Good Person does not automatically mean Good Parent and other annoying Parenthood tropes

I just read Harry Potter and the Cursed Child last night and I found it flawed but enjoyable. I really wish it was just a book instead of a play but alas. I'm a Potterhead and I'll take what I can get. I read some reviews people had on Goodreads and there was one reoccurring theme that I couldn't help but disagree with. The big beef people had was that Harry wasn't a particularly good father.

I'm still not sure who the cursed child is -- Scorpius or Albus (lot of -uses)

This leads into an assumption I'm not in full agreement with. Someone who has done good things and is mostly a good person doesn't automatically mean they will know the secrets of being a perfect parent. Parents are humans and no one has yet figured out the magical formula that guarantees your child will grow up to be a successful human being. The Cursed Child was flawed but I didn't think the whole "Harry was out of character" was actually a problem.  There were a few moments yes, but not about that.

***Spoilers!***

Albus is a typical angsty teen and let's face it, he's Harry but without the issues to angst at that Harry could. James and Lily are practically Weasleys in personality and Albus had Harry's sullen, urge to prove himself. That urge are clearly qualities Harry shares that are Harry's Slytherin qualities. Albus and Harry are too similar yet different enough that they can't see eye to eye. And Harry had a horrible temper -- mostly because he wasn't allowed to get angry as a child. His suspicions of Scorpius aren't entirely unfounded. He's a Malfoy and when Harry's scar started hurting, I could see how Harry would be jumpy about it.

Good Lord, seven years did he run into Voldemort in some form...

That being said, just because Harry saved the wizarding world doesn't mean he knows how to deal with a child like Albus. That's the thing, no one form of child-rearing works because all children are different. Albus is a little asshat because he's 14. Harry has no idea what he's doing because he has no frame of reference to work off of. I guess he had Arthur Weasley but that's about it.

Let's face it, Molly was mostly on her own here

Criticism of Harry in Cursed Child reminds me of another set of characters that received the same exact critique and that is of Aang from Avatar the Last Airbender. In Legend of Korra, Aang's children go on an adventure together where they vent their frustrations. It is revealed that Aang may be the Avatar but he wasn't the best of fathers. He favored Tenzin and ignored the other two. In fact there are shades of Albus in Tenzin. They both love their father but resent their family legacy to a degree and feel somewhat burdened with carrying it in the next generation.

Pictured: Family Resentment

However, Aang has the same problem Harry has. Yeah, he had Monk Gyatso but the idea of a familial unit like he formed with Katara, he doesn't know how to be a father in the typical nuclear family. The only relationship he's familiar with is mentor/trainee -- the one he had with Tenzin.

This can also happen in the reverse -- Bad People can love their children and be good parents. The Cursed Child also showed this with Malfoy and Scorpius. Malfoy loves his son (and his wife) and actually raised Scorpius to be a decent person. Malfoy doesn't even chastize him for it, in fact, he expresses he wished Scorpius would discuss his feelings more. I was surprised that Draco was a great father. However, this made sense because Lucius was cruel to Draco and Draco probably figured he didn't want to be that type of father. Draco at least had a guideline of what not to be while Harry didn't even have that.

Pictured: Father of the Year

Of course, at this point in the story, I hesitate to call Draco "bad" just more reformed. However, Narcissa, Draco's mother definitely counts. 

Also Bad People loving their children is in spades in Game of Thrones. Cersei is a horrible, conniving, social climber, but it is said over and over her best quality is she loves her children. Even the horrible one.

A little shit only a mother could love

 Another good example I can think of is in the Spielberg movie Munich. First off, I cannot recommend that movie enough. If you want to talk about a movie whose morality hovers in the gray, this one is it. For those who don't know, Munich is about the Israeli response to the murder of the Israeli Olympic Athletes in Munich, which was to send assassins throughout the world to kill those suspected to be behind the plot.

There is one scene in which the protagonist comes into the fancy house of a man who was involved in Palestinian movements that he was assigned to kill. It is clear this man is not a particularly good person. He is okay with killing innocents if they were Jewish people. As the protagonist sneaks off to get measurements to place the bomb, he runs into the man's daughter who is about 12 years old. The protagonist is obviously conflicted by her presence. And we watch as this nasty man who previously said he was okay with violence against Jewish people be the most adorable father to this 12 year old girl.

He loves his daughter? Holy shit.

 I feel like one of the biggest insult you can give a person is to accuse them of not loving their children (or if they don't have children, like children period). But how someone fares in parenthood is not the only quality you can judge a person on.

Another Parenthood trope I wish would just die is that motherhood has some sort of magical power that cure sickness and that anyone can just take to it like riding a bike. Sure, I am sure motherhood is a wonderful thing for some people but it doesn't solve all problems. It is not as prevalent as it used to be which is refreshing. I still want to share my favorite subversions.

 The first one has to do with Carrie Mathieson in Homeland. She has some mental issues, which are fine for a character to have, when the writers decided to make her pregnant, I groaned hoping that she suddenly wouldn't become well because motherhood is magical like that. No, Homeland made Carrie a terrible mother. She loved her baby, sure, but she could not handle that stress that it entails. There was a moment you could tell she came close to drowning the baby.

The other subversion is in the movie Babadook (another great movie). This horror film focuses around a mother and son and the bogeyman who haunts them. The mother gave birth to her son on the same day her husband died. And her son has behavior problems. She loves her son but she resents him because her son is so difficult to deal with and she misses her husband so much. He's like a constantly reminder of what she lost. The movie is brilliant in that it showed how motherhood did not solve her grief but rather it was something she had to grow into.

She looks like she wants to strangle him and she's not even possessed yet.

Parenthood is a wonderful thing for some people. It is also a complicated experience, or so I hear and have observed. I like when writers explore how complicated it is and how good parent/bad parent is not a label of absolutes. Yes, Harry Potter can beat Voldemort and make shitty decisions as a father. And yes, a conniving Queen Regent can love her children and supporters of terrorism can be cute fathers. But this also probably comes down to we as humans are not defined by absolutes. Villains can have good qualities and heroes can have flaws. And there is no such thing as the perfect parent.

Total disclosure: I am not a mother. I definitely could be wrong but this is just my opinion as I see it!

Frustrating Movies -- X-Men: Apocalypse

My relationship with the X-Men franchise started with a boy. My first boyfriend. He really wanted to see X-Men 2 and I went along with him after he whined a little. Before X-Men, I never was super into superheroes. I did like Spiderman but I said Spiderman was just the big exception. But the moment I saw Nightcrawler BAMFing everywhere, I knew I was in love.

Unf

Since then, I really liked the X-Men universe. I loved the characters and the hijinx they got into. I loved the frienemy friendship between Professor X and Magneto. I loved Magneto and the fact that even though he was a bad guy, you can see where he was coming from. His goal wasn't out of megalomania -- it was more about respect and protection. Misguided sure, but he was an interesting antagonist and an anti-hero. And at the time, I loved Wolverine. As I age, I find myself less interested with him but at the time I was a fan. I never stopped loving Nightcrawler though.

Magneto does what I want to do to Congress sometimes. SOMETIMES!

And I never really stopped loving the franchise, even during highs (X-Men Days of Future's Past) and lows (X-Men 3).

But X-Men: Apocalypse. I really wanted to be blown away. I really did. And instead, I decided to revive my frustrating movies series. Because it wasn't X-Men 3 bad but it wasn't super great either. The movie had wonderful moments and great choices but the missteps were big and distracting.

The movie starts with the somewhat origin of Apocalypse, the oldest mutant in the world, and how the Ancient Egyptians had him buried, hopefully to be forgotten. He rises in the 1980s and he chooses his Four Horseman -- street urchin Storm, sword for hire Psylocke, um... metal head hired fighter Angel I guess?, and Magneto -- and wants to destroy humanity to turn Earth into a mutant haven. So basically, Magneto's endgame but on steroids. Can the X-Men stop him? In the 80s???

Angel is so lame, I am not even gonna give him a section.

I decided to split the rest of the entry on what worked and what didn't. So, Spoilers below!

---

What Worked

Quicksilver

Look at this lil scamp

I loved Quicksilver in Days of Future's Past. I never get tired of his trolling of everyone around him and how he executed that trolling by using his speedster abilities. His scenes were small but they easily stole the movie. However, I respect Singer for only using Quicksilver when he was needed. No need for Quicksilver to take over with his one gimmick like Castiel took over Supernatural.

He took over the FBI now? So glad I stopped watching

I was pleased to see Peter Maximoff returned to the movie but I feared he would become a one trick pony like those characters have a habit of doing. However, the screenwriter gave Quicksilver a character arc which kept him fresh and developed him as a character but also gave us fan servicey scenes that made us fall in love with him to begin with.

Loveable anarchist

I saw one online reviewer saying he felt it unbelievable that Quicksilver still lived in his mom's basement 10 years later. I... don't think it is that surprising. First off, Peter is a classic slacker. I can also see him falling into the existential crisis hole because of his abilities. What would be the point of working if any task given to you, you can finish in five minutes, for an example? Then, I'm sure when you see your father on TV, who you just broke out of the Pentagon and then he tried to kill the president, that is something that would take a lot to work through.

Peter goes to Xavier's School to find Magneto and to meet his father despite his mother advising him not to. "Nothing good will come out of having a relationship with him" she insisted, "But I can't stop you." Quicksilver arrives at the school and manages to use his ability to save everyone mid-explosion in a beautiful scene to Sweet Dreams by the Eurythmics. I felt this defined Peter's character to show how much he grew. He didn't know these people yet saved all of them. Except Havoc.

When Quicksilver has his moment to tell Eric about his lineage and hopefully distract him enough to drop the large magnetic field, he chooses not to. It is like the words his mother said to him begin to ring in his ears. And he realized he won't figure out who he is by just talking to Magneto. That suddenly everything will make sense (another reason why he was a basement dweller for a decade) because he met one of his DNA donors. Also, he got to see what his father did when in pain -- he wasn't this strong man who had all the answers like he seemed to in DC.

He says at the end that one day he will tell Magneto, but  it has to be at the right time.

I imagine it would be like this (by Wacky06)

But, at least he moved out of his mom's basement maybe to live in Charles's basement, I don't know. But that is already a big bit of character development. So glad he did not become the franchise's Castiel.

Jean Grey

I'm not a fan of Jean Grey. I remember getting a huge comic fan friend pissed at me for saying that and even gave me the whole, "If you're a woman, you should like her!" But I never found her character particularly intriguing. She's an extremely powerful mutant who has two guys fighting for her. Okay? She's just so bland. I've been told the Dark Pheonix Saga is brilliant but still. I just never really liked her.

But I love Sophie Turner's Jean Grey. Maybe because she's young Jean and we get to see her before she gained more control over her powers. We get to see Jean vulnerable with this inner social awkwardness and fear about her abilities. We see her before she was the Big Woman On Campus. Now, we see her when everyone is afraid of her so she's pretty lonely as a result.

Jean should sit on the Iron Throne

Most importantly, we see her as a foil to Apocalypse. She is an extremely powerful mutant and Jean knows this. She fears it, something Mystique helps her to confront that fear. But more importantly, she has the good sense and empathy of when to use it. I'm sick of Wolverine but the scene of her giving back his memories worked really well (as long as you push aside the fact that Logan and Jean have a thing in the future). She is afraid of hurting people and her helping a stranger like that shows how she embodies the film's message of Great Power is all on how you use it. Use responsibly.

Charles Xavier Still Hates His Powers

Ever since First Class, Xavier's character development has always been treated well. I believe this is partially true due to James Mcavoy's performance. He loves playing Charles and you can tell. It's infectious. His crush on Moira is adorable. I was glad he gave back her memories.

We see him in this movie the closest he has ever been to the professor we all know and love. However, when gets into Apocalypse's head, there is one moment in particular that made me gasp. He says, "You want to know what goes inside my head? You want this?" And grabs Apocalypse's head to project a more chaotic cerebro. Why this moment worked so well is because while Charles had made peace with his abilities there still remains a part of him that hates it. There is part of him that didn't ask for this. Much like how Jean looks annoyed when she acknowledges knowing what everyone else feels, we see angry Charles at the fact he can connect with anyone.

It is another hook into the theme. Having great power is a BURDEN.

Michael Fassbender

I use the name of the actor and not Magneto because I have some issues with some of the choices made for Magneto's story line which I will discuss below. But man, Fassbender is an incredible actor. I still felt his pain even though he had a crappy fridging storyline to deal with.

SO ANGRY HOW BAD THIS SCENE WAS! Was probably his point of focus

Beast As The Bridge

Oh Beast. I just. I love everything about his portrayal. However, one thing I really liked how he is and was used in this part of the franchise is that he's sort of the bridge between Charles and Eric. On one side of the mutant debate we have Charles who believes in the good of everyone. On the other side, we have Eric who believes mankind is guided by fear and ultimately are dangerous to mutants. You can't trust them. Then there is Hank who believes that there are good in some people but not all. You should hope for the best but prepare for the worst. He is a much needed voice in a world of extremes.

The Action Scenes Were Good

I have no complaints here.

Storm was Mediocre

She wasn't great but she still was better than Halle Berry's passionless Storm.

NIGHTCRAWLER

Alan Cumming will always be awesome, but this Nightcrawler held a candle to him. He was adorbs and badass. Well done.

So wide-eyed and innocent

Psylocke's Costume

I just kinda liked the boots.

Most of the costume is like Whaaa? But those boots, man.

The Frustrating Part

Cairo

This is probably a nitpick but kind of bothers me. 1980's Cairo is depicted like 1920's Cairo with 1950's style cars. More people were dressed traditionally than not and there was reference to cutting off the hands of thieves. Also, Egyptians speak a dialect of Arabic. There is no Egyptian language unless you're referencing Coptic which is a scholary language.

1980's Cairo wasn't stuck in some time warp. There are paved roads and the government then was secular. In fact, Egypt in the 1980s was almost militantly secular. Most people in Cairo at the time would dress in western style clothing. Yes, some would have opted for traditional ones, not saying there would be any, but I saw one or two people dressed in 1980s clothing? Additionally, what was all this talking about hand cutting? Because of the secular nature of the Egyptian government, they pretty much banned any too conservative religious bodies. Hand cutting is sadly more common now than it was in 1980s Egypt. Cairo in the 1980s was not Agrabah from Aladdin.

1980s Cairo. Paved roads. Modern cars. Still rundown buildings but you get the idea.

I mean, Cairo is a cool setting! It really is! But don't treat the country as backward in ways it wasn't.

The Fridging of Mrs. Magneto and Magnelet

In 1983, Eric seems to have found peace in Poland working in a factory, a married man, with an adorable fledgling mutant daughter. Then the villagers find out about Eric's past as he saved a man from almost being crushed by metal. They kidnap the daughter to bring him out into the woods and confront him. He said he'll go with them if they just let the girl go. They do. The daughter is upset so all her animal friends attack the villagers, causing one person to shoot a bow that shishkabobs daughter and wife, killing them. This motivates Eric to join Apocalypse.

Pictured: Magneto's motivation to join Apocalypse

As I said above, Michael Fassbender SELLS it. But it is really lame. First off, it is lazy storytelling. fridging is when a writer kills off a love interest or their child to shock them into action. I understand that the writer wanted Magneto to be one of the Four Horseman, however, you really don't have to go to that length. For Eric, his mistrust and anger at humans is always bubbling below the surface. To get him to join Apocalypse, you could have done so many other scenarios. Like what if Eric didn't tell his wife about his past? What if his daughter's mutant ability is subtle so easier to hide? What if he just saved the guy and everyone in the village makes the connection and they go after him trying to kill him?

All those are plausible reasons to cause Eric to turn to Apocalypse. And Fassbender would have sold it either way. But shishkabobing his wife and child on an arrow, not only is it DUMB but just kind of lazy.

So while Kurt, Scott, and Jean save the world, I assume Jubilee was Babysitting?

I honestly don't understand the point of adding Jubilee. She didn't use her powers. She had a few lines. And while seem seemed to bond with Jean, Scott, and Kurt, why wasn't she suddenly there when Striker showed up? Couldn't Jean, Scott, and Kurt have their mall adventure without Jubilee and lose nothing?

They spent more time figuring out her costume than her lines

The Climax

When Charles decided to go into Apocalypse's mind, all I could think was aw yes, Charles is gonna mess with Apocalypse, maybe find the most vulnerable part of him -- the good part because it is Charles. Already in my mind, I saw this kid who only had one power, to jump into other people's bodies. He was ostracized and vowed to become powerful. I guess we don't need villain backstories but this was an opportunity for it and also an opportunity for Charles to practice what he preached which that there is good in everyone.

Then I thought later, what about the guy who Apocalypse jumped into in the beginning -- Poe Dameron. Where does his consciousness go? Does it "die"? Or does it become a shadow of the subconscious mind? Wouldn't it have been cool if Charles or Jean somehow freed Poe Dameron and he helped with the mental assault?

Apocalypse wouldn't stand a chance

Then when Apocalypse was finally destroyed, it was purely because Jean just went Phoenix on him. Which I guess is to show power comes restraint?

I just felt the Climax was a little bit lazy. What was special about Jean's powers that it could destroy an immortal being?

The climax made Charles a hypocrite because he always said there was good in everyone. But apparently not in Apocalypse. He was the exception. If anything, the climax proved Beast and Mystique right, which I guess is kind of cool. But it would have been cooler if Charles admitted to that. Which he didn't.

---

In Conclusion

I'm missing a few things. Like for one, timeline issues. I'm willing to handwave Magneto and the others looking young for people born in the 30s because mutants. I mean, Magneto almost always looks young in the comics even with his birth timeline placing him born in the 1930s. It's shaky but I'll take it. I have a hard time reconciling Havoc and Cyclopes brotherly though. Just messing with the timeline stuff? I guess? I don't know? Couldn't they just make Havoc that cool uncle instead?

Anyway, I don't hate his movie. It is not X-Men 3 or Wolverine Origins. But it is not near X-2 or Days of Future's Past or First Class. I will watch it again because there is so much snarkbait. SO MUCH. But what is so frustrating is it could have been good but it had so many problems.

Like I don't think people realize Apocalypse once jumped into the body of a mutant who had the abilities to make era appropriate superhero costumes out of thin air.

He has good taste in boots

Diehard fans will probably like this movie. If you're not and the kind of person to get hung up on details, you probably won't like it. 

Lisa the Iconoclast and Busting Family Lore

I know it has been another span of time before I wrote in this. I'm trying to be consistent but life gets away from me and I'll end up getting hyper-focused on something else.

Like lately, I've been obsessing in ancestry.com and tracing my own family story as far back as the site's many databases would let me. I even ordered and got the results from the DNA test... more on that later.

First, though, I want to talk (and geek!) a bit about "family lore". Like a lot of Americans, my family always had this way to talking about the ancestors and how in the old world they did these certain things and then they came to America and did these different things. Mostly, it is a glowing review. One line came in the 1620s and settled Massachusetts Bay Colony. Many fought against the British in the 1770s. Abolitionists. Tons of Abolitionists. Oregon Trail travelers. Italians that saw the Statue of Liberty as they floated into New York City. And probably like way too many, Native American blood from the Huron Tribe.

I knew there was a reason I liked this game.

I grew up proud of these anecdotes. Yes, I was aware Americans were not perfect. I knew about the dark chapters of American history but there was no way any of my family was involved in any of that.

Well, as I went through ancestry, I found myself busting a lot of those family myths.

One of the first ones happened with that Puritan line. That line came to Massachusetts in 1623ish, a man named Phillip and his six kids and wife. Of his six kids, my line comes from Joseph. Joseph was a yeoman, which is just an old tymey way of saying farmer. He had his kids -- I found some criminal records on  him (apparently for public disturbance -- he, his brother, and his brother-in-law were drinking a lot and being loud -- some things never change if you know my family).

Pictured: Probably my ancestor -- you lush

Then he died on May 19, 1676 in what is now Deerfield, MA. What was happening in Deerfield, MA on that date? A Native American Massacre. At the time, I'm sure he was hailed a hero as this was during King Phillip's War (no relation). But they killed mostly women and children and it was yet another battle in a string of battles that contributed to a destruction of a people.

Of course, my hyper imagination, I made up a story about the line being cursed since then -- because many of Joseph's descendants died in asylums (although it could be due to tuberculosis). But the curse is lifted because my great-grandfather in this line did a heroic deed during WWI, that is verifiable. He received the Croix de Guerre for flying in a plane before Air Force was a thing and mapped German positions while under fire.

I'm not sure what is more terrifying, being in one of these or being shot at

The thing about this story is no one in my family mentioned it. One of my relatives said I must have gotten the wrong Joseph but I kept on looking through primary sources and I'm pretty sure it is him.

Another Family Lore busted is that we had ancestors who fought against the British during the American Revolution. There is a few in different lines that did. However, I found a Loyalist (and probably a con-artist too).

In the 1700s, one of my great-etc grandfathers was a man named David Springer. He lived in Schenectady, NY. He had something like 15 children and a rather large bit of property. He said he was descend from the Delaware Springers who were founders of New Sweden. During the 1770s, David tried to get a bunch of locals to form a Loyalist militia and go bash the heads of some Yankees. A Yankee militia in the area confronted him, executed him on his front yard, and imprisoned his 4 eldest sons. Most of the rest of his children and wife fled to Canada.

There is even a plaque about the occasion.

Just as you would thinking being an executed Loyalist would be enough to bust this whole saintly ancestors myth, he probably was a con artist. A generation later, his descendants tried to get some of the Springer inheritance but the Springers of Delaware said they never heard of a David. It's been a point of conjecture for many genealogists. Some speculated that maybe they didn't like David because of his love of the crown. However, DNA tests of David's descendants do not match the Springers of Delaware. Even as I got my DNA test back, I only have trace amounts of Scandinavian which could have easily mixed in with the Irish or English during Viking raids or during Danelaw period.

The mystery of David Springer's line really bothers me. I traced his made up line but who knows where he really came from. And really his line of doing questionable things during war time doesn't stop there.

His daughter marries an Irishman in Canada with the last name Treanor. They chill in Canada for a generation then his son, Oliver moves to Iowa, farming with the best of them. Then, his son James joins up with the Union during the Civil War. He also lied about his age -- probably didn't want to be a drummer. He did serve with his unit for a year but deserted around Shiloh. Next thing I see, he appeared in California territory.

So I have a Loyalist and a Union deserter, just in one line. To be fair, I read about James's unit. They seemed more like King Arthur and his crew in Monty Python and the Holy Grail. Like for instance, they were forced to retreat because one of the Confederates shot a bee hive over their formation.

BEEEEES!

 But also, James did lie about his age to serve which meant he probably did think it was a good cause-- but probably wasn't prepared for how hard life really is. I did find the paperwork of the government forgiving his AWOL and even allowing him to have a Civil War veteran marker.

James did seem to have a successful business in California, so good for him.

I managed to bust a bit of Family Lore. But here is a big one -- Native American Blood. Everyone loves to claim Native American blood. I feel like it is this subconscious desire to justify belonging here in a former colony. My mother insisted that we did and my grandfather had the paperwork to back it up. I haven't found it yet -- but in many places, I'm going off based on names.

The DNA test didn't show any Native American markers. It did show Iberian Peninsula, North Africa, and Caucasus markers which opened up a whole new mystery. I have an Italian line. My great-grandfather came here from southern Italy. But I had no Italian markers. I'm not able to search further back from his father. I suspect Sicilian blood but I haven't been able to verify it yet outside circumstantial evidence. And it could be I just didn't get any of it passed down. Same with the Native American blood. The Family Lore COULD be true.

What did I learn from this? Well, recently, I've been rewatching the old Simpsons episodes. There is one episode I feel is extremely relevant called Lisa the Iconoclast. In this episode, Springfield is celebrating their Founders Day, Sprinfield's founder being Jebadiah Sprinfield. He has this American Folk Hero Story to him but everyone still has admiration for him.

Pictured -- David Springer probably

Lisa does some research on him and discovers the town founder is actually a pirate and criminal Hans Sprungfeld who tried to kill George Washington. She tries to shut down the Founder's Day Celebration calling it a sham. But then she noticed how just the myth is able to bring out the best in people and chooses not to tell what she learned.

Filled with so much hope and optimism

 I somewhat agree with that sentiment. Myths have power -- often as much as the truth. Like George Washington was a mercurial man with a horrible temper but what he represents is important too. I may have found a drunk Native American killer, a Loyalist con-artist, and a Civil War deserter in my line but still the overall American story of my family sometimes leaving everything to come here to start a new life is still an industrious story that you can draw inspiration from.

I understand why people tend to hide these things -- either it wasn't a big deal at the time or the details get muddied from generation to generation. But even the mistakes of our ancestors are worth learning about. For one, it's a great story; for another, you are more than just the line of blood you come from. And you can rise above it.

World Building World -- Part 1: Geography

I tend to be modest about my abilities but one thing I don't hesitate to say I'm good at is World Building. I've been complimented by a variety of different people on how I can create deep sandboxes in which people's characters can dig and turn up gold nuggets. I like World Building. I get lost in creating my worlds -- some I use, some just languish in my journals or in my mind. It is very cathartic for me. In fact, I remember after September 11th, my roommate and I created a map for a world to play D&D in. That was my first original world and it kind of sucked. I've gotten better since then.

The world is burning, time to start over and make a new one!

And lately, I've been itching to create again and I've had this idea brewing in my head for a couple of years now. I had a concept, characters, plot, but I needed a world. I thought I originally could just use the Hiromu Arakawa's, writer of Fullmetal Alchemist, world building strategy and I could be fine. Arakawa said that she started in a small world and built outward. But I couldn't do that. I like having an intimate understanding of how the world works, especially if the plot effects the world like this one does.  This includes if my story takes place in this world.

I thought I should break out my thoughts on world building and talk about the new world I'm creating in the process.

This will be a series I hope to finish. There is only one thing I like more than world building -- talking about world building.

This series will be more focused on building worlds from the ground up. Depending on how it goes, I may talk about world building on a smaller scale. But for now, starting from the bottom using a blank slate. I want to caveat that I am talking more about singular worlds and won't be discussing so much a galaxy of many worlds. Maybe that will come later but for now, I'm focusing on a single world.

Part 1: Geography

This particular social science I find is often treated trivially by many writers and game masters. It should be seen as the canvas in which the world is painted on, your core character stats, the face you paint make-up on. The land in which you live on, people often take for granted on how much that informs everything around you. It dictates what you wear, what kind of car you drive, where you work. This is why I have decided Part 1 will be about this often overlooked base in which you need to consider before you can build from the ground up.

And Happy Little Trees (tm!)

Geography Dictates Culture and History

 One of the youtube channels I like to visit, GeographyHub makes a great point in their first video -- change anything about geography and it dictates culture and history. When you take into consideration what makes a society function, what actions do they collectively take, especially in the beginning, it often ties into the land they are from.

For instance, take a raiding culture. Why do they raid? Usually, it is because their home land is not as fruitful as the lands they raid. Maybe winters are harsh or it is just not plentiful of resources. What kind of lands would they come from? A tundra maybe or plateau or desert. Or alternatively, if your society comes from a bread basket, fruitful region; agriculture leads to population booms in which a society may feel they have to expand. When they expand, they may step on the toes of other cultures.

I needed resources. Wut?

 What kind of geological formations inform their culture? For instance, a heavily mountainous region or a distant island isolates cultures developing them into very distinct cultures with languages that haven't been nearly as influenced as cultures who are trading partners for an example. Isolated cultures may not have the need to have much in the way of warfare because the land protects them enough. Conversely, take a culture with little protective geological formations -- they would be forced to develop technology to build up armies to protect themselves.

Geography also greatly informs cultural quirks. For instance, think how important the Nile was to the Ancient Egyptians. How much of their religion and culture revolves around that river. There were celebrations, specific gods, and it was the source of their well-being. If the Nile did not flood every year, they were shit out of luck. Likewise, consider the Tigris and Euphrates river and how important that was to the Mesopotamians. Places with Volcanic activity, how that dictated the cultures there. If a Volcano blew its top, the Gods must be angry. And so forth.

The Nile is the life blood in a barren land

Geography Often Contributes to and Dictates Conflict

We go to war for different reasons. Ideology is often dictated as a reason but if you take any ideological reason for war and look deeper, there is often a resource question -- basically the people fighting are doing so because there is either a real or imagined threat to their survival. I don't buy that conflict is purely ideological driven. Ideology is just the clothes you dress a conflict in -- almost nothing is purely ideological.

Geography is often the trophy that drives conflict in the form of geographical formations and resources. What drove the Age of Exploration was a search for resources. Wars have been fought over cities on strategic water ways or connections to key resources.

Not only is the reason to go to conflict often dictated by geography, but how the conflict is fought also is informed. Going back to our mountain people, they would have every reason to pull their enemy towards them and let the mountains do their work. Or what about a civilization familiar with swampy areas. Lure your enemy in and snipe from the trees. Or how about Never Invade Russia In The Winter. 

No matter how much fun this picture makes you believe

When you start your canvas of your new world, it is important to keep these aspects in mind.

People take advantage of the land we walk on because it is always there. As it works as a stabilizing force for us as we stand, it provides the foundation of the worlds we create.  

So don't skimp on geography. Don't be that GM who is like, "So you walk to the dungeon and there are trees I guess. Maybe desert. IDK."

Deadpool Made Me Cry ... But Not Due to Laughing

It's been a long time since I've updated my blog. Life got away from me. I got a new job, which is good. And my father lost his battle to cancer a few weeks ago, which is bad.

I try to keep my personal life away from this blog as much as possible but I got inspired to write about the Deadpool movie because of what happened in my personal life -- in this case, my father's death. In the past three years, I have lost two of the most important people in my life to cancer and my feelings on the disease is nothing short of F-U.

I've experienced seeing those I love suffer due to this disease and I'm kind of tired of seeing cancer used as the sexy, tragic disease in movies and TV Shows. Cancer victims are usually beautiful, good-hearted people who tragically lose their hair and die beautifully and good-heartedly, touching those around them as they beautifully leave this earth, manipulating the audience to cry. Having had a front row seat, I can tell you -- that is not the case. Cancer is a horrible, often disfiguring disease and it kills people of all personalities and all races and all classes. I just wish stories about disobedient cells ruining people's lives weren't so insulting to those who suffer from it.

Don't get me wrong. There are some great depictions of cancer patients and movies that aren't so horrible. I thought 50/50 was pretty good. Gran Torino was surprisingly good. And Miss Rosa from Orange Is The New Black is awesome and if you say so otherwise, I will find you and kill you.

But there is one movie that opened this last weekend that depicted cancer in a respectful way. Yeah, the writers used it as a way to get the story going but the insight made me cry. A raunchy, R-rated, superhero comedy made me cry. And in a stranger way, the movie felt cathartic.

What movie could that be?

I may get into spoiler territory from here on out so read at your own risk.

To be honest, I wasn't all that familiar with Deadpool. What I knew about him was the snarky panels people would share on tumblr and the brief appearance he made on Wolverine Origins. Originally, I didn't plan on seeing it in the theaters but I read reviews and decided this would be a good movie to uplift my spirits.

The movie made me laugh. That much, I wasn't surprised about. Ryan Reynolds often makes me laugh. What I didn't expect was it made me cry too. I couldn't believe it. And furthermore, what I couldn't believe was that the movie did the cancer storyline in a way that didn't feel manipulative. I'd even argue that part of the movie could be a metaphor for angry feelings at cancer -- I am already picturing Deadpool making fun of that statement.

Not only is it heartbreaking to see Vanessa, the hooker with a heart of gold and Wade's love interest, beg him to stay, but the way she went about it felt very similar to those I love reacting to my dad and my brother. Then, there was one line Deadpool said that really hit a nerve, "The worst thing about cancer is seeing how it hurts those you love around you." I know my dad felt that way.

There was yet another scene in which Deadpool studies Vanessa like this would be the last time he saw her. That stabbed me in the gut as I remember the last time I saw my Dad and he looked at me in a similar way, like he knew this would be the last time and he wanted to memorize my face.

Deadpool surprisingly could be sentimental in small, tiny moments like that. I saw some people complain that those moments were the worst because they wanted to see Deadpool act more like Deadpool. I respectfully disagree. Those moments grounded the film and just in general were well done.

The scenes with Ajax torturing and Deadpool mutating also brought to mind my father's own experimental treatment he underwent. It did give him some more time but the side-effects were brutal. While it certainly wasn't as brutal as Wade's treatment, I was reminded of that. And thing is, many cancer patients take the risks with these treatments and they don't always go the way they hope.

Kind of like Wolverine Origins

That brings me to Deadpool's revenge scheme against Francis. I saw it in part as a big fuck you to cancer and its brutal treatment of poisonous chemicals.  It sucks and man, I wish I could hunt down every cancer cell and destroy them while making witty jabs.

Lastly, Deadpool dealt with his whole ordeal with a sense of humor which certainly was a great message to have. That certainly how my dad handled it. He always had a joke to tell or a witty observation to make. Having a sense of humor has helped me survive these last three years. I needed it. The last time I made my Dad laugh, I recited the below -- something that could be a Deadpoolism if you added more dicks to it.

Or really this is moot for Deadpool because he can't die

I really liked Deadpool even despite me reading way too into it about its cancer themes. Most of all, it made me laugh and reflect at a time in which I needed it.

Mary's Special Fin -- Why Representation is Important

A friend of mine and I once ranked our favorite Pixar films. I put Finding Nemo in the top five. While I really love the dialogue and the characters and the overall story, the cherry on top of why I like this Pixar film lies in something kind of silly.

Nemo and I have something in common. We both have a special fin.

AND WE BOTH MEAN BUSINESS

When I popped out of my momma, I was on the small side but I also had a left hand that hadn't developed all the way. It's been with me my entire life and is just part of who I am. I do some things differently because of it -- particularly typing, playing piano, and getting stuck with the trumpet. I also really suck at jungle gyms. One of my earliest memories was falling off one -- because my hand wouldn't go all the way around-- and getting the wind knocked out of me. Luckily, it is something small enough that it takes observant person to notice it without me pointing it out. Kids could be mean about it (although kids zeroed in on my weight more) and as an adult, I even had someone I served in the army with said sincerely that my hand "creeped him out". Gee thanks.

SO DISGUSTED BY MY HAND! XD

I would have to learn how to do some things differently. Like my brother taught me how to guitar but said I would just have to play it backwards like Hendrix. I play Guitar Hero backwards too.

And then there was swimming -- yeah, it is not just the special fin that makes me feel a kinship to a fictional clown fish. I always liked the water and since I grew up on the ocean, I can't remember when I learned how to swim. Of course, mostly in the beginning I was the champion dog-paddler. One summer, I went to a day camp and took swim lessons where I learned actual strokes. My hand caused me to be weaker on one side, so I kept on swimming the crawl in circles or some other form of not straight. The swim teacher told me I probably won't be able to swim properly because of it. My hand was like a broken rudder.

I told my dad about that and he said, in the most incredulous way possible, "Why don't you just push harder with the left hand?!" And I did. Fast forward a couple of years and I gained my lifeguard license. I never used it but I defied what that swim instructor had told me. Now, I freestyle on the level of Haruka Nanase.

Yep. I'm so good, I freestyle in the shower

When I watched Finding Nemo for the first time, I literally screamed. Special fin! Special hand! And Nemo wanted to prove all of them wrong. I mentioned how I got the wind knocked out of me from falling from the jungle gym. What I didn't mention was after, I tried again and cut open my lip when I fell again. That time I stopped. I would dangle and that would be it. But the swimming. Both Nemo and I kicked ass at that.

 The thing is, I sometimes wonder what would have happened if I had Finding Nemo as a kid. I never was super ashamed of my hand. I used to brag that telling right from left was super easy for me. I tell Toph-style jokes making fun of it. And the only thing that bothers me is I can't make a heart with my hands.

*Tear*

But there would be days in which my classmates would do something like hand me four pinecones saying they "found my fingers" and other such things that would ruin my day. Or people who meant well but would ask when I showed up to Softball try-outs if I could even catch the ball. Trust me, if I didn't think I could do it or find a way to do it, I wouldn't have shown up.

I know my special hand is not a major set-back. Outside micro-aggressions and impatient teachers, I am not discriminated against. But it is still my special story. It was still a source of frustration to understand how I could never do complex chords for the piano or when I learned how to play the recorder or the Irish whistle, I would hurt my fingers to make sure they'd cover the holes. It was nice to see Nemo suffer from a similar aliment to me and see his all too familiar frustration that more people don't take him seriously, to not see him as weak, or how he could be independent. And most of all, to overcome the self-doubt. I can freestyle. I can serve in the Army. I can get a sharpshooter badge! I found different ways to do all these things. But I had to believe I could do them.

I know a lot of people argue about how this push for diversity is enforcing this "check-list" mentality. I can see where it is coming from. However, as children, one of the ways we learn how to empathize is through the media we consume. And a way we learn to discover/like ourselves is by relating to storylines in the media we consume. But here's the thing. Representation is not just for those who fit into those minorities. It is for the majority -- to be reminded that these people exist. And these people have stories.

Maybe, if Finding Nemo came out during my childhood, my classmates would have said what my roommate in Basic Training said, "Your hand is small! Like Nemo!"And maybe my classmates, just like my roommate, would become my friends. 

Or they could remain psychopaths. Seriously? Pine cones? Go to hell.

When Antagonists Have a Point

"Examine what is said not he who says it" - Arab Proverb

I've recently got my friends into watching Avatar: The Last Airbender and Legend of Korra and I've been enjoying listening to their point of view of two of my most favorite shows. One of my friends while talking about Legend of Korra said he didn't think Amon was necessarily a bad guy. Clearly Republic City had no problems discriminating against non-benders. They are underrepresented in the council and the police force. And he saw what Amon was doing wasn't necessarily bad. It wasn't like he was killing people. One of my other friends responded with while all that is true, taking away someone's bending is like someone taking away her artistic ability. 

Equality for All!!

 By the end of the discussion, we could all agree that Republic City and in general the Avatar universe at large does have a non-bender bias. But this is why Korra enforced non-benders into the counsel after the events of the first season and why the police force became more mixed. In a sense, Korra realized that Amon did have a point. Not about taking away someone's bending but that non-benders aren't treated that well.

In my Dungeons and Dragons Episodes post, I talked about why I liked the ending of Advanced Dungeons and Dragons episode in Community. After Pierce spends he entire episode being a complete asshole because he wasn't invited to the game, Neil invites him to the next game. Pierce was mean and a lot of what he said is unforgivable but Neil acknowledges how Pierce was right to feel left out. His methods may have been horrible but it was unfair he was excluded. 

The first Percy Jackson series very much envelopes this idea. Spoilers for the first Percy Jackson series below. 

Ugh! I wanted the movies to be good. I wanted so bad!

Rick Riordan's Percy Jackson series is about the idea that the Greek Gods are still around but have disguised themselves with the times and hide behind other ideas. They, true to themselves, still make nookie with mortals and beget demi-god children who they continue to use as pawns in their various agendas. These demi-gods go to camp on Long Island where they stay in cabins with their brothers and sisters or in the case in which their godly parent doesn't claim them -- the Hermes Cabin. Then, they train so they can protect themselves from monsters because the world is dangerous for demi-gods. 

I mean, they got a really good Luke

The main plot of the series has many different layers. The first layer antagonist is a demi-god of Hermes named Luke Castellan. He has a huge chip on his shoulder that can be tied back to issues with both his parents but in general, he's very out-going and kind of a joker like most Hermes kids are. Percy even regards him as an older brother type in the first book. But Luke is tired of being a pawn of the gods and wants to overthrow them so humans aren't privy to their whims any longer.

Luke forms a coalition with children of minor gods who weren't awarded their own cabin at Camp Halfblood and weren't given any respect and also a large group of demi-gods whose godly parent never claimed them. Together, Luke's army do questionable things and hurt many people.

To be fair, why Luke thought it was a good idea to trust someone who ate his children as opposed to having a dad who is just Nathan Fillion, I'll never know

Ironically, it turns out Luke, who was tired of being the gods' pawn, becomes the literal puppet of a titan -- specifically Kronos. It's kind of heart-breaking when he realizes this and there is no going back. Luke is not a bad person, not really. Yeah, he does questionable things and his methods aren't all that thought out but as they say, the path to hell is paved with good intentions. Luke was the Cabin Leader of the Hermes Cabin and had to see all these demi-gods get shafted by their godly parents or the minor god demi-gods get shafted by demi-gods of "higher parentage". Then there is someone like Ethan Nakamura whose mother, Nemesis took his EYE to give him power. Luke, who is a big brother type, must have really wanted to help these people.

Seriously, Luke's dad is Nathan Fillion and he trusts a guy who ate his kids over Mal from Firefly

After Percy hears about Luke's incredibly sad backstory-- I legit cried during it -- and saw Luke's big brother act was sincere, after Luke's death Percy makes the gods swear on the River Styx to claim their spawn on their arrival to Camp Halfblood. Also, minor god children were given their own cabins and recognized as equals among the other children of the big 12. 

In the end, Percy and his friends not only defeat the villain but also recognize that one of the antagonists had a point. Maybe his methods through the first three books were definitely villainy but Luke's grievances were STILL valid. And that is one of the strengths of the Percy Jackson books. Percy didn't defeat the bad guy and move on. No, he saw that hey maybe the antagonists had a point. The gods are haughty and don't own up to the responsibility of being parents. Every child deserves to be loved. 

I think the lesson of season 1 of Korra, Percy Jackson, and that one episode of community is often one that is overlooked. People too often focus on methods of their enemy without considering what is motivating them. Sure, some villains and antagonists' motivations are purely selfish. They want more land or more gold or more power etc. However, it takes a different kind of hero to look at the antagonists who don't and address those grievances -- not without consequence to the antagonists' choices of course. 

This is a lesson that I feel needs to be employed more often, especially in today's world. When, for instance, we see so many teenagers decide they want to live under the harsh regime of ISIS-- maybe start looking at the grievances they have that caused them to make those choices. Many are probably Luke Castellans -- angry at society and manipulated by a force with different plans. 

Now, to go back to reading Magnus Chase. Holy crap, it's so good.