quandary we’re staring down right now.

If it were me writing Sherlock (and obviously it’s not, and obviously I don’t trust these guys right now): I would say that it would be a nice touch to update Wilde’s version of being “Ernest” - having to take on an assumed name and a secret double life and hide your queerness under subtext - to the modern queer standard of just “Being Earnest”. As in honest. True to one’s self. Ernest to Earnest.

It’s fucky. It’s just so fucky. What the fuck are they up to, guys.

We took one for the team and rewatched TFP just to check for plot holes and other nonsense.
  • How is Moriarty talking to little Eurus in the plane at the beginning?
  • Not even gonna start on the killer clown
  • If she had such huge mind power, as described by Mycroft, why wouldn’t she have tried to leave the facility earlier?
  • Why wouldn’t Mycroft tell Sherlock who Redbeard really was when he talked to them in 221B, so that Eurus wouldn’t have the upper hand on Sherlock?
    • She called him ‘Drowned Redbeard’ and they hONESTLY coULDN’T FIGURE THAT OUT
  • Why didn’t Mycroft make them leave the flat IMMEDIATELY after he recognized the grenade the drone was carrying?? WHY DID HE WAIT FOR THE MOTION SENSOR TO ACTIVATE
  • Why the fuck does the skull painting keep changing colours, before it was lit up, now it’s… purple-y?
  • Mycroft says the bomb could affect the café downstairs, because it’s on the floor, but when they come back at the end of the episode the floor is perfectly fine?
  • John, do you want to say goodbye to your daughter who is incapable of even pronouncing a da-da yet, over the phone?
  • Jumping out of a window in the second floor, no wounds WHATSOEVER.
  • How is a fucking Fisherman aware of the Sherrinford Facility (because when he’s talking to the newbie his face says he clearly knows what’s going on in there)
  • If Mycroft can assume full control of the facility (It’s MY office now), why the fUCK DRESS UP AND PLAY PIRATES
    • Yes he said he can’t trust anyone and nobody can know he’s there, then proceeds to step out of the room where he will be seen, so what the frig, my man?
  • Eurus has been in prison, no contacts, no access to anything (there’s NOTHING in her cell, no internet, no books), yet she possesses a vocabulary worthy of someone with a PhD on psychology.
    • How does she even go to the bathroom, she would need to be escorted because there isn’t one in her cell, how was she escorted all these years without recruiting all her guards
  • Why the fuck did she wait until she was an adult to mentally enslave people and start doing whatever she wanted, why now
  • What was that thing about Eurus and Sherlock’s mom’s hairband again?
  • Mycroft has never heard, until now, about the guy who Eurus compelled to kill himself and his family??? The British Government is not aware of that??
  • How exactly is Sherlock’s playing the violin related to the question of how Eurus escaped the facility?
  • There was no glass, “you suspended the signs” THE ONE ON TOP, MAYBE, BUT THE ONE FLOATING IN THE MIDDLE OF THE AIR, UNMOVING??? HOW???
  • She wanted to make Sherlock laugh?? So she killed ‘Redbeard’ because she thought that would make him laugh, but that made him scream instead? How does that make sense
  • How did Mycroft not realize the Governor was brainwashed before John did?
    • John: This guy’s brainwashed, let’s go out on the balcony and get some air before Shit Goes Down™
  • Wasn’t Mycroft supposed to be in charge there now? How could the Governor put the entire facility in lockdown AND have EVERYONE doing Eurus’ bidding? Did she have a talk with EVERYBODY THERE?
  • Mycroft, why would you grant Moriarty entrance into Sherrinford and let him have an UNSUPERVISED CONVERSATION with tHE MOST DANGEROUS CRIMINAL MASTERMIND EVER, how was that a good idea and a CONTROLLED RISK
    • And to top it all, why do you have to tell him EVERYTHING ABOUT EURUS BEFORE HE GOES IN, you fucking dumbo, if you don’t tell him anything then she will have to spend most of the time explaining who she is and nOT plotting SHERLOCK’S DEMISE
  • How the hell is Eurus doing the ‘little girl voice’ thing if it’s HER?? Is she making that voice?
    • How does ‘the little girl’ never hear them talking among themselves when they’re not even lowering their voices
    • If Eurus is so deeply traumatized that she’s hallucinating being the little girl in the plane hOW THE FUCK IS SHE SO CALM AND COLLECTED IN A MATTER OF INSTANTS WHEN SHE SWITCHES TO HER NORMAL VOICE AGAIN
    • How can she mock the little girl’s fears when they are HER fears, HER trauma??
  • So, one of these men has to kill me or my wife will die, there is no other way, gUESS I’LL JUST SHOOT MYSELF
  • Mycroft being squeamish and puking at the sight of a dead body, but he personally infiltrated a Serbian den to save Sherlock from his torturers (SURE HE DIDN’T HAVE TO GET RID OF SOMEONE THEN) in S3 and she walked into a plane full of corpses in S2 like he was strolling through the park???
  • “I want to see you interact with people you’re close to”, for no reason whatsoever, apparently
  • “Who loves you?” “Irene Adler?” “Don’t be ridiculous, look at the coffin” ERM EVEN BETTER??? SHE’S??? A?? LESBIAN??? ???????
  • How is Molly not hearing Eurus’ voice if they’re on speaker
  • “I wouldn’t put explosives in Molly’s house, I wouldn’t be that clumsy”??? ??????? ??????????
    • What was the plan if Molly didn’t pick up the phone or time ran out, if you didn’t rig the flat with explosives??
  • Sherlock smashing the coffin?? For no reason?? No knuckle wounds or wounds of any kind afterwards???? Couldn’t expect less from Dr. Strange I guess?
  • “Don’t do as the Governor and kill yourself, because the others are gonna die anyway if you do” “Oh, I’ll just kill myself then!”  ¯\_(ツ)_/¯
  • John “I’m gonna stop Sherlock from killing his brother but not from killing himself” Watson
  • Okay so Eurus met Moriarty on Christmas Day 5 years ago, and according to what the show has hinted at, she wasn’t able to escape the facility then (she could have met up with him on her own if that was the case, but she didn’t ‘cause she was locked up, so that’s why she asked for him). Moriarty kills himself shortly thereafter, and still they somehow managed to orchestrate all of this??? When???
  • Sherlock is not the tiniest bit suspicious that, after hours of holding a call, A) the girl’s phone still has battery, and B) she hasn’t tried to call someone else in the meantime???
  • “Moriarty wanted to make trouble when he was dead”, by providing clock and train sound effects, apparently
  • Sherlock doesn’t know his dad is allergic to dogs?? His parents never bring up the fact that he seemed to be convinced they had one?? And that he had totally forgotten about his sister???? Like, ever???? #Parentsoftheyear
  • Victor Trevor was a kid who liked to play pirates and, according to canon, drink from a dog bowl with the name of his favourite pirate engraved in it
  • I haven’t asked my brother to join his pirate game like, once, but I’m jealous so imma kill his best friend and he’s gonna forgive me and hug the psycho away from me
    • How the FUCK did 6yo Eurus LOWER A KID HER SIZE DOWN A FREAKING WELL WITHOUT THROWING HIM IN AND KILLING HIM INSTANTLY (and he is shown alive down there, so, HOW??)
    • Sherlock remembers Victor and he’s still calling him Redbeard in his memory, what kind of fuckery, nobody uses your pirate-game name when things get that fucking serious
  • Fuck the girl on the plane and John in the well, I need to hug brunette Harley Quinn
  • She’s been on the air her whole life, why is the plane crashing now
  • “You went wrong the last time” UNDERSTATEMENT OF THE CENTURY
  • John Watson? Drowning? What is a Drowning?
  • Here, have a rope, now your feet are Magically Unchained
  • “I couldn’t tell you what your daughter had become” WTF THEY FUCKING KNEW SHE MADE A KID DISAPPEAR AND BURNED THE HOUSE DOWN
  • “She’s secure this time” well I hope you replaced the entirety of the staff working at Sherrinford
  • “Sherlock, you were always the grown-up”
    • Sherlock, who has been addressed as and called himself a Giant Baby Several Times
  • Back to Baker Street, where the floor is intact, the windows look like they exploded from the outside and not from the inside and the bookshelves, books and buffalo skull are safe
  • Whoa, that was incredibly convenient of Mary’s second posthumous DVD to arrive right at the end of the MCFREAKING CASE
  • “I know What You Two Can Become, because I know Who You Are, but also who you are dOESN’T MATTER
    • ?????
    • ???????????
    • ??????????????????????????

And people wonder why everybody thought the leak was a fake. Somebody turn off the lights and close the door, we’re done here. @malinwolf


Favourite Acting Scenes - Isak calls Even and his Father (9.10 part 3)

also known as that (non-creepy) Tarjei’s eyes post. 

Imagine this: the scene written for you has to be performed alone, in a room which is supposed to be your bedroom. Physically, you’re supposed to be alone. The only thing you have to act with is a phone, out of which presumably only a voice can be heard (if it’s not added in post-production). Now, since you’re in a tv show, you’re not really alone in the room: there are a few people there for sound, lightning, and a big huge camera is in your face. A director is watching your every move. Is this realistic? No. Do you have to make it so? Yes. This is a small masterclass in acting with your eyes.

One of the most important parts of what makes dramatic acting realistic is the eyes. You can make a million convincing faces, but if your eyes do not work along with you, you look disingenuous. In a close-up such as this one scene, eyes take the forefront. Whenever I look at someone’s face, whether it be an actor or not, I’m always focused on the eyes. Eyes can tell you a million words without even opening your mouth. That is what Tarjei is so good at in this scene, and it’s all on him because he barely has someone to act against: Isak’s father is only a voice, but it’s also only a background noise during the entire scene. It’s not about what Tarjei says in words; it’s about what he’s showing in terms of emotions. It’s also why there is not any music in this scene. You don’t need to hear: you need to see and feel.

The first phone call starts with a clearly felt feeling of his heart threatening to burst out of his chest. Which is an all too familiar feeling to anyone who has had to make an important phone call. Trying to calm down before calling, he puts his phone to his chest. Taking a deep breath, he quickly pushes call before he changes his mind. This is where the shot is in close-up: you can already see the stressful tears forming. What do I even say when he picks up? Or what if he doesn’t pick up at all? What does that mean? Please pick up. He closes his eyes. PICK UP. And then it ends. He doesn’t want to talk to me. I feel that if Isak’s father wouldn’t have called Isak probably would’ve cried anyway because of the stress he clearly feels. He’s not even really breathing at that moment; when his dad calls he realises again where he is.

(now, I have to admit that every time I see that moment that Isak sees his dad is calling I giggle, because that face. You can see him feeling like enough is enough. Do I need to talk to him now as well? Wonderful face, wonderful Isak.)

Even though he picks up the call, he clearly does not want to have this conversation; he almost majestically does his Isak™ eyeroll. Nevertheless he goes through with the conversation, quietly spoken and uninterested eyes. Until his dad mentions his boyfriend. This moment is the start of building up: you see it in his eyes, they become alert. He tries to dismiss this boyfriend, but his eyes tell us differently.

Crying on cue is possible through several different ways but I feel like this is all coming from the actor himself. You see him building up the emotions (the energy channelled in to feeling it) throughout dialogue that really doesn’t matter at all. He almost gets through without crying, but when his dad asks if he’s hurting.. that’s the final straw. Because he is. Badly. Then the tears fall. 

But he does not want to dwell in that feeling; his tears haven’t even really fallen yet before he wipes them off and clicks out of the conversation. And that was it. Isak composes himself but you see at the very end that his eyes have still not lost that hurt.

This is all from a barely three minute long clip without a lot of dialogue, from an actor who is only 17 years old. This is what you get if you give your actors real material to work with, trust them to act in silence, and get the best out of them. Although every scene is a culmination of different factors (his body language also really helped in this scene) I still feel that this scene hinges upon his eyes. I felt like Isak in this moment, and it’s all because of Tarjei’s ability to show you how he feels instead of telling you. 

The Problem Finale: Thoughts on Sherlock “The Final Problem”

This is probably going to get long, but I don’t really want to split it into two posts, so just brace yourselves.

I’m planning to cover the following:

1) What TFP Got Right (in my opinion)
2) What TFP Got Wrong (also imo)
3) About Johnlock
4) Some personal thoughts on #3 and the series as a whole

You won’t find wank or hate in this post. Quite the opposite. And I’m hoping it will be accessible and interesting regardless of your opinions on Item 3.  

I’ll do my best to respond to any asks, but I am headed into a writing deadline of my own and need to switch my attention to that for the next several weeks, so I might be a little slow on replying. Please feel free to get in touch, though. Would love to hear from you.

So here we go…under the cut:

Keep reading