Hearsay Heresy

21+/cisfem/Asian DNI if お気持ちヤクザ (Here be essays.) This is my fandom blog for Bare: A Pop Opera, Fraternity by Andy Mientus, Babel; or, the Necessity of Violence (an Arcane History of the Oxford Translators' Revolution) by R.F. Kuang and various other academia gothic.

[junglejim4322]

Be so completely yourself that everyone wants to kill you

[theshitpostcalligrapher]

req'd by @maddieredgrave

sigh. which pasty motherfucker is it this time

text: Okay but this is a uniquely evil British man

[rainy-daze1]

is this anything

[athenaspetsnek]

@ominous-signs do these count?

[ominous-signs]

damn...

[homunculus-argument]

If any part of your plan involves the words “nobody could be that stupid”, please be prepared to be proven wrong at any minute at a moment’s notice. Pay in mind that the person determined to prove you wrong may already be aware of this assumption, and is already approaching your current location at an alarming speed.

[the-real-seebs]

“it will be fine if people just”

people will not just

[alarajrogers]

In 2011 I attended an event called Bmore Fail, in which entrepreneurs in Baltimore talked about their failures and what they learned from them.

What I learned is that there is an inflexible rule about how people interact with systems. If your system would work perfectly if people Just Would, and yet they Don’t, then your system is bad and you should feel bad. Systems must be built with an eye toward “will people actually do this”?

Recycling was a thing when I was a child. (The 70’s.) In my home in New York State, you could carry recyclables to a recycling center. Nobody did. Now in 2024 Baltimore there is a trash truck that comes every week to pick up my recyclables, and I and my neighbors fill our cans with objects that can be recycled, because a system was developed that was easy for busy people to do, and there’s a lot of social pressure to do it – but the social pressure wouldn’t exist if it wasn’t easy to do. Only the most crunchy granola people bitched at you if you didn’t recycle in 1979, when it required a lot of effort. Now it is considered kind of on par with spitting in the street or leaving a dirty diaper on the diaper changing table in the bathroom instead of throwing it out, if you don’t recycle.

Your job as the system creator is to make it as easy as possible for people to do the right thing, and as hard as possible to do the wrong thing. This is why web forms have data validation (but too much data validation actually makes the forms harder, so hit the spot in the middle.) And if you want people to adopt social change, whether it’s environmentalism, accepting gay people, or whatever, make it as easy as possible. And don’t guilt people about not doing it until it’s as easy as possible; instead phrase things more like “wouldn’t it be cool if”. It’s not the fault of the individual that they can’t get things done in a bad system. Fix the system.

[the-real-seebs]

if users regularly fuck up using a tool you made, and your answer is “you’re holding it wrong”, the next question you should ask is “why did i make this tool so it’s easy to hold it wrong?”

[thesplendidsnout]

[monstrous-femme]

as a regular donor to Gaza Soup Kitchen I get their email updates, and they said today that while they've continued to be able to expand, donations are slowing down as Gaza gets less coverage. If you have a few dollars to spare, I encourage you to send them here to continue the amazing work that Hani and his team are doing.

[clairedflg]

[iremembersky]

So I decided to watch the 25th anniversary production of Phantom again.

The Final Lair has always been my favorite part, but this time I had a thought. Isn't it pretty funny to think the Phantom is such a fucking drama queen that he starts singing the music from his own opera at Christine and Raoul?

[saint-starflicker]

Christine and Raoul improvised counterpoint melodies.

Damn theater-kid polyamorous triad, is what that is.

[pumpkinspicebluntwrap]

?

[damnfandomproblems]

Fandom Problem #15,939:

I love picking songs for my characters, but there are two things I don't like:

When a song mentions the name of a character (especially if it's not a song from a movie/cartoon/TV series) or the name of the artist, and it's kind of strange to associate it with someone who doesn't have that name.

When you have interpreted a song in your own way, and it fits the character, but then you find out the true meaning that the author has put in, and according to that meaning, the song no longer fits.

[saint-starflicker]

As a musical theater fan, the only time this has not been a problem was when Andrew Muccitelli wrote “Jason” somehow without knowing about Bare: a Pop Opera

I can understand when and how this can be a dealbreaker (“Spark” by Tori Amos sounds like it's about quitting a nicotine addiction but it's really about her miscarriage; “Between” by Vienna Teng gets played at weddings despite very much Not being a wedding song) but I usually don't have a problem continuing to interpret a very vaguely-worded song in my own way

[badsalmonella]

You should check out Sydney Zarlengo's video on "Phantom" from a disability perspective on YouTube. Their videos are some of my favorite things right now, and they bring up an aspect of the story that fandom tends to somehow simultaneously overlook and take for granted. Like, the Phantom IS a disabled character--he has a facial difference--and that definitely shapes how the fandom talks about him, for better and (mostly) for worse.

I believe you are talking about this??

I have not seen this and I will DEFINITELY check it out because I love a good long form vid to listen to while I work :))) Thank you thank you!! I think I am also guilty of probably over looking this aspect too so I could definitely use a vid like this. Thank you again :) <3

[simply-a-dream]

“don’t take it personally” how would you like me to take it then? professionally? romantically? academically?

[creative-anchorage]

[suriandtaal]

[frankenmouse]

It is so ridiculously easy to gain a reputation for being competent by just reading signs.

This is not metaphorical. I mean actual, literal pieces of paper/plastic/metal/whatever explicitly erected to inform the public.

“How did you know this was the right trail?” I read the sign.

“Wow, how did you know what that flower is?” There’s a SIGN.

“How did you know we needed to use the side door?” THERE IS A SIGN POSTED ON THE FRONT DOOR.

Just…why are we having such different experiences of the world? People can read. I KNOW they can read. There’s nothing wrong with their vision.

Just. READ. THE. GOD. DAMN. SIGN.

This also applies to:

Syllabi

Instructions

[screampotato]

Suddenly struck with a need to explain to you how boat pronouns work (I work in the marine industry).

When you're talking about the design of the boat, you say "it".

When the boat is still being built, your say "it".

When the boat is nearing completion, you can say "it" or "she".

When the boat is floating in the water you probably say "she", unless there is still a lot of work to be done (e.g. no engine yet) then you say "it".

When the boat is officially launched and operating, you say "she". If you continue to say "it" at this point you are not incorrect but suspiciously untraditional. You are not playing the game.

If you are referring to a boat you don't really know anything about you may say "it" ("there's a big boat, it's coming this way"). But if you know its name, it's probably "she" ("there's the Waverley, she's on her way to Greenock").

If you are talking about boats in general, you say "it" ("when a boat is hit by a wave it heels over")

If you speak about a boat in complimentary terms, it's "she" ("she's a grand boat"). If you are being disparaging it may be it, but not necessarily ("it's as ugly as sin", "she's a grotty old tub").

If she has a boy's name, she's still she. "Boy James", "King Edward", "Sir David Attenborough"? The pronoun is she.

If it's a dumb barge (no engine), you say it. But if it's a rowing boat (no engine), you say she.

I hope this has cleared things up so that you may not be in danger of misgendering floating objects.

[glitched-out-mess]

[theramblingvoid]

Hit "view post" and lost it

[badsalmonella]

My possibly hot take take is that if Del Toro adapts the Phantom of the Opera like I think it'll be a fun watch and obviously he knows how to make a moving picture look good, etc,etc but like I also think he's gonna woobify the Phantom of the Opera and I justtt think I'm ready to see what a female director/ writer would do with the material. Let's see what the ladies will do huh. Like I need my girl Christine Daae done right in all her nuancessss plzzzz.

[saint-starflicker]

[ image ID #although what would interest me most in an adaptation would be the “oh my god they're CHILDREN!!” vibe the book narration had going ]

Sorry to Erik fans, but Gisèle Vienne would do this justice and I will declare every moment of it peak artistry.

[robobrat]

"why does it have to always be about knights?" because there's nothing hotter than a hulking mass of metal who could kill me with a flick of his wrist but instead gets on his knees and trembles as he restrains himself from begging for my touch. i'm not going to get that from some fur trader or councilor, am i?

this post is about t4t mlm.

[wickedsnack-art]

Hegemone in a style inspired by Alphonse Mucha, featuring almond blossoms. An almond tree is the kind of tree Agdistis becomes in Greek myth.

🌸 MY COMMISSIONS ARE OPEN 🌸 more info at link in source!

🌸 This piece is available as a print here! 🌸

[badsalmonella]

My possibly hot take take is that if Del Toro adapts the Phantom of the Opera like I think it'll be a fun watch and obviously he knows how to make a moving picture look good, etc,etc but like I also think he's gonna woobify the Phantom of the Opera and I justtt think I'm ready to see what a female director/ writer would do with the material. Let's see what the ladies will do huh. Like I need my girl Christine Daae done right in all her nuancessss plzzzz.

[badsalmonella]

LIKE OKOKOKOK obligatory disclaimer I feel like any time you say these things on tumblr dot com people think of these things in their extremes. Either you woobify the basement dweller or you must HATE HIM AND THINK HE'S THIS IRREDEEMABLE VILLAIN AND ANYONE WHO SYMPATHIZES IS AN ABUSE APOLOGIST blah blah blahhh nahhh not how I feel. It's somewhere more in the middle, the ending where Christine shows him compassion and it fundamentally changes him is a pretty good ending, and I think her ultimately leaving is also a requirement, not only because we have to see Erik's selfless act of letting her go, but ALSO because even though I think he's capable of changing and being loved I just think there's been enough done to Christine like she shouldn't be obligated to be the one to give that to him. GIRL LEAVE!! Everyone move on!!! NO LOVE NEVER DIES CANON IN MY HOUSE! (unless it's for comedy purposes)

Anyways I almost typed out in the initial post "It'll be a fun watch like the ALW musical is" but HONESTLY the musical has such a fascinating take on the book a lot of this is due to the fact that the medium of theater leads to lots of room for interpretation and huge amounts of people and productions contributing to it, like I think it gets this unfair reputation as a show that romanticizes the Christine/ Erik dynamic but I dunno if it goes THAT far, like I think there's more layers to it than that. I kind of feel like it's the 2004 movie that gives the show that reputation, I think the movie REALLY simplifies the musical and it was the most easily accessible way to the watch the musical for years so the reputation has stuck. I also think ALW's treatment of the piece in the more recent years (movie's handling included) that helps with that reputation. (THE LND OF IT ALL!!) Like their little behind the scenes documentary for the movie has Joel Schumacher emphasizing how he sees it as a piece about a young sexual awakening and yeah I don't think he's wrong to get that from the show, it absolutely is part of the show, but I think there's maybe something deeper to accompany that. Like I think there is something sexual going on there for sure, and I can't act like it's PURE horror and disgust, but also..........the horror should be there too. Like they gotta go hand in hand. One of things that has made me SUPER PHANTOM PILLED IN THE BIG YEAR 2026 WHEN I'VE HAD THE MOVIE IN MY HOUSE SINCE CHILDHOOD is just that I didn't realize all this time that the stage show had a couple more scenes and I think Christine's characterization (ESPECIALLY with Sierra Boggess' portrayal in the 25th anniversary) is SO rich! It gave me such a new appreciation for the character and added lots of nuance to the show that I didn't know was there! So there absolutely is something there in that musical script for good actors to chew on, and many of the theater actors who have made their way through the show HAVE ADDED SOOO much to it. So no I don't think it's fair to call it a show that makes the story into a simple romance. There's a full arc for Christine, she's trying to make sense of her grief- something that's already hard to do- only made harder because she's being manipulated by the Phantom, there's a dark allure for her in this relationship but also the deeper she comes into Erik's orbit the scarier things get and yes I think a scene like Past the Point of No Return when done right is driving home the dubious consent of the whole situation. I think you lose a lot of that in the movie, Christine's interior arc is a little more unclear in that one and I don't think it does an effective job at driving home the fear of the situation for her, because they seem more interested in prioritizing the sexiness of it. (again it's fine and an aspect of it, but it needs a lil something else to balance it out) Just compare 25th anniversary PONR with the 2004 movie scene. There isn't nearly as much power play being shown in the scene imo.

So yeah I like the musical as you can probably tell by how my blog's been looking for half the year lol, and even though I don't think it romanticizes the relationship as badly as some critics would say I do think it still has aspects that I wouldn't mind shedding a new light on. Like the ending is still implying Christine should choose someone romantically. Phantom or Raoul. Even though this is a Raoul sympathizer space I do think he's got his own problems (problems that I LOVE to see as an adult who likes a lil complexity in my fiction mmmm tasty) (and I do think again if you're like me and only went off the movie for years PLEASE give a version of the stage show a watch a good Raoul will give him some juicy flaws I WON'T GET INTO THAT TODAY THIS IS ALREADY SO UNFOCUSED AH) He means well but in the end of the day he fails in a lot of ways to understand Christine as a full person who should be listened to. I really like how book Christine expresses this want to never get married. I'd love to see an adaptation put emphasis on this. One where maybe she doesn't necessarily choose anyone, and something that wants to dig even deeper into just how vulnerable she is to the Phantom's manipulation and how yes that would drive anyone mad. When Emilie Kouatchou said this is about CHRISTINE it should be called the Christine of the Opera SHE WAS SO RIGHT!!

Ookokokokko let's try to focus and wrap this up and make a thesis statement here....

I think the musical, yes even the movie adaptation have their purpose. Del Toro has made many statements in the past about why these monstrous romances have appeal to him it's about seeing the humanity in what we deem as monstrous. This is a comfort to so many people, and yes it's even a lil sexy and ~dark~. He's clearly not alone in this, these things wouldn't be popular if it wasn't speaking to people, and yeah I do think a character like Erik needs to be shown sympathy even when he does terrible things. But it has now been done, many times over. I'm the rare tumblr user who actually think retellings are rad and should change and change over the years, even when I don't personally like them I just like to see what they do, what this says about where we are in mainstream society and the tropes we accustomed to. ( my academic paper earlier this year was literally about the way theatre goes about this in a way that tickles my brain. I THINK ABOUT THIS A LOT) (don't look for it. I'm a bad writer.) I WOULD BE VERY INTERESTED in seeing a different take on the material. We're living in a time where incel communities have such a huge voice due to the internet and we know there is this large sentiment that because they have been hurt by narrow society expectations they feel their reward for their suffering is a beautiful woman's love. There are lots of stories that explore this in interesting ways, there's a place for this, but I can't help but also want to see an exploration of how it feels to be the target of this obsession. The horror of being a woman stuck in this scenario, the way it absolutely does take such a bad toll on someone, the way it puts the woman in this very unfair position to swallow down their complicated needs to benefit what the suffering man needs. I think a story like the Phantom of the Opera has already dipped into these topics and the material has room to think about these things on an even deeper level. Why NOT go there?

[saint-starflicker]

I want a Del Toro version that pulls a Jean Cocteau Beauty & the Beast and reveals that Raoul and Erik were the same person the whole time. (In Christine's surrealist imagination.)

But yeah Greta Gerwig Phantom of the Opera where Raoul becomes a stand-in for the boyfriend Gerwig dated as a teenager who turned out to be gay so there's that odd “mildly disappointed yet also overwhelmingly grateful that this opposite-sex relationship is platonic” motif in her works — and the focus is on Christine's friendship/frienemy dynamics with Meg, Sorelli, Jammes, and Carlotta. Sorelli gives a speech about how awful it is to be a 19th century woman, and then 10 minutes before the end of the movie it's like everyone suddenly remembers that this was all supposed to be about Erik.

Sofia Coppola Phantom will be more about Christine in the gilded cage of the opera-house and high arts, Gustave Daaé’s legacy as the best violinist in Europe gets emphasis as the shadow that Christine has to prove herself out of. The budget will be budgeting. Sountrack featuring songs by Evanescence, My Chemical Romance, and Panic! at the Disco. It is still set in 1880 in France.

Cheryl Dunye's Phantom of the Opera will be a modernization and Americanization: a vlog from otherwise book-accurate Meg Giry's point of view that's like if Gaston Leroux were an intrepid fan-content-creator-turned-investigative-journalist because Meg has a lesbian crush on Christine and doesn't notice Original Character Ballerina pining after her for 70 minutes of run time.

Emerald Fennell Phantom of the Opera will be nearly identical to Schumacher’s but not a musical and plus it has an inexplicable cast. Archie Madekwe as Daroga for some reason, so we're all like “yey finally a version with the daro...emerald milady why? why why why??” The twist is that Christine killed all those people. Timothy Chalamet as Erik.