Intro: As mentioned earlier, Emi aligns with Social Penetration Theory, which asserts that as relationships develop, communication moves from superficial topics toward increasingly intimate disclosure. Interaction gradually penetrates the communicators’ public personas to reach their core sense of self.
EMI (SOCIAL PENETRATION THEORY):
If Shizune’s route is structured around influence, Emi’s is structured around layers.
Social Penetration Theory visualizes personality as layered:
Outer layer: surface traits, routines, public persona
Her communication is playful, energetic, routine-based, and forward-looking. Morning runs become the foundation of their relationship. They share time, jokes, and light teasing.
This reflects high breadth but low depth. They talk often. They spend time together. But the conversation avoids emotional gravity.
“They’re just legs. It’s not a big deal.”
Even when discussing her prosthetics, she keeps it surface-level. The statement minimizes depth and redirects focus away from trauma and toward functionality.
Emi’s outer layer is transparent but controlled.
Middle Layer: Selective Vulnerability
As intimacy increases, emotional friction appears. Hisao begins asking questions about her accident and her father. Emi responds with deflection:
“Why does it matter?”
“It was a long time ago. I’m fine.”
These are penetration barriers. She is not hostile; she is protective.
Social Penetration Theory emphasizes reciprocity. Hisao opens up about his heart condition and allows emotional depth. Emi does not fully reciprocate.
“Running helps me not think about stuff.”
This line is pivotal. It acknowledges “stuff” without naming it. The middle layer is partially visible but sealed.
Physical Intimacy and Emotional Asymmetry
Physical intimacy develops before full emotional disclosure. Emi allows closeness physically, yet resists emotional excavation.
“Don’t make this into something it’s not.”
This reveals asymmetrical penetration:
Physical layer: accessible
Emotional trauma layer: restricted
Intimacy does not progress evenly across all dimensions. Emi controls the rate and direction of access.
Core Layer: Grief and Emotional Avoidance
The emotional climax forces confrontation with her core. When Hisao pushes too forcefully, conflict emerges. The core contains her father’s death, the accident, and fear of stagnation.
“If I stop moving, I have to think about it.”
Running is not just athleticism. It is emotional containment. Greater intimacy requires risk. For Emi, that risk is reliving loss.
The Rift: Premature Penetration
In the negative trajectory, Hisao presses too hard. Emi withdraws emotionally. Penetration without consent produces retreat. Depth must be mutual.
Intro: As established earlier, Shizune and Misha align with Social Influence Theory, which argues that relationships develop as a result of change in belief, attitude, or behavior caused by another person’s actions. Power is the potential to produce that change.
SHIZUNE / MISHA (SOCIAL INFLUENCE THEORY):
Shizune represents coercive and structural force.
Misha represents legitimacy and normative reinforcement.
On Festivals / Life (Misha translating for Shizune):
"Human beings evolve with each new generation! The ideals and beliefs behind a festival will inevitably change with time! Now, it's about delicious fried food and amusing little games that you play to win prizes! Hahahaha!"
This statement reframes tradition as adaptive behavior. Festivals are not sacred constants; they are evolving systems shaped by participation.
That mirrors Shizune’s approach to relationships and institutions:
Meaning follows engagement.
Structure sustains participation.
Ideals shift, but activity remains.
Misha’s enthusiastic delivery normalizes the philosophy. Shizune supplies the framework; Misha supplies social accessibility.
On Decision Making (Shizune):
"We are going to play for it... The oldest game known to man, upon which the fate of nations has been known to rest: Rock, Paper, Scissors."
For Shizune, decisions are rarely casual. Even minor disagreements are formalized into competitive systems.
Rock, Paper, Scissors functions as:
A procedural equalizer
A depersonalized method of conflict resolution
A ritualized distribution of power
This preference for structured competition extends beyond isolated scenes.
Shizune:
Has mastered snapping loudly despite being deaf; an intentional physical assertion of presence and control over attention. She has one of the “loudest” characters act as voice (Misha).
Prefers strategic board games such as Risk, where territorial dominance and calculated expansion determine success.
Turns even leisure activities, like a fishing trip, into competitive metrics of performance.
Competition is not incidental to her personality; it is her communication mode. Rather than negotiate emotionally, she negotiates through systems. Influence becomes measurable: who wins, who adapts, who participates.
In Social Power terms, this reflects:
Legitimate power (Student Council authority)
Coercive power (pressure through structured expectation)
Reward power (approval, inclusion, status)
The snapping is particularly notable. Despite being deaf, she ensures auditory impact. That act demonstrates that influence is not diminished by disability. She asserts control over the communicative environment in ways that compensate rather than retreat.
On Friendship (Shizune):
"I forgot that the whole time, Misha was there, opening up to me, and giving a hundred percent everyday. I missed what I was looking for, because it was in plain sight."
This line identifies the limits of influence when it is overly systematized.
Misha’s role is relational reinforcement:
She softens directives.
She amplifies enthusiasm.
She legitimizes participation socially.
Where Shizune creates structure, Misha creates atmosphere.
From a Social Influence perspective, Misha embodies referent power, which is compliance gained through warmth and identification. Her legitimacy makes Shizune’s more coercive directives sustainable.
When Shizune overlooks that relational labor, it highlights a distinction: Influencing behavior is not the same as recognizing contribution (participation; creating a rift).
On Friendship (General):
"The world would be a different place without you or me but who else would realize it?"
This line reinforces a central concept of Social Influence Theory: influence is often incremental and unnoticed in real time.
Daily behavioral adjustments accumulate:
Schedules change.
Habits shift.
Expectations recalibrate.
In the good ending, we have increased participation and contribution from Shizune and Misha through Hisao.
Shizune alters environments and structures.
Misha alters tone and perception.
Intro: I originally had bunch of Comm. notes after I 100%'d Katawa Shoujo back in 2015. These are just some of the "raw" notes I took. Without essay form. The essay can be found here, as can my other Katawa Shoujo analyses.
COMMUNICATION THEORY IN KATAWA SHOUJO:
Rin (Redefinition Theory): States that in communication with ablebodied persons and among themselves, disabled persons engage in a process whereby they critique the prevailing stereotypes held by the ablebodied and create new definitions.
Emi (Social Penetration Theory): Asserts that as relationships develop, persons’ communication changes from superficial to deeply personal topics, slowing penetrating the communicators' public persona to reach their core personality or sense of self.
Shizune / Misha (Social Influence Theory: Argues that relationships develop as a result of 'change in the belief, attitude, or behavior of a person (the target of influence), which results from the action of another person (an influencing agent)', and social power as the potential for such influence. (Update: I should probably write more on this and how Shizune represents coercive force/Misha represents legitimacy. More on this later.)
Hanako (Uncertainty Reduction Theory): Posits that when interacting, people need information about the other party in order to reduce their uncertainty. In gaining this information people are able to predict the other's behavior and resulting actions, all of which according to the theory is crucial in the development of any relationship.
Lilly (Principled Negotiation Theory): Argues that a good agreement is one which is wise and efficient, and which improves the parties' relationship. Wise agreements satisfy the parties' interests and are fair and lasting. The goal is to develop a method for reaching good agreements.
Hisao Represents The Stages of Culture Shock:
CH. 1:
Preliminary Phase
Marked by rising sense of anticipation tempered by regret of leaving.
Spectator Phase
Passive but alert spectator, marked by intensity of emotion that careens erratically; ends when passive stance is no longer possible
CH. 2: (Story/adaptation theory chosen)
Increasing Participation Phase.
Greatest variation from persons to person; after (characteristically) clash of values, questions arise: Are values arbitrary? A fabrication? Natural to one’s own culture?
CH. 3: (Bad endings stop here.)
Shock Phase.
Strikes people who have had some success in first efforts at adaptation; manifests as paranoia, fear, self-consciousness, intense judgments of others based on ethnocentric criteria; could precipitate departure.
CH. 4: (If good/neutral ending)
Adaptation Phase.
Sense of being foreign no longer exists; language and thinking are simultaneous—being both in and out of the culture at the same time.
Update: So, one can apply communication models to everyday circumstances, even in games/narratives where they might not be as explicit, but reveal themselves through cultural patterns and actions. I hope you've enjoyed these notes as much as I enjoyed writing them back then.
Katawa Shoujo is a visual novel game about a high school boy named Hisao Nakai in Japan. After developing a heart condition (arrhythmia), he’s transferred to Yamaku Academy, a school for students with disabilities. As he adjusts to his new life, Hisao meets five girls, each with their own experiences of disability and unique way of communicating. Through these relationships, Hisao not only explores romance but also learns to adapt to disability culture — and each girl’s story represents a different communication theory that helps him do so.
The player also meets Kenji, a paranoid, legally blind student who lives across the hall. Though his over-the-top conspiracy theories and isolation from the rest of Yamaku make him an unforgettable character, his story ends early and doesn’t follow the same structure as the others. Because of that, while he deserves a mention, he won’t be discussed in detail here.
The game’s story structure follows a pattern of culture shock. Hisao leaves behind his old way of life and enters disability culture at Yamaku. “Only after I stand in front of the haughty main building, I surprise myself by realizing why the gate bothered me: it was my last chance to turn back, even if I had no life I could ever return to.”
Dr. Igor Klyukanov outlines five stages of culture shock in Principles of Intercultural Communication, which we can see reflected in Katawa Shoujo:
1. Preliminary and Spectator Phase – Hisao’s early days at Yamaku, where he passively observes the new environment but doesn’t yet understand it. He wonders if he will ever have a “normal” life again.
2. Increasing Participation Phase – As he interacts with the students, he starts questioning his old perspectives. He wonders, “Will I ever get used to sights such as this?” and, “Is this what passes for normal around here?”
3. Shock Phase – A turning point in Hisao’s journey, depending on the route taken. This is the emotional crisis where he must either accept his new reality or struggle against it.
4. Adaptation Phase – If he successfully navigates the shock, he reaches a point where disability is no longer foreign. He is able to exist in and out of the culture at the same time, accepting both his past and present selves.
Each girl Hisao meets serves as a guide, embodying a different communication theory that helps him through this adaptation process.
Shizune and Misha – Social Influence Theory
Shizune, a strong-willed deaf student and class representative, communicates through her interpreter, Misha. Misha’s loud, bubbly personality contrasts with Shizune’s serious and competitive nature, creating a comedic yet dynamic relationship between the three. Their story aligns with Social Influence Theory (French and Raven, 1959), which suggests that relationships develop through shifts in power, influence, and persuasion.
From the start, Shizune wants to draw Hisao into her world, challenging him through student council work and games. She believes: “The mark of great people is that they are daring and can follow through.” She wants to make Hisao stronger by encouraging him to take on leadership roles.
In her good ending, Hisao embraces this influence, realizing that Shizune was never trying to control him—she just wanted to connect. In her bad ending, the power dynamic collapses. When Hisao and Misha’s hidden relationship is exposed, Shizune loses trust in both, and Hisao becomes isolated. Since Shizune views love and life as all-or-nothing competitions, there is no neutral ending.
Hanako – Uncertainty Reduction Theory
Hanako, a shy burn victim who avoids attention, struggles with social anxiety and self-worth. Her story follows Uncertainty Reduction Theory (Berger and Calabrese, 1975), which states that as people interact, they seek to reduce uncertainty about one another. When successful, this leads to increased intimacy and trust.
At first, Hanako barely speaks to Hisao, often relying on her best friend, Lilly, for comfort. But as Hisao shares his own struggles, she begins reciprocating. “I-I have to,” she says when explaining her past, indicating her need to balance the information she’s given and received.
In her good ending, she fully opens up, allowing Hisao to see her scars and returning his affection. In her neutral ending, they remain stagnant, both agreeing to “stay the same,” preventing further connection. In her bad ending, she retreats completely, rejecting Hisao in a final outburst: “I hate Lilly! I hate you most of all! I know I’m broken!”—a full breakdown in uncertainty reduction.
Lilly – Principled Negotiation Theory
Lilly, a blind and kind-hearted girl, navigates relationships with a sense of fairness and compromise, making her story fit Principled Negotiation Theory (Ury and Fisher, 1981). This theory emphasizes agreements that satisfy both parties’ interests in a balanced, lasting way.
Unlike Shizune, who views conflict as a challenge, Lilly avoids unnecessary confrontation, focusing on harmony. She even accommodates Shizune, her rival, saying, “Please, Hisao, it’s alright,” when he tries to defend her.
In her good ending, Lilly stays in Japan, choosing her relationship with Hisao over moving to Scotland. The agreement is fair and mutual. In her neutral ending, she leaves, but encourages Hisao to follow his own dreams, showing wisdom but forfeiting their relationship. Because she has an older sister to care for her, she has no bad ending.
Rin – Redefinition Theory
Rin, an eccentric painter born without arms, often struggles to express herself. Her story follows Redefinition Theory (Braithwaite, 1990), which argues that people with disabilities challenge societal definitions and create new identities for themselves.
Rin doesn’t see herself as limited: “I don’t think I’m that disabled. I mean, I do pretty much everything differently. But it’s not that hard. I can always practice.” She adapts effortlessly, seeing disability as a part of her identity rather than a restriction.
Hisao, however, initially struggles to understand her. When he tries to “fix” her or make sense of her abstract thoughts, their relationship fractures. “I think in the end, I’m not really happy with who I am, either. But that doesn’t mean that I regret being who I am. That’s the thing that’s wrong with you, Hisao.”
In her good ending, Hisao accepts that Rin doesn’t need fixing, and their relationship becomes one of mutual understanding. In her neutral and bad endings, he fails to see her as she is, causing her to withdraw completely.
Conclusion
Katawa Shoujo is more than just a dating sim. It’s ultimately about Hisao’s journey of adaptation and self-discovery within disability culture. Each girl represents a communication theory that helps him move through the phases of culture shock, from uncertainty to acceptance.
Through these experiences, Hisao—and by extension, the player—comes to see disability not as an obstacle, but simply another way of being.
Bibliography
Berger, C.R., and Calabrese, R.J. (1975). Some explorations in initial interaction and beyond: Toward a developmental theory of interpersonal communication. Human Communication Research, 1(2), 99-112.
Braithwaite, D.O. (1990). From the Margins to the Center: An Intercultural Redefinition of Disability. Text and Performance Quarterly, 10(1), 7-21.
French, J.R.P., and Raven, B. (1959). The bases of social power. In Cartwright, D. (Ed.), Studies in Social Power. Ann Arbor, MI: Institute for Social Research.
Klyukanov, I. (2005). Principles of Intercultural Communication. Boston: Pearson.
Ury, W., and Fisher, R. (1981). Getting to Yes: Negotiating Agreement Without Giving In. New York: Penguin Books.
An Analysis of “Mein Krieg My Private War”: Amateur Films by German WW2 Soldiers (1989/1990):
Bringing Memories To Life:
“I think I still have my 8mm Siemens here in this wardrobe.”* The former German soldier, a narrow-faced old man now with unkempt tufts of white hair moves a heavy vacuum cleaner out of the way, and he sorts through the old closet, and pulls out a hefty old machine that looks like a miniature metallic jack-in-the-box. “Ah! So, it was the 16mm model, then! Look here!” He says, out of breath. The old man takes the big square camera and turns the crank on the side so that the lens is slowly exposed. “Hey, it still works!” he says excitedly. “I’ll be, look at that. Pretty hefty, ‘ey?”
As the man walks to a white room where a small table is sprawled with old black and white photos, the German seats himself in a big red armchair, his British translators sitting opposite him behind the lens of a camcorder so as to be transparent. “I am always amazed how these photos excite my senses...” He says, his voice falling from exasperation. “I still remember the smells of burning wood. The pictures...they sure bring memories to life, don’t they?”
He began slowly with a deep breath: “At first...we didn’t quite know where we were headed. Then, I saw this sign in some sort of Polish script or something as we headed further eastward from Berlin, and then I knew we were going to invade Russia. In the train, the next day our commandant said to us: "Boys, I'm not supposed to tell you, but 4:00 is attack time. We all had butterflies in our stomachs; we didn't know what to do." The face of the man then turns and laughs at an old film shown on a projector: German soldiers drinking beer around a campfire. One sticks his hand on the lens so as to hide.
"Aha! There I am! With a mustache, even! Look! And I was camera shy.
"Camera shy?" asks a translator.
"Camera shy!" he laughs.
ANIMALS TO MEN:
The next former soldier is a bald, tall man with glasses and an orange sweater. He sits in a dimly-lit room, possibly a darkroom, with a small round off-white table. The bookcases and shelves in the background suggest he has knowledge of his dark past. He begins nervously, speaking with a cracked voice. "My parents were of the opinion that anything that was considered good must be good for their son, too. And in these times... (falling voice, notably sweating...from clothes?) ...it was considered..."good" to be in the Hitler Youth; you see, not to be an outsider." Cut to black and white footage of a line of boys in Hitler Youth regalia; brown shirts, khaki shorts, and swastika armbands. They are carrying a big swastika flag on a pole and marching around a hilly meadow. "I think I was...14 years old, then? Yes, 14 years old."
He explains that his parents were very curious about what a young boy does in a Hitler Youth camp, and so they gave him a camera. But, he only took pictures of what interested him at the time. You then cut to photos of puss willows and a boy in a Hitler Youth uniform cleaning the front wheel of a bike.
"There was a certain regimentation to it all, you had a sense of purpose." He says. "You didn't walk around aimlessly. You marched." Footage shows boys raising the flag in a busy town center next to two Nazi troops. "I remember one day I was being very curious and troops came by me, and I looked at them, thinking "Aha! What's this, then? And a pedestrian grabbed me by the arm and barked: "STRETCH YOUR ARM OUT when the Führer's troops pass by! Then, I learned to stretch out my arm and stand at attention when they passed by from then on."
The old man then comments on some color footage of a teenage soldier smiling, standing at attention and marching, which he happily explains to be himself in basic training. Then, his voice becomes quiet as more footage of basic training is shown. Two men crawling on their stomachs in the snow. A man hopping up and down like a bunny. Men with bayonets stabbing a dummy. "Of course, when you were in basic training you had to be tough or the men would tease you and call you a softie. On the other hand, I did not want to lose my friends. So, I wanted to stay in the middle ground, you see." He says, while the footage runs.
"Did you, also?" Asks the male translator.
"Well..." The old intellectual hesitates slightly, pushing up his glasses. "Remember: I was 18; I was a different person!" He speaks fast and holds up a finger. Then, again at normal pace. "Now, I am 66. Back then, I had no way of knowing that their objective was to humiliate us, to break our will, to make us behave like animals, so that you were capable of carrying out ANY order without asking 'Is this right or is this wrong?' And that makes me an accomplice. Yes. As a soldier I was an accomplice."
"
Did you participate in the firing squad units [Todeskopfeinheiten] or did you see any in Russia?" Asks the female translator. He jerks at his collar and takes a deep breath, relaxing as he rests his knuckles back on the table: "No. I never even saw a firing squad but I heard stories when I was a POW in Kiev. Of the atrocities that the members German army, me, my friends, and Germany had committed." His voice is strained (from tears?) and he continues, gesturing slowly and half-heartedly to swat away the memory. "At first we...we thought this was exaggerated, or Soviet propaganda; they did call us the "fascist hordes", and to us the Russians and the Jews were subhuman. [Untermenschen]." Cut to a scene of gallows with 5 Russians hanging, all marked with a gold JUDE [Jew] star on their chest. A sign reads: THESE JEWS AGGITATED THE GERMAN WEHRMACHT. [Hitler’s army] “But when I was in Kiev, I saw the Russians starving, wrapped in blankets...they didn’t seem like a threat; they were human. I saw photographs of the concentration camps, too.” Next, the German is huddled over filing cabinets marked with the names of cities and concentration camps. “These are my archives. I decided to publish them.” The German nods.
MEN TO ANIMALS:
“NIEMAND erwartete den Russlandfeldzug!” [NO ONE anticipated the Russian campaign] yells a round, tanned interviewee wearing a loose red tie and open grey business suit, throwing up his hands emphatically. He sits in a yellow armchair, his stance is slouched, comfortable and relaxed, but he speaks passionately of the journey to Russia: “The feeling was...the...the...well, the same feeling when you undertake a journey!” Now, they were soldiers he says. Now, they were doing something. What mattered to him was the journey though, and not the politics: “I was an instrument of the state! The word kill never occurred to us, that was not a topic.”
he says, waving his hands. “I had orders and I had to fulfill them!” He tells of being in Sevastopol, and sings a song in Russian he heard when he was with 90,000 (Russian) POWs. He shot films of his artillery unit shooting down a Russian fighter plane with their carbine rifles. He laughs: “You see, it was a hornet that stung us. And that was very unusual at that time, to shoot down a plane with rifles. But, it was the only thing we had. He could’ve killed maybe five of our men.” The shot centers on the dead pilot, with a blue sweater among the smoking wreckage. “There’s the pilot...gray-blue sweater. A bit still there.”
“One felt like one was a rabbit! Poking in and out of the trenches, and eating and celebrating! War heightens the senses, you know.” Footage of men in trenches, digging, then drinking beer, and eating hard bread. He continues, this time around a small miniature model of the Brandenburg Gate, positioning Napoleonic cavalry models to the right, left, and center. “You see, I didn’t want to destroy; that’s not me. I only wanted to observe. I didn’t want to see ruins.” He says.
Cut to him back in the armchair, behind a large bookcase. It is obvious the translator has asked a question about the trains. “Oh, the trains during the wartime are a great topic!” He smiles. “We were so covered in armor, and our backpacks and supplies that we could barely move. The further east we came, the more room there was on the train. But, there were a few who packed instruments and...and we danced, sang, and until…uh, Russia.”
Then, in the first battle, at Sevastopol, he saw the first dead person ever in his life. “There was a German soldier: wedding ring glistening in the sun, face red… and bloated…flies around his mouth…” Footage of wounded Russians standing in line, bandaged. “There is no war manual that says ‘What do I do with 90,000 prisoners!” He says, “I looked after some Russians and give them water, dressed their wounds. I am amazed at how determined these wolves were. Look! There’s a Russian pilot. 17 years young!” Close-up of a captured Russian pilot.
“You have a clear conscience of all of this? What about the pilot you shot?”
“The pilot...yes… well, sure! Crystal-clear!” He smiles and clears his throat. “I could not tell you about all this so powerfully today if I DID…NOT…HAVE…A CRYSTAL…CLEAR…CONSCIENCE!” It is unclear to me whether this was meant to stop the questions, or if it was said slowly to reinforce his own affirmation.
SPARE ME THE ANSWER:
An older-looking German, his hair sparse, wearing a white business suit and tie with glasses. He is still notably blond as steers the wheel of a car. We arrive at a mall of some kind where he stands in front of a booth with a map on it. He begins his story: “I didn’t want to be in the army, I wanted to be a photographer. But, my parents said this job is not practical. You need discipline, and the army will prepare you for a job.” He was deployed to Vitebsk, Russia. His parents, as a farewell gift, gave him a camera. “It was amazing to me that we did it, but we attacked Vitebsk from the west. The Russians anticipated this. For hours, nothing happened. I climbed up a fir tree to watch, but nothing. I wanted action.” He goes on to explain that the battle began when they found out the population was living underground in earthen bunkers.
“And what did you do with the Russians you found?” Asks the male translator.
“Oh…They were…” He exhales, removes his glasses, and touches his palm to his forehead. “Questioned. Rounded up. Shot.”
“Did you hear the firing squads or see them, too?” The translators asks.
“I saw them, too.” He says.
“Did you participate in them, too?”
He turns stone-faced, whispering inaudibly...weeping softly. “Do I have to answer that? Spare me the answer, please.” His head in his hands. “I was glad to be doing what I wanted to do.” He is now standing, having collected himself and is apparently showing the translator a photoalbum either of dead Russians, or his comrades. He is frustrated and flips through the book fast and angrily. “See here? Gone-gone-gone-gone-gone-gone! Well, I’ll be…! A complete causality list! Colors you’ve never seen before. Only in Siberia at -55 C.”
The next shot is of the man at a department store in the aforementioned mall. He holds a large music box [Glockenspiel, toy clock] and says: “If you turn the crank this way, the soldiers march around the face of the clock. This toy is beloved of people of all ages. The parents buy them for the children, see?” He chuckles, pointing at the nutcracker- like soldiers, and showing of the cloudy panorama on which is painted a little girl in a pink dress. “But, the parents enjoy playing with it more than the children. And here’s how you turn it off.” He flips a pendulum switch at the top. The soldiers halt.
SEEING IS SEEING:
A full-lipped, round man in a neatly-cleaned business suit walks down a long hall, opens the white door, and enters a room with a large, crank-operated projector. He turns the crank, then faces the camera and speaks. “I saw many people taking photograph but very few were filming, probably because there were little film materials to be had. But, I made sure I had many sources. At the start, everything was available, there was Kodachrome film even, and my Kodachrome film...the last I had developed in ’42, and they kept their color very well...turned out great.” He then describes at length how the camera works and that it stayed in perfect condition, even in Moscow in the extreme cold. It is sounding as if he is personifying his camera, and attesting to his own physical endurance.
Color images of a swastika flag waving over a barracks transition to young men, firing rifles. Cut to the interviewee in a large leather armchair. Behind him is a bookcase. He now wears glasses. “That is a normal part of learning how to fit in to society.” He says of his basic training. “Naturally, when somebody fell out of line, there were consequences.” The next film shows a bombed-out high-rise building in Poland, the top completely blown off. “...we climbed to the top, got in, and filmed it. It was just interesting at the time. You can’t say: “You must evaluate this morally; as the majority of people say today.”
He explains his departure to Moscow, and not knowing originally where he was going. “Am I going to Persia? Turkey?” He muses, and then reveals that: “Everyone was hopeful that the destination was Moscow.” Color footage of an armored car, bearing a swastika flag, atop which a young man stands. Then, the camera focuses from the window of a jeep, and pans along the wreckage of another car: “The Russians would hide along the roads and try to flip the cars, crack them, or kill the driver,” He smiles, and explains matter-of-factly. “So that that didn’t happen, you spotted a hole, you threw a grenade in, and that took care of it.”
“Were you scared of that?” asks the female translator.
“No. It could’ve been anybody bombed out there. The jeep here took a direct hit. Well, that’s war.”
Black and white footage goes on, showing a pile of dead bodies, and men being thrown into ditches. “Here I was in Moscow, all alone.” He says.
“Why did you film the dead bodies?” asks the translator.
He becomes a little defensive, and waves his hand as if to dismiss her. “That’s war.”
Toward the end of the interview he says that he has no regrets, only that he never saw the Western front, in wartime too, because “seeing is seeing” and the circumstances don’t matter.
Conclusion:
Mein Krieg: My Private War is about war. Consequently, it also follows the soldiers as they experience different stages of the war. Comradeship, joy, death, and horror. The reactions ranged from abstraction of humans as animals, or returning to a natural state so as to avoid human conscience, to the deconstruction of the animal propaganda to confront human conscience. Soldiers were represented as instruments, toys, or as just observing events over which they had no control.
The question must be asked: why then was it filmed? Obviously, all the men experienced death, but most stopped short of expressing any guilt directly, except for the man in Kiev, who joined the Hitler Youth at 14. Responses to death ranged from avoidance of acknowledgment. “I was amazed at how determined these wolves were.”, “Spare me the answer.”, and “That’s war.”
Rather than seeing the horrors of war as they were, they were regarded as interesting, but something you did not judge morally. Accordingly, the more soldiers identified with their enemies as humans, and their actions as humans rather than instruments or animals, feelings of grief and remorse increased. The abstraction of enemies is directly related to, in other words, being a good killer vs. being a good human.
As we worry about the dying WWII population, we must not forget the stories of the Germans.
The Allied powers have reveled in the “glory” of its victory over Nazism far too long without considering the consequences of war itself. We think we are invulnerable, because we think we do not need two sides of the story.
__________________________________________________________________
* My translation differs from the film version of Mein Krieg: My Private War, in order to preserve both the phenomenological happenings (such as stuttering) and the narrative-analytic continuity. Rather than cutting from story to story, I proceed soldier to soldier with no cut scenes. As such, the information is not presented in the order of the film. It is hoped that I could better represent their stories holistically and thematically in this way.
Bibliography:
Eder, Harriet. Kufer, Thomas. Mein Krieg. BBC Elstree, 1990.
As I said before, one of the worst movies I’ve ever seen when it comes to disability portrayals is 1993’s The Secret Garden. Colin, the disabled character is typecast as a sour young man, who is even rumored to be a hunchback. He is described as crippled, (Yes, I know it’s Victorian times, but this set up the pathetic portrayal.) and his father doesn’t want anything to do with him or children. That being said, his father Lord Craven takes her cousin named Mary after she loses her family in India. She takes him to the Secret Garden in this castle.
Everything about this character’s image rubbed me the wrong way. His own caretakers lock him away and Maggie Smith’s character scolds Mary for even being with him. When he becomes hysterical, they tie him down to the bed. Re-watching this movie even for the purposes of analysis was extremely hard, though I did. It is a clear case of “curing” a disabled character for “love” by magic. After Colin starts having fun in the garden, he discovers that in fact he can walk. Then, they contact his father via “magic spell”. Yes, I know. It’s meant to symbolize the beauty of “natural” life vs. the isolation of modern times. Why prove it supernaturally? Why can’t Colin just be disabled? And it’s just so darn sappy in its message. For example, after Colin walks, his father decides he loves him, AND the kicker, MARY LOVES HIM TOO. The message is clear: if you are disabled, no one will love you.
If you’re cured though, and have the right attitude and the right body…then you can be loved! Surely, Colin’s disability was all in his mind, and had nothing to do with his intense mistreatment by those around him. No, all he needed was a little girl to show him how to have fun. It’s not like he’d never tried walking before. I apologize for my tone, but it is really difficult to watch if you have a disability. The clear implication is that a disabled life is not worth living or somehow the cause of Colin’s hysteria. Besides the fact, (and I know it’s an old book, but that doesn’t excuse it!) that the movie maintains the “You can do it…” attitude towards physiology, it also has one of those scenes where Colin hobbles over and hugs his able-bodied buddies. Such scenes were dated by 1993, one would hope, but there is a strong presumption of able-bodiedness, as Dickon and Mary watch Colin hobble; wide-eyed and smiling like goons.
Suffice it to say, I hated this movie and its able-bodied presumptions even as a kid.Worst disability portrayal ever. But, come to find out, the movie even engages in casual racism against Indian natives, and passes off British imperial aristocracy as just part of the charm of the movie. Of course the Yorkshire girl is happy to be a maid! Of course, Mary launches into a tirade when she dare presume she’d be an Indian native. I know it’s done for sentimental purposes, ostensibly…but re-watching was a real eye-opener into how offensive this film really was (and is.) to me.
Magic is something I have nothing against. But, only when it inspires me! This film is selling magic that isn’t really there. In fact, it’s quite nasty. And yet, it hopes to cover up its inhumanity with a pretty garden. I said I’d watch this movie because of the deep impact it had on me as a child. Now, as an adult it still has…perhaps even deeper impact. This was 1993...and attitudes like this exist. And they persist! Having seen such attitudes up close, still makes me think of Colin. But, you know? In a sense, this film is refreshing. It shows me exactly what kind of negativity I’ve been up against: The presumption that the aristocracy knows best, and a disabled life is not worth living. I’m proud to work with organizations like VSA to prove that wholly wrong. Thanks VSA Ohio! Keep up the fight for disability rights!
I’M AN INTERGALACTIC WARRIOR: ON DISABILITY AS AN ALIEN CULTURE:
Well, it’s been an exciting weekend! I had a friend over for olives and beer while trying to explain intercultural discourse, followed a Doctor Who blog, (Blogtor Who); I got a surprise visit from my mom and went to Whole Foods for Indian. Curry tofu. Later, we had curry chicken, but my mom is vegetarian, and so she had more tofu. On the first trip out for lunch, she explained to me that she’d met a “spirit reader”; a shaman. Being a sci-fi nut and a storyteller, I usually take such readings with a grain of salt. This one especially. So, she told me that he said I was an intergalactic warrior from the Pleiades in a past life, and she had been Alantean.
For me, I guess it was just cool to be pictured as an intergalactic warrior. I don’t believe it for a second except as cool sci-fi. Maybe I’ll write a story about it. What was interesting is that the shaman said that in my “present form” I felt pulled down by the density of my physical body. This is before he had learned that I have cerebral palsy. So, as we ate, I couldn’t stop thinking: If I know the environment of the Pleiades constellation, then maybe I can extrapolate some idea of the weapons and culture that existed there.
One of the things I had read later on an astronomy website said that its surrounded by a nebula, pulsars, and flare stars. So, I got this idea of people battling in zero gravity with radiation guns, energy shield rings, flamethrowers, light saber-type weapons darken the bright nebulous battlefield like camouflage Though I’m sure this is all laughable to a real astronomer: If life existed on such a constellation, wouldn’t it be informed by its nebulous and poisonous environment? Can any real astronomers help me out?
Also, I got to watch all of Joss Whedon’s 2009 Astonishing X-Men. I especially like Joss Whedon’s depiction of Professor X…although his wheelchair looks like concrete. Looking back on it, I suppose there’s an element of alienation in every Professor X portrayal, because, so far as I know…he has never been designed by a person with a disability. If anyone can prove me wrong, I’d love to be proved wrong. Professor X has always been my hero, but it never really struck me how odd his wheelchairs are until I saw him in Astonishing X-Men.
The earliest depictions of Professor X as paralyzed were in the 60s. He has a practical manual chair, with a blanket over the legs. In the 90s X-men he has a hover chair, but I wonder if this is reflective of the density of being pulled down by his body. It seems to symbolize the hope of inclusion, but is so impractical. I think in the 80s, he retained the manual chair, but in 1989 it became a power chair in Pryde of The X-Men. Thus, in X-Men Arcade it was also a power chair, but ways were contrived by which Xavier could also walk (in the comics, and 90s cartoon.) The power chair model returned in Bryan Singer’s X-Men trilogy, and the walking power suits stopped; however, Xavier dies. Days of Future’s Past may right this wrong! In X-Men: Evolution Xavier becomes a slave of Apocalypse.
It seems being both the world’s most powerful telepath and disabled means the writers really don’t know what to do with Professor X physically except destroy him or make him evil. Let’s not forget Warren Ellis’s Onslaught Epic! (Hover chair Xavier; 1996.) But, the Onslaught Epic does raise a good point…that people never say what they mean…Ellis’s Xavier can’t take this anymore, and years of repressed psychic darkness turn him into Onslaught. As a person with a disability, I can say I’ve been upset by the doubletalk I sometimes experience, such as when someone able-bodied says they think of me as “Just the same” as them; but obviously I’m different. Being telepathic and disabled would amplify (and perhaps verify.) this doubt. So, in that sense Xavier has been very strong for 30 years holding back. He is repeatedly referred to as the most powerful telepath on Earth, so Onslaught must be a negative manifestation of all his mental power.
Indeed, I might not be an ancient alien warrior, but my first experience as an alien was the awareness of the difference between my mental and physical abilities. I’m at home in more a weightless, maybe formless environment. One ruled by imagination. But, at the same time, that means there’s a certain euphoria in every physical victory. Every hang out, every time I give a correct speech, turn of phrase, when my speech inspires ACTION, when I even go to the library across the street; there’s a feeling of victory, going beyond my form.
Speaking of form, now that The Doctor is set to regenerate this Christmas, I wonder what form he’ll take next. In the sense that he’s a formless super genius unbound by time, The Doctor has always been my friend in disability experience. But, as you have seen, I have a tendency to read disability as an alien experience. Even in disability-based communities. Because no one experience is the same. For every Iron Man, or alien, cyberpunk, or sci-fi experience…there seems to me to be a disabled experience as well. I am able in this way to make the familiar seem strange. I’m comfortable looking into alien spaces.
Giant robots, high school, and alien attacks! Neon Genesis Evangelion is a 26-episode 80s anime that’s like if Power Rangers was conceived in the middle of a Freshman Philosophy course and turned suddenly into dark adult content. First of all, the art and detail are good: It’s set in the futuristic year 2015 and there’s always an electronic buzz in the background someone and cars whirring. The school kind of looks isolated if not for the giant robots underground.
(Remember it was the 80s in Japan; but the English version was conceived in 2004..so this is still apocalyptic.) The series revolves around students, mainly a young boy named Shinji Ikari who do battle with giant aliens called Angels while piloting huge robots called Evangelions or EVAs. Every episode is seemingly divided into one of the character’s psychological problems, then a huge robot fight to help them confront it.
And yes, multiple times the issues involve girls or Shinji’s female pilots/students. Most of the “fan service” however is done in the name of comedic relief. Occasionally, it addresses cultural, psychological, or philosophical issues. For example, one of the pilots is a German-Japanese girl dealing with fitting into post-apocalyptic Japanese society. Another girl seems completely detached from human relationships, for reasons that are later revealed, and also make her the best pilot. Shinji’s father issues also play in in the form of he’s the boss of NERV, which is the organization behind defending Tokyo and killing the Angels. Every episode has a bit of gossip and a big robot battle at the end.
The EVAs and their pilots minds are connected, in a bit of man-machine symbiosis. Without spoiling anything, eventually the angels figure this out, and the series turns dark. Between battling with giant machine guns and lasers and knifes, now they must also shield themselves from mental attacks. Shinji begins to question the war: “Angels are envoys of God. Why are we fighting envoys of God?” (To which stubborn Asuka replies: “Are you stupid or something? They attacked us, Dummkopf!” So the action takes place on three fronts. Man vs. Society (Their base in Tokyo-3.) Man vs. Man, and Man vs. Angel. I wish I could discuss Rei’s dilemma, but no spoilers.
Of course watching the battles is spectacularly fast-paced and over the top. When the drama gets too heavy they usually go back to their dorms, and then you see some funny stuff like Shinji trying to hide his nakedness from his commander, Misatu or Asuka Langley Sohryu being stubborn and adapting to Japanese ways. She’s usually scolded for being too stubborn and ambitious: “Asuka! The Japanese way is to consider others before yourself!” says Misatu. Eventually, I don’t think I’m spoiling when I say that when confronting her battle trauma (Caused by a blast of German Opera music from an Angel!) you learn the real reason she identifies with her mother’s side in Germany.
There’s always a battle going on; first the pilots are attacked individually, and you learn their bios, then NERV is attacked, and then the pilots’ minds when the episodes get darker and darker. The last few episodes take place almost exclusively inside the pilots’ tortured minds. I can’t imagine how this change in tone might have affected Japanese boys in the 80s, but it took me by surprise and added a lot of plot twists and suspense! There’s even some romance; yes, romance! Not just fan service. The big surprise though comes when the final form of the Angels is revealed, and they attack their young minds through the EVAs!
Overall, it’s a good show if you like extremes! Extreme action! Extreme fan service! Robots! EXTREME PSYCHOANALYSIS AND INTERCULTURAL CONFLICT! Oh, yes…and they all share a pet penguin! But don’t take my word for it: This stuff has to be seen to be believed! And when you're done with that I think there are Evangelion movies! PS: Sorry I couldn't find the English subs for the theme, but it's called "The Cruel Angel's Thesis"!
WHAT FORREST GUMP’S MOM TAUGHT ME ABOUT DISABILITY IN THE MEDIA:
Taking a break from comic book fights for a minute, I wanted to talk about great moms to disabled characters in honor of this past mother’s day. My first exposure to a disabled character was Forrest Gump, and from the moment Forrest’s mom has her son’s mental condition described to her, she adopts a strong can-do attitude and just takes to explaining things so her son can understand them. It is through her that he learns the witticism: “Life is a box of chocolates…” and he learns how to focus on what he’s got instead of what he doesn’t.
Invariably, this helps him on his trek through American history, running across the U.S. (Along with Jenny’s “Run Forrest, run!” we have “Momma said they was my magic shoes.”) and his experiences in ‘Nam, in love, and generally just preferring to explain things in ways he can understand. “…and that’s all I have to say about that!” I remember seeing this as a kid, and thinking how cool it was that the main character was disabled, and they didn’t try to change it! Beneath his simple storytelling was wisdom. (Arguably from his mother’s early attempt at communication.) And he was the hero, in a sense.
My only other exposure to disabled characters up to that point were characters like Professor X, Tiny Tim, and the kid from The Secret Garden, which is even now to me, one of the worst movies I have ever seen, both for the story and the moral. But, here was no attempt to “cure” the character’s disability. Instead Forrest’s mom raised him so that he understood that he simply has a different way of explaining things. I am empowered by such attempts at understanding.
Now, I know some out there will say that Tom Hanks promoted a bad moral for ex: “You should just look at things simply, and not be critical.” Maybe even some would say that since Hanks is able-bodied, he can’t play a disabled character. Well, I’ve never bought that and never have. I don’t see “simplicity” as the point, from the prospective of Hanks’s character. True, Forrest’s mom was tough and no-nonsense, but I see it as she was preparing him for the negativity that he would eventually face because of his condition, not because she herself was simple. She even says that he needs to do the best with what God gave him. That’s all I have to say about that.
My point is, that as a boy I had so few role models to look up to that had disabilities. For every Forrest Gump, which argues for understanding disability as a different cultural setting/life point of view there was Secret Garden and The Christmas Carol. Both of which I hated, and should probably review at some point in this blog. Look, I understand the Christmas spirit, and Tiny Tim is there to gain sympathy; but that’s just it. He serves no other purpose. The story would’ve been equally as cheery without him. But, those were my early exposures to two schools of thought with disability. One that says “God bless us, everyone!” after being miraculously given a feast by a rich man, and one with a tough woman who said: “Do with what God gave you.” (And of course Professor X’s “We’re not dangerous [Moira], we’re different.”; but that’s another post.)
Watching Forrest Gump’s mom was like watching my own mother who in those days told me not to focus on what I couldn’t do. But then, I knew I had a public voice. A decision to make in how to view my disability. And it still wages on in the media today…(Particularly in X-Men, I must say!) Cure us, or understand us. Sympathize with us or empower yourself with us; the choice is ours, whoever we are. And I know where I stand. Forrest’s mom inadvertently taught me how to watch movies for positive portrayals of disability, rather than outwardly pathetic ones. And it is through my own mother that I’ve felt empowered from my early days! Next time you watch A Beautiful Mind or My Left Foot, or Million Dollar baby…pay attention to how disability is treated! Happy late Mother’s Day! Love you, Mom!
Enjoyed talking Iron Man with you last time! Now, this is just something I need to get off my chest. As you may or may not know, I'm not a big fan of the dark re-boot aesthetic for Superman. But, mainly, here's why. The thing about Superman is he represents coming from two different cultures. And for the most part, stands up for what's good about his adopted culture, but he doesn't even particularly need to DO much. The environments, the soundtracks, HIS actions, fill you with hope. But, contrary to Iron Man, he's completely modest. All he needs to do is...save falling building, "Just doing my job, ma'am!" fly off...cue Superman theme! Isn't multiculturalism nifty? Sure am glad Superman flew down to save us...
The mind fills in the rest. This isn't the sense I get from Man of Steel. There's gonna be a lot of exposition. In Superman: New Krypton the graphic novel, we're told that the "S" is actually the Kryptonian crest of House El. As in "Kal-El" and "Jor-El". I like that explanation. It makes sense. His parents sent him with a momento of Krypton. Nope. Not in Man of Steel. In Man of Steel, it just means "Hope". Do we really need to be told Superman is hope? Anyway...I hope they base it on good comics, but yeah, essentially this seems to be a Dark Knight re-skin. I'll admit I was excited at first, but really Superman is about modesty and multiculturalism; when I see Henry Cavill in the preview explaining that the S means hope; I DUNNO....YA DON'T SAY???
Additionally, the soundtrack seems to be off. When I hear the new theme, I get the impression of a man burdened with responsibility, but still no hope, no rising notes. There are no rising notes to signify the "flight" of Superman which is optimistic because he's above the world he's saving; but he just sees it as his job. "This looks like a job for SUPERMAN." Ever since 1941, there have been these sort of three rising notes that (to me.) seemingly sing SU-PER-MAN, and symbolize his flight. Especially after the "It's a bird! It's a plane! It's Superman!" bit. Heck, even Lois & Clark played around those notes. As did John Williams, and the '96 Superman: The Animated Series (Which I was watching when I opened up the N64. Epic Nintendo reveal!)
To demonstrate the effectiveness of the Superman leitmotif and character, I leave you with a sample of selected Superman anthems, and Captain Picard playing around with notes (Because it's what Superman's themes do, too! (With the three rising hopeful notes.) It's never the same theme, but it's played around. The new theme does not, and is flat. Plus to demonstrate the effectiveness of Superman's modesty, consider the opening scene of Lois and Clark. It was a cheesy 90s drama, I know! But consider Dean Cain's first scene as Clark Kent.That's perfect! He stops a bus with his hand, and just walks it off. Modesty! All of Superman's traditional portrayals are essentially mild-mannered.
When I hear Russell Crowe as Jor-El say "He'll be a god to them." in the trailers...I cringe a little. Superman wouldn't want that; Jor-El wouldn't want that. That's what I have against all these "Superman learns not to be a god" plots. He just wouldn't want to be. He's just doing his job, and doesn't want to hurt innocents. It amounts to a humiliation of Superman to try to portray him as a god. But nonetheless, Injustice needs its villain...and Batman is popular right now.
You can make the argument that Superman's creators were Jewish, yes. But, to me, nothing about Superman is a religious experience. He's for America, and for everyone who's ever felt different. TRUTH, JUSTICE, AND THE AMERICAN WAY. It's about honoring that Jewish background, maybe, but there is no evidence that he is exclusively tied to it: he represents intercultural discourse. WITH HIS FISTS and a Boy Scout morality. Oh, sorry I went all Colbert on you there.
Like to me, Superman represents the feeling of me being in German class, almost. When speaking German, I don't worry about my disability. I'm able to focus on what I can do..speak. I have a sense of being judged by the good I can do, not restrained by physical limits. And indeed independent living has been an alien world for me, that I'm still in culture shock about. But anyway...you see, with Superman...the less said the better. Grant Morrison's All-Star Superman said it best: "Gods get their strength from us believing in them. Superman gets his strength because he believes in us." Superman can never be a god, and wouldn't want to be.
Maybe the film will clear it up later. "Secret Origin" was good as a comic, but I kinda lost hope when Superman was explaining to Lois that the "S" means "HOPE" and General Zod was all: "I WILL FIND HIM!" and blowing stuff up. In the comic, Luthor just manipulates the military's paranoia about alien threats, which they will no doubt do here, but differently. It all comes down to identity, not who Kal-El is, not who Clark Kent is, but as that comic later shows, who SUPERMAN is. I guess I just worry that when I see Henry Cavill strutting around is that armor over a gloomy orchestra...they're setting him up to be a god, and something much less human. Just my two cents. Enjoy the links, and see if you agree with my analysis!
Now let's learn about playing around themes with Picard!
Oscar Diggs is a bombastic carnival magician in 1905 in the midst of a levitation trick. He woos the audience by cutting down visible wires and yet his assistant still “floats”. When suddenly, a little girl in a wheelchair has a request: “Make me walk.” But, the once-proud magician is flummoxed. He’s a fraud. He can’t do it. Close curtain. He then goes back to being a selfish womanizer backstage, despite the fact that he really does want to be a good man. A GREAT MAN.
His opportunity comes when he is whisked off via tornado while escaping the wrath of a jealous carnival strongman to the Land of Oz, where he’s greeted by a charming witch, told where he is, and to beware the flying monkeys and river faeries. He’s a bit naïve, so he’s promptly attacked by both. And then, he’s betrayed by the witch, who thinks the Good witch is the bad witch. Yes, he does it all for money even though he knows he’s not a real wizard.
The interesting part for me, is the friends he makes along the way. The rest seems straight out of World of Warcraft. See, he saves a good flying monkey named Flynn. As in The Wizard of Oz, each companion I believe symbolizes a real world companion and Oz is it’s psychological counterpart in the imagination. So, Finley is actually Frank, his stagehand and assistant, who he never respected, but here he becomes good friends with. When their adventure leads them to China Town (Where everything and everyone is made of fragile China.) he encounters the seemingly David Bowie-inspired Little China Girl who lost her legs when the flying primates attacked. She’s the little girl in the wheelchair.
It’d be easy for me to be offended when Oscar/Oz glues her legs back on, but this is his adventure. He wanted to help the girl in the wheelchair, but he couldn’t so in his mind he made her the Little China Girl. That’s part of his quest to discover he’s a great man. In fact, it’s the China Girl who later asks if there are any real wizards where he comes from, and he responds Thomas Alva Edison; which gives him the idea to become Oz The Great And Powerful. True, there is an element of pity in the depiction of disability, but it is the disabled characters that inspire him to use technology to defeat the witches, overcome his own limits, and become great.
As I said, the rest of the movie seems straight out of World of Warcraft with Oz and munchkins using fireworks and a steam machine to make him appear as The Wizard of Oz. I kept waiting for James Franco to say: “I am Oz! The great and powerful!” but it never happens, so instead we get: “It is I, the great and powerful Wizard of Oz!” and I had to think, “Does MGM have that phrase copyrighted?” I mean, the title is Oz the Great and Powerful, so it would’ve fit perfect in just that way. But, it never comes. For shame!
There are some great homages to the original 1939 Wizard of Oz, such as the black and white film beginning in Kansas (But, never once do we hear that he’s not in Kansas anymore!) or the Poppy Fields being an important battleground. But overall, it reminds me of Oz-cum-World of Warcraft, with Mila Kunis’s green-skinned witch standing in for an orc, and munchkins for gnomish tinkers.
Entertaining and heavy on the “anything’s possible theme”, but also nice to see some disabled main characters, and side characters as well. (The Powerchair Munchkin Tinker!) Cheesy, yes, but sometimes we need to believe in ourselves to become great! Or just have flying monkey battles! Whichever you prefer…like an old-time carnival attraction, it’s got a little something for everyone!
.jpg)
.jpg)
.jpg)
.jpg)
.jpg)
.jpg)
.jpg)
.jpg)
