And when you gaze long into the abyss, the abyss feels slightly uncomfortable.
Fucking love triangles. UGH. I thought this was going to get better.
If you ever find yourself in the position where you defecate/urinate/vomit. I really don’t mind. I will not judge you at all.
But PLEASE PLEASE PLEASE, if you are alert and orientated, tell me /before/ I stand/kneel in it. Honestly I’m here to help but please.
shaydaly said: I have found iv been so much happier now that I do regular exercise. Even if it’s just a walk.
Don’t ever tell my mother, but I do do regular exercise. I just don’t talk about it.
The biggest factor for me is sleep. I’m such a shit when it comes to sleep. Good quality sleep.
The work-husband is such a reality-check for me. Ugh. Good. I needed that.
Well, one way to find out what had been making you nauseous and miserable all day is to burst out crying the minute a coworker starts talking about it.
In the middle of designing a city for a story, and struggling with the repetitive tropes involved in cities. I know many of these tropes directly relate to architectural precedent, and the architectural precedent often has a very informed purpose, but when appropriating the city typology for use in a story, the act of choice instead of actual historical evolution casts a different light on the matter.
terraces/levels (steep topography): often necessary in history because of limited arable land, need to be close to water ways, better defensible location, limited ability to terraform, better views! Storywise, this almost always becomes a framework to describe class structure.
walls within walls: again, defensible structure. Feudal. City starts with the ‘citadel’, which was an original family with some power/military call. Others come to the city to service the citadel family, when enough cluster around the wall, maybe a couple of wars where the houses are burned down, the ruling family feels obligation to protect those who service them, hence a second wall is built. Those who service those who service the ruling family arrive, clustering outside that second wall, until a third wall is built, and…again, we have a city structure defined by class.
density: the richer you are, the more land you own. the poorer you are, the more dense the area to live in. again, class structure. density in ‘affluent’ areas reaches a tipping point, the rich move out and start a new hub elsewhere, and what was once a mansion becomes a mass tenement. water: either becomes a resource, vulnerability or a weapon (for example, a city which floods on command as a defence structure - flood zones become slums, high points become ruling family housing / key seats of government).
All of the above as setting become a part of literary conflict: say the story involves any kind of struggle against something, the cityscape itself is representative of a subtextual or textual class struggle, an ongoing dialogue re resource, presence, prestige. (If you could just get into the next level up…) This presence/repetition is not unusual because I’m hard pressed to think of a story which didn’t either neutrally present class structure as a given (physical city structure is also presented neutrally, but also does not contradict the classism) or directly involve class struggles (and use the physical structure of the city as a clear representation of this class division).
Ok, says my brain, but speculative fiction now. How about cities without class. Cluster of standardised housing typology, mid density, communal ‘village hub’ on the ground floor for each residential cluster, easy access to amenity for all, rules about density, no walled enclaves. Government initiated housing placement, so you get residential villages of mostly doctors and nurses close to hospitals, mostly farmers and vets and mechanics near agricultural land. Would it have to be within a culture that never had class to begin with? There would have to be an abundance of resource. No fight for survival. A benign climate. But in such a situation then who steps forward to drive people who are otherwise content to produce at great effort a structure which will only perpetuate an existing contentment? No notable improvement or improved chance of survival. Spaceships land on untouched planet and construct these to fit a model preconceived, to avoid ‘mistakes of the past’. Ok. A series of Corbusian blocks on a grassy terrain. But how does a story pan out if the environment itself is not a risk, if cities exist for no real reason except humans are lazy and social and this way is the easiest way. Do the characters all ‘slot into’ their roles in the environment like submariners into their roles — if someone fucks up, everyone’s life is at risk, so there cannot be a struggle against the mechanism they are within because if there is then all will die. But in a benign environment, what is that struggle against? What drives the need to work together? (This is sounding less like a communist city than a bureaucratic city). If there is conflict with the environment, then does it become yet another typical struggle between stasis (represented by the submariner’s utopia — as long as everyone plays their part nothing will go wrong) or change (which necessitates struggle, achievement, the opportunity to win and the risk of losing - becomes the usual utopia is actually dystopia).
But say, take the question about why people live like this away, even as a background this would seriously impact the kind of believable, realistic character actions and thoughts which could occur. The city is an inherent representation of the culture, and the city then informs the bounds within which the culture can develop, even if that development is in conflict with the city-culture, etceteceasdkjfhsadlhfljkdfbsd.
I do not know where this is going, except as a complaint that I’m finding it difficult to break away from stereotypical representations of class divisions using physical city infrastructure, and beginning to wonder if setting a story in a city will automatically shape the story into one with an inherently classist text or subtext.