Avatar

haunt me haunt me do it again

@unnamedcave / unnamedcave.tumblr.com

20something queer. they/she . poems . contemporary media. grammar of grief. tn unnamed caves appreciation blog

I really don’t want to open this can of worms because Tumblr hath no fury like people called out on their political performativeness but it is literally driving me up the wall to watch people react to Serkis’ ‘keep Tolkien white’ commentary by insisting twice as hard that Tolkien would descend down to earth and dropkick the entire Republican party to hell or whatever, just because they want to ensure that a piece of media they enjoy isn’t seen as being morally impure. Case in point: I have seen at least five instances of Tolkien’s ‘I hate apartheid’ valedictorian address being used as a ‘counter’ to Serkis being racist, including by actual news outlets.

Except it’s only ever the ‘I hate apartheid’ line that’s shared, and not the actual quote in its full context. Because here it is:

If we consider what Merton College and what the Oxford School of English owes to the Antipodes, to the Southern Hemisphere, especially to scholars born in Australia and New Zealand, it may well be felt that it is only just that one of them should now ascend an Oxford chair of English. Indeed it may be thought that justice has been delayed since 1925. There are of course other lands under the Southern Cross. I was born in one; though I do not claim to be the most learned of those who have come hither from the far end of the Dark Continent. But I have the hatred of apartheid in my bones; and most of all I detest the segregation or separation of Language and Literature. I do not care which of them you think White.

Which is to say. This isn’t exactly the antiracist quote of the century, to say the least. This is a white South Africa born man and a white Australian shaking hands and going ‘omg we relate’ and expressing what is a very, very mild ‘segregation is not great’ opinion in order to convey his thoughts on an academic subject, ie the confluence of language and literature. Using race to make a point about his own subject of interest, in his own interest, which is, amusingly enough, what a lot of ostensibly well meaning progressive seem to be doing.

I also think that some of the general surprise around ‘what do you mean large swathes of the Tolkien fandom are incredibly conservative!?’ in lib/left Tolkien fandom is the result of a tendency in said parts of the fandom to transpose one’s own progressiveness onto Tolkien and turn a blind eye to things like, say, the Shire being a very specifically mid-century British racist construct that is very, very clear in its politics, often going so far as to insist it’s anarchist or an ideal society or whatever the fuck… and then getting really Pikachu-meme ‘but they’re misreading it’ every single time a conservative explains exactly what it is about the legendarium that they really love, and get surprised when someone uses the Shire being a racist construct to do more racism. It is 2026 let us do away with ‘I don’t see colour’ interpretations of media, I beg. Nobody is cancelling you for enjoying a book that is not kind to race. Most of the books I love are not kind to race.

Avatar
Reblogged

you've heard of faithful translations now get ready for unfaithful translations where i'm constantly cheating on the text i'm translating with another text that i find more interesting

relational trauma has to be healed relationally. the best way to practice having relatively "safe" interactions with ppl is joining a hobby group/club/whatever. I've recently joined like ten Fancy Leather Bag groups on fb out of deep curiosity and interest and the communities ppl will build around literally everything I swear to god. I've seen multiple ladies in these purse groups being like "thank you everyone in this hobby for getting me through my chemotherapy" like ... sometimes we dismiss the middle aged purse lady demographic but you know what they have got is a functional community where they support each other that just happens to be centered around purses. having now read many posts from these groups for several weeks I can see that the object being collected IS important, and is certainly the superifival draw into the space as well as something that provides an immediate shared interest, the actual benefit of localish hobby/collecting spaces is largely community and social support.

those of us who are Very Online Only could stand to learn from this sort of thing I think. it doesn't have to be purses it could be anything. but like. (gestures at the purse ladies who are getting each other through chemotherapy) Shared Interest Facebook Group And/Or Subreddit has it for you. i think.

this is actually my first step of learning emotional regulation. yes yes, restful sleep and physiologically appropriate exercise and getting outside and eating nutritious meals. these are all good. but also MEET. YOUR. SOCIAL. NEEDS. you need the relational foundation to cushion you while you work on these skills! i know it's really scary because we all have relational trauma but that doesn't mean we don't have a need for social connection and support!!!

I would like to say as an editor that when I edit someone's work I am not thinking, "WOW what an idiot this person is, can't construct a sentence to save their life!!"

What I am thinking is, "does this mean what the author intends it to mean, and if not, how can we adjust it so it does?" and also usually, "wow I'm so glad I get to read this, what a privilege it is to help people say exactly what they mean to say."

I think a lot of people get frightened by the prospect of editing and I won't pretend there aren't some editors who come at the task with a suboptimal attitude but a good editor just wants to help. They want the piece to mean exactly what you intended it to mean when they're done. They do not, if they are worth their asking rate, want to scold you for being a bad writer. They do want to make you a better one. It is a helping profession.

Avatar
Reblogged

best tactic you can steal from therapists to help your loved ones is to give them loving respectful advice based on what they actually need to grow and thrive not on what you need to say to protect the status quo in the relationships you all share together

it will also require taking sides and exerting active agency during conflicts and identifying and maintaining your values no matter what you stand to gain from abandoning them…..

every single time people are like "you can read this ancient or classical piece of lit for free on project gutenberg!" and then link to the worlds most dogshit and sexist translation it makes me insane. don't do that.

feel free to reblog this without the addition but i feel bad being catty without offering a solution so here is how to operationalize how to find a good translation of classic/al lit:

  • check gutenberg for list of "free" out of copyright translations so you know what to avoid (if it is from 1970 or earlier it's probably just a non-starter)
  • check wikipedia or an online bookstore shopfront or equivalent to find or make a list of (your language) translations
  • pick one that was done: (a) (mandatory) in the last 30 years (as recent as possible) (b) (optional, if you have multiple modern editions) by a woman
  • find it in the usual way you find cheap or free books (libraries, institutional access, thriftbooks, other options, etc)

from a classical studies perspective: unless you are specifically studying the translation and reception of these works across time there simply is no reason you should be reading translations from the 1890s (thru really the 1950s and even later in some cases), that call women whores and bitches simply for existing on the page🧍‍♀️. unrelatedly, emily wilson's excellent recent odyssey translation is currently on sale on audible for $8 even if you don't have audible i have heard tell.

obligatory statement here that some authors whose translation style is much more accessible to a broad audience are not especially beloved by academics who work in the same field for persnickety reasons (see: the way classicists get about anne carson being the trending translator on tumblr dot edu) so don't necessarily pay too much attention to THAT sort of persnicketing, but do be sure that whoever is translating the work actually knows the original language well enough to work with it (i.e. for academic translators maybe check their wikipedia page for a controversy section to make sure that, for example, the translator of rumi can actually read rumi). this is probably harder for modern publishing where translator info isn't as widely publicized and i don't have great advice for you other than finding and googling the translators' name in the hopes that they've done recent interviews or have a website etc etc etc.

however, all works of literature require the reader to come into being - they are a conversation between you and the historical/ancient author. the translator is just adding another voice to the conversation and there is nothing wrong or Dangerous or traitorous etc about reading thru a translator! ideally they're just helping the ancient author get close enough to you to be comprehensible, so a more recent translation is always going to do a better job of that bc it's closer to where YOU are in the first place.

recent treats have included: iced hojicha with the good honey from the nice honey guy at the farmer's market, fancy ice cream on the hottest day of the year so far, panzanella with good basil, mint-infused olive oil, sooo much fruit, pecan & crystallized ginger loaf cake, and 3 hot dogs eaten in one sitting

very into films from a child’s perspective about the weirdness, imagination and perversity of childhood at the moment

my recommendations:

The Reflecting Skin, 1990, dir. Philip Ridley

Poison for the Fairies, 1986, dir. Carlos Enrique Taboada

Celia, 1989, dir. Ann Turner

Angela, 1995, dir. Rebecca Miller

Tideland, 2005, dir. Terry Gilliam

Ponette, 1996, dir. Jacques Doillon

The Spirit of the Beehive, 1973, dir. Victor Erice

Heavenly Creatures, 1994, dir. Peter Jackson

Ratcatcher, 1999, dir. Lynne Ramsay

Cría cuervos, 1976, dir. Carlos Saura

Don’t Deliver Us from Evil, 1971, dir. Joël Séria

Oh, Moon!, 1988, dir. Reha Erdem

The Innocents, 2021, dir. Eskil Vogt

The Other, 1972, dir. Robert Mulligan

This is one of my favorite kinds of movies, and these are great recs. I would add a few:

  • Fanny and Alexander, 1982, dir. Ingmar Bergman
  • Parents, 1989, dir. Bob Balaban
  • The Curse of the Cat People, 1944, dir. Robert Wise & Gunther von Fritsch
  • I Start Counting, 1970, dir. David Greene
  • Laurin, 1989, dir. Robert Sigl
  • Lemora, 1973, dir. Richard Blackburn
  • Valerie and Her Week of Wonders, 1970, dir. Jaromil Jireš

I Start Counting, Laurin, Lemora and Valerie are more coming of age stories, but I think they still fit.

And perhaps it's considerably different from the others, but I'd also recommend The World Is Full of Secrets, 2018, dir. Graham Swon.

I usually tell my students that “close reading” means looking at what is actually on the page, reading the text itself, rather than some idea “behind the text.” It means noticing things in the writing, things in the writing that stand out. To give you some idea of what this means, I’ve made up a list of five sorts of things that a close reading might typically notice: (1) unusual vocabulary, words that surprise either because they are unfamiliar or because they seem to belong to a different context; (2) words that seem unnecessarily repeated, as if the word keeps insisting on being written; (3) images or metaphors, especially ones that are used repeatedly and are somewhat surprising given the context; (4) what is in italics or parentheses; and (5) footnotes that seem too long. This list is far from complete—in fact, no complete list is possible—but the list is meant to begin to give you an idea of what sorts of things we notice when we’re doing close reading.
What all five of my examples have in common is that they are minor elements in the text; they are not main ideas. In fact, your usual practice of reading which focuses on main ideas would dismiss them all as marginal or trivial. Another thing they have in common is that, although they are minor, they are nonetheless conspicuous, eye-catching: they are either surprising or repeated, set off from the text or too long. Close reading pays attention to elements in the text which, although marginal, are nonetheless emphatic, prominent—elements in the text which ought to be quietly subordinate to the main idea, but which textually call attention to themselves.
Most of you have been educated to ignore such elements. You have been taught to seek out and identify the main ideas, dismissing the trivial as you go. This has had to be trained into you: read to a young child sometime, you will notice she has the annoying habit of interrupting the flow of the story to draw attention to some minor thing. Close reading resembles the interruptions of that child. It is a method of undoing the training that keeps us to the straight and narrow path of main ideas. It is a way of learning not to disregard those features of the text that attract our attention, but are not principal ideas.

Jane Gallop, “The Ethics of Close Reading: Close Encounters,” Journal of Curriculum Theorizing, Vol.16, No.3 (Fall 2000), pg.7-8 (x)