A good rule of thumb for AI is "would you trust a trained pigeon to do this?"
"We trained a pigeon to recognise cancerous cell clusters and somehow they're really good at it" okay great, that's something that could plausibly be a thing.
"We trained a pigeon to recognise good CV:s and left it in charge of sorting through all our job applications" uh perhaps consider not doing that.
“Tales in the Sand” in Context of “The Doll’s House”
About Patriarchy, the Madness of Pure Dream and Nada & Morpheus as mirrors of each other
Over the past week, we had interesting community discussions about “Nada’s dream” on both a more direct and a more metaphorical/allegorical level (join us if you’d like to read/discuss).
But one of the most important functions of “Tales in the Sand” is its place in the overall narrative. You can look at it as a “story within a story” on several different levels—self-contained or as part of a whole.
One thing that can be looked at in a pretty self-contained way is “Tales in the Sand” as the opener of “The Doll’s House”—it explicitly belongs to this arc, even if it is somewhat of a transition issue.
Some of you might be familiar with Henrik Ibsen’s play “A Doll’s House”, and I can’t help but think about the common themes, especially with regard to Nada, but also parts of the overall Doll’s House arc:
A woman who is smart and extremely capable, but unfulfilled and caught up in a patriarchal system. I won’t summarise the whole story here, but Ibsen’s protagonist Nora secretly borrowed money (to help her husband recover from illness no less)—during a time when women weren’t allowed to engage in financial affairs. When the whole thing falls apart, she even thinks of killing herself. The reaction of her husband, which is belittling and patronising [he “forgives” her and has the gall to say that act of forgiveness reminds him of how much he loves her, because she is a “helpless child” and dependent on him] ultimately makes her leave him, despite knowing what this means: They have children, and while the play ends here, it was highly unlikely for a woman during that time to get custody. So we can only have a guess of what will become of her. In a way, she didn’t kill herself, yet committed societal suicide and might probably face a very difficult life from here onwards…
And while we have a real doll’s house in the actual story of the Sandman’s “The Doll’s House”, and that holds its own meaning (we are currently discussing this in the community as well), I cannot help but think about Ibsen’s play about:
A woman standing up for what she believes in at great cost to herself. Which: Ouch, because that sentiment as such is almost verbatim echoed in Dream Hunters.
Now that’s the self-contained parallel in “Tales in the Sand”—women who are capable still get caught up in patriarchal systems and beliefs (it is expected of Nada to “find a man”—why, one could ask? Because: the patriarchy…)
Let’s move on to Nada and Morpheus as mirrors…
Nada is an almost exact mirror of Morpheus: Lonely, caught up in her “function”, burdened by rules and responsibilities. And more importantly: She is as unwilling to let go of them as he. They arrive at a stalemate, which is made very clear in Season of Mists: She isn’t willing to lay down who she is for him, he won’t lay down his function for her. They are made of the same material, so to speak.
There is also a really interesting parallel when we look at Nada’s dream on a more conceptual level: What kind of dreams have the power to ultimately destroy you (and your people)? Nada is explicitly described as a good and benevolent leader, and while I have my personal theory what her dream was (you can find it here), this is open to interpretation and will forever stay a head-canon.
But there is much to be said for losing our grip on reality when we become too caught up in our dreams, whatever they may be and however benevolent—the script to “The Doll’s House” contains these lines when describing Dream’s throne room:
The windows actually lead onto the madness of pure dream, which is at the true centre of the dreamworld…
These lines don’t appear anywhere in the comics, but they are narrated almost verbatim in the Audible, so we can absolutely consider them canon.
And they apply to both Nada and Morpheus to certain degrees—they are both lonely, caught in the ivory tower of their respective existences. One gets caught up in a dream until it destroys her and her civilisation, the other is pure d/Dream (this also says a lot about Morpheus btw, because we all know how desperately he has to keep the proverbial lid on everything so it doesn’t consume him).
And then there is this, down to standing on a rock/spire (did I ever say I always wondered about the actual mechanics of Morpheus’ death? Because Death usually is NOT the one who kills you; but I digress):
They both make the ultimate sacrifice because they can’t be other than they are.
And then this:
Even the parallels of Nada being reborn as a boy (meh though, sorry, but maybe that’s for another time) and not remembering anymore, and yet clearly doing so on some subconscious level (she/he is at his funeral after all, and while all of us are, she/he is briefly seen with his lovers).
That’s like Daniel!Dream not being Morpheus and also not truly being Daniel Hall anymore, but echoes of both remain.
And don’t even get me started on hope. I wrote about this so many times, you can find all related metas here…
So I guess this is one thing about Nada and her dream that couldn’t be made clearer if we tried:
While all the other angles, be they a more direct or conceptual reading, make sense, the most important, and probably also obvious one, is that Nada’s dream is also Dream’s. And that’s something we also get in the TV show in other contexts:
…Is Also Dream’s
These quotes are from episode 5 (24/7):
“Garry dreams of proving his father he was wrong about him.”
“Kate dreams of r
NG stated it explicitly in his intro/script to The Doll’s House—the whole arc is about how the Endless relate to humans. And “the truth of mankind” is also Dream’s, whether he admits to it or not. How could it not be—he holds our subconscious.
Nada and Morpheus are direct mirrors of each other. And the whole of “Tales in the Sand” is just one ginormous bit of foreshadowing, whether NG was already aware of it at the time or not…
I’m reading the one star reviews for Frankenstein on Goodreads and here are some of the highlights
(Spoiler warning ig??? It was written in 1816 though so idk catch up homeslice)
Some people can’t handle the melodrama I get it. Sometimes you need to collapse into a fever at the mildest stress. Sometimes you need to lament you life and love ones destroyed by you’re own actions. Maybe Victor is a whiny bitch maybe he’s living passionately (spoiler: he’s a whiny bitch but I love him for it). The one thing we can all agree on is we were glad when that motherfucker finally croaked and I think that’s beautiful.
What does this mean? Idk! Absolutely living for it though.
OH?!
woooosh
Look, I personally see this as one of the best parts of the novel. I’m kicking my feet and giggling every time that man collapses.
This seems to be the sentiment of most negative reviews
And finally, a list of reasons why you should absolutely read Frankenstein
I’m reading the one star reviews for Frankenstein on Goodreads and here are some of the highlights
(Spoiler warning ig??? It was written in 1816 though so idk catch up homeslice)
Some people can’t handle the melodrama I get it. Sometimes you need to collapse into a fever at the mildest stress. Sometimes you need to lament you life and love ones destroyed by you’re own actions. Maybe Victor is a whiny bitch maybe he’s living passionately (spoiler: he’s a whiny bitch but I love him for it). The one thing we can all agree on is we were glad when that motherfucker finally croaked and I think that’s beautiful.
What does this mean? Idk! Absolutely living for it though.
OH?!
woooosh
Look, I personally see this as one of the best parts of the novel. I’m kicking my feet and giggling every time that man collapses.
This seems to be the sentiment of most negative reviews
And finally, a list of reasons why you should absolutely read Frankenstein
I love seeing the shock and disappointment from new readers of Dracula when they find out that Dracula basically makes a guest appearance at the beginning + end of the book and almost nowhere else. The rest is literally just a subtle homoerotic polycule between Van Helsing, Dr Seward, Lord Godalming and Quincey Morris.
titsay
kaledo-art
vaporwave
annaxmalina
andulkaphoto
germansingergirl
theartofmadeline
