Recent events have forced me to release this article, which I started (and abandoned) in November and was appropriately named “Kino(vember) Night in Kanada” That original article was born from my then recent acquisition of a 4k Blu-Ray player, and the start of a modest film collection. I had therefore watched a bunch of movies in November, and thought to make an article about that. Life caught up and I didn't have time to finish it. Now is the time though, with the remains of this article, and the subsequent review of Wake Up Dead Man, which we will talk about at the end of this article. So, we start with the original article, where I review movies I saw after I bought a physical copy of them.

Godzilla Minus One

I have seen this movie thrice now, and the more I watch it, the less I like it. I know it's a heresy in the Godzilla community to not like this movie, but it is what it is. The first time I saw it in the theatres, I already had given it a fairly positive albeit luke-warm review. With the novelty wearing out, it's just less appealing of a movie to me.

The acting's over the topness, is a bit more jarring with each rewatch, and some of the scenes are so dramatic and over the top that it stretches the limits of believability. The choppy pace is more visible and disruptive. The way godzilla moves is also super robotic which doesn't really makes sense with his design. Overall, I don't find this Godzilla (the monster) that internally consistent; why does it just go back to the sea after having destroy Ginza and come back? Why not just continue until all of Tokyo is rased?

Another fault in the movie, which is the movie actually is blameless about, is that it was released after Shin Godzilla. We had already seen a godzilla vs japan with Shin. The only differentiating part is the post-WWII setting, and I don't think they did anything super-duper interesting with that godzilla-wise. We need the new Toho Godzillas to fight other monsters, it's like half of the appeal of the Godzilla franchise. Godzilla Minus Zero (yes it's the official title of the sequel) better have another monster. We have not seen any takes from Toho on the classic Godzilla enemies since the release of Godzilla Final Wars in 2004!

On the character front, I wouldn't have minded a bit more character development, and more development in the characters' relationships.

Despite all of my complaining, it's still undeniably a good movie. The above is just the flaws that get exacerbated on multiple rewatches. All the good things I said about the movie in my previous review stand.

Previous, slightly edited, review right after seeing it in the theatres in 2023:

Not quite sure if I would call it kino, but it's a good movie. However clumsy, Shin Godzilla still has more merit to the Toho kino crown.  This last movie however does not have to blush on the theme fronts, and addresses some pretty interesting ones, due to it being set right after WWII. Those themes are also pretty original — at least from a westoïd perspective. Acting is a bit over the tops as expected, but it's not so jarring that it takes you out of the plot. Speaking of plot, the human section is not only decent, but actually interesting, I was actually made to care about the different characters. I even managed to be fooled: the ultimate plot twist is setup in a really obvious manner and I saw it coming a mile away. Or did I? Well yes, but actually no. [SPOILER] The outcome is the same, but the process was different and much better for two character arcs. [SPOILER] On the monster side, we stick to the classics; simple but effective. Godzilla's design works, and his breath attack is fucking dope, it's honesty 90% as hype as that bomb in the star wars prequelle (yk what I'm talking about). Now on to the negative; CGI can be a bit hit or miss, I thought japan had caught up as I was pleasantly surprised with Shin Godzilla's offering. There was really only one scene where I was like “wow that's rough”. And although they are not awful, the water effects/interactions with Godzilla is nowhere near what we saw in the recent Godzilla vs King Kong, which water effect really impressed me at the time. [SPOILER] Finally, other than the ending, there is only one Godzilla mass destruction scene, which at the very least one too little. [SPOILER] Cinematography was good, but nothing spectacular jumped at me. The music is pretty good here, but it mostly sticks with the classic safe vibe for Godzilla tracks. No iconic “Who will know” or “Persecution of the Masses” here. Overall this movie does everything well, and even some things great. As far as Godzilla movies go, it's at the top of the basket for me.

Amadeus

I have seen this movie easily 20-30times, and two thirds of those were during one summer. When I was a kid, during the summer vacations, my family used to drive to the italian alps, and we would usually spend almost a month on top of one of the mountain there. Our time was mostly filled with hikes, at a rhythm of one every 2-3 days. There was no internet, and with this being in the german speaking part of the italian part of the alps (you've read this correctly), cable was all but understandable to us. Therefore, we would usually bring a DVD player and only a couple of DVDs, that we would watch on repeat for the month, to the delight of my parents, I'm sure. One summer, we brought Amadeus and Big Fish. We've watched both almost every day. I haven't really watched or thought about it since, easily 12-13 years ago, but when Nick mentioned it a couple month ago, my memories of it suddenly resurfaced.

This movie is absolutely goated. What a fine choice for us to have a hyperfixation on that summer. The music is just bangers after bangers after banger, the sets look awesome, the costumes look awesome. The performances are amazing and the story great. I loved Salieri, what a portrayal of the pure essence of a hater. I also loved how somehow he would get super lucky with stuff happening in the movie, and would immediately incorporate that lucky stuff in his despicable schemes.

If I had to find one fault with the movie and the 4k remaster, it's that the audio dynamics is too wide; if you turn up the volume to hear the dialogues, the music will be blasting, and if you turn down the volume because of the music, you will not hear any of the dialogues.

Bladerunner

I had watched Bladerunner once before, the director's cut, and I thought it was good. Upon rewatch while I appreciate how maybe ground-breaking it was at the time, I found it a bit timid. While the cinematography is great, in terms of story, it's actually pretty generic. It is also very dated. The very young 20 year old ending up with the 40 year old dude for ? reason. Don't forget the sexual assault and coercion scene. The dialogue also feels pretty dated, honestly everything that relates to characters interacting with each other or being on screen. It feels pretty jarring for a movie set in the distant future of *checks notes* the year 2019 to feel that old in this regard.

Loved the eye replicant effect, and the ending monologue. The themes are still relevant and fairly well explored. I do not understand the debate around Deckard being a replicant or not, and people acting as if Deckard not being a human ruins the movie. I went into the movie thinking Deckard was a replicant and I found nothing in my viewing that contradicted that. Also I find that Deckard being a replicant is better in terms of narrative than him being a human, as otherwise it such a generic message of “actually the robots are more human than the humans themselves!!1!!!!1!”.

Please crucify me now.

Bladerunner 2049

I've tried to watch Bladerunner 2049 again and didn't even make it halfway through (to be fair it was in the plane a couple of years ago). I don't know what happened then, because this movie is awesome. I did get baited by the “of course the main character is the chosen one that everybody wants to get their hands on” and liked the switcheroo.

Colours and visuals, everything was great — Denis was really just getting his tools ready for Dune. There are so many interesting an beautiful shots. The themes are very interesting and I did love Ryan Gosling as the main protagonist. His relationship with his AI chatbot girl is very reminiscent of the movie “Her” (I've never seen it). I found his investigation more engaging and easier to follow that Deckard's. The only main negative point of the movie is that they dragged Harrison Ford from wherever he was to play in this movie, and he doesn't want to. Hell, even in the first one he looked like he didn't want to be there. Leave grandpa alone.

Shin Godzilla x2

“surprisingly engaging” – Elisa “oh, the SDF is still called the SDF?” – Bennet “damn, if I ever get a girlfriend that looks like her [talking about japanese lead actress], you know I'm compromised” – Spencer

I saw Shin Godzilla twice in November, first when I received the 4k blu-ray, and then 4 days later because Spencer wanted to see it, and so we watched it all together with Tetyana, Elisa, Bennet and Spencer.

I still loved it as much, it looks awesome although the VFX does look a bit rough until Godzilla gets to its fourth form. There's also a minor pacing issue with the movie, with the tension building all the way up and then releasing, but we still have a quarter of the movie left. Here's a professional rendition of the tension:

Bennet did point out something that is very apparent, but I had just glanced over during my viewing, which is the amount of SDF (the japanese army) dickriding. The movie showcase all the cool toys that the army has, they make plans to stop Godzilla and are discipline, risk their lives... It is very obvious, but I think I missed it because I'm used to ignoring the amount of military propaganda in us movies, which is omnipresent.

The deleted scenes + outtakes were really cool to have, another win for the owners of physical media. I already talked about this movie in Kino Nights in/above Canada so I won't really say more.

Dune

Peak. Denis Villeneuve my goat. Looks awesome, sounds awesome.

This is the end of the previous article, and I didn't really watch any more movies (other than the Grinch which I had already seen a handful of times), but here they are:

Frankenstein

Designs and shit interesting, cinematography not super interesting, especially the lighting which I found bland. I don't think the story was an improvement on Mary Shelley's work which I had read recently. Dialogues were ok. The wolf scene was awesome on its own but is super inconsistent with the tone and vibe of the movie. Kinda disappointed overall

On to the main course:

Wake Up Dead Man

I had already said I liked glass onion better than knives out in a previous movie article Kino Nights in/above Canada. After seeing this, I just posted my ranking of the knives out movies, from my favourite to my least favourite. I didn't expect it to stir that many reactions. Here's a chronological retelling of the events that happened between the evening of Feb 2nd and the morning of Feb 3rd:

21:20:45 – I finish Wake Up Dead Man with Tetyana, I turn to her and tell her “it's my least favourite out of the three movies, like it's not bad, but I liked the others more”

21:26:18 – I make this post on the cafe, with my ranking of the Knives Out movies, from my favourite to least favourite:

21:41:46 – Kaitlyn reacts to the post and posts her own ranking:

22:04:29 – Alex replies to the original post with the correct ranking, so far none of the rankings are the same:

22:06:03 – Elisa reacts to the post and asks if we can't all agree that the movies are all good (I think we all agree about that, be we each have our favourite):

22:07:38 – Bennet Blanc sets up a trap, replying to Kaitlyn's comment:

22:20:38 – Kaitlyn adds some cheese to the trap by replying to Bennet Blanc's post:

23:39:19 – Nick reacts to the post and accuses my original post of being stinky “french cheese” bait (the fool, does he not know that a cheese's taste is inversely proportional to its stench?)

8:13:35 – Spencer reacts to the post

8:32:52 – Noah reacts and replies to the post with the sanest reply of all:

15:06:06 – Jaeg reacts and replies to the post also accusing it to be bait:

[in an american southern accent, with infinite drip] We now have all the pieces of the puzzle... but I do not know yet who they fit together... Actually, I don't think there's even a puzzle at all here, there's no mystery... or maybe, the mystery was the friends we lost along the way...

Are my preferences so abhorrent that the expression of my taste has to be “bait”? Also what does that mean, how can it be bait? What would I be baiting? For people to give me their ranking of favourite to least favourite Knives Out movies? oh no fostering conversation on the cafe. I'm crashing out rn, I'm a tax-paying card-carrying citizen of crashout city and I wear it on my sleeves. Was accusing me of bait a bait in itself? If so, I have pushed away the little stick holding the trap open, let the box fall and I'm comfy in my little wooden enclosure, delecting myself with 'stinky french' cheese.

Alrighty, dramatic crash out out of the way, I'll briefly explain why I like this movie less than the other entries in the franchise.

I thought the mystery was way less fun than the previous two movies and more random. The story was better in the beginning than both movies, but the way it's told less interesting than in the second movie. In terms of setting, I also found it less appealing than the second movie, but better than the first (the third and first are extremely similar to me). I thought the secondary characters were super underdeveloped here, where they had been pretty well fleshed out in the second movie after being inexistent in the first. The main “main characters” were really excellent here (the priest and monsignor) but I lament the fact that I cannot count Benoît Blanc amongst them. Benoît Blanc being less present and having little agency was something they had addressed in the second movie but they seem to have sinned again here. The main antagonist kinda sucks and her motivations also suck. The secondary antagonists also suck. The cinematography is good, more mature than first one and better than the second one. The costumes and outfits were way less fun here.

My vision of the Knives out movies is as good movies that are really fun, like Bullet Train which I found awesome (although the Knives Outs are definitely more restrained). I think this one took itself a bit too seriously, and could not have topped how fun the second one is. And this is why my favourite Knives Out Movie is the second one despite its ending, my second favourite the first one due to its charm, and my least favourite one this third one.

I hope you have had as much fun reading this crash out as I have had writing it. Please do remember that it's not that deep.

Thank you for reading my logorrhea Eddie – Award winning author

New year, new book review! I have to say that I’m continually impressed by Eddie for carrying the Reading Roundup torch, and this year I’d like to get back in touch with my roots. I will say that most of the synopses have been copied directly from Goodreads or other sources, with minimal changes by me. Yes, I’m a fraud. >.<

This month I read 5 ebooks and 1 eaudiobook from the library, and 2 epubs, totaling to 8 books.

The numbers as they stand as of January 2026:

Total Reading Goal: 8/100 Canada Reads: 1/5 (when the 2026 Canada reads were announced I was delighted to find out that I’ve actually already read one of them; you cannot imagine how smug I feel). Nonfiction Goal: 0/12 TPL Reading Challenge: ?/? [It hasn’t yet been announced]

Dishonourable Mentions:

Antimatter Blues by Edward Ashton (Mickey7 #2)

Synopsis: Summer has come to Niflheim. The lichens are growing, the six-winged bat-things are chirping, and much to his own surprise, Mickey Barnes is still alive―that last part thanks almost entirely to the fact that Commander Marshall believes that the colony’s creeper neighbors are holding an antimatter bomb, and that Mickey is the only one who’s keeping them from using it. Mickey’s just another colonist now. Instead of cleaning out the reactor core, he spends his time these days cleaning out the rabbit hutches. It’s not a bad life.

It’s not going to last.

It may be sunny now, but winter is coming. The antimatter that fuels the colony is running low, and Marshall wants his bomb back. If Mickey agrees to retrieve it, he’ll be giving up the only thing that’s kept his head off of the chopping block. If he refuses, he might doom the entire colony. Meanwhile, the creepers have their own worries, and they’re not going to surrender the bomb without getting something in return. Once again, Mickey finds the fate of two species resting in his hands. If something goes wrong this time, though, he won’t be coming back.

My thoughts: Because of the recently released movie, I read the first book in the series (Mickey7 aka Mickey17), and thought it was pretty okay, if rather short. So I picked up the next book to try it. Reader, I forgot how much Mickey’s life just sucks. He has no job, slashed rations, his boss hates him, his friends and girlfriend don’t particularly seem to like him, and he is perpetually on the verge of contractually-obligated death. Even worse, he’s not a particularly compelling character to read about. I won’t say that he has zero agency, but he doesn’t have all that much, and I just don’t find him a particularly enjoyable character to read about. Every year I try to give myself permission to DNF more books, and maybe this is the year I listen to myself.

You might like this book if: your life also sucks so much and you kind of also suck

The Real Reviews

People We Meet on Vacation by Emily Henry

Synopsis: “Poppy and Alex. Alex and Poppy. They have nothing in common. She's a wild child; he wears khakis. She has insatiable wanderlust; he prefers to stay home with a book. And somehow, ever since a fateful car share home from college many years ago, they are the very best of friends. For most of the year they live far apart—she's in New York City, and he's in their small hometown—but every summer, for a decade, they have taken one glorious week of vacation together.

Until two years ago, when they ruined everything. They haven't spoken since.

Poppy has everything she should want, but she's stuck in a rut. When someone asks when she was last truly happy, she knows, without a doubt, it was on that ill-fated, final trip with Alex. And so, she decides to convince her best friend to take one more vacation together—lay everything on the table, make it all right. Miraculously, he agrees.

Now she has a week to fix everything. If only she can get around the one big truth that has always stood quietly in the middle of their seemingly perfect relationship. What could possibly go wrong?”

My thoughts: Starting the year off strong! I have actually read this book before but it was before I started writing Reading Roundups or using Storygraph, so I’m not going to count it as a re-read. I also didn’t remember much about this book at all, so I kind of did feel like I was reading it for the first time. And I had to suffer through the whole movie, meaning that I’ve earned the right to include it on my list of the year. This book was both better and worse than I remembered. Better, because the friendship between Poppy and Alex had a solid foundation, and their friendship was very strong and full of yearning. Worse, because the third act conflict felt so shoehorned into the very end. Alex confronts Poppy about only being able to commit to him when they’re on vacation, and not willing to do so during real life. Because he said this right before he got on a plane (without Poppy) they immediately had to separate and were not really able to talk about this. I also think that Alex was kind of unfair, because at this point their issue was more that they would have been in a long distance relationship, instead of a relationship where one partner has commitment issues. I also think it was clear that Poppy was genuinely unhappy with her life and was looking to make a real change; she obviously was not attracted to Alex just because they were on vacation. Overall the book was charming, and I appreciated it.

Rating: 4/5 stone bear statues that cost $21 000 but really “speak to me”

Peace Talks (Dresden Files #16) by Jim Butcher

Synopsis: When the Supernatural nations of the world meet up to negotiate an end to ongoing hostilities, Harry Dresden, Chicago’s only professional wizard, joins the White Council’s security team to make sure the talks stay civil. But when his brother Thomas, a white court vampire, is caught trying to assassinate the leader of the Svartalves, Harry is torn between shifting alliances. If he doesn’t rescue Thomas, his brother will be rightfully executed. But if he does, he will have betrayed the Svartalves, whom he greatly depends on, and are fellow signatories of the Accords.

My thoughts: Another year, another book in the Dresden files. OG readers of this blog will remember when Bennet and I started reading this series back in 2023. 16 books later, and we are still not done. This book in particular was not one of my favourites. It wasn’t bad, per say, but it did have strong “nothing ever happens” energy. We didn’t even get to the actual peace talks, which ostensibly should be the most important part of the book, since it’s the literal title, because Harry was too busy faffing around and also dealing with Thomas. We don’t know why Thomas acted so out of character and attempted the assassination in the first place. When Thomas finally was rescued, the peace talks were just about to begin when they were completely interrupted by the titan Ethniu, who will destroy the entire city of Chicago if all of the Accord signatories don’t immediately ally with her. Obviously they don’t, and then everyone starts planning on how to save the city (which I will admit that I loved), and then the book ended. Even with all of my complaints, I think it’s really cool how at this point in the series, everything is about the long game. The entire plot of the previous book, Skin Game, was to acquire an artifact that will likely have critical importance for the next book, Battle Ground. I have already started to read Battle Ground, and I am somewhat enjoying it, but I will be glad when we have made it to the end of this marathon. An 18 book series (with more still to be published) is a challenge even for someone like your girl.

Rating: 4/5 bad cases of conjuritis (I thought only teenagers got conjuritis)

The Grimoire Grammar School Parent Teacher Association by Caitlyn Rozakis

Synopsis: When Vivian’s kindergartner, Aria, gets bitten by a werewolf, she is rapidly inducted into the hidden community of magical schools. Reeling from their sudden move, Vivian finds herself having to pick the right sacrificial dagger for Aria, keep stocked up on chew toys and play PTA politics with sirens and chthonic nymphs and people who literally can set her hair on fire.

As Vivian careens from hellhounds in the school corridors and demons at the talent show, she races to keep up with all the arcane secrets of her new society – shops only accessible by magic portal, the brutal Trials to enter high school, and the eternal inferno that is the parents’ WhatsApp group.

And looming over everything is a prophecy of doom that sounds suspiciously like it’s about Aria. Vivian might be facing the end of days, just as soon as she can get her daughter dressed and out of the door…

My thoughts: This was a cute book. I wouldn’t say that it was cozy, but it was certainly cozy-adjacent. Even though it’s set in a fantasy town, it’s mostly about Vivian’s struggles to solo parent her daughter (while her husband works long hours in the city) and adapt to the new society as a mortal who knows nothing about it. I think it could be a good metaphor for families that have children with disabilities, or immigrant ESL families, both of whom often struggle to navigate systems and new cultural norms. (It should be noted that the book is actually poking fun at exclusive private schools, and their overly-rigerous admission policies). Vivian and her husband were able to talk everything out at the end, which was good, and the overall story had a happy ending, which was great. I didn’t actually mind the toxic interpersonal dynamics of Vivian’s “friends” (whom she rightly later abandons), but the whole prophecy plotline felt so cliche, so I’m glad the book poked fun at the trope a bit.

Rating: 3/5 science fair projects that no one would rightly believe that a kindergartener could do by themselves.

The Running Man by Stephen King writing as Richard Bachman

Synopsis: It was the ultimate death game in a nightmare future America. The year is 2025 and reality TV has grown to the point where people are willing to wager their lives for a chance at a billion-dollar jackpot. Ben Richards is desperate—he needs money to treat his daughter’s illness. His last chance is entering a game show called The Running Man where the goal is to avoid capture by Hunters who are employed to kill him. Surviving this month-long chase is another issue when everyone else on the planet is watching—and willing to turn him in for the reward.

Each night all Americans tune in to watch. So far, the record for survival is only eight days. Can Ben Richards beat the brutal odds, beat the rigged game, beat the entire savage system? He’s betting his life that he can…

My thoughts: I thought this book was great. It was a dystopia that felt very possible, and the fact that it took place in 2025 had me a bit nervous. I initially picked this up because a movie adaptation was released recently, and I wanted to see what all of the fuss is about. I don’t think I will watch the movie because I’m not a fan of the plot changes that they made, since I actually really like how the book was structured, as well as how it ended quite poetically. Just another thing that is different in a post-9/11 world. A very gritty read, but I would recommend it.

Rating: 4/5 free-vees that are always on… because they’re free…

The Three Body Problem by Cixin Liu

Synopsis: This book defies description, so I won’t even try.

My thoughts: I already said this at book club. TLDR; I didn’t really like it, but if we had read it in the original Chinese it probably would have slapped at least a bit more.

Rating: 3/5 film photos with numbers counting down along the edges in a sinister way (this never comes up again btw)

The Oxford Soju Club by Jinwoo Park

Synopsis: When North Korean spymaster Doha Kim is mysteriously killed in Oxford, his protege, Yohan Kim, chases the only breadcrumb given to him in Doha’s last breath: “Soju Club, Dr. Ryu.” In the meantime, a Korean American CIA agent , Yunah Choi, races to salvage her investigation of the North Korean spy cell in the aftermath of the assassination. At the centre of it all is the Soju Club, the only Korean restaurant in Oxford, owned by Jihoon Lim, an immigrant from Seoul in search of a new life after suffering a tragedy. As different factions move in with their own agendas, their fates become entangled, resulting in a bitter struggle that will determine whose truth will triumph. Oxford Soju Club weaves a tale of how immigrants in the Korean diaspora are forced to create identities to survive, and how in the end, they must shed those masks and seek their true selves.

My thoughts: I thought this book was cool conceptually, but I found the pacing to be super weird. It felt like the book ended very abruptly, and I was expecting a lot more to happen. I appreciated how the author structured the chapters; each one was divided into three parts, and covered both the current action and a flashback scene for a specific character. Instead of being specifically named, the sections were called “The Northerner/The Southerner/The American” and then they later switch to “The Exiled/[two more things that I don’t remember ahhh]. It was a really cool exploration of Korean identity, and what it means to be Korean. Despite all of the action, I did find it to be a bit slow (I get that stuff was happening but I just wasn’t super engaged in it, if that makes sense).

Rating: 3/5 bottles of soju that have exactly seven shots, because you can’t ever evenly share it so you’ll always have to order another bottle

Original Sins by Erin Young (Riley Fisher #2)

Synopsis: It's a brutal winter in Des Moines, Iowa, and the city is gripped by fear. A serial attacker known as the Sin Eater is stalking women and has just struck again. It's a tough time and a tough place for Riley Fisher, a former small-town sergeant, to be reporting for duty as an FBI agent on her first assignment.

Teamed with a man she's not sure she can trust and struggling to prove herself – while fighting the pull of her old life and family dramas – Riley is tasked with investigating a vicious death threat against the newly elected female state governor. Gradually, she traces a disturbing connection between this case and the hunt for the Sin Eater. Through snow, ice, violence and lies, Riley Fisher is drawn towards a terrifying revelation.

My thoughts: I picked up this book because I was specifically looking for a dark, psychological thriller about serial killers. In effect, I wanted to read a book that felt exactly like an episode of Criminal Minds. Because of this specific craving, I just picked up the first book that really felt like it matched that vibe, meaning that I accidentally picked up the second book in a series. I ultimately decided not to pivot towards the first book just because it didn’t quite fit the bill, and I suspected I wouldn’t be interested enough to bother completing the series (I was right). Original Sins itself was okay, pretty decent for what I was looking for, but not something I would go back to again. It’s set during mid COVID which makes it feel pretty dated. A large part of the book was framed in terms of feminism/violence against women, and I won’t say that it was out of place or jarring, but it felt strange in a way that I can’t put my finger on. I did think that the serial killer POV was well done, because it still left surprises to uncover as the book went on.

Rating: 3/5 old fashioned hotel key tags that were deliberately planted at the scene of the crime…

The Adventures of Amina al-Sirafi by Shannon Chakraborty

Synopsis: Amina al-Sirafi should be content. After a storied and scandalous career as one of the Indian Ocean’s most notorious pirates, she’s survived backstabbing rogues, vengeful merchant princes, several husbands, and one actual demon to retire peacefully with her family to a life of piety, motherhood, and absolutely nothing that hints of the supernatural.

But when she’s tracked down by the obscenely wealthy mother of a former crewman, she’s offered a job no bandit could refuse: retrieve her comrade’s kidnapped daughter for a kingly sum. The chance to have one last adventure with her crew, do right by an old friend, and win a fortune that will secure her family’s future forever? It seems like such an obvious choice that it must be God’s will.

Yet the deeper Amina dives, the more it becomes alarmingly clear there’s more to this job, and the girl’s disappearance, than she was led to believe. For there’s always risk in wanting to become a legend, to seize one last chance at glory, to savor just a bit more power…and the price might be your very soul.

My thoughts: I am definitely glad that I picked up this book. It was an epic pirate adventure tale, complete with fantasy and magical artifacts (but not in a way that felt forced). I think the setting and the placement of the book was really interesting: the characters travelled around the medieval Arabian sea, and stopped in a variety of countries, including Somalia and Yemen. The main character Amina al-Sirafi is a Yemeni Muslim, but the characters around her represent a huge swath of cultures and religions, and it made for a very rich setting. The book is also stylized as a scribe copying down Amina’s adventures as she was telling them, and the interactions between Amina and the scribe, as well as the scribe’s own interjections, were pretty funny. I think the author could have leaned on the scribe even a bit more. This book is long and it definitely feels long just because so much is happening; it was shocked when we had reached what seemed to be the main destination of the final climax and the book was barely 50% finished. The author seems to have set herself up for a quintology, although I wouldn’t be surprised if there’s a paradigm change and the pacing ends up being very different. I will, however, definitely be looking out for book 2 when it drops later this spring.

Rating: 4/5 humanoid parrot creatures that are obsessed with order, law, and justice (in that order)

(2026 Preamble: I wrote a majority of this article almost exactly a year ago having been inspired by Eddie's Humble Purge series. It would've functioned as a video game version of the reading roundups people post. I kinda got stuck writing the last part of it for reasons that will hopefully become self evident, so it was left on the backburner for some time. Looking over it now I found it interesting as a time capsule of a fragment of where I was at back then. So I cleaned it up a little and added what could be construed as “author's commentary”. To differentiate between the old and new bits I will stylize my addendums in the same way as you are seeing this paragraph now.)

In light of Eddie's recent printhouse contribution I've been inspired to take a slightly more structured approach to which games I play. The most notable difference is jotting down my thoughts as soon as I finish one and cataloguing it somewhere. I've been doing this for the last few games I've played recently, and I figured it would also be fitting to write up my thoughts more clearly here for everyone to enjoy. I haven't played these games entirely in this month, but I have finished them all this month.

(Amusingly, while the article in question I was referencing is no longer recent, the current most recent Eddie article, “The Humble Purge Awards”, did also spurn me back to this unfinished article. Having held off on posting this for a while I can kind of write a dialogue with myself from last year. I didn't really end up keeping with the cataloguing habit, though I do still sort of have a backlog thingy floating in my notes. I am not adhering to it as much as I am just jotting things down so I can check them out later.)

Each of these function as sort of mini reviews. As much as I wish I could be as precise and eloquent as Jimmy McGee, I at least hope that they are interesting to read. The last time I did a big list of games type article I got the impression that it gets kinda grating after a while, so I've included links for you to jump to different sections. Feel free to break up reading this into little chunks.

(Something I touch on here that I think I still struggle with here is how I don't really have a lot of confidence in my writing. I compare myself to probably one of the best video game analysts I have ever seen and lament that my work will probably not match his quality. I think there's also an element of shame in the fact that I struggle to write at length on subjects that aren't video games, and my target of comparison here also does generally centre his work around the same topic. However, in his case he executes his ideas so well they often are profound in a way that applies to more than 'just video games'. Even a year later I don't think these feelings about myself have changed very much.)

Jump to section:

• Portal 2
• Portal Stories: Mel
• Felvidek
• Laika: Aged Through Blood
• Venba

Portal 2

You play as Chell, a woman trapped indefinitely inside a deep underground scientific facility known as “Aperture Science”. You're awakened by Wheatley, a stupid, British, spherical robot who presents himself as your only ticket to escape this withering and decaying complex. Armed with a gun that can create portals you might find a way out to your freedom.

One of the all time greats, played most of it through in 2016 but never rolled credits on it for some reason. There are many games I've started but never finished, but I felt as though this one was the worst offender. I'm glad I did get back to it though because despite over a decade of technological and artistic advancements in the games industry there still isn't anything quite like it.

To analyze each aspect of this game on its own would be doing a disservice. While each pillar of this game supports this experience very strongly, I truly believe the whole is greater than the sum of its parts. While I could talk at length about each part, the point that should not go overlooked is the writing. It's rare that a game has an actually engaging cast of characters, but it's clear that Valve stands head and shoulders above the competition in terms of writing dialogue that you actually want to listen to. They knew this very well, as more often than not your reward for completing a puzzle is getting to listen to the characters react either to you or the situation at hand. These exaggerated characters in this ridiculous story is truly a treat, and becomes the ribbon that ties every aspect of this game into a nice present.

🌔🌔🌔🌔🌔

(I don't think I have much more I want to add to many of these game reviews themselves. I haven't played any of these games again so the only thing that might change is just what I remember about them one year later. It's interesting that the first game on this list connects to the idea of returning to unfinished business. The parallel here is purely coincidental but kind of poetic the way that lined up.)

Portal Stories: Mel

As great as Portal 2 was, taking a massive break halfway into the game only to finish it years later left me wanting more. Not to fear however, as Portal 2 is also known for its fully featured community created mods which often act as substitute campaigns. With new sets of levels, sometimes new mechanics, new voice acted characters, and the best of them wrap it all in an original story to boot. All of this (usually) available at the price of free! The biggest challenge mods like these would face however is a comparison to the game they derive themselves from, can a mod truly match or surpass the base Portal 2 experience?

Not quite but it is shockingly close. As a community made mod available for free I will lightly acknowledge its shortcomings and celebrate its achievements. The art and music was very good, the portal gun redesign really sets it apart as its own experience while still maintaining the visual language cultivated in the original game, I especially like the little paperclip on one of the prongs.

I also quite enjoyed the levels. That being said, I came out of this mod with a much greater appreciation of Valve's game development philosophy of extremely thorough playtesting. The level of challenge was an upward slope, which in theory is what you want but in practice it becomes pretty grueling towards the end as you do several hard puzzles in succession. There was also a spot early on where you would get softlocked if you messed a puzzle up which was quite frustrating.

The story and voice acting was fine enough. I can't really blame them for not matching Valve's excellent writing team but credit where credit is due, I didn't hate it. I actually quite liked the new antagonist and especially the final boss fight against it. It was quite creative and was definitely more fun than Portal 1's boss fight.

Despite a couple rough patches, I still found myself repeatedly coming back to this mod, which is definitely an indication of its quality. Fundamentally it filled the exact niche I wanted it to, a little more Portal 2 for me to enjoy.

⚛️⚛️⚛️

(What's intriguing here is the way that Portal Mel stacks up against Portal 2 kinda mirrors how I stack up against my own standards in terms of writing. I acknowledge the shortcomings of the mod, but I also note that it isn't realistic to expect it to be a real competitor given the difference between all of Valve software, and a couple modders. I don't really show myself that same level of consideration it seems...)

Felvidek

You play as Pavol, an alcoholic knight in 15th Century Slovakia. Your drunk ass is dragged around by your local Catholic priest Matej as you both are tasked by the local lord to make sure the region is free from Ottoman presence. Hopefully on the way you find your wife who walked off at some point because you were drinking too much.

I often recommend games to another printhouse reader, some of them have managed to make their way to his personal favourites. It's not often that this goes the other way, but if any game deserves to be highlighted it's this one.

I'm not typically a fan of JRPGs, but I'm not completely averse to the genre. A couple of years ago I stumbled on a quirky, short little game called Hylics with a very unique presentation. While Felvidek bears many surface level similarities to Hylics, it doesn't feel like a hollow clone in the slightest. Visually the game does a lot with a little, the limited colour palette, chunky pixels and large sprites giving it this class textbook photocopy vibe. As well as the sporadic low poly cutscene really helps set the unique visual style that this game has.

Part of my enjoyment with the game definitely comes from its intentional deviations from what might be considered the “standard JRPG formula”. Felvidek does away with the typical experience grind found in most RPGs. Your equipment is what determines your strength, and there are only a handful of upgrades. This keeps the game moving through the entire runtime which was very enjoyable. Also unlike many JRPGs which frequently last for tens, if not hundreds of hours, Felvidek is only about 4 hours long. This refreshing brevity is great for getting a nice sampling of the experience without overstaying its welcome.

(I feel the need to note that the concept of 'gear based progression' is not particularly rare in RPGs. It certainly contributes to the short runtime of the game, but it isn't necessarily true to say this is the only game that does this. I am just not very familiar with the genre.)

The biggest strength of this game however is its tone. The world of Felvidek is rather bleak, but the acknowledgement of this is placid. The characters face horrors with a grim smile and a jovial joke, because what else is one to do when faced with things beyond their comprehension? Beneath the Shakespearian prose is a genuinely very funny game that speaks of tragedy and absurdity in the same breath. The scene that best illustrates this is when an otherworldly creature crawls in through Pavol's bedroom window, stirring him from his drunken slumber. His immediate response to seeing this monstrous thing standing over him... is to wordlessly throw the closest empty bottle he has at its head.

🌞🌞🌞🌞🌞

(Looking back on this now I think the parts of this game that still stick with me are the slivers of it that references parts of my heritage. There's one joke about how Orthodox priests are able to have wives and children, which I found funny as a Coptic Orthodox christian. There's another running joke about this 'qahwa' craze tearing through this little eastern European land. Something which I immediately clocked in as the Arabic word for 'coffee'. I'll talk more about this at the end, but I have some deep regrets about not tuning into this part of my life more over the last year.)

Laika: Aged Through Blood

(TW: Violence towards children)

You play as Laika, a coyote mother who roams the sandy wastelands on her bone motorcycle and a revolver at her side. When your daughter's best friend, Poochie, is brutally murdered and crucified by the encroaching Bird army, his father, Jakob embarks on a quest for vengeance in retribution for the death of his son. You chase after him because he took your revolver to do it. So begins the spiral of blood and pain as the increasingly militant birds attempt to wipe out you and your tiny band of mammalian survivors.

What first grabbed my attention about this game was its very slick presentation. The world of Laika is beautifully rendered in this dusty yet simultaneously vibrant art style. The lovingly hand-drawn vistas and fully animated characters all come together to form a visual repertoire that is both distinct and very well executed. Interspersed throughout the game are also brief fully animated cutscenes which serve to punctuate specific moments, typically at the end of boss fights. It's clear there has been a lot of thought and care put into the look of this game, and it shows, the aesthetic identity of this game is proudly announced to your eyes, and sticks in my brain.

One I got past the eye candy, the second most prominent aspect of this game is clear. Laika bills itself as a “motorvania” and that's a fairly accurate summarization of the gameplay. When watching trailers of this game I was brought back to playing Trials Evolution on my Xbox 360. What Laika does differently however, is lessen the physics sandbox aspect of a 2d motorbike game and add in a seasoning of twitch reaction gameplay by making it a shooter. The momentum needed to clear jumps coupled with the backflip mechanic that reloads your weapons creates a sandbox where these two disparate mechanics flow beautifully together.

That being said while the game certainly has its “motor” it is somewhat lacking in the “vania”. One would expect a large world to explore gated by progression checks that you would come back later to with enhanced mobility. A typical metroidvania will present walls you can't climb up, or gaps you can't jump across prompting you to come back later when you are stronger and see what you missed. While Laika does do this, there's really only two major gates you are presented with. You pass the first one fairly early in the game, and you pass the second one right before the end. So for roughly 80% of your time with it, you are getting around the same as you were before. Riding around on your motorbike is very enjoyable, so this isn't really the biggest knock against the experience. Though, it does feel like there's something missing when you're given a grappling hook and the only thing you ever use it for is to do a sidequest.

The elements of Laika range from exceptional to middling, but the single biggest detriment I can point to is the boss fights. Laika's combat is highly lethal for the most part, all regular enemies die in one hit, as does Laika herself. That being said, it is only natural for a big hulking enemy to not die in one shot from a pistol. However, these fights are also drawn out further with phases where you can't hit the boss at all. Sometimes this is in the form of a driving section, sometimes it's in the form of you just standing there waiting for the boss to show up again for you to attack them. These things on their own are fine, but in conjunction with the fact that one mistake always sends you back to the very beginning of the fight culminates into a battle that does not test your capabilities in any way other than your patience. I feel like on some level this was known to the developers because the very final boss fight of the game was my favourite largely because its one continuous, fluid battle.

Aside from my nitpicks, the game is really quite good. The soundtrack is another major highlight. The acoustic soundscape and soft vocals contribute heavily to the feeling of this melancholic wasteland. I have caught myself on several occasions humming the vocals from certain tracks like “Trust Them” and “My Destiny”. I've never heard of the artist before but Beícoli absolutely nailed it. I also quite liked the integration of the artist into the game world itself lends a more diegetic tone to the music in the game. Especially how you collect cassette tapes to expand the soundtrack as you play the game. In fact the in-world character that the artist embodies becomes a major thematic plot point in the story of the game.

Speaking of plot, the story of this game was quite shocking, in multiple interpretations of that word. For a game that revolves around cute anthropomorphic characters I was really caught off guard by how grim the story is. Your efforts consistently prove to be futile, and the war that you fight as a single soldier is only very temporarily successful. Moreover, the game also just has really shocking moments. The odd sidequest or story beat has the possibility of just being genuinely awful, but what is one to expect when the game starts the way it did.

I didn't expect to have said as much as I did about this game, but something like this prompts you to recall it in its entirety. I respect the developer's commitment to their artistic vision, but such specialization leaves it with more of a niche appeal. The game definitely isn't for everyone, but I can certainly say that there is nothing else like it.

🦴🦴🦴🦴

(One of my main nitpicks about Laika is that despite being a game where you drive a motorbike, your character's mobility doesn't shift from where it starts for a majority of your playtime. I kinda feel that stagnation in me, I am not really a goal oriented person, but it's hard to shake the feeling that I myself haven't shifted that far from last year. Stuck having done an extra year of a Master's degree. Stuck in Kingston. Stuck having failed to achieve one of the main goals I set for myself at the beginning...)

Venba

You play as Venba, a Tamil woman who moves to Toronto in an attempt to start a new life there with her husband. Follow along as she faces the challenges of immigrating to an unfamiliar place, raises a child and most of all, cooks dinner for her family every night.

Never before have I had a game so perfectly mirror back aspects of my life that even I wasn't fully aware of. While I have never been embarrassed to be Egyptian, I can certainly say that I've had to try and balance wanting to fit in versus connecting to my own culture. The biggest barriers I've faced in trying to find this balance, is my lack of ability to speak my mother tongue. It's no secret that Arabic is a very challenging language to learn, and I've always held onto a slight frustration with my parents for not raising me with the language. The beauty of this game is that you take the perspective from the mother in this dynamic, and it's given me a lot of sympathy for my own parents in the dilemmas that they faced.

Food is a wordless language, which allows it to be expressed and understood universally. Eating a meal from my heritage is like having a conversation with my ancestors. I take great delight in being afforded this opportunity where I otherwise fail with spoken words. I've clung to it as the strongest means of interfacing with my roots. Venba is a cooking game, but in the way that food forges interpersonal connections with friends and family.

(This was all I had written about Venba, not because I didn't have more to say but because I had a lot of difficulty trying to explain the deeply resonating experience of playing this game as a second generation immigrant living in Canada. I was also doubting if anything I would've said would've made sense from an outsider's perspective. Having finished the game I was left with an overwhelming need to attempt to properly connect to my culture and ancestry by trying to mend the bridge that was never properly built in the first place, learning the Arabic language. It was going to be my new year's resolution)

(I have never done a new year's resolution before, and as you might have gathered, it was not very successful. This, in and of itself, isn't particularly bad, but there is another major event that especially twists this knife in me. In my life I never got to meet my grandfathers, they passed before I had the chance. My only remaining grandparents have been my two grandmothers. They are lovely people, but I have always struggled connecting with them primarily due to the language barrier. As a result, I was never particularly close to them. So a secret wish of mine in this new year's resolution I set for myself was to leverage that newfound knowledge to get to know them a little better.)

(They both passed this year, one not long after the other...)

(...)

(I write this in the dwindling hours of Coptic Orthodox Christmas, another fun quirk of my background I hold dear. This was the first one my family has had without them around. I don't really miss them as much as I feel like I should. The unrealized potential of what my bonds to them could have been had I learned Arabic stings more than the actual bonds that I lost. That makes me feel kinda shitty, like I don't actually care for them or something...? I don't know, it's weird.)

(Am I even gonna post this? Or will this addendum be unfinished just like so much of this past year. This article, left to fester in my obsidian notes. Perhaps it will grow like a tumour as I add more to it year on year. Why write this flavoured up image of myself and post it for my friends anyways?? Why do anything at all???)

(Like... it's not like they couldn't speak any English, one of them was decently fluent in it. Is it really worth it to play up that aspect for the sake of dramatics, even if it isn't fully true? )

(I want to be better about finishing things, and maybe that starts here with this weird ass, slightly fictional, self indulgent article...)

(I still want to learn Arabic, if for no other reason than to strengthen the bonds I have with the people who share my culture. But I will have to learn to spend the rest of my life with the regret that I didn't do it soon enough to talk to my grandmothers in our mother tongue. So I will cherish the moments that I was fortunate to get, the broken english conversations, the odd secret 20 dollar bill unbeknownst to my parents and most importantly the delicious meals we got to share.)

I recently finished Clair Obscur: Expédition 33, and it being a very story rich and emotional game, I was very engaged in choosing the ending. After playing the game for 85h and being so engrossed by its intricate narrative, I needed a satisfying or at the very least compelling ending. And I was not disappointed, as there is so much to the ending, whether from a human, emotional or even philosophical point of view. The ending being a very personal thing, and the two choices being both kinda grey endings, without seemingly a clear good ending is what makes it so interesting and makes me and others think and discuss about it.

However, I forgot how much of a reach this game had, and how uncritically a lot of people go about appreciating some works.

This article obviously contains major spoilers so do not read it if you haven't played and finished Clair Obscur: Expédition 33 (thereinafter referred to as E33). And if you don't care about spoilers, I also forbid you from reading this article because it is a great game with a lot of soul, passion, rawness and vulnerability that you would be doing yourself a disservice not playing. This article will also make no sense if you haven't played an finished the game, and I will make no effort to clarify anything. I'm making this article for myself so really: don't read it.

Why this article

There are four things that made me want to write this article

• The conversation I had with my friend Marco about the game.

Marco and I played the game at about the same time, with him finishing it about a week before I did. Obviously as soon as I finished the game, we talked about it. The first question he asked was about what ending I had chosen, but the way he posed this question told me everything I needed to know. He said: “I hope you picked the only correct ending, right?”. You see, Marco in my eyes is, when it comes to art, a serial bad-takes-haver. And with his propensity to have some reddit-pilled takes as well, I knew not only what his preferred ending was, but also on what grounds he would oppose my decision. I am not on reddit or any social media anymore, but it is so easy to predict the takes that people will have on any piece of media that I responded: “I did choose the only right ending for me, but I don't think we agree on the right ending”. I was correct and so allegations of “being clinically insane”, “smoking crack” and other ad-hominem were thrown from both side, and we had a “healthy” albeit completely unproductive disagreement about the ending, before returning to our honour playthrough of Baldur's Gates 3 where we kidnap children and turn them into unpaid interns.

• The video from Daryl Talks Games

If you have read any of my articles about video games, it will come to no surprise to you that I enjoy the videos from Daryl Talks Games, whose one of my favourite and best video-essayist talking about video games on youtube, with Crimes New Roman. Well Daryl released a video about E33, titled “How Expedition 33 Exposes You”, and I completely disagreed with his characterisation of the world in E33, of the ending, but also of the people who choose the Maëlle ending and their reasons to do so. Honestly, even the rhetorical questions he posed in the video pissed me off. But he is not the only one to have a characterisations of the ending I disagree with...

• The way the game characterises the two endings

If you've finished the game (why would you still be reading this otherwise 🤨) and seen both ending, it is obvious that one is painted as the sad but right ending. Let me be clear, neither endings are portrayed as optimal or even good, but one is clearly softening the blows of its bad parts, while the second has its worst part emphasised. In the Verso ending, every person that Verso erased from the painting is sorta cool with being killed. Maëlle cries a bit but is comforted by Verso and goes in peace. Esquie and Monoko just hug Verso as he erases them without protesting. Sciel has a comforting hand contact with Verso as she withers away, with no protest. Sure, Lune stares at Verso with murder on her mind, but her only form of protest is to sit down. None of them fight, there are no cries, no tears, no rage. It's depicted as sad but necessary. He takes the little piece of (real) Verso's soul (a little boy) and walks into the sunset, setting it to rest. And in the epilogue, we see the Dessendre family around (real) Verso's headstone, finally dealing with the grief cause by his death, and begin to heal, it is a hopeful ending. Credits roll.

In the other hand in Maëlle's ending, as soon as she beats Verso, he collapses on the ground, repeating “Unpaint me, unpaint me, I don't want this life, I don't want this life”, begging to be killed, which is a heart wrenching moment. So super bad vibes here. When we get back to lumière, we have a super brief part where we see a couple of people that Maëlle saved from either Verso erasing them, or her father's previous mass murder. It's only a teeny tiny part of this ending, and straight away things start to feel weird, with Maëlle's smile being unnerving. Verso enters the frame, the picture goes black and white. He is a shell, Maëlle puppets him. Every movement he makes feels like he is dragging himself through life involuntarily. He sits down, his hands tremble. Jumpscare, Maëlle's eyes are fucked up. More depression. Credits roll.

The artistic direction for the endings is not equal, with one clearly being depicted as darker and more wrong. One is bittersweet and trying to make you feel good, the other unnerving and trying to guilt trip you. I disagree this that, even if the intent of the authors was to show us that the Verso ending is the good one, I disagree with this. I don't care what the authors intents were, they are dead and I am now the interpreter of their work.

• The online “discourse”

With the dichotomy of how I felt, and how Daryl, Marco, and the game were telling me I should feel, I thought I might have missed something, so I looked online in the forums and in the youtube comments to see what people's take were. I had forgotten how insanely stupid any form of conversation is on the internet. Everyone was using the most stupid analogies that don't even make sense but because everybody is using them then they feel they don't have to justify their repeated uses either; repeated ad-hominem attack towards people who chose a different ending; straw man; pseudo-realists that see the thing as it really is (right...); removing every single nuance from the topic; oversimplifying everything so much it looses all meaning and interest. It's a fucking cesspool and nobody is actually trying to have interesting conversation.

Both ending can be argued for. I can see anyone with a sane mind choosing one ending over an other. Exploring how people reach the conclusion that they'd rather choose one ending over another is interesting and worthwhile. Trying to portray one as the only someone should choose, and doing armchair psychology on why people who chose X ending actually are immature and if they were more intelligent they would choose the other is stupid and utterly uninteresting.

Making my case

The main deciding factor — that I actually saw very little people talk about — for choosing an ending over an other, is the metaphysical question: “Are the people in the canvas real beings?”.

There is no objective answer to this, and therefore, there is no objective “correct” ending in E33. So, now that we are done stating the obvious, we can get to the interesting part, exploring why I chose one ending over the other.

• I believe the people of the canvas are real

The not-so-hidden central question of the game. The people of the painting/their ancestors were created by the painters. We were shown that they are sentient, can feel and decide for themselves. They do no abide by a set of instructions, an algorithm or anything, as far as we know in the game, everything stems from just regular human biology/a simulation of it. They can be born and reproduce without their/their ancestor's makers intervention, and it doesn't matter if their/their ancestor's maker is dead, they keep on living. They can even affect “real” people in physical ways, like when the mostly painted crew took out Aline and then Renoir, forcing them out of the canvas, or when when painted Verso defeated Maëlle and forced her out of the canvas. They have their own thoughts, fears, aspirations, feelings... This for me would be the description of a real being. That the painters hold the power of live and death over them, or have something akin to reality altering powers in their world (the canvas) doesn't change anything. That the painters can evolve in their own world and also into the canvas doesn't change anything.

The choice then becomes: kill everything and everyone in the canvas to prevent Aline and Alicia from escaping into the canvas to grief, or let the canvas be and Alicia stay for as long as she wants.

I want to talk about perspectives a bit. Even from a bird's eye view I consider the people of the canvas to be real people, let's step into the shoes of the people in the story. I would get the argument that from Renoir, Cléa, Alicia... any of the painters' perspective, the inhabitants of the canvas are not on equal footing and their lives are not comparable to the life of one of the member of the Dessendre family. I understand Renoir's point of view, he'd rather sacrifice everything and everyone in the canvas not to — in his point of view — lose his wife and child. Shifting perspective, the inhabitants of the canvas feel that they are real. They feel themselves and their world as real, the canvas is their reality. It's just that there's another universe outside of their own that also exists. But they would absolutely not want to be erased just because of some discord in the family of their creators in that other universe. I think if we had the gestral, the inhabitants of Lumière and other sentient being take a vote, they would choose not to be erased.

Which brings us to You the player, are you a inhabitant of the canvas, or are you one of the gods of this world? Is it legitimate for you to associate with the Dessendre family? You start in control of Gustave, a painted person, and inhabitant of Lumière and the canvas. You gather another companion, Lune, as a painted person and can switch who you control between the two. Then you get Maëlle, a member of the Dessendre family who lived her live thinking she was a painted person. She is kinda of the bridge between both worlds, the Lisan al-Gaib if you will. The rest of the members of your party afterwards are only painted people. Verso being a painted person, not a god of this world, who was painted to be the dead son of the Dessendre family. It is the portrait of a dead man, but still a painted person. You start the story as an Expeditioner. The frame of reference shift toward the end when you see things more through the eyes of Verso and the narrative focuses more on the Dessendres, but you are still not a god. The only person that has any legitimacy and moral ground destroying the canvas that you can put yourself into as the player is Alicia, and she is the one trying to save it. Verso has no legitimacy destroying it and is just a class traitor. So from a perspective point of view, as a player, you are either a painted person wanting this world to endure, a painter trying to save this world, or painted person trying to end your world. As a player you are therefore not legitimate think of the people of the canvas as not real and disposable, and to destroy the canvas.

• Destroying the canvas is entirely unnecessary

Why is the solution destroying the canvas? The Dessendre dealing with their shit in a healthier way and leaving the canvas and its inhabitants alone is a much better solution. But we are forced to make a choice “life keeps forcing cruel choices”. The fairest choice is Maëlle ending — letting the canvas live, saving the people in it from their previous eradication and having Alicia living in it. How is it the responsibility of the people of the painting that their gods cannot grieve properly? How are they responsible for anything that happens outside of the painting? Why should they have to sacrifice themselves for the possibility of maybe having the Dessendre family dealing with grief a bit better? It does not concern them, they and the player are entirely valid in fighting for their survival. On the other hand, do the painters not have a responsibility towards their creation? They created sentient beings that feel and think and have been hurting them for decades. Using them and deciding to erase them once they become inconvenient is unbecoming. The painters are unworthy of the powers they wield. Destroying the canvas is almost nonsensical. It will not bring Verso back, Aline is already out of it, and there is no indication that Alicia is going to grieve in the same way as her mother, and even if she did, so what? Is she not allowed to choose for herself?

Those are the main crux of my argument. There are some little things here and there that I could talk about, and some of it is just debunking so claims made by the Verso-choosers but I don't think it's that interesting to explore. As you can see there's a big philosophical and even political dimension to explore with the ending of E33. What I've written above is the divagations of someone who care way too much about the ending of a video game. It's not really well put together, but I needed to get it out. This really more of a “I get myself and it's not really the point for anyone else to understand me” kind of article, I ripped that shit in a couple days and there is not going to be a second draft. This is definitely more of a going back to my rambling roots. This entire article was also an excuse to be able to use the word “thereinafter”.

Me getting so invested in a video game should be a testament to how good or at least interesting it is. But you should already know about it since if you've read this article you should have played it. If you have played E33 and would like to discuss the ending I would be more than glad to.

Thank you for reading my logorrhea Eddie – Award winning author

I completely forgot to write about my readings in November and December, so I guess we'll merge both article and fly through everything. Also I got my Storygraph wrap-up now, so I'll share it as well.

Let the Old Dreams Die – John Ajvide Lindqvist

Collections of short stories from the guy who wrote “Let the Right One in” that I read in October. Very good, I think he's a very good writer and the way that in a few paragraphs he can already transpose the state of mind of his characters is very impressive. Some very good stories, some that are just alright, but overall they're original.

Lip des Héros Ordinaires – Laurent Galandon (script), Damien Vidal (drawing)

There is a bunch of history here (this in non-fiction). Lip was a french company that manufactured watches, and that was gigantic at a a time, producing millions of watches per year. They were a staple of the watch world in those days. They were the sole importer of some big brands like Breitling, Universal Genève and Blancpain in France, and as part of that deal also got to put their names in the dial. All of this to say they were a very big deal, and taking some business away from the Swiss, who have a huge stake in the watch business. Lip was acquired by Ébauche SA, a swiss company, that secretly decided to destroy it from the inside, to get rid of competition. Slowly but surely the business died, but as soon at it reached the layoffs stage, corporate had to fight with the workers' union, and couldn't just sack everybody without notice. During this battle, the employees discovered some documents revealing the scheme from Ébauche SA, and decided to fight back, occupying the factory, sending off the current inventory of watches to be hidden in a monastery, and building watches without supervision, with the little guys running everything, completely autonomously. Their slogan was “On fabrique, on vend, on se paie” (We're crafting, we're selling, we're paying ourselves). The workers were effectively owning the means of production. This was a first in France, and the capitalist state was not a big fan. The CRS (the police squadron that the french government sends to beat up civilians keep the peace during protests, even to this day) were sent to push the worker out of the factory, using violence. Using a combo of night operation, false fire alarm, cutting the power and rushing in, they were successful. But the workers had hidden the stock of 25 000 watches that was in the factory, and were continuing to produce off-site after this, so this was not the end.

All of this and more is told through BD format, through to the “resolution” of the conflict. It looks good, it's interesting.

Artificial Condition + Rogue Protocol + Exit Strategy- Martha Wells

Book 2, 3 and 4 of the Murderbot Diaries. Still very good.

Frankenstein – Mary Shelley

Very good, and fairly accessible for a classic. I'm always a sucker for unreliable narrator and my boy Victor Frankenstein is one. The way he portrays himself as the perfect romantical hero when he's a piece of shit who won't take responsibility for his creation is always flabbergasting. It was so funny how sick he got all the time. *mosquito passes wind next to victor* “Heaven's I am getting sick, I will be bedridden for the next 6 months” There is a lot to unpack and think about.

A Winter's Promise + The Missing of Clairedelune + The Memory of Babel – Christel Dabos

Book 1, 2 and 3 of The Mirror Visitor Series. It's originally a french series that I have read multiple times, but I brought the first book to the white elephant exchange and as most of the people participating didn't speak french, I had to get the english translation. Obviously, I had to re-read it first, this time in english. I think the french version slaps harder. During my re-read I also found more flaws in the book, but I still love them.

Le joueur d'échec + Lettre d'une inconnue – Stefan Zweig

Two short stories from one of my sister's favourite author. The first one was very good, but where it supposed to be dramatic, the situation is so funny to look at from an outsider perspective that I don't think I got the feeling of dread and despair that the author intended. The second short story was a bit yucky and too repetitive.

I can't choose a favourite book this year, but my unsorted top 3 would be:

• Let the Right One In
• Fire and Blood
• The Remains of the Days

And my favourite BD would be L'Aigle sans Orteils. Let's take a look at the storygraph stuff.

Story Graph

Storygraph does all the data analysis for me, so I just have to steal the graphs from the app, what a delight.

Storygraph isn't super accurate in the number of books read so here's a more precise breakdown:

• Mangas: 60
• Books: 44
• BDs: 9
• Anthologies: 5
• Comics Compendium: 3

Here's the breakdown per month:

I do plan maybe balancing the books I read in french or english a bit better, and maybe adding some more languages next year. But I have another book related project from next year...

___

2026 Booklog

I will be joining the challenge that our Glorious Leader has set for himself, of going through all the books/pdfs that he has amassed without reading. Obviously, I will not be going through his unread books, but through mine. Whenever I visit France, I love getting classics of french literature/philosophy/whatever which are way more affordable, and since I got an e-reader, I've been going a bit hard on the pirating. I have a pretty extensive booklog, that I've compiled here: google sheet. I'm not sure which rules our Dear Leader is imposing himself, but for my part, I will have the following:

• Read at least the first 50 pages/20% of the book, whichever is the shortest, before DNFing
• Be only allowed to DNF 10% of the list (6 books)
• Only allow myself to pickup something as a treat that's not on the list every 5 books from the list read
• Concerning the rule above, gifted, bookclub and group read books don't count as treats. As well, if the first book of a series is in the list, I am allowed to read the rest of the series without having them counts as treat books.
• Grant myself two red buttons which allow me to delete an epub instead of reading it.

That should cover it. My plan right now is to go through the low hanging fruits, and then just go based on vibes. See you next month.

Thank you for reading my logorrhea Eddie – Award winning author

Recently, Canada has seemingly had a bit of an issue when it comes to our institutions and their ability to get the results they want. Economic productivity is reportedly low, which, avoiding the fact that productivity is a dubious measure in itself, has become a big talking point. This is what people are blaming for stagnant wages. Many cities have also seemingly been unable to develop anything substantially new. Until extremely recently, two weeks ago as of writing this, Toronto managed to develop and grow for 23 years, increasing its population from ~4.5 million to ~6.5 million, all while reducing the amount of subways it had. This involved closing the line 3 after a derailment in 2023, after running on out-of-date hardware for some 15 years. The Eglinton Crosstown has been under construction for 15 years, and the Finch West Extension finally opened to poor results (the trains run slower than the buses they replaced and costing in at only $3.7 BILLION) in late 2025.

The government seems to be attempting to solve this apparent complete failure of results in one way: by stripping regulations and workers’ rights. More sacrifice from the workers for maybe potentially some later gain and a few more jobs. In Ontario, Carney and Ford are teaming up to ensure that select private companies will be able to ignore laws and regulations to develop faster and hopefully get us on track to where we “should” be in their eyes. Don’t worry about climate change; we plan to miss all our goals. Don’t worry about the environment or homes of endangered species; it can be clear-cut to make a toxic dumping ground. Don’t worry about workers' rights; we need more profit.

This is one attempt to solve the issue, one that is distinctly pro-capital and big business. If you are big enough (with a successful enough lobby to get a contract), you can get selected to break the rules set out for everyone. If some people get to break the rules, what is the point of having universal rules? All this is to say that the democratic process is changing. In this case, they are becoming less “of the people”. This is the state merging with corporations, the economic model that defines fascism, employed by liberals during crises in order to maintain capitalism.

This is being done to “cut through bureaucratic bloat and red tape”. The idea is that the process holds back our development: that skipping it and developing without feedback would be better for the people no longer involved in the process. In times like these, we need to make “touch choices” to “get what needs to be done, done.” People often seem to ignore that giving a bourgeois state unchecked power just means you will get forced into bourgeois results! This talk of these tough choices, however, seems to skip over something completely: If the process is broken, and we need to allow specific companies to ignore regulations and processes to get anything done, why are we not directly addressing and evolving the process? While the real answer sits somewhere around protecting profits, we should still look into how the process works and what something else could look like if we want to have even a hope of implementing something better in the future.

I am going to approach this through a very narrow lens: my discussions in the process of the bike lanes on Sloane, as well as other recent discussions I have had to use as examples.

As a Toronto waste yute, witnessing our development is pretty crushing. The economy seems bad for workers, who struggle to live comfortably and are constantly told to sacrifice for the greater good. This greater good seems to never materialize, or if it does, is so loaded with half measures or absolute failure that you wonder why it was even done in the first place. Recently, I have been attending meetings related to bike lane development on Sloane Avenue, and watching this process and talking to the people has given me a little insight into how this comes to be.

First, I will start with a discussion I had many months ago that prompted an article that got lost in the sauce and didn’t make it out of the sticks: I was talking with a health and safety consultant at work. She mentioned how long it took her to get to our meeting, as is a usual conversation in Toronto. I gave the usual platitudes about “yeah, traffic, amirite!” She asked about my travel and how I find getting around these days. I said I have an electric bike, so I can zip around all the way downtown without any lights or anything. It’s quick, convenient, and consistent, which I like. This comes at the cost of winter inconvenience and some places being dangerous due to a lack of infrastructure. She generally just gave me a remark of disapproval about bikes and said she’s a car person, so we should avoid the topic. It was a bit strange. Later, she also said she was really against working from home and thinks people need to get back into the office. I also found this particularly strange. To summarize: she hates traffic, but wants more people moving around all the time, and wants less alternative transportation. She hates traffic, but the result of each thing she wants is more traffic.

On to the bike lanes meeting on Sloane. Unfortunately, I had an event at the same time as the initial proposal, but I was able to make it to the consultation, where people could give feedback. For reference, the road is full of potholes, extremely wide, and frankly, about as falling apart as a road can be in a city. It is up for redevelopment, so it will be redone completely, no matter what. The question is how it will be redone. Currently, the road has one lane of traffic each way, some parking in certain spots, and a bus. The plan would add separated bike lanes, keep all lanes of traffic, keep all parking, and keep the bus with approximately the same stops. This was all laid out wonderfully on some big maps that made the redevelopment easy to see in its totality. People in the community had complained about the safety of the street (especially at the elementary school), the speed of cars on the road, and people on scooters zipping around everywhere with no regard for the rules of the road.

All of these are addressed in the plan. The bike lanes would help kids bike to school safely, reducing traffic and also offering a safer drop-off zone for the buses. Narrowing of lanes would help reduce the speed of cars, and having a bike lane would get non-car methods of transportation off the roads. It also brings the road up to date with what has been successful all around the world. All this while not reducing any car lanes, and maintaining all the parking that was there before. People must have loved that their issues were addressed and engaged with the plan to pick up on specific details and see how it all works, right?

Well, not at all. Instead, the consultation was packed full of people yelling at random school staffers, people who could barely walk, talking about how “as an avid cyclist” they “just don’t think it’s right”, and asking for the entire development to be called off. This would mean instead of losing nothing, improving the street, and having all their problems addressed, they would rather the road remain full of potholes. These are the NIMBYs, and we know these types. They preach that every development is a disaster, fight against it any way they know how, and if the development gets through. None of their fears ever materialize, but they WILL keep on fighting.

I spoke to my councillor about these people, right at a time where most working people could discuss things: his office discussion event at 9:00 AM on a Monday.

It’s easy to say something like “Democracy could be good, but the people are stupid” or “we need a strong leader to make decisions for us”, or even just say that “we just need someone to finally force some change through for this one”. It’s also easy to say “we just need to overthrow capitalism and have a real, equitable world”. I think these are easy cop outs to actually addressing a problem. The first calls for outcomes in a way that is not equitable, which will only serve to ensure that non-equitable outcomes can’t be punished. In the second, ok, so what will that process look like?

Here, I will outline a process different from the one we have that addresses the key flaw: people seek both means and outcomes that are contradictory. This guarantees poor outcomes. There are two goals in a new system: Better outcomes and a means that aims to ensure outcomes are equitable. I don’t see them as contradictory.

One thing our system does extremely poorly is guarantee quality outcomes. Decisions are made, they are abject failures, and we follow them up by making the same (or worse) decisions. Projects are completed, fail to do what they are designed to do (or even make the problem worse), and the same decisions get made for the next project. This is a symptom of some of those means issues. People who do not understand the problem are a part of how we decide to solve the problem. Traffic? Add more lanes. More lanes didn’t solve traffic? Clearly not enough lanes, add more. Some solutions make sense if you think about it for a couple of minutes, but the world is pretty complicated, and often these “intuitive” solutions simply do not work.

This could be replaced with a process. People are asked about what outcomes they want for a specific project. Meetings are held, and a broader consensus is made on where priorities are and what metrics would be primary indicators of success (other metrics would obviously still be tracked). From here, experts in the subject field (city planners, etc) create a plan that addresses those issues, execute the plan, and after varying amounts of time, take surveys about the results of the plan according to metrics. Surveys can also include perceptions of the plan and non-specific community satisfaction. The results of these surveys are relayed back to education on city planning, where researchers would adjust models based on the new feedback. Changes would be made, more projects would be done, more priorities and metrics would be set, more plans executed, more input would be cycled back, etc.

Projects could get a certain number of “marks” based on the successes and shortcomings of the plans. Sections of the plan deemed successful could be positive marks on the record of planners who supported it. Sections riddled with issues or receiving negative feedback could be negative marks on the record of planners who supported it. Plan proposals that do not receive support mean that planners do not have faith that they will achieve desirable outcomes, and the plan should likely be redeveloped. Positive and negative reviews for planners would be based on broader trend lines. One plan gone wrong for one reason or another should not harm a planner’s career, but rather consistent failure to achieve desirable results should make them revisit what we know works.

1. A scope or plan for the project is laid out (similar to now)
2. Get community input
   1. Decide priorities
   2. Decide focus metrics
3. Create a plan that accomplishes what the community wants
   1. Note: You could get community feedback for small changes here, but the larger core of the plan must stay the same
4. Execute the plan
5. Survey results at different intervals after completion (including shorter and longer term)
   1. Measure target metrics and other surrounding metrics
   2. Survey perceptions on the planning and execution of the plan
   3. Gather subjective input on the results of the plan
   4. Gather broader input on quality of life
6. Use the results of the plans to update models and education for future planning
7. Based on results:
   1. Good results can be positive marks on the planner’s record
   2. negative results can be marks against
      1. too many marks against and education must be redone for a period of time, where the person can not create or execute more plans until they are re-certified

What is the result? Here is what I have broadly broken down for city planners:

• City planners would be able to execute plans based on what people want.
• Plan execution could be uninterrupted and decisive.
• People who do not understand city planning are not able to destroy quality plans.
• City planners would be focused on making projects that benefit the communities they work for.
• City planners who consistently do projects that communities don’t like get removed from the pool of selectable city planners.
• City planners are kept up to date on the latest, and consistently successful city planners don’t need to worry about that since they’re successful anyway.
• City planners are given tools to re-entry if it is their passion, but they didn’t quite land their first shot.

This model could similarly be applied to other fields, like economics.

1. Economists make predictions and prescribe policy on a region (differing regions may have different policies enacted at the same time)
2. Goals and metrics are defined and agreed upon
3. Policy is enacted, and results are monitored
4. Surveys are done, metrics are collected, input is received, and quality of life input is received
5. According to these, policies are measured against each other
6. Bad outcomes are deemed failures, good policies are assessed, changes made, models updated, and the process begins again

Economists who prescribe bad policy for the majority get filtered out, two separate good policies can be assessed for their benefits, and economies are made better gradually for the majority. People get input and the results they want, while getting rid of the part where they can demand results, then destroy their own results by being insufferable. Plans can be executed faster with less interference at every step.

Since this is almost certainly not going to become our real policy, and is mostly just me creatively complaining, I don’t want to get too into the weeds, but it is necessary to address potential shortcomings of the system as outlined. Some of these may happen, some may not, some are the same as now, and some aren’t even actual problems of the system at all. It’s a necessary step and worth thinking about potential problems as an exercise, dialectics or whatnot, but I’m not here making hundred-page bills, I’m here making something I hope my friends will like reading.

Pigeon Holes and Risk Aversion

This policy rewards doing something that people will receive well, and broadly moves forward in a kind of alpha-beta testing strategy on the academic side of things. This could lead people down a specific “branch” of policy prescription that is good, but another branch is better. People may not want to take risks and try something new because this one is ol’ reliable, or ol’ reliable may continue to be used even after structural progression beyond its ideal use case.

I always tell people you can’t let perfection get in the way of something good. Right now, we will consistently do things that are actively bad for the majority. The new system is thus an improvement. Additionally, if there is a new consensus amongst the studied planners, they can agree to execute the plan and check the results, potentially dedicating money to re-developing to the “main” branch of ideas if it does not work out. One plan does not dictate the career trajectory of the planners; it’s about trends and consistency. If something is tried and fails, a regression to something tried and true is not necessarily a bad feature. I like some experimentation in my life, but consistency is also healthy.

Selection Process

Who gets to go to the meetings where goals and concerns are voiced? This is a problem now and would probably also be a problem in the new system, and I don’t think it can be truly solved. It is the contradiction between freedom and domination. Give people freedom of choice to show up, and they can freely choose not to.

Broadly, handle it as it should be handled now. Flyers sent out the the community, have different meetings at different times of different days spread out over a month or so, get feedback, and move on. People can show up if they care, or not if they don’t care about this specific thing. Allow them to write in, send an email, or do a digital survey. Someone could live 2 blocks from a road being redeveloped and never take that road, making them also not helpful if they do show up to the meeting under any mandatory jury-duty-like condition.

NIMBYs / Loud Minorities

What about groups of people who absolutely love showing up and hating on plans? I believe this new strategy is actually better than now for a couple of reasons.

Firstly, many of these people know the outcomes they want, but just hate it when things actually happen around them. They want better traffic flow while having safer and better designed entries and exits for school traffic. The problem is that when they see what that looks like, they hate it when it looks different from what they know. Here, they can say what they want, have it built into the plan, but be removed from the process until it is done.

Right now, these people are given opportunities to change plans at several steps. By removing them from the steps where they are most destructive, they are not able to jam up the entire process forever. Their initial inputs are received, then a real plan is executed, and the new strategy stops them from creating infinite half measures or bad decisions that cause end-result failue.

Metrics Becoming Targets

This could actually become a problem in this system, but it is also a problem of our current system, where we can’t even meet metrics in the first place. Given metrics and planners with careers on the line, what stops these planners from optimising around certain metrics?

My main counters to this are having the community have input on success metrics as well as having a secondary and differently “weighted” subjective feedback attached. Having community input on metrics stops the process from getting completely focused on having one metric dictate everything, even if it doesn’t necessarily help people (think GDP). Having the subjective feedback helps with trying to figure out what new metrics or adverse effects may be present that aren’t represented using the currently measured metrics.

What if people think certain metrics will have certain impacts on them that don’t actually happen (think GDP)? Having room for more than one metric is my main attempt at resolving this.

What if metrics are broadly at odds with each other (Think right now with house prices vs home values)? Which will take priority in success metrics? I think part of the process here is that it would be harder to develop into these places in the big picture, but frankly, this is a tough spot off the dome that would require professionals from several areas to address. Luckily, this system allows that, unlike the current one, where the bourgeois interest is always taken.

Mass Insistence On Bad Decisions

What happens if everyone in the system for one reason or another wants decisions with bad outcomes, from the planners to the people being consulted in the process? Not only does this happen all the time right now, but metrics and subjective experience would show this over time, and the planning decisions would be culled, as it forces learning from the evidence rather than just vibes or promises.

If only the planners insist on bad plans, the poor results would force them back to school so much that they would lose representation in the moment and also not be able to sustain themselves because they would now only be spending half their career getting re-certified.

The people can’t really insist on bad plans in this system.

Existential Shocks

What happens if something, like a pandemic response, means the plans don’t really get a fair shot? In these cases, surely, good plans would receive negative feedback. Board reviews could be done to account for this, which would then in turn open up more opportunity for more bad plans to get away with sticking around for longer, but existential shocks I see as a real potential shortcoming. It is also a shortcoming for most systems like this, including ours today. I think doing planner reviews as a trend line and not a “three strikes” or “one bad plan and done” helps people get through shocks, and having short as well as long-term measuring of outcomes makes it more likely that a shock and recovery are both accounted for at some point in the review cycle.

Cross Contamination

What if other plans cross-contaminate and muddle feedback, or if two otherwise good plans happen to not blend well together? I would have to assume that under this system, cross-contamination would be near constant. I think this is mostly a problem of thinking of this system as a one-off, isolated event. If the system were working on a larger scale for a consistent amount of time, good and bad plans would be selected for and against, and cross contamination for different projects would be something planners would be constantly studying and building in as the process continues to evolve. Thinking once again in branches, there may be a branch that is optimal in one scenario, but another branch that tends to work better in another. The point is that people who study and understand this are part of the selection process.

Keeping Communities Unique

First, I would just like to state out front that I think if people had communities that improved over time in favour of their best interest, people would probably care less about their specific neighbourhood being “unique”. I think if there were a system that people could trust, a lot of attitudes would change over time. I do think having different communities is cool. Aesthetics could easily be made part of this process, for example, a development near brick works could be specifically mandated to need to have exposed brick integrated into its style. Generally speaking, there is also subjective feedback. If planners want more positive feedback, the feel of the community is something they would want to preserve and have people be proud of to appeal to residents of the area.

Do It In Another Community

What of things that are broadly seen as negative, like a homeless shelter that people may not like, but needs to happen? Right now, we simply struggle to get these things done anywhere at all. If development were done in favour of the majority of people, these types of developments of last resort would likely need to happen less often.

Alas, it may still need to happen. Under this system, for starters, it would actually happen, as the community would just give overall feedback on how it would be brought about and how to make sure it goes well, not destroy the entire plan.

For reviews, some development may just be fundamentally deeply unpopular. In this case, good planners may need to be assigned to make it simply have as many upsides with as few downsides as possible, or it could be made a smaller part of a larger development to offset it. I would call this a definite weak point of the process, but it is a definite weak point of our current process as well.

Some of the astute among you may have noticed that I have re-invented democratic central planning in one form or another. This brings me to a brief discussion I want to include about reform and revolution, as well as organic marxism and process thinking.

For reform and revolution, we often joke about the concept of “voting your way to a revolution”; We have a bourgeois state, and as such, the bourgeois state will not ever concede the ability for voters to vote for a proletarian state. Then comes the alternative: do a revolution. There will be chaos, and in the midst of all the chaos, your ideology will win and rise. This is also funny, because people think their ideology will rise from the ashes, when the reality is that my ideology will rise from the ashes. I think many people who want revolution don’t necessarily express themselves well on what revolution actually looks like and how it could be done on a global scale.

The focus of my fascination with post-capitalism and bringing about new systems is found on a few fronts. One of these is likely sourced in my influence from Mark Fisher: making other systems tangible. I want to imagine new systems, outline them and some of their processes, think of where they might succeed and what shortcomings they may suffer from. This leads to others. What systems, if put in place, may mimic or mirror our current system in surface-level function, yet inevitably lead to changes compatible with post-capitalist or socialist desires? If you were to do a revolution (whatever that entails), what systems could you put in place to ensure progress towards your goals while making compromises to either reduce the likelihood of a successful reactionary counter-revolution or the necessity of having to rebuild an entire modern economy from scratch in one day, all while not getting conquered?

Compromise is necessary one way or another, but you don’t have to compromise on everything. This system I focused on is mostly through the lens of making it so that bike lanes are actually installed, but I did outline briefly how the exact same system could be used for economic planning. This economic planning is separate from and replaces bourgeois economic planning, but in terms of people’s interaction with it, the changes are nearly invisible. Bourgeois economic planning is able to assign austerity over and over, implementing a neoliberal model that doesn’t even succeed in its own internal logic. This planning, seemingly very similar, necessitates positive outcomes as reported from the majority, so things like austerity cease to be a feasible policy prescription.

I remember speaking to Bennet a while back. We were talking about systems like worker co-ops and their shortcomings, as well as my defence of them despite historic criticism. My defence of worker co-ops stems from a simple principle: they are incredibly easy to imagine for your average person, they offer more agency for your average person, and if everything was suddenly a worker coop, why would people decide to bring back private ownership? The decision to bring back private ownership stands only to make people lose agency for no gain. Socialist structures like worker co-ops, which are market companies owned by workers, have been measured as more efficient than private ownership with better outcomes, so they suddenly become possible under democratic planning like this. If this worker co-op replacing private ownership scenario were to happen, you would eliminate private ownership of the means of production. From there begins work on what comes next. There are still criticisms to be had by all means, but they allow the opportunity for further changes impossible under the current system.

Systems like these are alternatives to capitalist forms without thinking of alternatives to capitalism as “giant government no freedom” that permeates the discourse so much. The system of planning outlined above is familiar; it resembles the process people know. Hell, it could even be implemented under capitalism without drawing too much attention. It may also offer better results in the way people seem to currently desire and not be restricted to bourgeois outcomes. Instead of having a government pick corporations as big winners, it rather promotes outcomes that support the masses.

When the ruling class tell us that we need to strip away workers’ rights, environmental protections, and indigenous sovereignty to get things done, it isn’t because they want to get things done. It is because they want to strip away workers’ rights, environmental protections, and indigenous sovereignty. Other options are easy to imagine and available. They simply prefer fascism because it’s good for their material interests. Don’t fall for it.

Thanks for joining me on this exercise.

Sankofa say look to the past to find our wisdom replenish as intuition There's growing pains and I know that's nothing that you don’t know If we only knew our mistakes then I’d kick us in the ass

Oncle

System Erasure is a tiny game development studio based in Finland. The only two members of the team have so far managed to create two staggeringly different entries into their repertoire. The first is the high octane shoot-em-up 'ZeroRanger' where the player is tasked with being the sole defender of earth against an overwhelming alien fleet. The second being the far more subdued sokoban (block pushing) puzzler where the player delves deeper and deeper into a cryptic labyrinth in search of something at the bottom. While on the surface these two experiences seem to hold little in common with the other, astute individuals will notice peculiar details amongst the sparse store pages of both of their games. What kind of shoot-em-up would include “mystery” as one of the major selling points of the game? Why does the seemingly medieval fantasy presentation of Void Stranger's trailer contain a cutaway of what seems to be a mech? Indeed, there is more to investigate on those fronts but I will not discuss these things in depth. Instead, the spotlight will be on the major thematic connection that underpins both games regardless of gameplay or setting. Both of System Erasure's games want you to give up and succumb to despair.

Games that want you to stop playing

spoilers for “Spec Ops: The Line” and “Undertale”

The concept of a game that presents a narrative which brings to attention the player's active participation isn't unique. These games are often dubbed as 'meta' though it isn't necessarily a prerequisite for that kind of storytelling. What likely comes to mind for many would be the final boss of Undertale's appropriately named “genocide route”. Over the course of repeated thrashings the final boss in question takes time to explain that in order to stop you they must present an insurmountable challenge to get you to lose interest and quit. Presenting an in-universe justification for the unexpected jump in difficulty inflicted on the player. This is framed as an act of heroism on behalf of the boss, as in this scenario the player is quite clearly made out to be the villain.

Alternatively, one could look at “Spec Ops: The Line” where a generic third person military shooter centres around a main character who's singular obsession with an end goal is used as a justification for more and more reprehensible actions. This goes to a point in which the game begins to call you out in the loading screens asking if you “feel like a hero yet?”. This is a compelling narrative, and I can attest to feeling like a terrible person in being complicit to the events of the games through my shared drive to see the game to its end. Perhaps in retrospect the best choice would have been to stop playing, upon having realized my motivations were corrupt.

What makes System Erasure's games noteworthy (besides the excellent game design, art, music etc.) is that they flip this script on its head. Instead of critiquing a player's decent into darkness they instead pose a debilitating threat which the player is then invited to overcome. It instead becomes a trial of triumph in the face of adversity, every setback designed to shatter your resolve, every barrier broken begets an even greater challenge. At times it feels the game is laughing at you, relishing in your seemingly futile efforts to summit the ever growing mountain climb set before you. All this in service of the hope that you, the player, decide to end it all and move onto something else.

DO: 1. NOT 2. GIVE 3. UP.

In this framing it is plain to see why these experiences can be unpalatable to many. However this scaffolding is the bones with which System Erasure fleshes out a narrative that makes these games compelling. The depths of despair that the player may find themselves in percolates into the vessel they inhabit. The personal journey one takes when attempting one of these games becomes as much a part of the story as the textual content itself.

To that end, the successes and failures the player experiences also become the character's shared milestones. Ultimately the fate of the character and the overall story is left in the hands of the player guiding them. Should the proverbial suffering become too much to bear and the player unwittingly provides a silent and unspoken “no” to the video game mantra of “do you wish to continue?”, this too reflects on the story being told. With the game having been dropped what remains is a tale of a valiant challenger tackling the adversity they face head-on and failing, left to the whims of the forces that opposed them. This is by all means a “bad ending” and it all takes place with barely a single dialogue option.

If you reverse this outlook however, you instead get a tale that is electrifying. Despite their better judgement, despite all the slings and blows, the player steels their resolve and carries onward. Stoking the flames of determination as it lights the way to the shores of victory. Their human spirit remaining indomitable as they persevere to reach what can only be described as nirvana. This is the story that System Erasure seeks to craft with their players.

It is with absolute certainty that I say that System Erasure delivers some of the most exhilarating rewards in the medium for the players that commit to sticking with their experiences. The satisfaction coming in part from the sheer difficulty that the players faced matched with the elation that the journey is over. The bizarre form of Stockholm syndrome could be easily dismissed as self fulfilling if not for the absolute grandeur and spectacle of these climactic endings. So bombastic are these conclusions that it almost becomes an experience in ascending to the divine, shedding your mortal shell to comet through the stars.

Story of a Sojourner

It's unlikely that the player's path to that aforementioned state will be direct. In my personal experiences with both ZeroRanger and Void Stranger there were periods of committed progress and then there were long stretches where I would put the game down. In a normal scenario I would probably have left these games behind me, making peace with however deep I got into them. However I found it uniquely difficult to fully drop these games, burdened with the lingering feeling of unfinished business. In service of advocating for these games I believe it is necessary to discuss my personal experiences with them.

In the case of ZeroRanger, without tipping the game's hand too heavily, there is a major point in the story in which the player chooses to risk everything to continue. Ultimately, it is unlikely the player will be successful on their first attempt, and so must undertake the process of retrying after their failure. In a game in which you are facing a constant onslaught of enemies and bosses, this moment functions as a particularly deep gut punch to your progress. This is softened by the fact that every attempt is accompanied by knowledge gained which can then be applied to further attempts. Repetition breeds mastery, fuelled by the player's self confidence and willingness to persevere.

I would occasionally have bursts of playtime interspersed with long periods of doing something else. With each spat of commitment to the game I slowly circled towards the gravitational well that is the game's conclusion. While I may have been orbiting this game for years, I was inching closer and closer to my final goal. Until one humble evening I booted the game after another long period of downtime with no preconceptions or desires for any particular result. I played, and played, and found myself doing better than I had ever done before. Before I know it, I faced that final barrier once more, and choose to push onwards. At this point I've become so well acquainted with the game that even if I lost here it barely constitutes as a setback. Risking everything, I keep moving forwards, my little virtual spaceship has been shed and my very ego is laid bare. My screen dances with colours and lights, and I find myself dancing with them. I've been here before, but this virtual dance partner previously had me stumbling over my feet and leaving me in the dust. This time, however, it's like I have known these motions my whole life. Step, step, twirl, I trip. My heart is beginning to race, I just have to keep it together for a little longer. I move on instinct, and worry how long I can keep this going for. Just as I was about to give out, and get sent back to that familiar starting position I open my eyes to see something I hadn't seen before. I realize I made it through, I have actually felled this beast. I would've screamed for joy but... it was 1 in the morning.

In the case of Void Stranger, instead of the high octane action of its older sibling, you are instead subjected to the mental strain of a gauntlet of puzzles. However despite the completely different setting the same rule applies here as it did in ZeroRanger, that being “knowledge is power”. In playing this game I assembled a board of notes that would grow alongside the things that I learned. Despite that, I ran out of steam my first time in. It wasn't until another person encouraged me to continue trying several months down the line that I picked the game back up and made some major revelations which completely changed the game, that I was sure to have seen everything the game had to offer. Only to face walls so impenetrable that despite all my notes and deranged reasonings I could not find a way to continue, so I stopped again.

It wasn't until this summer, roughly a year later that I happened to stumble on my notes for Void Stranger, idly thinking “ah yes I would like to finish this game sometime”. As I peered once more upon my scribblings I began to notice some connections that I hadn't noticed all those months ago. I began rearranging these pieces I had collected. Next I realized I was staring at this shape I've assembled in my notes, the culmination of all of my efforts. I had finally made what might just be the proverbial key to this locked door that prevented my progress. There was no other choice but to open this game once more, and see if it fits... click!

You can probably figure out the rest.

Embrace the void

It would be pertinent to add one final note to this discussion. While these games are quite challenging, they are by no means miserable experiences. On the contrary, I consider these to be some of the best games I have ever played. I would hope that in reading this dissection you might wish to investigate these games yourself. Much like how someone else helped give me a little boost when I was playing Void Stranger, I would be more than willing to give tips and guidance for either of these games. More than anything, if you do decide to dive into these experiences then...

May you attain enlightenment

One year since the end of the Humble Purge, my backlog slaying endeavour of 2024. I have chronicled this project in two previous articles (Clearing the backlog: Humble Purge Act II & Cleared the backlog?: Humble Purge Act II) as well as a bonus article (The Humble Purge Awards). In those, I said I would keep posting about the games I play in 2025 in the form of a journal. Today as I write these word it's December 31st 2025, and I need to haul ass. Just like last year, I recorded all the info about the games I played in a google sheet, which you can peruse at your leisure. Note that I finished my backlog project last year around the end of November, so the 2025 Journal encompasses all the games played between Nov 23rd 2024 and Dec 31st 2025.

What the backlog was this year

As stated in my previous articles, this year the “backlog” was more of a gaming journal. I didn't have any set games to play, or any amount of games to play, I was free to pick whatever. That is a very different vibe from last year, where I just had a list of games to complete by the end of the year. I was kinda lost at the beginning, so I just ended up playing the cheapest games of my steam wishlist. This was still not the way to go, as I would still feel a bit disconnected from the games I played, and couldn't get in the right mindset to enjoy myself. I was more going through the motion than actively participating in the games.

Choosing games from my wishlist was not the Humble Purge, but it was still not an organic way to go about having fun. It still felt like a work project. Thankfully, it took me less than a month to realise this, and I went for a completely vibes based approach to playing games after. Instead of picking games that had been on my wishlist for god knows how long, I let myself be influenced.

I played the hip games of the moments, or whatever my friends were playing. Throughout December and January I played Inscryption, Balatro, replayed Dark Souls III, my favourite game ever. I also played a shit ton of Street Fighter 6, my very first* fighting game. I was planning to make an article about it and stuff, but while I did write 5500 word, I lost interest in the game in May and didn't want to edit all that. If you are really interested, please find my unedited and unfinished article here: *link.

So this is what the backlog was this year, a journal of games I play on the fly. Sure, there's some stuff that I picked up from my wishlist, and some from the rejected games of the Humble purge, but overall, it was just stuff that caught my eye in the moment. It was still the same process to play them, I log everything into a google sheet, and play each game for a minimum of an hour before giving up if they are not to my taste.

_{my steam wishlist, there's like 55 games on there}

The games

The final tally for the Humble Purge, or the games I played last year, was 110 games played for a total duration of 758h. This year, I played 55 games for a total of 805h. _{this is a stream of consciousness-ish article because I have not time to write anything else} 805h?! How the fuck is that possible! I mean sure, this time around I logged games that I played throughout the end of November and December 2024 but that's only an extra 1.25 month. 805h! What the hell?! I wasn't even trying hard this year! Am I a no-life? There's no way I played dozens of more hours of video games this year than last year, when my whole year last year was dedicated to the backlog. 805h! When did I have time to play all these games?

Let's look at the data to figure it out:

November and December do add about 110 hours, but still. It looks like February — which is not yet busy at work — and July — when I was on vacation — were the months I played the most, accounting for about 30% of my playtime. Honestly, apart from those, I don't feel like I spent that much time on video games this year. And I played so little games, how is it that I played half as many games, but ended up playing for longer than last year?

Alrighty, my 5 most played games account for ~50% of all my playtime last year, and my top 10 for over two thirds. I did get a bit obsessed with Street Fighter 6 at the beginning of the year, and then I got Slay the Spire on my phone and played on the can, and then you do need about 90h to get a proper playthrough of Elden Ring with the Shadow of the Erdtree DLC, and then well, you need to take your time with Silksong, and the new hard mode came out for Ready or Not so I had to play as well... I do start to get how I got to 805h this year. So did I really play games for for that long?

This graph shows for how long I've played each games. Every duration past 7h has grown compared to last year. This year I played almost half of all games for more than 7h and a third for more than 10h. I spent so much more time on each game in general, so that must mean I had more fun. I also introduced a new rating system this year, where instead of rating everything out of 10, some games are rated out of their scope. This is because making a flawless game is more impressive for a massive game of the proportions of Elden Ring, than one of the scale of King of the Bridges. Therefore the bigger games are rated out of 10, and the smaller ones out of less than 10. A flawless big game will be a 10/10, a flawless small game a 4/4 for example. This makes it super annoying to make graphs, so I have to put everything back to 10/10 to do it 🙃.

I was expecting way stronger results here. While the average is 7.26/10, which is higher than last year's 6.92/10, it's nowhere near high enough as this year I replayed some of my favourite games, and only picked games I thought I would enjoy. More on that in the The Journal is in need of improvements. Hype is not really super relevant this year, as I had not set games to play, and I just picked stuff based on a whim. But now the question is, did the game genre distribution change from last year since I could pickup whatever I wanted?

Some games were counted twice because they fit in two categories, like Balatro and Slay the Spire, which both fit in “Card” and “Roguelike” equally. Since I had half as many games this year, I have a bit less categories, and they are all represented on the graph. I merged “Action” into “Shooter” and “RPG” because all the action games I played this year actually fit either categories. No adventure games this year, which is a more generic genre. I consolidated the more thinking games that aren't puzzles into “Strategy”, and voilà. Overall, the top genres are pretty similar, except for “Point-and-clicks” which I just didn't play as I discovered I really hated them last year. Proportionally, way more Fighting games this year, more RPGs, Roguelikes, Puzzles and Platformers, the first being a genre I discovered this year, and the the last for genres I love. There was only one Metroidvania in 2025, which is something I'll have to remediate as it is one of my favourite genre.

I don't think it really matters that much if I finished games or not this year, but in any case, here's the breakdown: Of all 55 games I played, 35 could be finished (e.g. you can't “finish” a purely multiplayer game). Of those, I completed 24, played 8 for more than an hour before giving up, and abandoned 3 after only 1h. I finished about 69% (nice) of the games I set out to play this year, which is more than last year, but that's not surprising.

The Journal is in need of improvements

I already talked about what went sort of askew at the beginning of the year, but the way I corrected it was not satisfactory to me. First, choosing games on a whim led me to buy games on sale that I wanted to play, but then not playing them because by the time I got to them, there was something else that caught my eye. I have now created another backlog. Second, there is something I lost by not having a list of games to play, I'm just not challenging my tastes or being very adventurous. There are many games from the backlog last year that I would never in a million year have picked but that ended up being amazing experiences. With the way I chose my games this year, I was only playing stuff I expected to enjoy, and therefore set myself up for disappointment. Last year, there were not high expectations for a lot of games, and that lead the good surprise to become greater. I did play a couple of games from the rejected list of last year's backlog, and came out with a great surprise, which was Basement. With an original hype of 5/10 and a steam score of 77%, I would not have played this game, and yet it garnered a 7/8 rating after I played it.

Going back to Daryl Talks Games videos, which inspired the Humble Purge, I think I should do something similar to what he did — have a mini list of game to play throughout the year, like one a month or so, and then continue playing things on a whim.

_{thumbnails of Daryl's four backlog videos}

Guess I need another backlog project

As I've said above, I have acquired some games during steam sales that I haven't touched, an unforgivable offense that will need to be addressed. Therefore, my mini list of games that I have to play next year is gonna be those 12 games. One per month is honestly not that bad. I had done a Games Backlog project, followed by a Games Journal project, and I now realise that the optimal way to go about this is to have a bit of both, a Backlog Journal Fusion. And as usual, if I had just listened to Daryl's videos more carefully I would have seen that earlier. So that's what I'm gonna do next year if I have time. (Let's not kid ourselves, I will have time). See you next year,

Thank you for reading my logorrhea Eddie – Award winning author

The Greatest Athlete Of All Time

In March 2001, Hakuho Sho would fight his first few bouts before getting placed in a low division. In May 2001, he would compete in his first tournament, winning 3 bouts and losing 4, a negative record. Through to the end of 2003, he would post 14 winning records (3 x 6-1, 5 x 5-2, 6 x 4-3, 0 perfect) and 2 losing records (both 3-4, including his first that we have discussed). This is overall a good performance, but more of a performance that just shows that someone is better than those who are not great. Not necessarily an indicator of greatness, but an indicator that they might belong at a competitive rank and hold their own. After the November 2003 tournament, he was promoted to Juryo. This is the second-highest division in sumo, and the start of the salaried ranks where you actually get paid to compete. These ranks also demand 15 bouts instead of 7 per basho.

In his first basho, January 2024, he would win 9 of 15 bouts. This isn't spectacular, but as you reach the salaried ranks, competition is fierce. People just below are fighting like hell to get a salary, and people above are fighting like hell to not lose their salary. Many post losing records for their first second division (Juryo) basho as they adjust to the jump in skill, and the same often happens for their first top division (Makuuchi) basho. A winning record is a good indicator that he belonged at this level and could retain it. At higher ranks, he would be tested again, and in his next basho, he would show a considerable leap in skill, winning the second division championship with a 12-3 score. This would promote him to Makuuchi, the top division.

Where most stumble, he would succeed, posting another 12-3 record and winning a fighting spirit prize for his efforts in his first basho at this level. In 2004, another wrestler, Asashoryu, would win 5 of 6 annual tournaments, including this one. The next year, in 2005, Asashoryu would win all 6 tournaments.

Pictured: Asashoryu

While Hakuho could not win, at this time, he would prove himself a strong wrestler. Posting a few very strong double-digit scores, but mostly just favourable scores, he would work his way to the top of the rankings. In Sumo, you can get to a rank called Sekiwake by just posting positive scores. Once at Sekiwake, if you post ~33 wins over 3 basho (average 11-4 or better), you get promoted to Ozeki. He would get this with 9 wins in November 2005, 13 wins as a runner-up to the winner in January 2006, and 13 wins as a runner-up again in March 2006. While the sumo administration generally does not promote if one record is 9 wins, the other two in this Ozeki run were dominant enough to warrant promotion. The decision proved the right choice, with our wrestler winning his first Yusho (championship) with a 14-1 score in his first Ozeki performance in May 2006. Asashoryu would still win the remaining 3 Yusho in the year, leading to Asashoryu having 4 Yusho in 2006. In the last 3 tournaments, Hakuho would have another runner-up performance on one, a mediocre but still positive performance in another, and sit out the last due to injury.

Hakuho's next decade would look like this. Yusho are in green. Runner-up tournaments are in yellow:

Pictured: Hakuho

He won 35. He was the runner-up for 16. In 2010, he won 63 fights in a row, losing only 4 times that calendar year. Of 60 total tournaments, he won or was inches away from winning for 51 of them. In 12 of his championships, he was undefeated. This is in a combat sport. This is, quite simply put, probably the most dominant performance of any athlete across any sport in history.

For the rest of Hakuho's career, he would be plagued with injury, sitting out many basho and having many partial performances. He won 5 more tournaments, which is still a record that would be considered very dominant for most. When he competed for a full basho, he would still be expected to win, but his time was running out. He would retire at the end of 2021 after posting a 15-0 Zensho-Yusho (undefeated championship) in July as a send-off, marking the end of the Hakuho era.

Hakuho holds the record for: Most Yusho (45), most Zensho-Yusho (16), most consecutive Yusho (7), most playoffs (10), most wins (1187), most top division wins (1093), most wins in a calendar year (86) (tied with himself at another 86 record), the highest win rate (84.6%), and surely more if you start inventing stats like they do in baseball. But now, Hakuho had retired. After a decade and a half of straight dominance, without Hakuho, what would things even be like?

The Shadow of Hakuho

As sumo goes, things can only happen when the sumo administration wants them to happen. Hakuho's last competing tournament ended with him 14-0 against Terunofuji, also 14-0, who had won the previous two tournaments. Hakuho won, going 15-0, and Terunofuji got promoted to Yokozuna, ensuring that the top spot was not vacant. Teru was, despite having both his knees obliterated twice, an incredibly dominant Yokozuna, his chart here:

Pictured: Terunofuji

Terunofuji, or Big Teru, or simply just Teru, was a force of nature. He was so immensely strong and stable that there was a meme of “Teru wins lol”. You could charge hard, you could get low, you could get a double inside grip, you could get beside him, you could keep him off your belt, and at the end of the day, Teru wins lol. Why did you even bother with all that? There was only one problem, which may be apparent looking at this. His body was not in a great state. He had made it to Ozeki before this, but his knees imploded, his diabetes acted up, and he got kidney stones, so he took some time to heal and got demoted to the bottom of the rankings before returning and pulling all of this off. He would continue to get injured, to the point that when he retired, I wasn't even sure his knees ever existed in the first place.

Big Teru, having an imminent retirement for a couple of years, demanded the question of who would be next. There were some other promising wrestlers bubbling in the rankings:

In 2022, Mitakeumi was gaining some real momentum and, after hanging around the upper ranks for a while, had a very strong run, resulting in a championship and making Ozeki. In his first tournament at Ozeki, he would injure his shoulder and not take the time to get surgery for it to actually recover. Losing a central tenet of his power, he has remained a shell of his former self, in the bottom ranks of the top division.

Pictured: Mitakeumi

Kirishima, with incredible speed, power, and tactical ability, would also make Ozeki. He would win a Yusho as Ozeki, but last only one year, with injury preventing him from being able to apply the entire range of his sumo. Kirishima still shows incredible potential, but remains inconsistent as he makes the necessary adaptations to his style with some nagging injuries. At 29 with still incredible skill, it is not unlikely that with some more consistency, he may be able to regain Ozeki status.

Pictured: Kirishima

Hoshoryu, the nephew of the previously mentioned Asashoryu, was also climbing the ranks, making the top division in September 2020. Not a clear superstar out of the gate, but incredibly tricky and remarkably consistent, he slowly started gaining steam, rising in the ranks, and getting more wins. Hoshoryu is an incredible tactician, but loves risky plays. This has made him inconsistent, which he countered by doing almost strict belt battles for a while until he was one of the strongest. Making the top ranks in January 2022 and posting 10 winning records in a row, Hoshoryu would start posting fairly consistent double-digit wins and make Ozeki in September 2023. Hoshoryu was great, but his inconsistency made it clear that he was not picking up the torch of sheer dominance that we were used to. We will return to Hoshoryu later.

Pictured: Hoshoryu. Note: Hoshoryu often looks very angry while fighting because he has trouble seeing without his glasses

Kotonowaka (now Kotozakura) would make the top division mid-2020 and stay there starting 2021. Similar to Hoshoryu, he would slowly but consistently work his way up the rankings, slowly but steadily making improvements until he would make Ozeki in March 2024 after two jun-yusho. As he made Ozeki, he would change his name to Kotozakura, his grandfather's name. Kotozakura would have a pretty monstrous 2024, posting double-digit wins in 5 of 6 basho, and beating Hoshoryu to win 14-1 in November in a tournament where they were both dominating the rest of the field. Unfortunately, he would sustain an injury and, in 2025, he posted a 5-10 score, 9-5-1 score (1 absence due to injury), and the remainder would be 8-7. Not bad, but not nearly the dominance that could have been. He remains Ozeki and hopefully is able to return to dominant form.

Pictured: Kotozakura

In March 2024, the tournament in which Kotozakura made Ozeki with a jun-yusho, another rikishi exploded onto the scene. In his first top division tournament, he would win the Yusho with a 13-2 score, becoming the first wrestler in 110 years. In his 14th fight against Asanoyama, he would injure his ankle, forcing him to leave in a wheelchair. He would still win his 15th fight, but sitting out would cause him to get demoted in the following tournaments. He has since returned to the top division and shows flashes of brilliance when uninjured, but he has shown some persistent injuries, making it a big ask.

Pictured: Takerufuji

A New Era Emerges?

After making Ozeki and getting 9 winning records in a row, Hoshoryu would make it, getting a jun-yusho (1 short of winning) score of 13-2, followed by a 12-3 yusho. The 13-2 was considered equivalent to a yusho, and he was promoted to Yokozuna. While Hoshoryu has still struggled with some mild inconsistencies, he has continued to improve and is now an incredibly consistent title challenger, almost always in the title picture. Every year, he seems to just get better, and continuing to do so year over year now has him as a significant threat to all opponents. I believe he is the only rikishi with a winning record over the next rikishi we will discuss, Onosato.

Pictured: Hoshoryu

2024 would also see a giant in Onosato make the top division. Onosato has been incredibly dominant, with most bouts looking like he simply needs to escort his opponents out of the ring. He is an absolute monster at 6'4 410 lbs, but also incredibly fast on his feet. Onosato is easily the most dominant right now. Where other people are competing to get a yusho, Onosato is competing for a zensho-yusho. He is brand new, but just agility mixed with monstrous physical prowess means it's hard to find a real counter to his style. People were looking for Onosato to show Hakuho-like dominance, and while he has been incredible, watching how good Onosato is, then looking at Hakuho's record shows just how insane Hakuho was. Onosato is yet to post a losing record, and having made Yokozuna, it is not unlikely that he never will.

Pictured: Onosato

Last but not least, Aonishiki, one of two Ukrainian wrestlers, has just hit the scene. Something remarkable about Aonishiki is that he has so far almost exclusively posted the same score. When he was fighting 7 bouts, he would get 6-1. When fighting 15 days, he would get 11-4, no matter what level his opponents were. He has an amazing style of staying low, getting in close, and being incredibly stable on his feet. Once he is in below someone's stance, it is incredibly hard to fight back, and also hard to try to push him down because of his quick pivots and throws. In his last tournament, he managed to win a playoff against Hoshoryu, whom he has never lost against, and will begin his next tournament as our newest Ozeki. Having a little shrine to his success would be a cool addition to any Ukrainian restaurant in the city.

Pictured: Aonishiki

So we have some strong challengers, but also three competitors distinguishing themselves in the current moment. To further this, Hoshoryu keeps beating Onosato, Onosato keeps beating Aonishiki, and Aonishiki keeps beating Hoshoryu. While none of them have shown the absolute domination that was Hakuho, I think having a few people competing at such a high level makes it all the more exciting. It might just be the most exciting time in sumo in years.

The Next tournament is from January 11 to January 25. With daily updates (one day delayed once the tournament starts) HERE

I originally had a different idea for this article, but it turns out that the idea was a bit too ambitious for me to do in the given timeframe so I've pivoted to this :).

I have been writing, I promise! Just not for the article.

CAIN and Tom Bloom- what I've been doing every Saturday

Every Saturday, I run a TTRPG game called CAIN. It's extraordinarily fun and is written by the same guy who draws the art for LANCER. He's also the artist for the webcomic Kill 6 billion demons. The art is fantastic, it's so incredibly detailed and gorey in the best possible way. However, (and I say this in the kindest way possible) I think a lot of the tension that is built up in the webcomic is ruined by this... almost compulsive need to shove in “adult show comedy”. There's a lot of swearing to be funny, a lot of punchlines that land flat that echo “Marvel humor” in that way of “haha isn't that so weird to say at this serious moment?”. I wish I could recommend this webcomic because the idea and art is so interesting but I can't.

But CAIN is different. The entire rulebook takes itself seriously. And yes, it's edgy and takes itself seriously the entire way through, but that's what I think makes it cool! When I'm running a dark, edgy game, I'm not going to pull back and say “wow that was so cringe! Let me make a joke of how serious I'm taking this whole setting so I can claw back my credibility after being genuine!”. Sometimes, things can just be genuine!

CAIN is about exorcists working under a supernatural organization (named the eponymous CAIN) who work to kill SINS, manifestations of human trauma made monstrous. Exorcists have powers called Blasphemies. CAIN is a shadowy organization and has the entire world government in their pocket. It works off a 6 sided dice system, with theater of the mind combat.

If this sounds like the game for you, here's the link to the rulebook:

https://tombloom.itch.io/cain

There's a lot of interesting ideas and threads you can work off of, but enough established themes where it's easy for all the players to be on the same page.

And it's not supposed to be for long term campaigns.

The long term campaign

This is the story I've been working on for the past year. It's been tough coming up with a throughline that connects all the character's backstories, but I've managed it.

The Group

Good Intentions is an Ardence blasphemy (explosions and fire) exorcist who is now the handler for the group and is following the Virtue Justice. (Virtues are part of a supplemental pack – basically you get extra benefits for following specific rules, but get punished when you break them). Was part of a cult sacrifice before awakening his blasphemy and exploding the entire cult.

Silac is a Flux blasphemy exorcist (time control) who was captured by CAIN. British (this campaign takes place in the US). Killed her lover before being captured.

Shadow is a Whisper blasphemy exorcist (scary ghost follows you around) who was switched with the original soul of her body at ten years old. The original person was named Abigail, who now acts as the Whisper.

The story so far

The group has fought a bunch of SINs and have gotten closer as a group as a result. Carter, their handler, was murdered by Isaiah, a previous teammate of Carter and a high ranking official in the rival organization Iscariot (thanks Nick).

Carter became a SIN when she died, and is now held by Iscariot.

They're REALLY attached to their handler, so they're working with Iscariot to betray CAIN and bring back information for the organization. They're also betraying CAIN because they discovered that CAIN is prolonging the war on SINs rather than trying to end it.

The group has already met Isaiah, who was affected by the memory wipe in some way and wants to infiltrate CAIN by creating a massive SIN event on Christmas to distract all the exorcists away from the facility. The group managed to convince Isaiah to allow them to infiltrate the facility and not create a massive SIN event, since they were already part of CAIN and it would be easy for them to complete the heist.

(The whole “memory wipe / a missing puzzle which is framed by what I do know” is heavily inspired by There is no antimemetic division. I thought it was pretty interesting and had cool ideas.)

NPC story

The group is also trying to find a way to restore their old Handler, Carter, back to being human after becoming a SIN. Carter was murdered by Isiah, who's a high ranking rogue binder in a different organization called Iscariot whose goal is to destroy CAIN. Isaiah, Carter, and Morgiana were all exorcists who were on a team in CAIN before Morgiana was killed. Carter continued in CAIN and became a handler for Good, Silac, and Shadow, while Isaiah took Morgiana, who became a hound SIN, away from CAIN and joined Iscariot. I haven't decided whether the 3 of them were in a toxic relationship or not...

The group also had met Carter as a SIN as part of their deal with Isaiah to cooperate with Iscariot. The last message she gave them was to forget about her. Morgiana was killed at the time of the memory wipe done by Hope due to a psychic backlash as a result of her high level bond with TEMPERANCE.

Before Carter had died, her final message to them was: Leave or find out Project Temerity Stigmata Room 11668 Hide from Faith Dig into Morgiana Take Care

This was a scrambled message, they figured it out :). They were also able to connect with Carter as a SIN where they were able to talk to her normally, and she asked them to forget about her and run away.

The situation

They're breaking into their old facility that's located in Oregon. Hope is a Virtue that does mass memory wipes from a space station, and is away only on Christmas Eve.

The memory that was wiped is that Temperance (the missing Virtue) and Truth (something stronger, more priomordial than a Virtue that is behind the increase of SIN events) are both in an eternal, secret battle. It was wiped out ten years ago by a previous generation of Hope, due to ?someone? discovering something they weren't supposed to (I'll figure this out later). TRUTH is a priomordial thing where grace is stored and emanated from, allowing for the creation of exorcists and SINs. The way that CAIN has bound it is that: 1) TRUTH must remain bound, or it will be released upon the world 2) If everyone forgets that TRUTH exists, the binding fails because it's based off maintaining a knowledge equilibrium (still workshopping this one) 3) But if everyone knows TRUTH exists, TRUTH becomes powerful enough to break free

The group has already gotten to the research laboratory level. The head reasearcher Marcus Webb has allowed them to drop off cargo, while two of their allies who are NPCs (Barry and Ruby) both have an access key that gives access to the upper levels and are waiting for them.

Next session

I have a session in TWO weeks so it gives me a lot of time to plan... problem is there's a lot of threads to piece together and make into something that might kill a player.

There's two levels left for them to go through: a level called the HOLD, which is a prison system for more dangerous SINs and other things that need to be kept under lock and key. The other level is the Archive, where the information is being held.

Conclusion

Uauauaua helpppp

The year is 2025. It’s been five years since the COVID-19 lockdowns began, and our lives changed fundamentally. No longer could students and workers simply “go into the office” and continue on with life as normal. Suddenly, it was dangerous to leave your house. Everyone wondered: “will I get sick?” or even worse, “will I get my loved ones sick?” To deal with the predicament, governments and companies alike quickly pivoted to remote work. For the first time, office workers no longer had to physically go into the office. Instead, they could just log in from home and still get all of their work done. But it’s been five years since COVID, and many are wondering why anyone is still working from home. The push for Return to Office (RTO) grows increasingly stronger every year, and people are mad about it. .

You might be asking, “Elisa, why do you even care about this? Your job can’t be done remotely.” You would be right: the vast majority of public library work requires workers to be physically at the branch. I have to sit at the circulation desk and answer questions; I have to assemble craft supplies to test my programs; I have to collect books off of the shelves; I have to sit beside a senior to troubleshoot their computer question. Unless I become some form of manager (which wouldn’t happen for at least a decade), I will never have a remote or hybrid position as long as I stay on this career path. And yet, I am still very passionate about how utterly stupid the RTO mandates are.

Let’s rewind to the year 2022. In Winter 2022, I was completing the first year of my library science master’s degree in Toronto, and desperately hunting for a placement in my field that would employ me over the long university summer. My quest for money and experience was complicated by the fact that my then-boyfriend, now-fiancé, Bennet lived in Kingston, where he was completing his own masters. I scoured the internet, but there were no positions to be had anywhere in the Thousand Islands region. So, it fell to me to make a choice: should I put my career development first, and take a job in a major city, and continue to suffer the misery of a long distance relationship? Or should I choose love and happiness, spend the summer with Bennet in Kingston, and hope to find a retail job that would likely not give me any relevant experience to put on my resume? But then, the answer to all of my problems appeared on a beam of pixelated light, as if sent down from God herself: a remote job. It was the perfect solution; I could gain experience in a new aspect of librarianship based in Ottawa, while still living in Kingston and having a gloriously happy summer with Bennet. So, I took the position, and it was so worth it. Summer 2022 was an excellent one, filled with drive-in theaters, mini-golf, double rainbows, and adventures in upstate New York; none of which I would have experienced by myself in Toronto.

And at the end of Summer 2022, I had a similar yet opposite choice to make. Should I go back to full time classes in Toronto (which I was super disillusioned with) and deal with the one-two punch of seasonal depression and a return to long-distance, or should I take a different work placement in Kingston, where I could continue to learn new professional skills and also generally enjoy life. Due to the perks of remote schooling, I was able to work in-person in Kingston and do a remote class based in Toronto so that I could still graduate on time. Fall 2022 was also one of my happiest ever, featuring corn mazes, fall fairs, bar trivia, and my first Hoco. I will be forever grateful to the time and opportunities that these two remote options (work and school) provided for me, and I think everyone should have that chance.

Now that you know why I am fighting this battle, let's zoom out a bit and clarify what exactly I mean by remote work. In my mind, jobs that are largely computer based that involve minimal physical work or face to face interaction are well suited for remote work or hybrid positions. Obviously not all jobs meet that criteria, but many do meet them at least partially, and their workers could thrive with various levels of remote or hybrid working. To add, I also believe that a remote job should not be constrained to a strict 9-5. If you want to shift your working hours to 10-6 or 8-4, or split your shift so that you can take a longer lunch, or catch up on work on the weekends, I think that remote work should give you that chance. As long as you can attend any meetings and get your work done, I think that employees should be free to choose the hours that they keep.

And now, with all of that exposition out of the way, we can finally get into the many, many benefits of remote working.

Geography

If you have a remote job, then you aren’t physically tied down to your office location. This means that jobs can be distributed out of major cities and provide opportunities for residents of small towns. This is about more than just people who moved rurally during COVID, although this would benefit them too. I’m primarily bringing up this point because it would allow people to stay in their own communities without having to move out. So if the major employer of SmallTown, Ontario goes bust, there are options for people to get jobs without moving away. As an aside: I know that these opportunities are not one-to-one. Obviously someone who has worked a very physical job of manual labour will not be able to seamlessly adapt to a high-tech fully remote computer job, but I think the principle still stands.

Being able to work from anywhere also means that you can work while travelling, whether for pleasure, obligation, or emergency. This is good for employers because it means that their employees are more likely to keep working while out of town, which increases productivity. It’s also good for employees because it gives them much more flexibility to keep working without having to take vacation or sick days. Obviously I’m not advocating for employees to never take vacation days; quite the opposite. Remote work should empower employees to work from anywhere they want to, and still take all of their vacation days. Consider an employee that only has 10 days of vacation per year who wants to take a two week trip. They could take two days of vacation for travelling to and from their destination, and take three full vacation days at their destination, and then work remotely for the remaining five weekdays while at their destination. In this scenario, they are still able to save five vacation days to use another time during the year. Sounds amazing to me. On a personal note, during my summer of 2022 remote job, I had a family emergency back in Toronto. Since my job was remote, I was able to travel to Toronto and be with my family without missing work (and therefore without missing pay). It was a relief for me to not have to worry about taking time off when I didn’t have any vacation days, or not having to choose between paying rent and seeing family.

Even more, the ability to work when travelling doesn’t just have to be about jet-setting to Europe or Asia. Remote working means that you can work from your house, but also your favourite cafe, your friend’s house, your cottage. If you have a stable wifi connection and a power source, the opportunities are endless. My personal favourite place to work remotely that summer was on the front porch of my rental house, where I could sit in the sun and be surrounded by trees and fresh air. It really made working a lot more enjoyable for me.

Traffic & Commuting

When you don’t have to physically go into the office, you no longer have to commute. It’s a simple statement but it makes such a big difference. I have multiple friends who technically live and work in the GTA, but one lives in Markham and works in Mississauga, and two live in Burlington and work in Toronto. For all of them, it takes at least an hour each way to commute into work. Being able to live close to your work is a privilege that not everyone has access to. Often, people are forced to choose between a long commute and a precarious or unaffordable living situation, especially with the current housing crisis. If you work remotely, your commute becomes the 10 second walk from your bed to your desk. And that means that you get those two hours back! You can do whatever you want with them: get on top of your daily chores, get some exercise, do a hobby, spend time with loved ones. The world is your oyster because you have that extra time back in your day.

Less commuting also means that there will be less traffic. Obviously there will still be some traffic for the people who work jobs that cannot be done remotely, and travel that is not work-related. But traffic overall, especially the dreaded rush hour, will be significantly reduced. This has a lot of excellent downstream effects. Less cars on the road means that there will be less reliance on cars, and makes more space for a non-car centric way of existing. If your primary use for your car was commuting to and from work, then remote work could give you the freedom to get rid of your car. This is probably most realistic for larger households, who may be able to downsize from three cars to two cars, or from two cars to one car. This obviously reduces the costs associated with owning a car (maintenance, insurance, gas, etc etc), and likely would be a net positive for households overall.

Fewer cars on the road will also be better for the environment in multiple ways. Obviously it would reduce air pollution, which was memorably noticed during the first few months of COVID, when major cities worldwide began announcing that their smog had visibly reduced during the height of restrictions. However, vehicle emissions are not the only factor that we should be considering. Rubber particulates that are released from car tires as they wear and tear are a huge source of microplastic pollution, reportedly accounting for more than 25% of global microplastics in the environment. The auto industry itself creates so much waste and is also energy and resource intensive. Although remote work cannot by itself solve any of these problems, the chance to reduce the amount of cars on the road, or even reduce the overall amount of cars in use is absolutely one that we should be pursuing. It’s also worth noting that the reduction of cars on the road would help reduce the amount of car accident-related injuries and deaths, for both drivers and pedestrians.

Pivoting away from cars, widespread remote work also has the power to change how public transit infrastructure is planned. Many major cities, including my hometown of Toronto, have their transit prioritized to shuttle office workers to and from the downtown core. This is great if you actually need to go downtown, but makes it a lot more inconvenient to use transit to get across town, say from North York to East York. If there were fewer workers commuting downtown for the traditional 9-5 workday, it would free up transit resources. Instead of being forced to focus on adding capacity to the existing downtown pipelines, they could create brand new routes that spread access more equitably around the whole city.

Illness

Remote working is generally a much more supportive environment for people with illnesses. Let’s start with acute illnesses: a strong work from home policy means that people no longer have to come into the office when they are sick. No one likes it when their coworkers come into work with a cold; it’s easy to spread germs and become the office patient zero. And yet many people struggle with the idea of taking time off for minor illnesses. I personally struggle with this even though I have a healthy sick day allowance, because I don’t feel like a common cold warrants me taking off 5-7 days of work. If I was able to work from home, it would be a non-issue: I could still work as much as I saw fit without majorly stressing out about accidentally infecting my coworkers. Remote work also benefits people with acute injuries. Say you broke your ankle and had difficulty getting to and maneuvering through the office with your cast and crutches. If you were able to work from home, you would not be forced to put unnecessary strain on your body.

Remote working is also great for people with chronic illnesses. They can save a lot of spoons by not having to commute to the office, and well as not having to do other miscellaneous tasks like packing a lunch or putting on makeup that are often necessary for in person work. A flexible remote work setup also makes it a lot easier for people to take the time needed to go to doctor’s appointments. If you have to be in the office 9-5 but you have an appointment, it often requires taking at least a half-day off in order to attend it. Whereas a flexible remote set-up could let you take a few hours in the middle of the day to visit the doctor, and make up the missing hours in the evening. Even without having an appointment, the flexibility provided by remote work would allow people with chronic illnesses to work at their own pace and take breaks as needed. A potentially underrated point in favour of remote work means that people with chronic illnesses wouldn’t have to interact with the physical environment of the office. One of my coworkers is allergic to dust, mold, and perfume, all of which are abundant at my workplace. Other things at a workplace to consider are stairs or other physical accessibility barriers (both at the office and on the way to it), non ergonomic work stations, poor ventilation, and bad HVAC settings (being too hot and too cold). In all fairness, this is based on the assumption that someone’s home is better suited to them than their office, which is likely but not guaranteed. However, I do feel like people often have more control over their living spaces than their offices, which is a major point in the favour of remote work.

Freedom to Be Home

Extending from the previous section, a lot of people consider their home to be their happy place. A place where they enjoy being, and something they have set up and arranged to their specific liking and needs. I don’t think it would be a huge exaggeration to say that most people would prefer to spend more time in their homes, instead of in the office. Homes typically have a lot more amenities than an office, such as a private bathroom, a full kitchen, and access to all of your clothes and possessions. The amount of times that I’ve forgotten something for work at home, or something for home at work is more than you would think, and I know at least that I would appreciate it if I didn’t have to lug a giant tote bag full of all of my things between the two places. Having access to your own kitchen during the work day means that people are more able eat home cooked food instead of having to spend money on unhealthy take out. Having access to your own space means that it’s much easier for you to sneak in a quick workout and shower in the middle of the day instead of having to get it at an unholy time before or after work. The standards at home are a lot more relaxed, so you can work in your own personal uniform of comfortable clothes instead of a stifling office ensemble.

Besides the comforts and luxuries of home, there are also more important reasons one might want to stay home. A big one is pets: many animals benefit from having their human around all day to interact with, instead of being cooped up all alone. If they need to be fed, walked, given medication, or just snuggled with, their human is available to meet all those needs while working from home. Being at home is also convenient if you need to receive any packages (increasingly common while the hysteria of online shopping has a firm grip on our society) or have any repairs done. The last time I had to receive a furniture delivery from Ikea, I had to specifically schedule it on a weekday that I didn’t work in order to get the pieces delivered up into my unit, and also not be charged exorbitantly for a nighttime or weekend delivery. I’m overall very lucky that my in-person job has some flexibility of hours, but it would have been even easier if I was a remote worker.

On a more serious note, being at home allows workers, primarily women, to perform more caregiving duties while still participating in the workforce. Women often bear the brunt of caregiving responsibilities in their households, which means that if the family can’t afford daycare then it’s the woman who most often stays home with the children. This means that women are participating in the workforce to a lesser extent, so they are sacrificing career growth and future earning potential. Some women ideally would like to be stay-at-home moms, and I fully support them. However, I worry for the women who, for whatever reason, want to be working mothers but are unable to work while caring for their children. Being able to work means that you have access to your own income, your own relationships, your own goals, and your own achievements. Women who don’t work and don’t have their own incomes are more easily exploited by abusive partners. So, having a remote position with flexible hours allows women to be at work while actually being at home keeping an eye on their children. It should also be a good reminder for any men who have remote jobs that they too could become the primary caregivers for their children. I clarify that I’m not implying that it’s easy to work full time while caring for your children, but it is at least possible to do so, compared to how impossible it is when you have to be in the office 9-5 every day. It also allows you to perform less intensive acts of caregiving, like picking your kids up from school, or taking your older relatives to appointments, without having to constantly sacrifice work and career. As someone who may have to care for children, and very likely will have to care for parents, this point feels more significant to me, and it’s a non-insignificant factor in my overall thoughts about having kids of my own someday.

I Agree, Remote Work Is Better!

Thanks for agreeing with me! I know I’ve been very eloquent and convincing. :) But to be fair, we should also examine some of the downsides of remote work.

Space and Equipment

I worry that companies may use remote work as an excuse to not adequately equip their workers. In the office, you are ideally provided with a computer, monitor, keyboard and mouse, a desk and a chair, and other more specialized equipment that is required for your role. When working at home, you definitely have to provide your own desk and chair, and potentially even your own tech. It unfairly puts the burden onto the worker, when this is something that the company has and should still be responsible for. In the same way, I have to recognize that not everyone has an adequate space to work from home. Traditionally, it’s the responsibility of the company to provide the office space, but in remote work that goes back on the worker. During COVID a lot of people talked about how they were stuck in their homes with absolutely nowhere to go, and while that’s more of an indictment on the lack of third spaces in our current society, it should be recognized that the office is a space that you get to go to, and might even enjoy going to.

Social Isolation

If you’ve watched any workplace comedy show then you might think that your coworkers will become your best friends, and maybe even your lovers. Television is obviously not the same as reality, but it is true that you often spend more time with your coworkers than anyone else, and that a certain bond definitely forms. I know that if I wasn’t part of this wonderful thing called Code Monkey Cafe then I would have a lot less friends, and would definitely turn more to my coworkers to fill that resulting gap in my life. As much as we love to hate them, our coworkers are indeed a major part of socialization or many workers. In a fully remote position, it becomes much harder (but not impossible) to make social connections when you are always separated by a screen. There is no longer any chatter when you first get into the office, no shared lunch breaks or coffee runs, and no holiday parties. The camera-off culture during video calls also contributes to this lack of social interaction. It’s such a relief to have your own camera off, but it’s so demoralizing to stare into a void of black boxes with no one looking back at you. At my own workplace, we have department-wide meetings once a month; part of the reason why they are such a waste of time is because we don’t actually get to interact with other members of our department. These remote meetings don’t really give us any opportunity to meaningfully connect or build solidarity with one another, and I wish that they were at least occasionally in-person.

Lack of Downtown Customers

An argument against remote work that seems to constantly be brought up is that if there are no downtown workers, the businesses that cater to downtown workers will go out of business. “Oh won’t someone think of the poor workers!” they cry, “the poor dry-cleaners, shoe-shiners, dentists, and lunch-counter workers! Will no one think of them??” Well, I am thinking of them, and I am not too distraught about it. First of all, there will still be downtown workers, because not everyone’s job can be done remotely. Second of all, why should we prioritize these downtown businesses over similar ones that are located in people’s home neighbourhoods? They too have dry-cleaners, shoe-shiners, dentists, and fast casual lunch spots. Ideally neither one of these groups would suffer, but it’s impossible to make a cake without breaking a few eggs. Frankly, I think a widespread shift to remote work would be an excellent opportunity to make more mixed-use neighbourhoods, and redistribute resources around the city instead of only focusing them in certain high-value areas (like the downtown core). This also ties into one of the major reasons that companies are forcing their workers back to being in-person: their office buildings are languishing empty. Corporations have egg on their faces for wasting all this money on a large workspace, and they’re forcing people back to the office just so that they don’t look embarrassing to shareholders. This too could be a great reason to consider redeveloping downtown areas to become more mixed use, but no one wants to foot the bill for the renovations. Tragically, most office buildings can not simply be converted into apartment units with a wave of a magic wand, no matter how much I might want that to be true. But there has to be a happy medium between empty offices and forcing people back to in-person work just to save face.

What does this all mean?

Hopefully you still believe in the many benefits of widespread remote work. All of these advantages that I’ve talked about so far are worthwhile and worth keeping. I’m a firm believer in a healthy work-life balance; whenever possible, people should be working to live, instead of living to work. The flexibility and opportunities granted by remote work can help make the need to work more tolerable and manageable, as well as more affordable.

The return to office mandates that have recently become popular destroy all of the things. Return to office means a return to commuting, pollution, traffic, illness, being uncomfortable, barriers to working, and much more. It should also be noted that the return to office mandates aren’t even being done well. There are hundreds of stories about offices that are not large or private enough to accommodate workers and their tasks, people schlepping themselves to the office just to be on remote calls all day, overcrowded and underfunded amenities and services. But most of all, people are less happy and less productive. Remote work wasn’t perfect, but it granted a lot of possibilities that we could have only dreamed of pre-COVID shutdowns, and it shouldn’t be arbitrarily taken away based on the whims of CEOs and politicians.

And that, my friends, is why I think Return to Office is stupid.

Introduction

What does the word “football” mean to you? As I'm sure you're aware, this is a controversial question. To the majority of native-born English speakers, “football” refers to the gridiron variety originating in Canada and most popular now in the United States. However, “native-born” is doing much work here, as the majority of the native Anglophone population – 260 million out of 400 million globally – are born in the United States and Canada, skewing the statistics significantly. When restricted to the regional rather than global level, native born English speakers referring to football are actually referring to the most traditionally popular variant of ball-sports-played-on-foot in that region. Indeed, if you were to travel to every former British colony where English remains the dominant language, you would hear the lone word “football” used to refer to Soccer, American Football, Canadian Football, Rugby Union, Rugby League, Australian Football, and Gaelic Football without qualifier. But why? Why are these sports all called football? Which sport was called “football” first? Who owns the term “football?” Should we even call Gridiron and Rugby football “football” when the “balls” in question are lemon and egg shaped respectively and both games have very little kicking?¹ Why does the Wikipedia article for each of these sports reference something called “Medieval Football?” What even is that? Answering these questions was one of two things motivating this article. The other was Blood Bowl, a board game set in a medieval fantasy world with Orcs, Elves, and other such creatures. Instead of fighting on battlefields, these fantasy creatures resolve their differences in a violent sports competition nominally inspired by American Football.² Playing Blood Bowl made me curious: what were the antecedents of modern football games actually like? Is the lore of Blood Bowl, in fact, real life?

Episkyros and Harpastum

It may (or may not) surprise you, but all the games that Anglophones call football allegedly share one common ancestor. In Sparta starting from at the latest 800 BC, a game possibly meant to train young boys to operate as a unit (as claimed by later sources) was developed. The game was called επίσκυρος (episkyros or episkuros), meaning “upon the stone debris” or ocassionally eπίκοινος (epikoinos), meaning “upon or in the common”.³ The game was played on a rectangular field of unknown size, with 3 lines crossing the field horizontally, one at each end and one through the centre. The centre line was referred to as the eponymous “skyros,” specifically because it was typically marked with chips of limestone. The two teams started an unknown distance off the line, and a ball of unknown construction (probably a stuffed animal bladder) was placed on the line by a neutral party. The two teams would then either fight for the ball or determine who starts with the ball in some other fashion (sources vary). The goal of each team was to throw the ball over the heads of the other team and past the line at the other team's end of the field, at which point the game would end immediately.

How exactly the game worked beyond the very beginning and end is not clear.⁵ As will become a consistent pattern throughout most of western history, Greek intellectuals were seemingly too embarrassed by the existence of team sports (as opposed to the individualistic achievements celebrated in the Olympics) to write meticulous accounts of the game. Nonetheless, the game spread out of Sparta and was so popular that at one point a Macedonian Episkyros player was allegedly granted honorary citizenship of Athens in celebration of his talents. As Athenaeus recounts in Deipnosophistai: “The Athenians made Aristonicus the Carystian, Alexander's ball-player, a citizen of their city on account of his skill, and they erected a statue to him.” Now obviously the Athenians had an ulterior motive: sucking up to Alexander the Great, but it is worth noting that Episkyros was a popular enough sport that the ruling class of Athens used prowess in it as a pretext for extending favour.

The Romans, in their typical fashion, allegedly⁴ copied the Greek Episkyros and adapted it to fit their own sensibilities. In the 2nd century BC, following the Roman Republic's ultimate subjugation of Greece, the story goes, the victorious Roman soldiers brought Episkyros home with them. Unlike the Greeks, who were ashamed of the game's popularity with the lower classes, the writers of Roman records found Harpastum worth describing and on occasion, even encouraged their readers to give the sport a chance. The physician and author of medical texts Claudius Galenus (Galen) recommended Harpastum, stating: “[Harpastum is] greater than wrestling or running because it exercises every part of the body, takes up little time, and costs nothing [...] it is a profitable training in strategy.” and “When, for example, people face each other, vigorously attempting to prevent each other from taking the space between, this exercise is a very heavy, vigorous one, involving much use of the hold by the neck, and many wrestling holds.”

It is thanks to this unashamed embrace of Harpastum as a harmless hobby that we know so much about it. Based on my review of descriptions of the game by Pollux, Apollinaris, Galen, Antiphones, Sidonious, as well as a reading of Marindin's 1890 collection of notes on Harpastum, I was able to reconstruct the most common rules.⁶ Harpastum was played on a rectangular field, probably between 80 and 120 metres long and 40 to 60 metres wide. As with Episkyros, three important lines were marked: end zone lines at the far ends of the field, and a centre line at the exact midpoint of the field. The objective of the game was to throw the ball on to the ground within the width of the field but past the line indicating the other team's end zone. The two teams could advance the ball and stop the ball's advance however they liked, almost always in hand a la Rugby as opposed to kicking the ball along a la Soccer. Unlike in Episkyros, where a team scoring immediately ended the game, Harpastum was scored in points with the winning team being whichever had more points at the end of play.

The teams would be equally sized, and could have as few as 5 and as many as 15 players on the field at a time. Antiphones and Sidonious describe three positionals: the Standing players (Stantes), Middle Runners (Medicurrens), and Forwards. Each of these positions specialized into one or two specific skills important to succeeding at Harpastum. The Stantes, equivalent to a hybrid of a Safety and pocket passing Quarterback in American Football or a Fullback in Rugby Football, was tasked with standing in defense by their team's endzone. Typically large and strong but not particularly agile, if a Stantes came into possession of the ball somehow, they were expected to be able to throw it back quite far to a friendly Medicurrens. The Medicurrens were midfield players, specialized in quick running, short passes, and juking out defenders. The Medicurrens also acted as the principle ball carriers, and were typically the player expected to score points. It should be no surprise that the Medicurrens was the most exciting and prestigious of the positionals. Antiphanes describes watching a particularly adept Medicurrens: “He seized the ball and passed it to a team-mate while dodging another and laughing. He pushed it out of the way of another. Another fellow player he raised to his feet. All the while the crowd resounded with shouts of Out of bounds, Too far, Right beside him, Over his head, On the ground, Up in the air, Too short, Pass it back in the middle.” Medicurrens, when faced with a prospective tackle were supposed to be able to dump the ball off quick to one of their fellows and had a reputation for wily trickiness. The trickiness of a good Medicurrens was the source of Harpastum's nickname “phaininda” (to deceive), as Pollux recounts: “Phaininda takes its name from Phaenides, who first invented it,⁷ or from phenakizein (“to deceive”), because they show the ball to one man and then throw to another, contrary to expectation.” Fans of Gridiron Football should recognize the play Pollux is describing as a “pump fake”. The final positional was the Forward. Forwards were mobile to a lesser degree than a Medicurrens, but stronger. Somewhere between the lumbering Stantes and agile Medicurrens in build, the Forward's job principally was to brawl and tackle. As the ball was advanced, Forwards on attack were supposed to block down defenders while on defense Forwards were supposed to bring down the ball carrier while ruining passing attempts. The exact mechanism by which the ball would change possession isn't entirely clear, but it appears that the most common cause of turnovers was intercepted passes.

Harpastum was a game of incredible violence. The historical record of the game is replete with injuries not just of the players themselves but bystanders as well. Harpastum related injuries over the centuries included broken legs, arms, and backs. In one incident, a man receiving a hair cut or a shave at a tonstrina (barbershop) was killed when a pickup game of street ball spilled over into the store. The brutality of the game is not surprising if it is indeed based on Episkyros, as the original Greek game was intended to teach young men martial skills.

The Roman Empire was massive and long-lived, and Harpastum retained popularity throughout most of its existence and across most of its territory. However, for whatever reason following the split of the Roman empire into West (based in Italy) and East (based in Greece), Harpastum declined precipitously in popularity in the Eastern half. As the classical era gave way to the medieval in the Eastern Mediterranean, Harpastum died out there. In the west on the other hand, even after the Roman Empire's collapse, the game would survive and eventually evolve into what sports historians call “Medieval Football.”

Knights in Shining Shoulder Pads

If you look at the Wikipedia articles for any game that calls itself Football in the present day, it will list a mysterious game called “Medieval Football” as its direct ancestor, presumably removed by only a couple of generations or even less. What exactly is this? Unlike Harpastum which was in general one game with slight regional variations, Medieval Football was a broad spectrum of independent games that almost certainly branched off of Harpastum and then may have then syncretized with some local indigenous ball games in the former territory of the Western Roman Empire. Trying to pin down what exactly Medieval Football games were is further complicated by the return of the shameful connotation of the ball-playing sports in Western Europe in this time. When reconstructing these games, we can't rely on the same level of in depth description that we have for Harpastum, instead many of these games are referenced by contemporary sources only in passing and often with a dismissive attitude.

In general, however, it appears that the successor games in the former Roman territories branched off into two subsets following Rome's collapse: “carrying” games and “kicking” games (so labeled in Francis Willughby's post-medieval 1660 text Book of Games), differentiated by the principle action through which the ball was advanced down field. From around the 6th century AD until around the 13th century AD, both variants were interchangeably referred to in England as “playing ball” (literally pila ludicra according to the Venerable Bede or pilae ludus by Nennius) and after the 14th century AD as simply “foot ball” or “football.” Little is recorded in primary sources about the rules of these games until the early modern era. What we do know for sure, however, was that these games were both extremely popular and extremely violent.

As with Harpastum, there were typically no or few limits in either version of medieval football on how violent the contest could be. In multiple cases in medieval England, players were charged with murder for killing opponents during the game.⁸ It should be no surprise then, that the legal authorities of the middle ages in Britain and France (where football was most popular) cracked down on the game frequently. In fact the first recorded instance of the word “football” in the English language was a legal edict issued by the mayor of London banning football games in the streets of London.⁹

Despite their violent nature, football games (of the carrying type especially) took on a literally religious significance in England. The carrying game of football acquired the nickname “Shrovetide Football” in medieval England, as large semi-official exhibition games were organized around Christmas, Easter, and Shrove Tuesday. In fact, these games are still practiced in England to this day in certain parts of the country. Shrovetide football has few rules – except for avoiding manslaughter and grievous harm. Instead of being played on a ~100 metre field, the game is played on the entire space between two villages or neighbourhoods. Each participating polity has a traditional stone or marker for the purpose of playing football and the winner of the Shrovetide game is whichever polity touches the ball to the other polity's marker first. Under traditional Shrovetide rules, there are no restrictions on how the ball can be moved. It is and was not uncommon for the ball to be advanced on horseback (or in a motor vehicle today).

The association of the carrying game with religious festivals was significant enough that it led to their suppression under the Cromwell regime in the 1640s and 50s .¹⁰ Both causes for legalistic suppression of football – religious and in the name of public order – failed miserably. In the middle ages, when the state machinery was primitive, such edicts were simply ignored without consequence. Under the republican regime (arguably the first modern state in Europe) the ban was actually enforced to disastrous effect. 13 citizens engaged in a friendly match of the kicking game were arrested by military authorities in the town of Scarborough in January of 1660.¹¹ On the same day in Bristol, military authorities interceded to break up a football game of the carrying variety. Both towns erupted into riots, which spread to other cities where football was popular. By March 30th, restrictions on football where walked back by most regional authorities and football fans had seized the city hall of York “in warlike manner…with halberds, swords, muskets, fowling pieces and other guns and weapons” (according to a paper by Professor Bernard Capp of the University of Warwick) and demanded a nation-wide end to restrictions on ball playing. The republican government revoked all bans, but not before fining the ringleaders of the York rioters £10 each for “instigating publick disorder.”

In order to reconstruct the medieval form of football, we will rely on the early modern writingof Francis Willughby in his Book of Games. Although Willughby was writing as late as the 1660s, his extensive description of football is the first of its kind since the Roman period. He was writing during a renewed embrace of public sport by the British aristocracy following the downfall of the republican dictatorship, when even a sport as low-brow as football was allowed an academic treatment. Willughby refers to the kicking game as “football” and lays out the rules:

They blow a strong bladder and tie the neck of it as fast as they can, and then put it into the skin of a buls cod and sow it fast in. They play in a longe streete, or a close that has a gate at either end. The gates are called Gaols, as A B, C D. The ball is thrown up in the middle between the gaols, as about O, the plaiers beeing æqually divided according to their strength and nimblenesse. A plaiers must kick the ball towards C D gaol, C plaiers towards A B gaol, and they that can strike the ball thorough their enemies gaol first win. They usually leave some of their best plaiers to gard the gaol while the rest follow the ball.

They often breake one anothers shins when two meete and strike both togather against the ball, & therefore there is a law that they must not strike higher then the ball. Tripping Up of Heels is when one followes one of his enemies & to prevent him from striking the ball strikes that foot as hee runs, that is from the ground, which catching against the other foote makes him fall. All the slight is to hit that foot that is mooving and just taken from the ground, & then a little touch makes him fall. Suppose a foot fixed, b mooving from n to m. If it bee strooke on the outside before it comes to C, just against the fixed foote, it falls crosse behind the fixed foot at L and makes him fall. The harder the ball is blowne, the better it flys. They use to put quicksilver into it sometimes to keep it from lying still. The plaiers must at first stand all at their gaols, the ball lying just in the middle betweene them, & they that can run best get the first kick. In this we can see that the kicking form of football has already become significantly less violent that its ancestor game of Harpastum, even before the Cambridge rules neutered it totally. Even so, it seems that while you could not tackle your opponent outright (“therefore there is a law that they must not strike higher than the ball”), you could still trip them down. Willughby describes the carrying game – which he refers to as hurling – as follows:

Hurling is divided into In-Hurling & Out-Hurling. The first is thus. After 20 men or thereabouts are numbered on either party, one takes a leather ball & tosses it up in the midst betweene both sides. He that catches it endeavours to run away with it to the adverse goale. If one of the opposites stop him, either he wrestles (then the ball is throwne to one on his owne side, but the others may intercept it, & taken by one of his owne party, who runs away with it towards the contrary goale &c.) or throwes it if he can to one of his owne side & refuses to wrestle. Outhurling is playd by one parish against another, or Easterne men against the Westerne, or Cornwall against Devonshire. They play in the same manner as the other, but make churches, townes &c. theire goales. If any of them can hold of a stirrop he is not denyed liberty to run with the ball in his hand as fast as the horse goes. Other horses are engaged against him. They runne through the worst of places, quagmires &c. If he that tosses up the ball at the first be not in the middle, he is then to hurle at the furthest goale. Any one that can procure leave from the next Justice of Peace, goes into a markett towne & holds in his hand a wooden ball covered with a silver plate, & by a proclamation invites all that will come to a Hurling, mentioning the time & place. This fellow that finds the ball gathers mony of those that play.

What interest me about this passage is that it actually divides the carrying game in two: it describes a carrying game obviously very similar to Harpastum (“In-Hurling”) and Shrovetide football (“Out-Hurling”). If these were indeed considered separate games – and we have no reason to suppose otherwise – then it implies that it is the “in-hurling” variety that serves as the one-generation antecedent of Gridiron Football and Rugby rather than the academic consensus ancestor Shrovetide football. It is also worth noting that Willughby only gives the name “football” to the kicking game, which is unusual for the time. This is the earliest example I could find claiming that the kicking game and carrying games were in fact separate families rather than the same amorphous game played by the common mobs.

Modern Football

The word “Modern” in the historiographical sense refers to the period of history following the rapid social changes of the 15th and 16th centuries, but in the study of football “modern” (as distinct from “medieval”) refers to the games played after football transitioned from being a sport played by common people to a game with rigidly defined rules developed by the growing bourgeois upper class in the 19th century. The bourgeoisie – who were born from the urban merchant and business owning classes of medieval Europe – were themselves very recently “common” people, meaning that as they rose to power in the states of Europe in the 18th and 19th centuries, common athletic pastimes like football rose with them and eclipsed sports with a more aristocratic tinge.

If any singular transition from medieval to modern football can be pinned down, it must be what occurred in 1845 at the Rugby School in Warwickshire, England. Rugby was a school founded in the 1500s as a “public” school opened to the children of any family able to pay for tuition.¹² By the 19th century, this meant that it was one of the network of prestigious schools that trained generations of British colonial administrators, army officers, and sea captains alongside Eton, Harrow, and Winchester College.¹³ It makes sense then, as a nucleus of bourgeois culture, that Rugby would take a game as diverse and nebulously defined as British football and attempt to constrain it to a consistent and rational ruleset. The bourgeoisie have always prided themselves on doing away with medieval superstition and irrationality in favour of sterile and liberal rationalism.

The ruleset that Rugby developed was based on the carrying game of football rather than the kicking game and was inspired by the rules of medieval football that happened to be most popular in the Warwickshire area. The rules as they were laid out in 1845 were written by the physical education department of the school and you can read them in their original form here if you really want to, although there are some glaring omissions (how many points is a try?). The rules were quite similar to modern rugby (of both kinds). The original game of rugby was played on a 110 yard by 65 yard field with 10 yard endzones. The goal of the game was to touch the ball to the ground in the other team's end zone (worth 5 points) at which point you would be given the opportunity to score more points (2) by kicking the ball through upright poles at the front of each endzone. The ball could only be advanced forward by kicking it or carrying it, but could be thrown laterally or backwards. Tackled ball carriers had to relinquish control of the ball to a teammate and players without the ball could only be tackled by the ball carrier.

Immediately the codified game of Rugby became immensely popular with the upper and middle classes of the British Empire. As it spread outwards through the empire, it was tweaked by the settlers who brought it with them to colonial schools. The first of these tweaked versions of football was Australian rules football in 1858, followed shortly after by Canadian football in 1861 (developed right here in Toronto, Ontario). By 1863, Rugby football had escaped the culture of the bourgeois upper-crust and had become popular in England as a general past-time enjoyed by all. Calls went out to further refine a unified code of football and the “Football Association” (FA) was founded by a network of donors interested in the sport and set about writing a new universal code for the game. However, things took a strange turn. The document returned by the FA was not at all like Rugby. It banned hard hits and tackles, ball carrying, and replaced the end-zones with goals. The FA had based their new rules not on the carrying game as many of the organization's initial donors had presumed they would, but instead on the kicking game of football. This result was polarizing, with those donor institutions that were unwilling to accept the new rules leaving the FA in its first year of operation and organizing their own competitor the “Rugby Football Union” by 1871. Eventually, the FA rules would become more popular with the British public, which is why soccer is referred to as “football” in England and “soccer” in the rest of the Anglosphere, where local variants of Rugby had already been established by the time of the FA/RFU split.¹⁴ Rugby is still played at a high level in England despite soccer's much greater popularity, but it has attained a reputation for being a bit of a snobbish sport enjoyed by Eton alumni.

Aside on the history of American Football

If you google “when was the first game of American Football played” or “first game of College Football” you will be served factually incorrect information. This has been my pet peeve and a thorn in my side since before I began writing and researching this article. The false information is the following: “What is considered to be the first American football game was played on November 6, 1869, between Rutgers and Princeton, two college teams.” This quote is lifted directly from Wikipedia. This is not correct. American Football is a SPECIFIC sport. It is not just any old game of football played on American soil! I have even seen this claim repeated by so called sports ““academics”“.¹⁵

American Football is a Rugby-descended sport played on a gridiron where the ball is moved by carrying it. There are very restrictive rules on when players are and are not allowed to kick the ball intentionally. I ask you this: does this sound like American football to you? “[The game] consisted of 25 players per team and used a round ball that could not be picked up or carried. It could, however, be kicked or batted with the feet, hands, head, or sides, with the objective being to advance it into the opponent's goal. Rutgers won the game 6–4.” This is not American Football! This is the kicking game of football! What Rutgers and Princeton were playing was a more civilized version of American kicking game “mob football” (as medieval football was called at the time). It is basically soccer. It has no relation to American Football in any way other than being a game played in America with a ball on foot.

The first game of American Football, as I explained in my article about Canadian Football, was played in 1874 between McGill and Harvard. American Football is directly descended from Canadian Football and has absolutely no relation at all to the so called “American Football” game played between Princeton and Rutgers in 1869. It is a genuine disgrace that the NCAA lists the “1869 season” in their College Football archive. The first actual season of College Football was played in 1874 after the McGill-Harvard game with rules inspired by Rugby Football and was won by an undefeated Yale team who went 3-0-0 that year.

The biggest mystery of all is why this is even claimed – and so widely! It is not like this game was the first time a game of medieval (pre-Rugby) football was played in the United States of America. Are Americans just too chauvinistic to admit that their national pastime was not invented in America? They have to claim the 1869 Princeton Rutgers game was American Football because otherwise they would have to admit that the first Gridiron game was played in Toronto? Not only is this unfair to our country, it is also unfair to the Yale football program who should rightly be credited as the first NCAA champions (not Rutgers).

The Football Family Tree

Based on my study on the games pretending to the name “football,” we can roughly organize the history of the sports into a single family tree extending back to Episkyros. This family tree is exhibited in the following diagram:

Extinct antecedents of modern football are shown in red. Games that are played ceremonially but do not have professional infrastructure are shown in yellow. Games with professional leagues are shown in green. Lines show both confirmed and alleged descent. I have left Shrovetide football as the ancestor of Gridiron football and Rugby football rather than differentiating between “In-Hurling” and “Out-Hurling”, as is the scholarly consensus. Calcio Storico Fiorentino¹⁵ and its tenuous connection to carrying game of football is included as a teaser for a future appendix article investigating a dubious claim I found in a late medieval source alleging Italian influence on the development of football in England.

Conclusion

So who owns the name “football” then? Well, nobody, really. The name itself is an invention of the middle ages and the original game or games that it describes no longer exist. Whatever game is called “football” in a specific part of the Anglosphere is more dependent on what variation of modern football was more popular in that region in the 19th century than on any sort of logic about the name's etymology. I will however contend the following: any game that does not allow full contact or violence of some sort should not be calling itself “football” for historical and traditional reasons. Therefore, until soccer allows full on tackling and/or fighting, FIFA should drop the name “football” from its acronym. They can take it back up when I see Messi break somebody's nose. Blood Bowl was real, and we can make it real again.

I ran out of time while writing this article, and had to stay up past my bedtime on November 30th to get it done in time. In the near future, I will go back over this article and correct any spelling or grammar errors as well as add an organized bibliography with my sources. I will also be writing an appendix article covering stuff I didn't have time for in this article, mainly about medieval football in Italy.

Footnotes

1. Despite Europeans online smugly referring to Girdiron Football as “Handegg”, the ball used in American and Canadian Football is in fact officially called a “lemon” according to the Football Canada rulebook. Perhaps calling it Footlemon would satisfy the complainers. The NFL instead refers to this shape as a “prolate spheroid,” but Footprolatespheroid simply does not roll off the tongue.
2. Blood Bowl's tagline is “the real game of fantasy football” and officially claims to be inspired by American Football, but Blood Bowl actually bears little resemblance beyond the superficial to the real life sport. Indeed, with the lack of play stoppage and inherently limited substitutions, the game is more like rugby with no onsides rule and legal forward passing.
3. Whether or not κοινος refers to “[upon the] common land” or “[in] common” as in “in a team” is apparently not unambiguous. I found more sources supporting the latter interpretation, however in his article Epikoinos: The Ball Game Episkuros and Illiad, David Elmer summarizes the common counterargument: “Episkuros was not the only ancient game (ball or otherwise) played in teams or groups, so that, on this view, the name would not refer to a particularly distinctive feature. “
4. Whether or not Harpastum was copied directly from Episkyros or in fact the Romans simply retroactively claimed that it was is not entirely clear. It's hard to directly compare the two games, as we have much more documentation on the procedures of Harpastum than we do on the specifics of Episkyros.
5. This hasn't stopped FIFA from claiming Episkyros as the original game of Soccer. Technically, they are correct, in the sense that English medieval football descends from Episkyros by way of Harpastum, but one of the few things we know about Episkyros is that very little kicking of the ball was involved.
6. I say most common rules because like all pre-modern sports games, there was not necessarily a universally agreed upon set. The Roman empire was massive, and Harpastum was played from Scotland to Egypt, with presumably many tweaks to rules from region to region.
7. Almost certainly not.
8. As the English version of the edict reads: “forasmuch as there is great noise in the city caused by hustling over footballs in the fields of the public from which many evils might arise which God forbid: we command and forbid on behalf of the king, on pain of imprisonment, such game to be used in the city in the future.” The edict was also issued in French, wherein the football is referred to as “pelote de pee” (lol).
9. This was especially common in university towns, frequently with both the perpetrator and the victim being a young student. In the most famous incident, a group of unnamed Irish students murdered an English student named Adam of Salisbury during the course of a game played on the streets of Oxford.
10. Cromwell was England's head of state during the country's brief republican period. Despite the radically progressive nature of his regime, he and his core supporters were devout puritans. Puritans were egalitarian minded (based) but also opposed all public displays of fun and all religious holidays (cringe).
11. Although the republican era is usually associated with the austere character of Oliver Cromwell, this was actually during the reign of the republic's 3rd and final head of state: Committee of Safety Commander-in-Chief Charles Fleetwood.
12. This is why in Britain a “public” school actually refers to a school that rich kids go to (what we would call a private school). They are not “public” in the sense of public ownership but public in the sens that anyone of sufficient net worth may attend.
13. The influence of these schools was so great on the new British upper class of the 18th and 19th centuries that the Duke of Wellington himself once claimed “the Battle of Waterloo was won on the playing fields of Eton.”
14. The word “soccer” itself comes from a 19th century fad in English slang. At the time, it was common to add the syllable “er” to the end or replace the final syllable of words as a joke. As a result, “Association Football” (as FA rules football was called) was shortened to “Assoccer” and finally “soccer”.
15. John Eisenberg – you better PRAY I don't see you in the streets of North York. This is a threat. I am putting this in the footnotes because it's less likely your lawyer will find it.

I saw them hurrying from either side and each shade kissed another, without pausing, Each by the briefest society satisfied.

(Ants in their dark ranks, meet exactly so, rubbing each other’s noses, to ask perhaps What luck they’ve had, or which way they should go.)

—Dante, Purgatorio, Canto XXVI

I’m sure I’m not alone in this, but I love to read specific books at specific times. I read Around the World in 80 Days whenever I’m on a road trip. I read The Plague whenever I get sick¹. And every spring, I find myself reading Ant Encounters by Deborah Gordon.

I’m not sure why I find ants so interesting. My fascination with them certainly doesn’t carry over to any other bug or insect, which for the most part I am grossed out by. All creepy crawlies, really. I had pet hermit crabs as a kid and while my brothers were happy to hold them, I could not stand the feeling of their tiny legs crawling across my palm. Spiders I have a primal aversion to. I do not want to touch moths, caterpillars, grasshoppers, beetles, bees, or ladybugs.

But ants I’m chill with.

I think it must’ve come from a place of early childhood wonder and confusion: How do ants actually do anything?

Have you ever been walking down the sidewalk and seen a large black splotch on the pavement… only to realize it's a swarm of ants moving a discarded lollipop? Then you know the experience. Hundreds, thousands, of tiny critters all working together under a single will to achieve things otherwise impossible for them.

Somehow these vast and complex ant colonies build nests, forage for food, wage wars with other colonies, farm fungus, weave nests from larvae silk, kill plants with acid injection, conduct raids across forests, and cover food with leaves to hide it from scavengers. And believe me, ants do not have very big brains! So, how does it all get done?

The answer to how ants are able to do this changes as our own understanding of organization evolves. Let’s jump into Gordon’s Ant Encounters to learn about two of my favourite things: dynamic systems theory… and ants!

I suppose it’s only natural I love ants because I am equally fascinated by dynamic, complex, non-linear systems. I remember being a first year university student and watching videos on Youtube about those bird flock simulations known as boids. I’m sure anyone who has a computer science degree has seen these before…

Beautiful boids flying together in a virtual sky.

What makes boids so interesting — in my opinion — is how this behaviour emerges from extremely simplistic rules programmed into each boid. Just three rules:

1) Separation – Each boid moves away from other boids nearby to avoid collisions.

2) Alignment – Each boid adjusts its velocity to the average of boids around it, causing the flock to move in a general direction.

3) Cohesion – Each boid steers towards the average center of mass of boids around it, ensuring group integrity.

There is no global pattern or overseer that the little arrows are following. From these three simple internal rules, complex flocking patterns emerge, just like in real life. Similar rules govern real birds, swarms of fish, flying insects. Even groups of people driving cars are a sort of dynamic system. There are more rules than just three, but from very simple interactions (stop at red, drive at green, let pedestrians cross, etc.) a self-adjusting and self-sufficient system is born that works… most of the time. When it fails, it’s catastrophic and you are stuck in traffic for hours and hours… but it's still impressive that we can shuttle thousands of people on asphalt grids with minimal inter-vehicle communication between them all.

Ant Encounters starts off with a historical account of ant research. As long as there have been humans, there have been humans fascinated with ants². As we saw in Purgatorio at the top of the article (which is also quoted at the beginning of the book), Dante poetically muses that ants rub noses as a way to tell each other what to do and where to go. In Proverbs 6:6, we read: “Look to the ant, thou sluggard—consider her ways and be wise. Without chief, overseer or ruler, she gathers the harvest in the summer to eat in the winter.”

Yes, sluggard, consider the ant!

But don’t ants have a ruler? What about their queen?

It is true that in all 11,000 species of ants, there is always a single (or a few) reproductive females which lay eggs while the rest are sterile worker females. However, the history of the term ‘queen’ comes from 1609 in Charles Butler’s The Feminine Monarchie, or the Historie of Bees, where bees are described as loyal workers, toiling away happily under a benevolent monarch. The idea quickly spread to those researching ants and the name stuck. Monarchy then wasn’t just another human political invention, it was a reflection of the cultivated perfection found within Nature… but 200 years later, this view was beginning to change.

“In a lively discussion in the Ecole Normale in Paris in 1795, year 3 of the French Revolution, Daubenton, a professor of natural history, argued that there is no royalty in nature—for example, the queen bee does nothing more than lay eggs. His colleague Latreille wrote in 1798 that the ants in the colony are not really subjugated workers; instead, the colony has 'a single will, a single law' based on the love each ant feels for the others.” (pg. 2)

As political structures around Europe twisted and turned and flipped, so did the way we see and investigate nature. Kropotkin, famous anarchist writer, sees in woodcutter ants co-operation rather than competition as the driving force in natural organization. Even towards the current day, we see modern life and fears reflected in our tiny friends.

“In The Book of Merlyn by T. H. White, Merlin transforms the young Arthur into an ant and sends him to work in a desolate tunnel with loudspeakers blaring allegiance to an ant Big Brother and walls plastered with signs reading 'Everything not forbidden is compulsory.' More recently, movies such as Antz, It’s a Bug’s Life, and The Ant Bully show the colony as a corporation with more or less disgruntled workers.” (pg. 4)

As modern ecology begins to come out of the 19th and 20th century, an interesting point is made: individual ants don’t actually reproduce. Colonies reproduce, by sending out new queens and males to mate with other colony representatives. Ants don’t create new ants. Colonies create new colonies. In an ecological sense, it’s not the ant which is the organism, but the colony itself; a sort of “super-organism” wherein all the ants make up the cells and organs and internal processes.

It’s like a body without skin needing to hold everything together, where the parts freely move about, arranging and moving food, waste, and eggs. A colony is, in a sense, those cells — and a nest is its temporary body. In some ways, the ants are also like individual neurons in a brain. I hope I’m not pressing the point too hard, but I just find the concept of a super-organism so bizarre and alien, a body made of bodies, that I really want to emphasize it. If your world is not enchanted, you are not paying enough attention.

Okay but enough of this (I hear you say), enough about boids and Dante and Antz, how do ants actually organize if there is no king or queen or dictator or project manager?

Well, let’s start with what ants actually do.

Gordon mostly focuses on red harvester ants (Pogonomyrmex barbatus) for her research, so we will follow her description of their roles. Here is a picture of the fellas so you can envision them in your head (or I guess if you have no thought imagery you can just keep scrolling up to look at them every now and then):

Red harvester ants. So cute!

“These seed-eating ants are common in the deserts and dry grasslands of the south-western United States, Mexico, and South America. Four tasks are performed outside the nest: foraging, patrolling, nest colony organization maintenance work, and midden work. Foragers travel away from the nest in streams reaching 10 to 30 meters from the nest and then fan out and search for seeds, which they bring back to the nest to be processed and stored. The patrollers are the first ants to leave the nest in the morning. They search the nest mound and foraging area, and choose the day’s foraging directions. It is the return of the patrollers that stimulates the foragers to begin their work for the day. Nest maintenance workers carry out the dry soil that collects inside the nest during the excavation and repair of underground chambers. Midden workers manipulate and sort the refuse pile, or midden.” (pg. 30-31)

That gives us four rough categories of work ants: 1) Foragers 2) Patrollers 3) Nest maintenance/brood care 4) Midden workers

You might be tempted to think that there are different types of ants for different roles, as I thought the same before doing further research. This is especially tempting in species with different sizes of ants within the same colony. But this would be a very unstable system. What happens if all the foragers are wiped out on patrol during a rainstorm, or all the midden workers are crushed by a cave-in? Research has also shown that even in the minority of ant species with size differentiation (only 44 of the 263 genera), there is little difference in task effectiveness between ants of different sizes. It's not so much a division of labour where some ants are born for foraging and others for midden work, but instead a term Gordon calls Task Allocation. Each of the four categories of work an ant can do is a specific task. What an ant is doing at any given time is dependent on what other ants are doing and what it is currently doing itself.

“I found that ants switch tasks if more ants are needed to perform a particular task. Not all transitions are possible. If more foragers are needed, workers of the other three tasks will switch tasks to forage. If more patrollers are needed, nest maintenance workers will switch tasks to patrolling. If more nest maintenance workers are needed, they must be recruited from the younger workers inside the nest. Then, once a worker becomes a forager, it does not switch back to any other task. Thus, foraging acts as a sink, while the younger workers inside the nest, who will be recruited to nest maintenance if needed, act as a source.” (pg. 32)

So through the life cycle of an ant (around one year for red harvester ants), it will go from an egg to a larva to a pupa to an adult. After emerging from its pupa cocoon, it immediately begins brood care — taking care of other pupa and larva, i.e. spawn in and keep doing what others were doing to help spawn you in. After some time and noticing there aren’t enough nest maintenance workers, it will switch to nest maintenance. Then if there aren’t enough patrollers, it will switch to being a patroller, and then finally to a forager if necessary. Foraging works as a sink because it often ends in predation or other death.

Now for the final piece of our puzzle: how do ants know when to switch tasks?

This comes back to what our old friend Dante³ said at the start of our article: rubbing noses. Ants have extremely limited senses. Most are limited to vague sensations of light/dark, water, vibrations. Where ants excel is their sense of smell, from which they can detect chemical signals, trail markers, members of their own brood or rival colonies, food, poison, and a host of different signals.

“The most important sensory mode of ants is olfaction. Ants use their antennae to perceive odors from objects they touch with their antennae or from the air.” (pg. 37)

So then do touching ants send signals to each other about what to do? “Need help here” one scent says, “More foragers this way, please” another smell goes. Nope, it’s much more simple and elegant than that.

“An ant uses its recent experience of interactions to decide what to do. The pattern of interaction itself, rather than any signal transferred, acts as the message.” (pg. 47-48)

The medium IS the message, literally!

“What matters is not what one ant tells another when they meet, but simply that they meet. An ant operates according to a rule such as, “If I meet another ant with odor A about three times in the next 30 seconds, I will go out to forage; if not, I will stay here.” The rules are actually more probabilistic than that—more like, “If I meet another ant with odor A about three times in the next 30 seconds, the probability that I will go out to forage will increase by about 10%; if not, it will go down by about 20%.” (pg. 48)

It's all about ants encountering ants⁴. From a series of these hard-wired, instinctual rules, ant colonies move and breathe with a fierce group intelligence. And just like boids, it’s relatively simplistic rules that in aggregate regulate the colony work allocation. No queen needed! How these individual instincts are coded or how they evolved as such I will leave as a question for science and God, but the mechanism remains as beautiful clockwork.

This ties back to how an ant switches from one task to another. If there is no change in its environment, it resumes the same task as the day before. If there are significant changes, it can reallocate itself to balance the colony equilibrium.

“An early example of the effect of interaction rate on task allocation is Wilson’s 1985 result that when the smaller workers, or minors, of Pheidole pubiventris species are removed, the larger ones, or majors, switch to perform brood care. This is the outcome of a simple rule of interaction: when majors met minors near the brood pile, they turned away. When minors were removed, there were fewer minors around. This meant that majors were less likely to meet minors and instead more likely to encounter other majors, and so they did not turn away, but instead stayed to help with the brood.” (pg. 49)

This smoothly replaces a suffering worker population. As more ants transition to brood work, it becomes more probable a wandering ant will encounter brood workers, and then less probable it will switch to that task.

To better illustrate this ‘interaction as the message’, Gordon gives us an experiment done to artificially prompt the ants to start foraging early. If you remember from before… patrollers go out in the morning and on arrival back, trigger the foragers to leave.

“Colony activity begins early in the morning, when a small group of patrollers leave the nest mound. This is probably stimulated by the warmth of the first touch of sunlight in the nest entrance; nests in the shade tend to begin patrolling later. The first patrollers meander around the foraging area, and eventually return to the nest. Foragers are stimulated to leave the nest for the first time in the morning by the return of the patrollers. If patrollers are prevented from returning, the foragers do not emerge. What guarantee do the returning patrollers provide? If a patroller can leave and return safely, without getting blown away by heavy wind or eaten by a horned-lizard predator, then so can a forager. The patrollers also put down a chemical on the nest mound that shows the foragers which direction to take when they leave the nest;” (pg. 51)

“We then replaced the patrollers with patroller mimics: little glass beads coated with extract of hydrocarbons from that colony’s patrollers. We dropped glass beads into the nests of colonies whose patrollers had not returned. Glass beads treated with patroller hydrocarbon extract stimulated foraging. Glass beads treated with hydrocarbon extract from another task, nest maintenance, or treated only with solvent as a control, did not stimulate foraging activity. Contact with beads that smell like a patroller is enough to stimulate the foragers to leave the nest.” (pg. 52)

“The rate at which patrollers return is crucial to stimulate foraging. Glass beads that smell like patrollers do not stimulate foraging unless they are introduced at the correct rate. Foraging begins when patrollers return at a rate of about 6 per minute or 1 per 10 seconds, and glass beads must be introduced at a rate of 1 per 10 seconds or foraging does not begin. One of the few ways we have ever succeeded in getting ants to do our bidding was to drop in beads coated with patroller extract at the rate of 1 per 10 seconds before foraging began. We were able to trick colonies into starting to forage earlier.” (pg. 52)

Awesome! I wish my job was to trick ants with smelly glass beads!

You could also see how these micro-interactions can quickly propagate across a group of ants, even across the entire colony, in a matter of moments.

“Many ant species use chemicals to signal alarm. Alarm pheromones are volatile, dispersing quickly in the air. Alarmed ants often run around in circles, sending out more pheromone that gets more ants running around in circles, so there is a spreading wave of alarmed ants. Alarmed ants are likely to react aggressively to whatever they meet as they dash around.” (pg. 40)

Before I go on, I want to mention a cool tidbit from the book that ties into this interaction story. I’m sure you have heard of that experiment where an ant was covered in ‘death pheromones’ and taken to the midden (trash/graveyard of the hive) by fellow hivemates, still kickin’ and screamin’. This experiment isn’t pop culture science, it is a real experiment and it does prove how much olfaction drives ants behavior. But as Gordon explains, the common story you hear leaves out a crucial detail: the “dead” ants were covered in death pheromones AFTER the scientists cooled them in a fridge until they stopped moving. Aw c’mon, that’s cheating! I’d like you to try to tell if someone is alive if giant aliens paralyzed them and made their heartbeat undetectable!

Still, there are many mysteries about ant life and memory. How long can an ant really remember something? Most of the behaviour is instinctual and automatic, but still trails need to be remembered and jobs need to be tracked. I’ll leave you with a final anecdote from Gordon’s research:

“Rosengren found that in the spring, an older ant, which survived over the winter, leads a young ant out on its preferred trail. Then the old ant dies, and the young ant adopts that trail. The older forager must remember to go on the same trail at the end of the winter as it did in the autumn, and the young forager must remember, from one day to the next, to go on the trail that the older one showed it the day before—but the colony remembers the trail for decades.” (pg. 62)

Ant intern to senior worker… :’)

If any of this interests you in the slightest, I’d give Ant Encounters a try. Especially in the Spring, once the snow begins to melt and you can read it in the park on a picnic blanket. It’s quite short too, around 180 pages. I only discussed some of the history and ant interactions, the rest of the book is full of discussion about ant colony life cycles, colony interactions, and all sorts of other goodies, including many fun insect anecdotes from Gordon’s decades of studies.

The truth is that, even now, we know next to nothing about ants. Of the 11,000 species, only about 50 have really been studied in depth. And it is hard to study ant life, given how small they are. I’m sure you can imagine how difficult it is to even detect the micro-scents that govern so much of their miniscule lives. Most of the experiments Gordon herself conducted had to be done by capturing ants and marking them with tiny dots of paint. That’s not light work!

Some of the biggest mysteries are around early life for ants… It’s tough to mark and inspect ants deep underground inside a nest without fundamentally altering that nest. Many mysteries have been solved, but ants still find ways to surprise and impress us. I’m sure as our human understanding of organization and complexity changes, so will our relation to our tiny friends.

“Not many people have taken the time to watch ants carefully. In the nineteenth century, the English took their obsessions with birds and wildflowers around the world, to the great benefit of ornithology and botany, but have you ever heard of a local ant-watchers club?” (pg. 16)

Well…. anyone want to start one?

Stay frosty, Noah Ant-Watchers Club – 001 – York Region Chapter

Another article about watches. I'm too poor to buy them, but I can at least still talk to you about them. Why an article specifically about women's watches? Well, although it has gotten better, especially in recent years, the watch enthusiast crowd is a sausage fest and most watch releases are not geared towards a womanly clientèle. This article is my modest contribution to improve that first point, and study the second. I think watches are really cool and I want other people who might be interested, no matter their gender, to appreciate them as well. Included as a bonus at the end of this article is a little section about what watch I would see the people of café wearing, purely based on vibes. A thing to consider for this article is that I am mostly talking about “enthusiast” watches. Watches that are more geared towards people who care about watches, their materials and their movements – anyone that lies on the watch nerd spectrum.

_{making this image was painful}

a very, very, very brief history of women's watches

As one can expect, in the west women were excluded from the watch club early on, as the early watches were only pocket watches. Those were expensive and reserved for the elite, and elite women's garments were pocketless. Therefore women aristocrats, starting in the early 1800s, commissioned smaller watches that could be affixed to broches, necklaces and bracelets. We got the very first wristwatch, which is exclusively what we mean now when talking about watches, thanks to Queen Caroline Bonaparte Murat of Naples. It was a french made watch, built by Breguet in 1812.

_{the original was lost, this is the contemporary version, still by Breguet (the brand not the dude this time)}

The following ones were were also commissioned by women. Still, wrist watches were extremely costly and completely out of the grasp of the average woman, only being worn by the tippity top of the aristocracy. Not gonna lie, there's not a ton of info about the everyday woman's watches in history, during my research articles either talked about men or watches, but not women. It seems like then most of the women watches were confined strictly to the jewellery domain, and therefore unattainable for the majority. During WWI wristwatches started gaining popularity, and after the Great War we start seeing more varied designs — but there is no info specifically about women. Watches did get much simpler and “function over form” during WW2, but the production was not aimed towards women. And it is still not aimed towards women.

Sexism and gatekeeping did play a part in this, even as recently as the beginning of the century. Reading an article, I came across this IWC ad from November 2000, which I'm sure some chud somewhere thinks is awesome:

It reads “is nothing sacred? You'd think that a mechanical chronograph with a drag hand (maximum indicator) to measure intermediate elapsed time or a second timing cycle would be enough to put her off . No such luck. That's why we specifically made the Portuguese Chrono-(illegible) with a wider wrist — just in case she gets any ideas. Ref. 3712. £4895. Also available in 18 carat pink gold. IWC. Since 1868. And for as long as there are men.“

Although that line about pink gold is unintentionally very funny and ironic, if major watch brands were brazen enough to use this sexist garbage in their advertising in the 2000s, one can only imagine what the industry was like before in terms of sexism and gatekeeping.

I have my own theories about why it was like that: First, on the sexism part; women were not seen as needing a precise, tool-oriented timepiece — why would women need to tell time? They are just subservient creatures to their husbands, definitely not valuable and autonomous elements of society. Second, on the gatekeeping part; as pocket watches (distinctly male-oriented), disappeared to the profit of wristwatches in the early 1900s (then distinctly woman-oriented), the marketing tried to shy as far away from the jewellery label to capture men, make them feel secure about wearing watches and reaffirm their fragile masculinity. On the other hand, to help this, they triple-downed on the jewellery aspect of watches for women. You then had your men watches, which were rugged, technical and tool-oriented, and then your women's watches which were artful, precious and jewellery.

This also lead to the current general disinterest of women in watches; making watches artificially more of a man's thing and not catering to women would drive them away from watches. This whole talk about men and women's watch begs the question: what makes a watch a woman's watch?

what makes a watch a woman's watch?

The only differences that matter as far as watches are concerned, between men and women, are anatomical. On average a woman's wrist measures between 5.5” and 6.2” and a man's between 6.5” and 7.2”. That will influence the fit of a watch. But then, fit matters only as far as comfort and personal taste. So basically, anatomical differences are not relevant when it comes to determining if a watch is a “woman's” watch or not. And the rest of the differences are only due to social constructs.

_{this definitely fits}

Therefore, my postmodernist ass' take is that the concept of a woman's watch makes no sense. Just wear what you want and enjoy. Problem solved, there is no issue with watch brands not catering to women because there is no such thing as a woman's watch! Obviously there is still an issue here, if there is nothing that women want to wear and enjoy wearing, then the problem is not solved. This is why brands need to also cater to women's wants and needs, just like they do men. There are plenty of “jewellery” watches, but the offering for accessible regular watches is lacking for women. The 'regular' watch caters to men, and excludes women.

why cater to women?

Before we dive into how brands have chosen to cater to women, it would serve to establish why it's important to cater to women, and not just men. It's simply not cool to exclude women is the first major reason, and the main reason that watch manufacturers should consider. However, the main reason watch manufacturers would actually consider is the second major one: if you exclude half of the population from your consumer base, you are leaving money on the table. Nobody will be surprised to learn that the watch market has been suffering for the last few years. Firstly because people have less money to spend on useless luxury goods, which watches are, but also because US tariffs are increasing the price of watches in one the the biggest luxury goods consumer market in the world, decreasing the demand even further. Swiss watches are ubiquitous when talking about luxury watches, and at the moment of writing, the US tariffs for Switzerland are 39%. This is also a double whammy because watch brands want to keep semi-consistent pricing around the globe, and will therefore also increase prices all around, not just in the US, making it harder for you and me — who don't live in the US — to buy watches (fuck the USA and their stupid-ass government).

shortcomings with the current catering to women

One of the main ways women are excluded from the watch world is with dimensions in my opinion. Looking at the ad I showed in the previous section, IWC used sizing to gatekeep their watches from women “That's why we specifically made the Portuguese Chrono-(illegible) with a wider wrist — just in case she gets any ideas.“

_{refresher on watch dimensions}

Currently, the enthusiast watch market is mostly composed of watches meant for medium to large men's wrists. There has been a very recent push by enthusiast to have more 39-40mm diameter offerings (a couple mm makes a difference, I swear), but it is still on the larger side, and that's even without factoring the lug-to-lug dimensions, thickness, lug width... To put it plainly here is a lack of good offerings accommodating smaller wrist from regular brands; some women will like to wear watches that look small on their wrist, others watches that fit just right, and finally some watches that look oversized — there should be good watches available to all of them.

There are challenges with making good, smaller watches however. One of those is with the movements. If you remember, the movement is the engine of the watch. Miniaturising anything is a challenge, and it is no different for movements. But while it is an engineering challenge to make smaller movement, not only do we have the technology, but it was done before. Watches from decades ago were smaller than their contemporary counterparts and they were not all just quartz movements, which are easier to make small. It is possible to make small mechanical movements, as all watches before the Quartz Crisis (beginning in 1969, having a cool-ass name and being a topic for another article) were on the smaller side and still mechanical, simply because quartz movements were not available before then. But brands are just not putting the effort into making smaller movements.

I'm not just talking out of my ass, let's take a concrete example with the brand Breitling. Breitling recently refreshed their Super Ocean Heritage line-up, which is their historical diver's watch model. With this refresh came 4 different sizes, and more excitingly their newly unveiled B31 movement. This movement is particularly appealing because it is Breitling's new and first three hand “in-house” _{(not really but it's not the point of this article)} movement. And it's great that it's what's powering those new watch models. Well that is, for all sizes except the smallest one, which incidentally would be the one preferred by bearers of smaller wrists, which uses a third party movement.

And then, Breitling is not doing too bad; for the smaller Super Ocean Heritage model, the colours are good, it still looks on par with the bigger models, and the movement is far from being bad. The way some other brands go about making smaller watches leaves way more to be desired. I'm talking about the infamous “pink it, shrink it, quartz it”. The lazy 'womanification' of a watch goes as follows: take a male model, make it smaller (do not take any element of design into consideration, just miniaturise it), put a random quartz movement in there because no decent cheap pre-made mechanical movement will fit the case, change the dial colour to be more girly, add diamonds, stones... and you're done. That is very lazy and also shitty and tacky.

I don't want to be all doom and gloom, it is looking up for the people in the itty bitty wrist committee. The 'pink it and shrink it' model is becoming more of a thing of the past for the established watch brands. One can hope that in a couple of decades, we'll just have good offerings for every wrist size (if the brands have not all gone under). In the meantime, let's look at some brands that people think are doing good when it comes to catering to women, and what they do.

so what do we do about it? (or What some brands that have good women's offering are doing)

The image above is from one of Cartier's most popular watch, the Cartier Tank — do you notice something? They have a bunch of sizes for that model, and they still look identical. They don't have the big sizes being males models looking clean, and the small size women's being bedazzled, and pink. Their designs are very similar, they look good on men and women alike, and they have size options ranging from mini to extra large — with small, medium and large in between (pictured above). And that's not just for the Tank, but for most of their collections. On the movement front, they do use quartz, but it's usually for the whole line up, and with watches that are that small and not always round, like the Cartier Tanks mini, quartz is just the best option. It's cartier's own quartz movements, so they're not just putting any random shitty movement that fits. And that's why they're the goats. _{(Also quartz does not mean bad by any means, but it's a topic for another article)}

Let's move down to more reasonable prices and look at Casio. Casio's claim to fame are their digital watches. And while they only come in one size, they usually boast very restrained dimensions that look good on both small and medium wrists. Bigger wrists are also eating good with Casio's giant chunky g-shocks. Their designs are good, and what I would qualify as indémodable, their watches are very affordable, useful and will last you a lifetime. And that's why they're the goats.

Another brand that I have read a lot of women appreciate is Rolex. We are moving way up in price. Despite what one may think about Rolex currently, they are generally doing good by women. They have popular models in a variety of small sizes — not just a couple of medium to big sizes and a single small size for women. They have 41-36-34-31-28mm diameter sizes usually, which gives many option for people who have smaller wrists. The designs are also almost identical, no matter the size of a particular model, just look at the image above. Their popular lines are also customizable: you like bedazzled? Select the diamond incrusted bezel and the diamond indices dial. Hate it? You can also choose a plain dial and bezel. They have good movements in their smaller watches, that they make in-house just like their bigger movements. They have good models for women, but unfortunately some of their most popular models like the submariner, the GMT Master and the Daytona are only available in one size, and that size only fits medium to large wrists.

From this small selection of brands that are doing good by women, there's a couple things that are apparent. First, there are size options for smaller wrist. Second, they just have good design, it's stuff that is appealing for everyone, not just people who love stereotypically “girly” stuff. Lastly, the technical aspect of the watch is not disregarded; the movements of the small models are good, it's not just some random thing thrown in at the last minute. In general those watch brands care about their womanly clientèle and put effort in their “women models” or into making their more unisex general models accessible for people with small wrists. But does all this effort pay off? Well, Rolex is the #1 best selling luxury watch brand, Cartier just overtook Omega as the #2 and Casio, after reading their Q4 2025 report _{(note japan's fiscal year starts in April, so Q4 is Jan-Mar)} is doing solid.

conclusion:

In this article, we've established that the categorisation of a watch as a “woman's watch” is purely due to social constructs and therefore woman's watches aren't a thing. However, we've also seen that there is not a lot of watches that women would want to wear, primarily due to them being gatekept from attractive models with sizing, and being served inferior models — whether from a technical or design standpoint — in the only sizes that fits them. To confirm this, we've looked at some brands that women seem to appreciate. We find that those brands provide attractive designs in a wide range of sizes. Now if you've read this article, you might be under the impression that I just want traditionally more male models (boring steel watches) to fit women, and that I think that would fix the issue; I don't. I want to make clear that I think there should be all kinds of designs in all kinds of different sizes. If a man wants to wear some cool bedazzled watch that is almost more the realm of hardcore jewellery than watch, like the Bvlgari Serpenti Secret Watch, I think there should be options for him. Similarly, if a woman wants to wear some more sterile pseudo-military watch, like the Micromilspec Milgraph, she shouldn't be sized out. In my ideal watch world, there would be many options for anybody wanting anything.

_{BVLGARI Serpenti Secret Watch and Micromilspec Milgraph}

We still have a long way to go, but I think big brands are slowly moving towards more inclusive sizing. The microbrands are really driving the change in some respect, but they are more niche. There's some other work that to be done as well and, in my opinion that needs to be done, it's the only way for watch brands not to die. Particularly, if you allow me to digress [1000 words rant redacted, we'll keep it for another article]. Let's just leave it at that. See you in a next one.

Disclaimer: I'm just a regular dude with no special insight whatsoever into the watch world, don't take anything here too seriously. Those are just the divagations of a watch nerd.

Thank you for reading my logorrhea Eddie – Award winning author

bonus section: watch for people

Alrighty, the part that most of you are waiting for, the bonus watch assignment. I hope none of you have scrolled all the way down to this section without reading the full article 🙂. I trolled you a bit with the first picture of the article, and if you hadn't noticed, it's all horrendous watches. Also, don't hold it against me if you aren't on the list — it's either that I don't see you wearing a watch, or I haven't been inspired by any watch and thought “that screams [insert name]“. My own wife is not on this list. It really isn't that deep. Ok, let's get started:

• Nick: Hamilton Khaki Field “Murph” 38mm. I just see him wearing this, it's a simple and classic piece, that is not boring. Easy to style.

• Noah: Seiko Prospex SPB121 “Alpinist”. The green dial is reminiscent of his Muggies outfit – and the smooth steel bezel of his head. The watch may be a hair too thick for him but the other dimensions should be perfect.

• Kaitlyn: Jaeger Le Coutre Reverso Tribute Small Seconds Q397843J. I'm gonna cheat a bit with this one on two aspects. Firstly, although the watch comes with a green strap, I would see Kaitlyn wearing it with a brown strap like in the picture below. Secondly, I think the watch might be a tad big, so this will be an imaginary version of the watch that is smaller and comes with a brown strap. Brown strap and green dial will also make it so both Kaitlyn and Noah's watches have similar colour scheme, which I'm sure they can appreciate.

• Edna: Tank Must de Cartier – Small Model. A classic, refined and elegant piece for a dignified corporate girlie. I think Cartier's blue accent would fit Edna's vibe very well.

• Elisa: Tissot PRX 25mm. I genuinely don't know why but I see Elisa rocking this. I saw it in the flesh metal at the airport, and it's what immediately jumped at me. I think it might suit Elisa better if the dial had a subtle waffle pattern, like the bigger models, instead of the sunray finish.

• Bennet: Grand Seiko SLGW003 “White Birch”. Classic old timey feel without having to deal with the hassle of a vintage watch. It not being automatic and needing to be wound is a plus for the tactile feel of it. The cherry on top is that when rewinding the watch, it looks like a wood pecker is pecking at the gear (90% of the reason why I chose this watch for Bennet).

• Dan: SpaceOne Jumping Hour. Spaceship, Dan — the connection is evident. The choice of colour was a bit less, and I was hesitating on either blue or the iridescent colour below. I think this is it though. Apart from the design, the non-standard way the time is displayed on the watch does match his persona.

• Shrey: Fifty Fathoms Automatique – 5007 1130 B52B. I was gonna pick an apple watch for Shrey, but ever since I saw him with his massive Swarovski Diver, I knew I had to choose an equally imposing watch. One of my personal favourite design wise, the Fifty Fathom has a ton of history and heritage. This new version comes-in at a more restrained 38mm in diameter, which I think would suit Shrey best. (no heartbeat technology unfortunately)

• Vivian: Frédérique Constant Manchette. Another pick purely based on vibes. When that watch was unveiled recently, I just thought it was pretty cool and that it would suit Vivian.

The End

The streets of Downland are never empty. Quiet, sure. Safe, sometimes. But never empty. The inhabitants take pride knowing that people steer clear of Downland when the sun goes down. Most citizens of New New York never even leave the bright lights and illusion of safety, which makes Downland all the happier. Despite it's private residents, Downland has thriving businesses and shops. Most notably, “Carroway Detective Agency and Lounge”. Once famous for stopping no11 on the top 15 most wanted list of powered individuals, Carroway Detective Agency and it's lead detective, Heston Carroway, have fallen in recent years, now operating as the go-to for missing pets and cheating spouses.

So he sits. In his office, at his desk, and in the lounge, where he helps himself to the liquor cabinet and reflects on past glories.

“I could've taken all 15 myself!”

He shouts into the empty lounge. Heston is a burly man. Never out of shape, but about as wide as he is tall. If he told you he beat a powered unarmed, you might believe him. You would be wrong, of course. That credit is reserved for the glowing blue revolver strapped at his hip, half as big as his leg. Carroway draws the revolver, its blue lining illuminating the otherwise lightless room. Bottle in one hand, revolver in the other, he stumbles from the lounge to his office, murmuring to himself.

“...number...11...I coulda...”

He kicks the door shut behind him and carefully rests the half empty bottle on his desk, then promptly collapses onto what he would call a bed; an old pillow and two torn blankets. Heston is out cold. Whether the low rumbling is his snoring or labored breathing, he is out. Outside his office, driving onto the road from the dirt, is a devastating scene. A cherry red mustang. Heston loves antiques. This car is something he would see in a magazine and imagine himself driving with a beautiful woman. The open road, wind blowing in his fading hair. But even Heston Carroway, AutoMag subscriber, would fail to identify what used to be an antique mustang. Both bumpers missing, windows broken, probably more parts missing than not. It's engine sputters and dies after making it across the road. A woman stumbles out and quickly gathers herself. Dressed in an all black dress, now damaged from wherever this woman came from, she grabs a briefcase from the wrecked mustang and walks up to Carroway's office.

She reaches the entrance of “Carroway Detective Agency and Lounge”. Shaking, she leans against the wall and takes slow, deliberate breaths. Everybody outsources to powered contractors these days. When New New York tried to pass legislation banning all non-powered individuals from working on criminal cases, the public wasn't shy from sharing their opinions. Barry Bartlett, Samantha Barrett, and Chris Harper, all reporters, pushed stories opposing the “powered protection” bill. Anti bill sentiment was growing from both sides until Bartlett, Barrett, and Harper all disappeared forever. The bill didn't get passed, but the message was clear. It was happening whether they were allowed to or not. Eventually people stopped speaking out. Then they stopped asking. In the 5 years since, they would grow complacent, whether to fear or feigned ignorance. This is why Heston had to add “and Lounge” to his business. Also because as he now gets regular deliveries from the brewery under “work expenses” straight to his office.

The woman with the briefcase knocks on the door. She is frantic, but calmer now. After nobody answers, she knocks again, only to see the door slowly open. She peeps her head inside, sees Detective Carroway asleep on the floor, and reaches around for the light switch. After flicking it on, Carroway slowly awakens, and sees her in the doorway, masked by the lights outside the office. Seeing what to him is just a blurry figure, he leans up and wipes the sleep away from his eyes. He goes to get up and waves the blurry figure over. The woman shuts the door and walks over, seemingly calm again. He begins to make out more as he becomes more awake, now seeing the woman's figure walk over to his desk. Heston makes it to his desk, plops down in the chair, and turn to face the woman. She approaches, and gently places the briefcase on the desk.

“Detective Carroway?”

Heston looks in her eyes and hesitates. He knows this woman. Quickly he begins to cycle through possibilities in his head.

“Someone from the neighborhood? No, they don't talk to you anymore.”

“A spurned bar patron? A client? Impossible.”

He takes another look. Now in the light, we see that the woman's face is smeared with dirt, clothes torn as if an animal had gotten to it. She has been crying. But now she stands. Waiting. Heston leans back in his chair, stunned. It's Samantha Bartlett. The reporter. He gathers himself.

“You're Samantha Bartlett. The reporter.”

“I am.”

She answers. She doesn't seem bothered by the question but that what she has to say is more important than being missing without a trace for over 5 years. Heston stands up promptly and offers his hand to Samantha.

“Ms. Bartlett. I'd love to take your case. What you must've gone through... Don't you worry, I'm on your side. You know don't you. Who's behind it all?

She softly shakes his hand and goes to open the briefcase.

“I don't.”

She says. She takes out a picture from the briefcase and flips it over to show Heston.

“But I know who kidnapped me.”

Heston looks down at the photograph. It's an old ID picture from years ago. It's of a man. Jet black hair and a faded scar across his throat. His eyes, black and cruel. His smile, cold and empty. Jack Gage, 34.

But Heston knows him as something else. Something more personal than Jack Gage, 34. Something familiar. Something dark, and horrifying.

No11.

The stench in the sewers beneath Amuun was nearly unbearable- but a boy must have adventures. This boy was called Slippy. He used to be called another name, but there are some humiliations so complete and devastating that they stay with you. You are known to the world by that terrible moment. It warps and becomes you. Down here, he was called nothing. He preferred that. The relative silence of this place made up for its wetness, foulness, and darkness. It was a different world from the city above it. Not a kinder one, not gentler at all, but a different world. That was all Slippy asked for. He shuffled his feet along the narrow ledge, which dropped down into the dark stream of sewage water, his palms feeling along the cold gray stones of the tunnel's wall. He didn't slip very often these days, so he wasn't worried. His eyes assessed the water. He was not the only creature that found sanctuary down here. Reptilian beasts with long, sharp-toothed maws swam beneath the surface. Were you to miss the sight of their shiny black scales in the water, then they would snap from below the surface and drag you down in a matter of seconds. Slippy had encountered one on his second excursion into the sewers, losing his cape and nearly his life. Since then, he had learned their signs and places, where in the sewers to avoid, what times they slept. In time, he became comfortable going further into the sewers, planning more dangerous expeditions and expanding the map of the place he held in his mind. Today had been a particularly good day. Begging had earned him an entire silver, and the baker's daughter had spared him a loaf that wasn't even very moldy. She was one of those rare, kind people. With a full belly and feeling emboldened, Slippy was determined to explore deeper into the sewers than he ever had before. He passed through the familiar tunnels and intersections, light pouring in from the street above. The sounds of the day were muted, held at a safe distance. Most people above were aware of the sewers, but Amuun was an old city. The network of tunnels extended much deeper and wider than most citizens suspected. Slippy found a shaft that extended downwards, into a deeper darkness. He lowered himself into the hole, dropping down slowly to avoid making noise. Sound carried well down here. He felt his way down this new tunnel, knowing that lighting a match in this strange and pungent air could have a terrible consequence. Committing each turn and length of the tunnels he passed through to memory, he pushed through the dark. Once you get past the fear of darkness, what remains is only blissful unknowing. His entirety was concerned with each second that passed. He didn't think ahead to the next, or dwell on the previous, but experienced the present blackness as he was being consumed by it. It was careless and peaceful. He came into a chamber illuminated by a small ray of light, which betrayed just how far underground Slippy was. In the center of the chamber a small tree had erupted, allowed by the ray of light and kicking up a number of displaced bricks around it. It was no lost civilization or dragon's hoard, but it might as well have been to a boy looking for something to find. He knelt down beside the small tree, admiring its tenacity. He was learning that things lived beneath the earth and had their own places.

Satisfied with this finding, he turned back into the darkness of the tunnel. He again felt his way through. Left... Right... Right... The tip of his foot hit an unfamiliar surface. Surprised, he felt around in front of him. He had hit a brick wall, where there shouldn't have been one. Once again, the ancient, primordial panic of being lost in darkness washed over him. He must have taken a wrong turn— but he was so careful! How could he have made a mistake? For a while, he stood paralyzed. He became aware of how real the possibility of dying here was. The boy sobbed in the darkness. With a final sniffle, he collected himself, and began to feel his way through the darkness again, trying to backtrack to the chamber with the small tree. Perhaps he could climb up to the source of the light. But it was as if the entire network of tunnels had changed. He was unable to find anything familiar. The cold, wet air became dry. The rough stones of the sewer walls ended abruptly at some point, being replaced by smaller bricks with sharper edges. Slippy was no longer sure that he was in the sewers anymore. He turned a corner, and saw orange light peeking out from a crack at the bottom of the wall. As he quietly approached it, he recognized that it was coming from beneath a wooden door. Was it a way out? It certainly wasn't daylight, but any light was divine at this point. He spotted an iron handle and cautiously opened the door. Inside was a small room lined with shelves, with a large burlap sack sitting proudly in the center. A small wooden table held a lantern that gave off the orange light. Strange knick-knacks lined the shelves; large books written in strange languages, idols from other lands, dice, bottled multi-coloured liquids, and more than a few knives. Seeing that there was no staircase leading to the surface, Slippy's heart sank. But that disappointment was quickly distracted by curiosity. What was this place doing down here? He approached the burlap sack in the middle of the room and tugged it open. His jaw went slack. Inside were more gold coins and jewels than he had ever seen in his life, nearly filling the sack completely. Without thinking, he grabbed a fistful of coins and shoved them into his cloak pocket. Thoughts of warm meals and warm beds filled his head. He could buy boots without holes in them, or a new cape. He could buy bread from the baker's daughter instead of begging for it. A blue coin caught his eye. Nearly the size of his hand, it was in the shape of a crescent moon and had a number of ‘X’ marks that had clearly been etched into its face. He flipped it over in his hand and saw that the other side had a tiny inscription along its edge: I'll take a gold and leave a penny, maybe two if I take twenty, but if a fellow has more than plenty, I'll be sure not to leave him any! It was funny and simple, like a children's rhyme. He may have even heard one of the other poor kids sing it before; it had that ring of familiarity. He noticed something red and wet on the crescent's pointed end. He recognized it as blood, but how did he not notice it immediately? There was more of it on his hand, and it was pooling in a red puddle on the floor. Only then did he begin to feel the sharp line of pain along his neck, just beneath the chin. Somewhere beneath the shock of sensation and realization, his vision blackened and his legs gave out.

Slippy awoke in a bed in a dark room. The air tasted wet and cold. A drip, drip, drip sound assured him that he was still underground. He weakly felt his pocket and found it was empty. Cloth was wrapped tightly around his neck. “Don't move your neck if you can help it,” said a gruff voice in the darkness. Slippy almost turned to face the voice, then having heard the warning thought better of it. Looking with only his eyes he saw a cloaked man, lit by a lantern on the bedside table. Under the hood, the man's face seemed to be wrapped in cloth, or maybe bandages. In a similarly wrapped hand, he held a knife by the blade, playing with it idly. It danced between his fingers, almost as if it was acting on its own- it was oddly mesmerizing. “Who?...” Slippy croaked, unable to get out the rest of his question. It hurt to speak. “Your throat will heal.” Said the man. “Probably. Sorry about that, but you were touching things that you really shouldn't. Thieves hate to be stolen from, you know...” he chided. “I'd ask how you found my hideout, but I'm pretty sure I already have a good idea. The tunnels down here sometimes change... You see, they never take you where you want to go, which makes them a very good hiding place if you don't want to be found. The only way to find that room is to do so by accident.” The man leaned in closer. Slippy could see his eyes narrow as if inspecting something. “You must be a beggar boy. But you're a poor thief, between the sobbing and the way you shuffle your feet... Then again, so was I when I started out...” A heavy pause filled the air. The man seemed to be holding words in his mouth. Then after consideration, carefully let them into the air.

“Under the moonlight they make their crusade those baneful youth, bless them they are children of the derelict and dying but the progeny of kings for this is a wicked seed that the holy have sown

a deliciously sharp irony for seeds, I say, are meant to be grown.”

It would be difficult to guess from within the city’s walls, but Amuun's countryside in summertime was beautiful. The hot air had a similar effect to a slow, lulling song played on the harp. It was a time for thinking sweet and selfish thoughts. Slippy sat under a plum tree outside the city limits, feeling and turning a scone in his hand. He enjoyed the crumbling texture. It was another gift from the baker's girl. She was always good to the street urchins, but Slippy secretly and stupidly hoped that this gift was something other than generosity... “You have a look of desire in your eye.” Said the sewer-man. Slippy jumped. Sewer-man (as Slippy had begun calling him,) had approached in complete silence. It was one thing to hide in darkness, with the shadows swallowing you and masking your presence. Could the same really be done in daylight? Sewer-man had shed his cloak for this hot summer day, but he retained the cloth wrappings which covered nearly his entire body. Bits of golden hair slipped through the bandages around his head. He couldn't be nearly as old as he sounded. From a distance though, he simply looked as if he was damned to some terrible illness. “You're late.” Said Slippy, aware of his cheeks becoming a shade of red. Sewer-man didn't allow the change of subject. “Desire is good. A thief without desire is like an artist without a muse.” A tone of amusement lay beneath his words. “You want something you cannot have.” Slippy frowned. This probing was irritating. “What I want is to learn blades!” He demanded awkwardly, resolving to stop this conversation at once. Since he had seen Sewer-man flipping the small knife in that dark room when they first met, he had become transfixed by that skill. Sewer-man snorted through his bandages. “Blades... Blades are hardly a thief's first weapon. Silence, darkness, nimble hands, empty words of sweetness...” His words trailed off. He often stopped mid-sentence and it seemed as though his mind had moved to some other thought entirely. “Alright.” He conceded, “I'm in a good mood, so I'll teach you some blades today.” Sewer-man had already taught Slippy how to hide in a good shadow, make his voice sound like another's, and how to read letters. He retrieved something from his bag. “Here, take this.” He said, holding out a small silver needle. “This isn't a blade!” Protested Slippy. “It's got a pointy end, doesn't it?” Said Sewer-Man. “That should be enough for someone your size.” He laughed, “You are only a boy, and so you do not know, that a blade can’t destroy if there’s no place to stow. A bee has its flower, and a clock points the hour.” Slippy crumpled his mouth. “Say what you really mean, for once!” “I mean what I said, but I’ll put it in simpler terms. That needle is just as useful as a knife, if you know the right places to put it.” He said. He pulled another item from the bag, a chest small enough to hold in one hand. It was cubic in shape and looked to be made completely from iron. “For a thief, the world is a world of doors and keys. That which you desire is behind a door, and everything else is a possible key. It is only a matter of finding the right fit. When you can unlock this little door with that needle, I'll give you a bigger needle and a bigger door... And eventually I will give you a blade. But in time, that little needle in your hands will open any door. Any treasure, anything you desire, will be only within a needle's reach of you. That is what it means to be in our profession- to hold the keys in a world of doors, and open them as you please.”

This is my article for Blogvember! Notevember? Noahvember? This is my article for Noahvember. It’s obviously a fiction piece, and it's one I’ve had kicking around for a long time, unfinished probably over a year.

As readers we love to read fiction, but as writers, we loathe it. This is because writing fiction is very, very fucking hard. Presenting ideas in a clear fashion is easy, but trying to present ideas with subtlety takes true precision and consideration. That’s probably why even this short story is really only a few vignettes from a pretty specific point in a young man’s life.

Poetry seems like the easier version of writing since the actual length of the work is usually very brief. It is pure emotion, without anchors.

Fiction and poetry when married together are a kind of sick indulgence- when you put them together you can sort of get away without totally doing one or the other, and the whole affair becomes much easier. Within the fiction, you can make a place for your poetry to live, and create a context. Within a context, a poem will likely just present itself. Likewise, a poem can carry the narrative payloads you just aren’t skilled enough to work into the story organically. Add some pictures to that, and we’re off to the races. It feels a bit like cheating, but I’ve already done the dark deed and there is no one who will stop me. There is no one who can stop me…

The drawings were the very last piece I did for this story, which I guess is the logical way to go about it. I realize after doing that, It would be so so fun to do the art for a text adventure game set underground. Just drawings of your items and vignettes of underground spaces. That would be super fun.

It shouldn’t surprise you that this is a backstory for a Dungeons and Dragons character who steals things professionally. When I was looking at my character’s sheet, I found that some of the techniques at his disposal were pretty sophisticated. With a wizard it is pretty straightforward where they learned their stuff; a wizard school, a tome, an apprenticeship. For the thief class, (which is common enough in these fantasy worlds to be its own class of character,) it's assumed that they learned these skills out of some necessity to steal things.

I guess that makes some sense, but I don’t totally buy it. At a certain point, you need instruction, or at least some model to base yourself on in order to become totally elite at any task. I believe that wholeheartedly. But, if you are a thief, your occupation is explicitly not allowed. A wizard, a warrior, or a cleric all have their place in society where they can find role models and conventional wisdom. The same seems less likely for thieves. While I appreciate the idea of a thieves' guild, it seems a bit out in the open for my taste. In this story, I imagine Slippy is being inducted into some kind of order, but one that is decentralized, almost to hardly exist at all. This order of thieves is a tradition, a culture, but not an association or group with a governing body.

The hardest part of all of this was the ending, which kept me stumped for a long time. In the end, I think just implying the rest of his journey is good enough. I really like Slippy, and I feel like I have a pretty good idea about what happens to him next, but if you’ve known me for any amount of time, you know that I have a hard time sticking to an idea. I’m erratic that way. Whenever a wheel starts turning, it kind of runs away from the currently turning wheel, and I have to choose which one to chase. This is the beginning of Slippy’s story, but nowhere close to the end. Whether I decide to check in on him again, we will have to see. For now, I'm onto other things.