old law

Prince Aladdin

i just rewatched aladdin with the roommates and it got me thinking

aladdin wishes to be made a prince, but all genie does is get him a lot of stuff and money. that’s not what a prince is. a prince is the son of the king, someone in line for the throne. someone with a lot of money is just - rich. so what i think is:

genie goes okay, that’s a big one - and i can do it! but not on my own, not if you want to do it right. not if you truly want a chance to marry your princess for real, as a prince. and aladdin is a foolish, moral, kind boy - and he agrees. he’s fallen in love with jasmine, an innocent all encompassing love, and he’ll do anything for this sweet, clever girl he only knew for a few hours. so genie takes him across the desert, far from agrabah, and plops right in the middle of a skirmish and is like okay, good luck! and aladdin is like ?????

but there’s assholes with swords attacking a young girl, and aladdin doesn’t even have to think about that, just like when he stood in front of the whip for those little kids. there are three men against him, but he’s fast and clever and has been against a dozen trained palace guards. so it’s not easy to get out of there alive, especially with the little girl to protect, but he manages it with only a thin slice on his upper arm, and he’s endured worse for less. so he picks up the little girl and says “i think we should get out of here, hmm?” and she’s in a pretty red silk getup with tiny jewels encrusted on her like stars against sunset. and she nods and throws her arms around his neck. she won’t talk, only points in the direction of home, but aladdin’s okay with that, he’s used to quiet, scared kids. so he keeps up a steady stream of stories of agrabah, which seems almost like this other desert land. but there are more men with swords and aladdin is like what the fuck is going on, but he hides the girl in a corner and fights them too. and that’s how it goes all the way home. there’s no one on the streets really, and they all scatter when the men attack, and they keep on attacking, he fights his way all the way through the city with the girl on his hip or hidden away.

and he should have known, of course, but he was tired and bruised and bleeding by the time he realized the little girl is silently guiding him to the palace and he’s like why can’t you princesses stay inside??? but he walks up and the guards get one look at the child in his arms and whisk him through and multiple people try to take the girl away but she won’t budge from him, a stubborn pout to her lips as her hands remained locked behind his neck. and he’s finally tossed into a throne room where a tall old man is sitting in agony and two young men pace in front of him, each at least a decade older than aladdin. “they’ve taken our sister!” one of the younger men hiss, “i don’t care about their power or their connections, they’ve taken esfir, and we must go get her!”

“uh,” he clears his throat, “hi?”

and all three men whirl on him and the old man stumble-runs to him. esfir finally lets go of aladdin to picked up and twirled around by her father. the two men are rahim and shapur and they look in wonder at this dirty boy of fifteen who’s returned the girl to them, and he speaks with an accent and clearly is not from here and they get the story from him - he’s traveled across the desert because those in his own country want him dead. “you know,” rahim says as the king clutches at esfir in desperate relief, “you could have held her for ransom. you almost died saving her, and we would have paid handsomely to have her returned safely.”

and aladdin gives him a flat disapproving look, appearing in this moment four times his age, and says “people are not objects or bargaining chips. especially not lost little girls.” and rahim and shapur share an impressed conspiring look and they each grab one of his arms and lead him away. “hey! what are you -”

“do be quiet little brother,” shapur says cheerfully, “we really have to get you out of your rags.”

Keep reading

some very very good vimes facts™ i have picked up while rereading jingo
  • absentmindedly strikes matches using sgt. detrius, who is made of rock, on multiple occasions
  • murmurs sarcastic clapbacks under his breath during official city council meetings, while vetinari glares at him. the saltiest bitch in the game
  • allergic to paperwork, apparently solely because he can’t stand his coworkers spelling and/or punctuation from hell
  • thinks “so are we gonna have a war or what” is appropriate diplomatic dialogue
  • literally so noir that he takes extra unofficial patrols to stand in the rain at 3 in the morning and brood 
  • and fucking loves it
  • honestly doing his best to work against a lifetime of ingrained prejudices. not perfect but t r y i n g
  • fluent in latatian (discworld latin) or fucking close enough for a guy with presumably no secondary education
  • doesn’t give a shit about the laws of space and time, just the good old laws of ankh morpork. get that supernatural shit outta here 
  • can toss his sword high enough to spin three times and still catch it by the handle
  • “a watchman is a civilian you inbred streak of piss”
  • will only eat food which Sybil has burnt beyond recognition cooked over the flame of a live swamp dragon
  • so in love with his wife, gets really flustered every time she speaks
  • a knight, but incredibly embarrassed about it
  • by the end of this book pretty much the second most powerful man in the city, being a duke in a kingdom with no king, and still really embarrassed about it
  • ghost rides the whip piloting a boat through a deadly thunderstorm on not one but TWO separate occasions (here and in snuff), still doesn’t know how the fuck boats work
  • calls the prow of a ship ‘the sharp part’
  • i can’t let this go by without mentioning this sonofabitch also ARRESTED TWO OPPOSING ARMIES and then his OWN TYRANT in order to stop a war like how incredibly Extra–
  • fuckin made me cry again guys ive read this book like ten times

oh, shit, people actually asked me to follow up on Preaching The Good Word of A Functional Alignment System, okay

i hope you people know what you’re unleashing here

(whole thing prompted by this right here, notably including the tag #unpopular opinion: the definition of lawful and chaotic has been thoroughly twisted over the years since od&d)

So some of you (the ones who didn’t request this) might be wondering: “Alterz, why would you want to go back to the old alignment method? If people generally agree on the new alignment definitions then why confuse things by trying to change them? Is this just some old system nostalgia?”

Well 1) I’m too young by far for old system nostalgia but more importantly 2) people don’t? agree????? on the alignments???????

And that’s a problem, because the whole point of the alignments is to give some rough guidelines on how any given character is likely to act. It should be inarguable. The very fact that people can have arguments over what an alignment is means that the system has failed.

If you look in the alignment section on the more recent D&D editions, they literally have to go into detail on each alignment to explain what each one means. Worse still, for a system theoretically set up as a gradient, the different alignments are basically buckets and it gets really confusing if a character doesn’t neatly fit into one of those buckets.

Some examples from characters I have actually played: a mercenary who I labeled as neutral because I could make equally compelling arguments for why he should be lawful neutral, chaotic neutral, neutral good, and neutral evil. A hermit who at any given time was chaotic neutral or neutral good, but could never reliably be described as chaotic good.

Under the system I’m about to provide you, the mercenary is inarguably chaotic neutral and the hermit is unambiguously lawful good. End of sentence, all cleared up.

Keep reading

5

Dialogue: Exposing the Rhetoric of Exclusion through Medieval Manuscripts

By Kristen Collins and Bryan Keene, originally published on the Getty Iris

We invite your thoughts on an exhibition-in-progress at the Getty that addresses the persistence of prejudice as seen through lingering stereotypes from the Middle Ages.

As curators in the Getty Museum’s department of medieval and Renaissance manuscripts, we are interested in how books, and museum collections more broadly, can spark dialogues about inclusivity and diversity. Our manuscripts collection at the Getty consists primarily of objects from Western Europe, which can present challenges when trying to connect with a multicultural and increasingly international audience. 

We are striving to make connections between the Middle Ages and the contemporary world—connections that may not be immediately evident, but are powerful nonetheless. Museums are inherently political organizations, in terms of the ways that collections are assembled, displayed, and interpreted. This year’s meeting of the Association of Art Museum Curators addressed how institutional narratives and implicit bias can skew ideas of history and culture in ways that exclude minorities and gloss over the shameful aspects of our past. Groups such as the Medievalists of Color, the Society for the Study of Disability in the Middle Ages, the Society for Medieval Feminist Scholarship, and the Society for the Study of Homosexuality in the Middle Ages, among others, are applying similar lines of inquiry, seeking to decolonize and diversify the field of medieval studies. We stand with these groups.

We were also inspired by Holland Cotter’s call to arms, as he exhorted museums to tell the truth about art, “about who made objects, and how they work in the world, and how they got to the museum, and what they mean, what values they advertise, good and bad. Go for truth (which, like the telling of history, is always changing), and connect art to life.”

Here is our description of the exhibition, still in draft form:

Medieval manuscripts preserve stories of romance, faith, and knowledge, but their luxurious illuminations can reveal more sinister narratives as well. Typically created for the privileged classes, such books nevertheless provide glimpses of the marginalized and powerless and reflect their tenuous places in society. Attitudes toward Jews and Muslims, the poor, those perceived as sexual or gender deviants, and the foreign peoples beyond European borders can be discerned through caricature and polemical imagery, as well as through marks of erasure and censorship.

As repositories of history and memory, museums reveal much about our shared past, but all too often the stories told from luxury art objects focus on the elite. Through case studies of objects in the Getty’s collection, this exhibition examines the “out groups” living within western Europe. Medieval society was far more diverse than is commonly understood, but diversity did not necessarily engender tolerance. Life contained significant obstacles for those who were not fully abled, wealthy, Caucasian, Christian, heterosexual, cisgender males. For today’s viewer, the vivid images and pervasive narratives in illuminated manuscripts can serve as a stark reminder of the power of rhetoric and the danger of prejudice.

We begin the exhibition with a masterpiece of Romanesque painting, shown above. This manuscript, with its gilded pages and geometric symmetry, reveals the institutionalized antisemitism that formed the basis of Christian rhetoric about the triumph of the Church.

Ecclesia, the personification of the Christian Church, is seen above and to Christ’s right, while the Jewish Synagoga appears on Christ’s left. Often represented as a blindfolded figure, here Synagoga (in red robes) points at Christ, glaring. She holds a banderole representing Old Testament law that proclaims “cursed be he who hangs on the tree.” Below, two additional personifications echo and intensify the antithetical positions of these two figures. In a roundel below Ecclesia, the fair-skinned figure of Life (at far left) gazes calmly across the composition at Death, whose dark complexion and hook nose are seen in caricatures of Jews in other twelfth-century images.

We’d Like Your Comments

We are in the early stages of writing this exhibition, which is scheduled to be presented in the Getty’s manuscripts gallery in January 2018. As we create both the thematic content and the individual object texts—which we will be posting periodically on the Getty Tumblr—we are curious to receive community input. Specifically, we are curious to know any or all of the following:

  • Your level of interest in an exhibition of medieval and Renaissance art exploring these themes
  • Comments on the wording of the exhibition description we’ve shared above (as a whole or in any part)
  • Suggestions for perspectives and points of view we should consider in developing the exhibition
  • Any and all other suggestions or criticisms

Please reblog with your comments, DM us, or contact the curators directly by email at manuscripts@getty.edu.

anonymous asked:

The other day my friend looked at me and said how she thought it would be funny if Lucia was secretly dating Chief Dodds and Barba didn't know because he would freak out when he finds out and now I'm curious like is this a thing?? Do people actually ship them? What do you think?

…. wh.… oh my god…. but.…… YA’LL…….. THIS IS BRILLIANT!
I DIDN’T KNOW THIS WAS A SHIP BUT IT’S NECESSARY.

Originally posted by knittingharlot

OKAY BUT CAN WE IMAGINE POOR LIL RAFI HELPING HIMSELF INTO LUCIA’S APARTMENT UNANNOUNCED AND HE JUST STARTS TALKING ABOUT THINGS UNTIL HE TURNS THE CORNER AND LUCIA IS ALL (O.O) AND FIXING HER LIPSTICK IN A MIRROR WHILE CHIEF DODDS IS STRAIGHTENING HIS TIE AND TRYING TO RE-COIF HIS HAIR?

Originally posted by minidodds

Barba: “Chief Dodds! What’re you doi… M- … Mami…?!?!?!”
Lucia: “Rafi, it’s not what it looks like-”
Chief Dodds: “I, uh, should really get going now…”
Barba: *has no idea what to even do* “OBJECTION! MAMI?! OBJECTION! OBJECTION!”

Originally posted by knittingharlot

Chief Dodds: “This isn’t court, Barba, don’t be a dramatic nancy-”
Lucia: *mama bear* “Don’t you talk to my Rafi like that.”
Barba: “WHY IS YOUR LIPSTICK ON HIS SHIRT COLLAR?!”
Chief Dodds: *shit shit shit* “Okay, I’m sorry, Rafi-”
Barba: *gasp* “NO NO NO, OBJECTION! OBJECTION!”

Originally posted by obsessed-north

[[okay but seriously; Barba’s father was abusive and not there for him at all // Dodds Sr was overly-involved in his son’s life // both Barba’s father & Dodds Sr’s son are deceased at this point // this dynamic could actually be pretty fulfilling for both of them and us viewers: giving both of them what the other lack ((Someone to actually stand up to Dodds / Someone to actually be supportive for Barba)) / are most upset about ((saying this because obv Chief Dodds misses his boy, and Barba has mentioned pain due to his father more than he’s shown aaany consideration to a romantic relationship)) / could fill the gaps in their character’s desires without going cliche at all… and I really would love more Lucia… I really really wanna right a shortie story about Barba & Dodds having a drink after this discovery now….]]

Tiny Mystrade Patreon Commission for the lovely @warpedchyld. First time I finally get to draw these two dorks and I love it <3 <3

Name: Frank Sinatra

Crime: While working at “The Rustic Cabin”, in 1938 he became involved in a dispute between his girlfriend Toni Della Penta, who suffered a miscarriage, and Nancy Barbato, a stonemason’s daughter. After Della Penta attempted to tear off Barbato’s dress, Sinatra ordered Barbato away and told Della Pinta that he would marry Barbato, several years his junior, because she was pregnant. Della Penta went to the police, and Sinatra was arrested on a morals charge for seduction. After a fight between Della Penta and Dolly, Della Penta was later arrested herself. Sinatra married Barbato that year, and Nancy Sinatra was born the following year.