Jump to content


  • Posts

  • Joined

  • Last visited

Everything posted by fionwe1987

  1. There are extragalactic stars, and by extension, extragalactic planets. We’ve seen extragalactic stars and not planets imply because our instruments aren’t fine enough to detect them, though we have some indirect evidence. I took Species 10C to be part of such an extragalactic star system, close to the edge of the Milky Way. Rogue planets and stars are often found close to galaxies, and they were probably flung out of the galaxy relatively recently. Umm… doesn’t it make sense if they were an extragalactic star system that encountered no life before they started mining the Milky Way? In relative terms, you’re part of one such advanced species that kills a bunch of folks, so… They knew what they were doing with their tech. The side effects of using that tech was not clear to them. This is hardly a revolutionary story idea, but it makes sense. True enough. The 10C weren’t quite that.
  2. Yeah it probably wouldn't work for Kelley. But Fetterman and Tim Ryan have already come out and called for an end to the Filibuster. I can't think of another time they can actually make this an election issue and have people listen.
  3. It's perfectly clear to those who know of it's existence. Most voters don't know. The Dems should have all candidates for the House and Senate, as well as Senators who won't be standing for election, come out and say they support this bill. Then make the case that conservative Dems and the GoP are holding this up. Make it a race to 52/53/54. Specifically call out the states where there are open seats, or where a Dem is facing strong headwinds, and make their opponents go on the record as against this. None of that happened with the failed bill. It died a procedural death, and even the Dems didn't make much noise about it. I'm saying they need to make noise, they need to make this one issue where there's a very clear dividing line between what you get if you check the D vs what happens if you check the R.
  4. Except they can't, with the Filibuster. Yes, they have the votes to overturn the Filibuster, but 2 of those votes are conservative Dems. This is procedural and boring and in almost any other context, not a great way to get people to vote. But the cost here is clear, so they should run on an explicit message of ending the Senate filibuster. Biden didn't, last time. Nor did most of the Senators. They should now hammer home how much the GOP gets to block because of the filibuster, and ask for a larger Senate majority so the first thing they do is to end the filibuster.
  5. Not what I mean. This is a failed bill. It can certainly be the template for what they propose. But I think they'll need to make clear that to get this passed, they'll need their current House majority, and increase their Senate majority. That's the only way to make Wisconsin, Pennsylvania, North Carolina, Georgia and maybe even Ohio competitive. Will this guarantee success? No. But not making the distinction between what the Dems will pass, and what the GOP will (a national ban), would all but ensure that they have no chance at all.
  6. Whether this shifts voting patterns or not depends on how Democrats handle the messaging on this. They should promptly write up a bill that would guarantee the right to abortion nationally, give it a name that is easy to remember and hard to object to, and then have every single candidate vow to back the law. Have their GoP opponents publicly state they'd oppose the law, which they will, because there's talk of Republicans proposing a national ban to galvanize their base. Simultaneously, the Dems should use this to educate their voters on how critical the composition of the Supreme Court is, and thus why they need a strong enough Senate majority to end the filibuster, which should also be in the platform of all Dem senate candidates. Make the election about this, have clear messaging, sell it will to the majority that agrees, and it's conceivable the midterm tides could turn.
  7. Especially in the South, which marries lack of abortion access with lack of prenatal care. They do, eh? So you're for the child tax credit? Affirmative action? How about public education? Or police reform? I'm betting you support none of these things which make the lives of black babies more livable. Conservatives claiming this is about saving black lives are just concerned with keeping the prison slave labor market well supplied.
  8. Why? If abortion is indeed about terminating the life of the most defenseless, why do you support some exceptions? For you. Practically, a lot has already changed, with Texas's law. Right now, Oklahoma and Louisiana are overwhelmed with patients from Texas. This is nothing to what happens the day the judgment is delivered, and abortion becomes immediately illegal in these states, because of the auto-trigger laws they have in the books. Everything has changed. You'd have to be wilfully blind to miss that. Where does this end, though? Why shouldn't there be city/county level laws on abortion? Why stop at the state, which, after all, is still a pretty gigantic entity?
  9. And I'm pretty sure Hollywood took notice of the amount and the popularity/publicity of this Kickstarter. Given that cinematic Universe are in vogue right now, the Cosmere seems not too far from seeing actual adaptations. I'm betting we see a Mistborn series/movie by 2025/26.
  10. Astronomy is definitely full of Tolkien geeks, but the PR department (in line with The Martian, amusingly ) seems to have nixed the Tolkien reference, because I've seen multiple articles refer the Old English meaning, but not Tolkien.
  11. I thought that too, but the article says not quite: I'm guessing this Old English word might have inspired Tolkien, though?
  12. Yeah, the spirit of this season was correct. Hopefully, it only gets better from here. Wonder if we’ll get more of the 10C.
  13. It was really cool to see the President of United Earth played by Cool casting! Mixed feelings about the rest of the episode. As always, Discovery feels like it could do with a couple of more episodes.
  14. I'm totally fine with those few moments of heart-to-heart conversation in this episode. The balance was rightly in favor of the actual plot. That's how this should go.
  15. All of them? Again, this isn't true for every single citizen of any land. That's the problem with Tolkien's work. Anyone of color is the "other" who gets lumped into one big blob that he uses as convenient allies of the enemy who make the lives of out noble heroes harder. They are not characters with motives and goals that he cares to explore. You can claim all you want that exploring these lands in greater detail is somehow more true to Tolkien that what the show is doing, but it is not. And you can claim it's a better way to increase representation, but as long as the show treats it as canon that all the Haradrim and Easterlings supported Sauron in the Third Age, Sam's musings on the lone soldier notwithstanding, then it would be perpetuating that flaw.
  16. You're aware that the Haradrim and Easterling all being Sauron's vassals was a decision Tolkien made, and not actual history he had no choice but to accurately report, right? What I'm trying to tell you is that if you keep that as truth, exploring Numenorian colonialism in Harad isn't actually going to address concerns about the portrayal of non-White races in Middle Earth, because the story will show the Numenorians committing atrocities, and then we're supposed to buy that in response, they Harad all followed Sauron, no dissention, no contradictory voices deciding it doesn't make sense to make a deal with the devil just because he offers strength against the Numenorian colonisers? There's a perfectly analogous historical corrolary that Tolkien would have been intimately familiar with too: during the Second World war, while some Indian political leaders sought Nazi and Japanese support end the British Raj, a substantial majority of the political factions rejected any thought of joining with the Axis powers despite considerable outreach. This despite Churchill refusing to send food during a famine in Bengal in 1943 (caused entirely by British farming policies), which caused 3 million deaths from malnutrition and disease. Humans under colonial rule, of any skin color, do not make pan-societal deals with the devil. It is hugely offensive to suggest otherwise, and beliefs in that kind of nonsense was used to justify colonial rule in the first place. Yet this kind of depiction of the Haradrim is what you suggest is a way out increase diversity in the show? I suppose, as others said, it's only that there isn't exactly a strong pro-monarchy drive anywhere in the world. If we ever truly get post racial, I think one signal of that would be that an all white cast for an LotR adaptation would no longer occasion any comment. Unlike absolute monarchy, though, racism hasn't been consigned to the garbage heap of history.
  17. As someone born in a former British colony, I think outrage might be too mild a word if I'm to buy a story that imperialism drove an entire people to worshipping the devil and serving him. Sure, Numenorians ended up serving him too, but not all did. Empowering? There's no way to depict Numenorian imperialism without also changing the notion that somehow everyone who was and Easterling or Haradrim simply allied themselves with Sauron. That kind of reduction to unnuanced sameness is at the core of the issue in the books. Your proposal, as you present it, only deepens the issue.
  18. It is hypocrisy if you ignore context. The fury about the race of the characters in Avatar being changed had nothing to do with respect for the pseudo-mythology of the story and everything to do with the fact that in the context of a Hollywood that is strongly weighted towards white actors and creators, a story that was a golden opportunity for non-white actors to take center stage instead collapsed into more of the same. Of course, that a non-white director sat at the helm of this travesty only made it more infuriating. And pointed to how strong the forces in Hollywood were that kept marginalizing stories that didn't center on whiteness. What you're seeing today is in part a response to that. A few decades from now, it is perfectly possible that we start seeing enough content that centers a variety of racial and cultural perspectives that we'll have plenty of movies with all white casts that will get no special mention. We're very very far from that ideal, though, so calling hypocrisy doesn't make any sense.
  19. I don't particularly care about Hollywood's motives. Nor much for how they execute on these things. But Hollywood is also responding to the fact that they're no longer making art for a select audience, and acknowledging the reality that there is actual harm in constantly seeing just a single race/ethnicity/culture represented on screen. They're doing this badly, sometimes, without serious thought, and that's worth pointing out, but that doesn't mean the issues with the original do not exist, or that it's feasible or correct to just keep things as they are for the sake of fealty to the original. Stories change when they're told in different contexts. This is the norm since well before printing was invented, so let's not all get huffy about something that's entirely normal. For the simple reason that a global audience doesn't care to continue seeing exclusively white characters on screen. Yes, it would be ideal to come up with wholly new stories that are better suited to a global audience (and to be fair, that does happen), but tentpole projects that draw a lot of funding tend to focus on existing works, do it's pretty inevitable that you'll see more of this happening. Why not just accept that?
  20. I doubt they're clever enough for it to not be a horrific, gory betrayal.
  21. This is definitely true, for me. It was a gradual shift but as the season progressed, I definitely started looking at the flaws more. My real complaint isn't that they changed so much. It's that they changed so much without clear focus or purpose. That, and the editing/storyboarding was also something that I increasingly found hard to accept. And for me, part of reason the EotW plot being ok doesn't matter is because Rand just accepting he's the Dragon Reborn increasingly seems like it's a bad choice, to me. The more I think on it, the more it cuts away the crucial early struggle with accepting his fate that makes him a sympathetic character. The Rand of the show can still have that struggle, modified, of course, but Season 1's writing doesn't exactly make me think they'll do a great job with it.
  22. Wouldn't be surprised if there's some shitty algorithmic storytelling tool that sniffed through the scripts of a bunch of fantasy stories and decided a "Who is X" format is associated with large audiences. I sincerely hope these shows based on such formulas fail, then. And fail big. Amazon can absorb the shock of it, and hopefully we can all move on from such travesties.
  23. So Moraine searching for the Dragon Reborn, whose identity is a mystery, is wholesale being transposed as Galadriel searching for Sauron, whose identity is also a mystery? Seriously, Amazon seems to delight in needless mysteries that weaken the story.
  • Create New...