Toni Morrison? Alice Walker? Zora Neale Hurston? Ralph Ellison? James Baldwin? Lorraine Hansbury? Maya Angelou? Octavia Butler? Langston Hughes? Bell Hooks? Many many many many others? Go fuck yourself you lazy, anti-intellectual asshole
Have I watched the movie in the last decade or more? No. Do I have iron clad evidence to support my argument? Yes.
1. She’s the most knowledgeable about candy. She’s committed to it, and knows her stuff. When Wonka holds up a little yellow piece across the room, she recognizes it immediately. She was able to switch to candy bars for the sake of the contest, so we know she has personal discipline and is goal oriented. Also, two major projects play directly into her strong suits: the 3-course-meal gum that Wonka failed to make safe (gum) and the neverending gobstopper (longevity).
2. She’s the most fit to run a business. Violet is competitive, determined, hard working, and willing to take risks. Her father is a small town car salesman and politician, so she could easily pick up knowledge and support from him. (Veruca’s dad is also a business man, and in a compatible market (nuts), but it’s made very clear that Veruca has no respect or knowledge of business practices or hard work.)
3. She’s the most sympathetic to the Oompa Loompas. She critiques Veruca when Veruca demands to buy one. More importantly, Wonka has been testing the 3-course-meal gum that ‘always goes wrong’ on Oompa Loompas while he presumably just watches. Violet is ready to put herself on the front line, instead of treating the Oompa Loompas as disposable, and would therefore be a better boss.
4. Her personality ‘flaw’ is the most fitting for the company. In the moralizing Oompa Loompa song, they just say ‘gum is pretty cool, but it’s not socially acceptable to chew it all day‘. The thing is, we already know that she can stop if she wants, because she already did that to win the golden ticket. And yeah, she is defensive about the perceived impoliteness of her hobby (like when her mother tries to shame her about her habit during a televised interview) but the obsession with candy and neglect of social norms is EXACTLY what Wonka is all about. This is on brand.
5. Her misstep in the factory is reasonable. Wonka shows everyone a candy he’s very proud of. Violet is like “oh sick, that’s gum, my special interest.” Wonka then pulls a “WRONG! It’s amazing gum!” In the very moments before she takes the gum Wonka has mislead her just to belittle her. So when he’s like “I wouldn’t do that” why should she give a shit what he has to say? She’s not like Charlie over here who’s all “Sure Gramps, let’s stay behind while the tour leaves and secretly drink this thing that has been explicitly stated to fill you with gas and is too powerful for safe consumption, oh and also I just saw what happened to Violet so I actually KNOW what this stuff can be capable of” Also, Violet is not selfish about her experience, she tells everyone what she’s tasting and feeling, and everyone is eager to hear it. Taking a personal risk to share knowledge with everyone. Violet is Prometheus: fact.
So Augustus contaminates the chocolate river. Charlie sneaks around and contaminates the vent walls. Veruca destroys and disrupts the workspace. Mike knows exactly what will happen to him and transports/shrinks himself deliberately. Violet had no idea what the gum could potentially do to her, and caused no harm to anyone or anything but herself.
Lastly: Can you imagine Charlie filling Wonka’s shoes? That passive, naive boy? Violet is already basically Wonka. She’s passionate, sarcastic, candy-obsessed, free thinking, and a total firecracker. She’s even better than Wonka, because she doesn’t endanger others.
Violet should’ve been picked to inherit the chocolate factory.
Yes, absolutely, except in the older movie, it was never about who did something wrong in the factory, it was about who gave away their Everlasting Gobstopper to Slugworth or whatever his name was.
“ILLINOIS is 1st STATE to BAN BOOK BANS! Per HB 2789, state funding ($62 millions) will not be awarded to public or school libraries that remove books from circulation and do not “adopt the American Library Association’s Library Bill of Rights.”
So far, the bill is the only one of its kind in existence. Since being passed in the Illinois Senate, it is now being sent to Governor J.B. Pritzker to be signed. It’s expected to go into effect, as the democratic governor has already voiced his support for the measure.
“Indigenous tech and culture experts say that while such technologies can help preserve and revive their languages, harvesting their data without consent risks abuse, distorting of Indigenous culture, and depriving minorities of their rights.
“Data is like our land and natural resources,” said Karaitiana Taiuru, a Māori ethicist and an honorary academic at the University of Auckland.
“If Indigenous peoples don’t have sovereignty of their own data, they will simply be re-colonised in this information society.””
If you want to read more about Indigenous data sovereignty, Te Mana Raraunga — the Māori Data Sovereignty Network — has quite a lot of information on their website. They’ve also published Indigenous Data Sovereignty and Policy which is available for free (!) as an ebook on Google Play.
[ID: A statue of a person lying on a very plush looking pillow-bed; the sculpture is nude with back to the camera, face turned to the side, lying on a dramatic drapery, with one foot gently raised.]
This is an incredibly compelling work in person for a number of reasons – to begin with, the raised foot isn’t done justice by the photograph, but it’s really funny and very human in person. It looked ancient enough, but also whimsical enough, that I was surprised I hadn’t seen it in the records yet, so I checked out the placard, which put the date at around 100 CE. I must have just missed it while paging through the records. I’m sorry I did, because it’s a gorgeous sculpture. (Its history is complicated but it appears the figure and draperies are ancient while the bed itself is 17th century.)
And it’s called the Sleeping Hermaphroditus, because…
[ID: The statue as seen from the side; head still turned away, the torso is visible, and shows both the generous curve of a breast and also a penis and testicles resting on the drapery on which the figure reclines.]
In ancient history, Hermaphroditus was the child of Aphrodite and Hermes, originally male, who was merged with a naiad who was obsessed with him and became both male and female. He’s generally represented as a very feminine-looking person (hair in the female style of the time, prominent breasts, female clothing, rounded hips) with male genitalia, often coyly on display. The history is complicated; we don’t have good sourcing for the story and we don’t truly know how Hermaphroditus was viewed in the ancient world, as far as I know (classicists feel free to correct me on this). Hermaphroditus, generally referred to with male pronouns even after developing a female appearance, may have represented trans women, intersex people, or some spiritual concept that had little to do with human gender expression at all.
Regardless of the complication surrounding the narrative, the sculpture itself is beautiful, and well worth sharing, I think.
There’s a very similar statue in the National Museum of Rome. In the gift shop, there’s a small replica of the back, but not the front, which is disappointing.
It does help actually, to post the whole context of Hank Green supporting sex workers
Raise your hand if you’re just incredibly fucking tired of people taking things the Green Brothers say out of context to make fun of some of the straight white dudes that use that privilege to their advantage to help marginilized people.
The Green brothers speak out about racial injustice, financial inequality, homophobia, housing issues (including homelessness), mental illness (ESPECIALLY John, who has gone through intense depression and anxiety in the past), and many other topics.
They provide dozens of free resources for students online, specifically Crash Course, and every year during the holidays they donate thousands of dollars to multiple charities.
They actively acknowledge their privilege and use it to lift other people up and provide resources for those who don’t have the same privilege.
I’m sure many people don’t know this, but John and Hank CREATED VidCon. They’re the reason VidCon exists today. They were some of the ORIGINAL YouTubers, and they’re one of the only platforms on YouTube that has stayed true to their original content idea.
People LOVE to hate on them. They love it. John was sent so many death threats and harassed so much that he gave up all social media but YouTube for a long time. The reason? People claimed he was glorifying cancer (which if you’ve actually READ the book, he doesn’t) and that he was a “pervert” for writing about high schoolers (as if LITERALLY every single book about a high schooler isn’t written by someone older than 18 I mean Jesus Christ people). Hes spoken on this a couple times but stopped because people just ignored him and dragged his name through the gutters.
The hate on Hank is, from what I’ve seen, fairly recent - he was kind of the forgotten brother for a while. Until he published a book where the main character was bisexual. And he said positive things about trans people. And then suddenly “Hank Green is just a dumb man and his opinions are trash.” Almost like people didn’t like that the “science man” was openly supportive of homosexuality
The Green brothers acknowledge when they get things wrong. They speak out on injustice, on inequality, and they always, ALWAYS try to do what’s right. They are some of the most wholesome straight white men I’ve ever come across in life in general, and it infuriates me that people reduce them to “okay? okay” and “oh didnt he do Crash Course?”
And now hank green is the honorary father of gen z and science tiktok
on this blog we respect the green brothers
Somewhere along the line some people saw ‘people with more privilege in certain areas are less likely to be as aware of their advantages because they are not forced to be aware of the issues constantly’, and somehow read it as ‘if someone ticks enough Privilege Boxes then they’re a Bad Person by default and I’m allowed to bully them’, and those people are a blight on the community.
