One reading of what Mr. Utterson suspects the possible relationship between Jekyll and Hyde, and the 'ghost of some old sin', might be is that Hyde is his illegitimate son, but between Hyde entering through Jekyll's back door (literally and metaphorically), Utterson having a nightmare of Hyde breaking into Jekyll's bedroom while he's sleeping and forcing him to do his bidding in the middle of the night, and thinking of shenanigans around Jekyll's bed a second time, another theory he might have is that Hyde is Jekyll's secret lover, either estranged or ongoing, and between those two possibilities, the latter would be far more dangerous to Jekyll in social and legal terms if it were to be discovered or used to blackmail him.
For historical context, the novella was published in 1886, though as we will later find out, the only information we are given about the temporal setting is that the story is set in the 19th century, though it can't be any earlier than 1850, if you do the math based on Jekyll's age. Homosexuality between men in the UK in the form of sodomy was punishable by death until 1861, during which the Offences Against the Person Act was passed to amend the penalty for sodomy from death to a minimum of ten years in prison; later, and just prior to the novella's publication, the Criminal Law Amendment Act 1885 criminalized any and all acts of homosexuality between men (not just sodomy), including those done in private with no witnesses — even a mere affectionate letter would suffice as evidence for prosecution — to the point where it became known as the Blackmailer's Charter (source); this would later be the act under which Oscar Wilde would be found guilty of 'gross indecency' in 1895 and sentenced to prison.
Meanwhile, it wasn't uncommon for upper-class men to have illegitimate children, and while potentially scandalous, it would not necessarily be life-ruining — though of course, the concern in that case could be that Hyde has other information he is holding over Jekyll's head as blackmail, including possible relationships with other men that would be both scandalous and illegal during this time period.
first letter from my good friend Jonathan: paprika recipes!
first message from my new pen-pal Ishmael: the only cure for suicidal depression is the Sea.
hbo’s succession is an insane fucking show because remember when they said “he never saw anything he loved that he didn’t wanna kick just to see if it would still come back” and when they said “life’s not knights on horseback. it’s a number on a piece of paper; it’s a fight for a knife in the mud” and when they said “you know this is just fun, right? there’s no god, there’s no anything. there’s just people in rooms trying to be happy” and when they said “what could you possibly kill, that you loved so much, it would make the sun rise again?” and when they said “i love you. i can’t forgive you” and when they said “i wonder if the sad i’d be without you would be less than the sad i get from being with you” and when they said “the good thing about a family that doesn’t love you is that you learn to live without it. you’re needy love sponges and i’m a plant that grows on rocks and lives off insects that die inside of me” and when they said “we think these grand horror things, at times like these, these ice shelves are gonna come at us in the night and take our heads off. its not true. he was an old bastard. and he loved you” and when they said-
The most interesting thing to me thus far about this whole goncherov thing is that Tumblr has collectively constructed some pretty convincing side characters for this movie. Katya leaps off the page as this frustrated woman caged by her lack of autonomy, Sofia coyly plays both sides and acts above it all when really she's desperate for the same freedom Katya is. Ice Pick Joe is a less developed character who nonetheless acts as a stand in for the inescapable nature of cycles of violence. andrey, loyal to a fault, gets pulled deeper and deeper into goncherov's orbit until there's no way for him to make it out alive
and yet with all that I have ZERO sense of who goncherov is supposed to be himself. i've see a lot of stuff suggesting that the film is theoretically about loss, including the loss of one's identity, shown primarily through the way goncherov becomes unrecognizable to himself by the time of his death at the end of the film (seeing himself in a fractured mirror is a common motif). it's very interesting to me that we have a fine time coming up with a group of collective blorbos based on mafia movie tropes, but somehow the main character feels unknowable, to the degree that we had to make that one of the core themes of the film.
According to the CIA was when someone gets to 33 (33rd vertebrae or Golgotha) it creates a superimposed image of the spirit, the body, and all of the components therefore since Kundalini is a temporal paradox, they die and live through Christ and have the old neural network freely moving in the vessel. This old mapping of the first vessel is the Holy Ghost. The second time one gets to 33 by the number 666, it decimates the first image and keeps the second. Therefore God in the Flesh and something greater than man is in control. 777 is when bio lightning or the lightning flash of creation grants Christ to the heart of the initiate who completed the great work. It spirals down in the months that proceed after the lightning flash. The number 666 is the serpent of wisdom climbing back to the highest crown.
idk about you but recently i’ve been enjoying the slow rise of very particular “food themed” genre of cinema(?)(idk how else to describe it) where food must go on par with some sort of psychological thriller; bonus points if creators manage make it funny or weird, or both. main examples are The Menu (2022), The Bear (2022- ) and Drops of God (2023- )
and of course there is also subcategory devoted to cannibalism: Yellowjackets (2021-), Gannibal (2022) and upcoming tv-series The Horror of Dolores Roach (2023)
Nobody:
Me: OH MY GOD YAYYYYYYYY IT’S NOBODYYYYY!!
“Of course we’re in love. That’s why I tried to shoot you.”
“If we were really in love, you wouldn’t have missed.”
genuinely one of the rawest lines in all of cinema holy FUCK
So, why do it then? Why choose to be good, every day, if there is no guaranteed reward we can count on, now or in the afterlife?