#i-amneveralone

[return-of-the-trinidude]

You are so right about the plot with Captain Marvel. Her backstory is superficial. It has no depth like the other marvel movies where the story actually works hard to get you to know the character. Her story is so sporadic that yeah, someone could peice it together but it doesn't work well. But that's what made her being away make so much sense tho. She has personal things to get to and I hope that is an actual conflict point in endgame. I don't want her to just punch Thanos.

Yeah, I hope she gets some good character development in Endgame, something that gives her a foundation for her heroism.

[haitianhistory]

Do you know of any documentaries about Haitian's whole history or maybe cut into segments such as pre-revolution to independence, independence to the Duvaliers, if you know what I mean.

Hi! First of all, I want to express how sorry I am for taking so long to answer this question (especially since I don’t have much to say)! 

I cannot recommend any documentary (rigorous or not) on Haitian history that covers the entire colonial period up to the Duvalier era. (*Actually, see the second to last paragraph.)

Now, if you are interested in the Haitian Revolution, an obvious choice would be PBS’s Égalité for All: Toussaint Louverture and the Haitian Revolution (2009).  (I believe it is now part of the public domain?) Now, the documentary has its own issues and it completely leaves out the war between Toussaint Louverture and André Rigaud (which, is regrettable given how important it is both in Haitian historiography of the Revolution but also in popular imagination as it is seen as”the first” war between blacks and “mulâtres”). While I wouldn’t go as far as to say that the documentary was simply an hour of hero worship, I think anyone better acquainted with the literature on the Haitian Revolution would be somewhat disappointed at times. Overall, however, if you are simply looking for an introduction to the topic, I believe it makes a very good contribution!

I am not sure I know of any documentary that covers the nineteenth century, particularly the post Jean-Pierre Boyer era (1843-1900). That being said, I am aware of at least one documentary by the CIDIHCA that may interest you. (I should note that it is in French.) Une histoire de la banque en Haïti (which I believe was released in 2015 around the time of the “celebrations” to mark the 100th anniversary since the beginning of the US Marine Occupation of Haiti) talks about the history of the Haitian bank. The story is very important and helps better understand foreign (particularly French and American) interventions in Haitian domestic affairs. The controversies around the Haitian bank are also crucial to grasp how the indemnity question was played out in the early twentieth century. They also provide a good prelude to the history of the Occupation. I know only what would be “common knowledge” about the founding of the bank therefore I am not really able to critique the documentary. From where I am standing, I enjoyed it and it did correspond to most of my (light) reading. Perhaps an economic historian would feel it was too simplistic but since we are in the spirit of finding accessible introductions to Haiti’s past, I think this one is also a great to watch. 

Moving on to the early twentieth century and the pre-Duvalier era (so really, everything from 1901 to 1957), I would absolutely recommend Les chemins de la mémoire, Haïti avant Duvalier (2001). This documentary by the CIDIHCA makes clear that it is possible to produce work that is entertaining, accessible and well-researched. As I said before, this documentary covers all the major events prior to 1957: the political instability of the pre-Occupation era, the US arrival, the rise of the Indigéniste and Noiriste movements (although not in enough details in my opinion), the Revolution of 1946, the election of Dumarsais Estimé, the coup against Estimé and Magloire’s military government, “the” 1957 election which elevated François Duvalier to the presidency. This is a lot to discuss in a documentary (that yet, I don’t remember being particularly long) but it is done very well. Frantz Voltaire, the director, mixes testimonies, with archival pictures and videos. While, of course, additional research is needed to really grasp the explosive nature of Haitian politics of that time (and because I am a bit partial to any discussion on Noirisme, I was a bit sad they did not address it more, particularly knowing the CIDIHCA supervised a book exploring this period), this documentary is still a very good place to start.

Now, if you are interested in the 1940s and Haitian literature I recommend Arnold Antonin’s Jacques Roumain, la passion d'un pays (2008). (Once more, it is in French.) As the title suggests, this documentary focuses on the Haitian writer and political figure Jacques Roumain (1907-1944). Beyond this, I think the documentary gives a good feel of 1930s and 1940s Haitian politics. I’ve watched this quite some time ago and cannot remember what faults I remember finding in it. Overall, my impression was positive one. There is a lot of interest for Jacques Roumain both in francophone and anglophone intellectual circles at the moment (well, probably always, but even more so now). I am sure you will enjoy learning about his life and time. 

On to the Duvalier era (1957-1986). My understanding is that there are a few documentaries that were made about this period. I will admit I haven’t watched a single. Simply reading about torture is difficult, seeing photographic evidence of it, even for “scholarly pursuits” seems somewhat unnecessary and can even become voyeurist. Now, a documentary which has been recommended to me time and time again by Haitians whom I deeply respect is Arnold Antonin’s Haïti: le chemin de la liberté (1973). Now, the act of making the documentary in itself during Jean Claude Duvalier’s presidency (1971-1986) is an evidence of great courage. I think the documentary can be seen as both a primary and secondary source. It serves as a great testimony of life under the Duvaliers but also of the increased awareness and adoption of “human rights language” in political and activist circles during the 1970s. My understanding is that the documentary deals with state-sponsored violence and armed resistance to the Duvaliers. (I have it that a version with English subtitles exists somewhere.) I am sure it is a difficult watch but a worthy one. 

Continuing with the Duvalier era, in 2004, the CIDIHCA and their colleagues produced Au Nom Du Père… Duvalier (which I am guessing focused on François Duvalier’s regime as opposed to that of his son). Once more, this is a documentary I haven’t watched. As you can see from my previous recommendations (and this blog in general) I have a high esteem for the CIDIHCA and therefore I am inclined to believe this documentary was well-made. The title itself “In the name of the Father” is a good jab at how François Duvalier enjoyed appropriating Roman Catholic language and symbolism to make his regime seem divine and god-sent. I am guessing the totalitarian aspect of his tenure will be well explored there.

*Since writing the above, it occurred to me that I had not included Haiti, land of tragedy : Haiti, land of hope (2004) which I recently became aware of. It apparently covers all Haitian history from the French colonial era to Jean-Bertrand Aristide’s first (and potentially) second term. I know little about this other than Antoine Léonard-Maestrati, Frédéric Tyrode Saint-Louis, Peter Hudson (who is an historian) were involved in the project. Again, I have not watched it and given it was released in 2004 (probably amid the second coup against Aristide) I am intrigued by the potential political motivation behind it. 

At any rate, I hope this was useful. I am sorry I am not a big “documentary junkie” and don’t have much more titles to share. If anyone is aware of an important contribution I have missed, please let me know. I am working on a permeant page for the blog where I review documentaries. Anyhow, good luck @i-amneveralone!

[surfeit-of-stoats]

Very happy to hear that you had a good time in church. I pray for better days to come :)

thank you!!

[quiche-quibbles]

My counter argument or a comment argument I have to your abortion post is that a lot of people compare abortion to slavery (which as a black christian, Idk how to feel about that) and this comparison is done to show how people devalue fetuses the same way the lives of slaves were devalued. So by permitting abortion, the same way as slavery, we are letting an evil sort of persist in our society. That's why Christians in the west fight for legislation against it.

I get that. And I wouldn’t know how to feel about that either. 

But to be honest, comparing abortion to slavery wasn’t really part of my point. In fact it is within the scope of what I’m cautioning against. You’ve only presented an argument that Christians use to resist those pushing for abortion. An argument that appeals to the past where rooted Christian ideals were more valued, in order to influence the future. It’s still within the circle of the debate. And as we can see, that influence is losing its grip. Keep in mind, for example, that despite the resistance, same-sex marriage was still legalized. 

So that showed me we could not control government bodies (just look at the state of my country’s government as a prime example). That we are not in control of the results and it’s not going to keep working in our favor especially when the system’s core ideology, which is near utopian, I’d say, is to give every person a voice. In other words, democracy demands we put trust in the majority of people to know better. But you know what they say in Scripture:

“Cursed is the one who trusts in man, who draws strength from mere flesh and whose heart turns away from the Lord. - Jeremiah 17:5

The heart is deceitful above all things and beyond cure. Who can understand it? - Jeremiah 17:9

(Do not mistake this for me denouncing democracy. I’m simply pointing out the consequence of a flawed system from flawed people.)

But to make things clear, not once did I say that we ought to be permissive towards abortion. Here’s the issue I’m inferring from your argument. Folks conflate a more “passive” approach to being complicit in allowing certain societal ills. That by not aggressively pushing back, you automatically let bad things happen, therefore it’s a sin. 

But I personally don’t believe that. I don’t remember anything from Scripture that tells us to resist our leaders or even society in that way. When Peter cut off the soldier’s ear, Christ told him to put down his sword. 

I see such conflations as false equivalences. I think there are ways to resist and still stick to biblical values that don’t rely on crowding around and shouting at others or making arguments or posts in spaces that will trigger a blaze around you.  In fact many could very well be violating Scripture through their behavior with this abortion debate, regardless of their intentions. There are less aggressive ways to go about this that do not necessitate making more needless enemies (I say needless because we will make enemies for sure, but foolishness adds more to it than what it’s worth). For example, the beauty of democracy? Being able to vote. Use that. Another can be something as simple as having a one-on-one private conversation that ends in civility. But unfortunately, a majority of discourse I see in public about abortion result in shouting matches and mud-tosses.

But one problem I see is that Western society has been so inundated in Christian values as the societal norm that they have since taken a form of its own entirely devoid of worshipping Christ, and people are becoming fatigued, even when we attempt to bring it back to its root, especially because there is no understanding as to why such values even exist or why such roots are valuable. That’s not to say I like it or even approve of such a development. It’s simply a matter of natural progression and we even see it straight from the pages of Scripture. 

So with that said, my point wasn’t that we stop resisting evil. My point was that we need wisdom in knowing how to resist evil in a more prudent, more God-honoring way that would set us apart from the rest of the currently known society.

And doing exactly what others do (like arguing online, making denouncing posts, rallying etc.) is not something I would call different. 

What would be different? That depends on where you are physically, the people you’re surrounded with. You don’t need to influence others in a mass scale. That’s not your burden. Focusing on your own physical communities is already the best thing you can do. And if God permits, perhaps that physical influence will grow bigger.

Of course in the end, God will still determine the results. But that doesn’t mean we can be complacent with wisdom.

Let me end this with another piece of Scripture. A passage from Proverbs that stuck out to me in a very...unnerving but eye-opening way.

“There are six things the Lord hates, seven that are detestable to him: haughty eyes, a lying tongue, hands that shed innocent blood, a heart that devises wicked schemes, feet that are quick to rush into evil, a false witness who pours out lies and a person who stirs up conflict in the community.” - Proverbs 6:16-19

[its-a-state-of-angst]

i-amneveralone reblogged your photo and added:

Bill is such a character. Like when he said this,...

I love Bill(and Joshua Jackson), but I totally had to rewatch this scene to see what he really meant. He’s so subtle in how he says things and definitely holds back when it comes to Elena.....I think it was like an ask(Link here) definitely highlighted to me about this scene, and that Bill  was saying it matter of factly that yah they will probably win, but he doesn’t feel good about it or proud of it...

But who knows Bill could totally surprise us all with his endgame in the finale(he’s got something simmering with Elena). Also love Moody too, here’s hoping he won’t be too heartbroken in the finale either(but yah doubt it).

[return-of-the-trinidude]

You're an engineer and marvel fan. What do you think of the fact that Tony Stark flies around in a fast acting suit but somehow does not manage to die while inside of it. Like dude basically fell from the sky in the first Avengers movie at a likely high velocity but survives when the laws of physics could have/should have killed him... Sorry if this is a nerdy question but someone commented that on a physic guy's review of sci-fi movies and it has stayed with me all day.

Oh yeah, Tony would definitely die in real life. Not just falling at high velocity, but just the speed at which Tony changes direction when flying would probably severely injure him, if not kill him outright. That’s why no one has built a flying robotic suit...yet

[return-of-the-trinidude]

K-pop is honestly such a trap. You listen to one song and find yourself immersed.

YES!!! I don’t know what it is they do, but they have that formula down!!

[return-of-the-trinidude]

Haha. Twas I who was the anon! Another food question. Do you like goat? What do you think of it?

lol I was so sure it was someone else. Umm...I’m ok with goat. Many people don’t like the gamey taste it tends to have, but if you curry or stew it, it’s actually pretty good! What do you think about it?