Sinner Sanctum

Reblogs and posts on the cultural aspects and analysis of NBC Hannibal.

[settegiorniinpurgatorio]

The wrath of the lamb vs The wrath of the lion

A recurring theme in the show Hannibal, it delightfully boils down the difference between Will and Hannibal’s proclivities toward murder.

The wrath of the Lion is the vengeful wrath of one wronged. "I, king of the forest, have received an affront; some one has presumed to do an unkindness to me." Hannibal had been wronged gravely in his childhood and has carried out his vegeance. As an adult, he still carries out vegeance against those who have wronged him, that is, been rude to him. His grievances are personal in nature.

The wrath of the Lamb isn’t personal in nature. It is the wrath of a righteous man who sees unjust in the world and delivers justice. "An unkind thing has been done." Even before meeting Hannibal, Will has had that wrath inside him. When asked about how he felt when he murdered Garret Jacob Hobbs, Will answers he felt, “Just”. Later, when Hannibal asks how killing him would make him feel, Will answers that it’ll feel, “Righteous”.

Killing feels good for both Will and Hannibal. It’s not something that Hannibal has cultivated in Will, it was in Will’s nature all along.

WILL GRAHAM: I didn't see Hobbs. HANNIBAL: Then it's not Hobbs' ghost that's haunting you, is it? It's the inevitability of there being a man so bad that killing him felt good. WILL GRAHAM: Killing Hobbs felt just.

In their moment of wrath, the lamb is no more gentle than the lion. Perhaps less so.

And I beheld when he had opened the sixth seal, and, lo, there was a great earthquake; and the sun became black as sackcloth of hair, and the moon became as blood; And the stars of heaven fell unto the earth, even as a fig tree casteth her untimely figs, when she is shaken of a mighty wind. And the heaven departed as a scroll when it is rolled together; and every mountain and island were moved out of their places. And the kings of the earth, and the great men, and the rich men, and the chief captains, and the mighty men, and every bondman, and every free man, hid themselves in the dens and in the rocks of the mountains; And said to the mountains and rocks, Fall on us, and hide us from the face of him that sitteth on the throne, and from the wrath of the Lamb: For the great day of his wrath is come; and who shall be able to stand? - Revelation 6:12

[amourduloup-deactivated20210512]

Absolutely love the scene ‘Ko No Mono’ where Hannibal and Will talk about Abigail’s (supposed) death. Will is being entirely open and vulnerable in his mourning (both for Abigail’s death and because Hannibal did it; he’s mourning two losses). Hannibal, for his part, is equally open – not entirely in the things he says, because he’s still lying to Will about Abigail not being alive, but emotionally he is being honest. Hannibal regrets that he’s causing Will pain, and in turn feels Will’s pain and grief himself. It’s one of the rare times when Hannibal seems unable to look Will in the eye, and turns away.

That’s, to me, one of the most interesting things about Hannibal: he isn’t unable to feel human emotions, in fact I believe he feels them all too well, but he’s very certain of his decisions, and will continue to cause pain to himself if he believes the outcome is necessary. “What happened to Abigail had to happen”. I don’t think Hannibal quite regrets all the things he did to Will in S1, because he probably thinks they were necessary for Will’s becoming and the evolution of their relationship, but it causes him pain nonetheless.

Even as Hannibal says this – and he is being sincere – he’s planning to hurt Will again. He will manipulate events so that Mason will abort Margot’s child, and he knows exactly how much pain and grief that will cause Will. I believe causing that pain hurts him too, but doesn’t stop him from doing what he believes is necessary – namely, taking away from Will any kind of strong emotional tie that isn’t also tied to him. Hannibal idealizes a family with Will and Abigail, and another child (that isn’t even his) would put that in jeopardy. In ‘Tome-wan’ Will accuses Hannibal: “you don’t want me to have anything in my life that is not you”, and he is entirely correct. Hannibal is a jealous lover. He wants to occupy all of Will’s life and mind, and that means cutting away any other ties he might have. Abigail is allowed to live (in his current plans, that is) because she is a tie between them; she is their child, and a symbol of their relationship. I don’t mean to imply that Hannibal doesn’t care about her, because I believe he does, but he’s willing to sacrifice her the minute she no longer serves his idealized idea of a family life with Will.

When Hannibal does truly sacrifice Abigail in ‘Mizumono’ it’s an act of a broken heart and it’s a punishment. Will doesn’t choose Hannibal, so Hannibal takes Abigail away: he kills their daugther both to hurt Will and because he’s attempting to sever their relationship by killing its symbol. At the same time, Hannibal is attempting to distance himself from love. It wouldn’t be a true sacrifice if he didn’t care about Abigail and what she represented.

Bedelia says of Hannibal that he had not truly been influenced by his environment until he met Will – I would add “since he lost Mischa”. It’s crucial that Abigail reminds him of his sister, whom he loved. He chose to be like a father to her, and to share that parenthood with Will. That was an act of emotional vulnerability that he comes to regret. He opened himself up to love and was burned. At the end of Mizumono, he is very much a man scorned but trying to keep his head up and his pride intact: he walks out in the rain and tries to convince himself he’s free. He tried getting back absolute control over his emotions by cutting off all emotional strings – only he fails, of course, because he doesn’t seem able to cut himself off from Will Graham.

[dweebball]

honestly tho i hate those fanfics where Hannibal is the “alpha”, or like in complete control of Will, or super manipulative or whatever like lets think about this. Honest to God Hannibal gave up his whole “alpha thing” day one, Day One, first time he saw Will he was like “I’m going to be his until the universe decides to swallow its own stars” or some pretentious shit like that. Hannibal got him out of prison because he missed him, Will manipulated Hannibal Lecter Himself in Season 2, and then Hannibal couldn’t even enjoy his time in fucking Europe without Will. Like??? Every time he had sex he was like, “So…Will Graham.” These assholes are probably out on a boat in Cuba somewhere with a dog and Will asks one thing like, “Haaaannibal.” You know. and Hannibal is immediately like “I let you push me off a cliff. Please. Do you want me to take over the U.S of America? I can. I would kill for you, I have killed for you, moved mountains. Please. I love you.” Will would be like wtf I just wanted him to do the dishes??? That’s it. Hannibal is wrapped around Will’s finger, Hannibal wouldn’t do shit if Will says no, he’s whipped you son of a bitches, whipped. Don’t ever come at me with the “Hannibal is the “pants” of the relationship, again.” I know who is in charge here, and it isn’t that mopey, dopey, love sick devil. That is all

[theglintoftherail]

Fight, Flight, Posture, or Submit

I just noticed a dynamic between these guys that I’d never quite put together before: in precise contrast to what Will thinks he wants, he will always fail to follow through on a lethal confrontation with Hannibal if (and only if) Hannibal makes a show of rolling over for him.

Bear with me for a sec because this is kind of fascinating: a while ago, I read a book called On Killing: The Psychological Cost of Learning to Kill in War and Society. The author Dave Grossman proposed a theory which jives with a lot of stuff I learned in anthropology classes, but he has a particularly pithy way of describing it. Between animals of the same species, he says, the choices of behavior in a confrontation aren’t as simple as the “fight or flight” choice we usually talk about.

Grossman calls his model “fight, flight, posture, or submit.” This model takes into account a common trait among most animals (including humans): members of the same species almost never jump immediately to the ‘fight’ option in a confrontation. Doing so would result in needless deaths, particularly among younger individuals who haven’t yet learned to defend themselves, and then to eventual depopulation and extinction.

Instead, animals tend to begin confrontations by posturing – by making a show of their superiority in an attempt to make the other party back down. If, during the posturing phase, it becomes clear that the individuals are fairly evenly matched, they are likely to start a physical fight in order to establish dominance, while still avoiding lethal attacks if possible.

However, if it becomes clear during the posturing phase that one of the individuals is definitely strong enough to defeat the other one, the weaker opponent will do one of two things: flee or submit. I’ll just quote the book here:

“Submission is a surprisingly common response, usually taking the form of fawning and exposing some vulnerable portion of the anatomy to the victor, in the instinctive knowledge that the opponent will not kill or further harm one of its own kind once it has surrendered.”

So, now that we’ve got all that context out of the way, let’s talk about Will and Hannibal!

Keep reading

[settegiorniinpurgatorio]

What sort of killers are Will and Hannibal?

Will: 1. He finds beauty in the fight. >> He's probably more interested in prey that are used to being predators. Ones that don't go down easy.

2. He revels in harsh justice. >> His choice of prey would be those he thinks deserves it. Will would be an excellent judge since he can see the core of a person. "I have seen you, and now you will see yourself". As for who deserves it, those who harm the innocent seem to be on the top list.

But then there's Hannibal. People like Hannibal would be Will’s usual prey. 

Hannibal: Hannibal's motivation behind murder is simple artistic enjoyment and luxurious hedonism (Fresh Human is very rare meat, afterall). He targets those that were rude, because he finds that abhorrent. But he doesn't seem to mind killing the innocent if it's convinient to do so.

Most of his enjoyment comes post mortem as well. He's not usually interested in dragging out the kill. // edit: Perhaps not true? Though we’ve only been shown quick kills, his file states he brutalises victims while they are alive.

How would Will and Hannibal cohabitate? Would Will tolerate some of Hannibal's kills? Such as the arrogant and annoying Sogliato? While Will can empathise with killers of any preference, he himself doesn't seem to be interested in prey that aren't killers or abusers.

[after-the-ellipsis]

Hello! I was hoping you could help me understand the significance of Hannibal drawing Will and Bedelia as the two characters from La Primavera- at least thats how I understood it. I'm not familiar with the greek mythology but I've heard this one has to do with a nymph being violated. Is Hannibal simply revisiting his past murders after Pazzi, or is he musing on his upcoming violating of Will and Bedilia? I'm asking you because I think you write the best Hannibal and understand him best. Thanks!

This was one of the moments in Dolce that I really loved. Hannibal’s sketch is his hilarious attempt at Hannibal fanart, yes, but it’s also a deeply personal moment for him. This strange juxtaposition of Will and Bedelia as figures in a mythological dreamscape operates as a direct through-line into Hannibal’s subconscious, a tantalizing glimpse of not only Hannibal’s feelings about both Bedelia and Will, but also his relationship with Botticelli’s Primavera, a painting that had such a profound effect on him as a young man that he created a murder tableau in its image. 

It’s oddly sweet that young Hannibal chose to imitate great art rather than attempting to create something entirely his own. This kind of experimentation is typical of unformed artists, who first need to copy the masters before they can become masters themselves. Hannibal will eventually progress to the point where his murder tableaux reflect who he is – most notably the Tree Man and the Heart, both completely original compositions – but for now he is content to reproduce Botticelli over and over in pencil, as well as in his favorite material: dead human flesh.

He chooses to reproduce the scariest segment of the painting: the nymph Chloris’s abduction by the wind god Zephyrus. Ovid writes about this story in his long-form poem The Fasti. Zephyrus steals Chloris away from her woodland home and rapes her, but then “makes amends for his violence” by marrying her and installing her in a beautiful garden. Zephyrus bids his new bride: “Goddess, be mistress of the flowers.” And from then on, Chloris receives a new name, Flora, to mark her transformation into the goddess of flowers. Botticelli (and Hannibal, in his copy) dramatize the exact moment when Chloris is abducted – and we can see her Becoming has already started as flowers stream from her mouth, a disturbing and oddly violent detail. 

The whole notion of a Becoming and a rebirth, of course, is one very important to Hannibal. But note that it’s a very specific brand of Becoming, a transformation with a violent, violating catalyst. Zephyrus forces Chloris to become Flora. Although in Ovid she is pleased with her married life, it isn’t a life she chose for herself. Juxtapose this story with Hannibal’s modus operandi: he creates companions for himself by putting them into situations where they commit murder. It’s the first step in Will’s transformation, the first step in Bedelia’s, the first step in Abigail’s. This experience binds them to Hannibal, and inculcates them with a taste for violence that they will continue to pursue. They become perpetrators just like Hannibal, but they are still victims in that this Becoming was not something they originally chose for themselves, but something Hannibal thrust upon them. 

Hannibal replicates Primavera in pencil, but instead of copying the painting in every detail – as he would have done when he was a young man still learning his craft – Hannibal replaces Chloris and Zephyrus with Bedelia and Will. Bedelia becomes the innocent wood nymph who is spirited away, and Will becomes the overmastering wind god, forcing a violent transformation upon her. In other words, Hannibal draws Bedelia as a victim and Will as a perpetrator!

Keep reading

[settegiorniinpurgatorio]

(I’d like to point out that this does not suggest Hannibal Lecter ‘gets off on consumption’)

[rue-is-me]

The name Hannibal comes from Hann’Ba’al. From the Phoenician “Hann” meaning grace, and the god Ba’al. The grace of Ba’al. Ba’al meant “lord” in the Northwest semitic languages of Levant, but was applied to patron gods. To Hadad the god of storm and fertility, in particular. Ba’al was decried as a false god and sometimes was claimed to be Beelzebub himself in Christianity. Ba’al was a vanquisher of Mot, the death god. Ba’al’s symbol is the sheep. Hannibal. Grace of Ba’al the god of storm and sheep, vanquisher of death, and sometimes known as the devil himself. The Carthaginian general who fought against the Romans was named Hannibal Barca.

[iesika]

Okay, can we talk about this painting? It’s both historically interesting and Hannibal relevant, so something for everyone!

This is Le Radeau de la Méduse (The Raft of the Medusa), and the original was painted by Theodore Géricault in 1819. It’s a depiction of the aftermath of a colossal fuck up that took place three years earlier. The painting itself is massive - the figures in the foreground are twice life-size, to give you an idea of the scale. If you stand in front of the painting, you’re in the painting. It’s in the Louvre if you ever want to see it in person.

Hannibal Lecter’s version is much smaller.

The frigate Méduse was stranded in shallow water by a series of shitty sailing decisions by a very bad captain, about thirty-five miles from shore near Mauritania. The crew built a raft they called la Machine to put all the cargo on to try and lighten the ship enough to float it - but the ship started to break up in bad weather, so everyone panicked and all but 17 people out of 400 decided to make a run for it.

There were 6 boats, which held about 40 people each, leaving 145 men and one woman to cram onto a 20x60 foot raft that had not been designed or stocked to carry people. They had one bag of biscuits, two barrels of water, and six casks of wine. The raft sank below the level of the water pretty much immediately and stayed that way, with the majority of the deck under the surface, so everyone on board was stuck in the water or fighting for drier spots, and all constantly terrified they were going to sink further.

It got worse.

Keep reading