“When We Cease To Understand The World (Grothendieck’s Ghost)”(2025), oil and oil pastel on linen, 180 x 160 centimeters. All images courtesy of Damian Griffiths and BEERS London, shared with permission Literary Citations Abound in Andrew Salgado’s Vibrantly Layered Portraits June 4, 2025 Art Grace Ebert A new body of work by Andrew Salgado (previously) unfurls from a central premise: we are the books we read. The artist, who works between London and New Brunswick, Canada, is literarily insatiable and considers every unread tome an opportunity of “infinite possibility.” At BEERS London, Salgado’s Self-Portrait as a Stack of Books presents a series of paintings that open like chapters and together, build a larger narrative. “My Year Of Rest And Relaxation” directly references Ottessa Moshfegh’s bleary novel of the same name and depicts a young protagonist inert and detached. There’s also “Véra (Please Come Over, You’re Always Welcome),” which portrays a resolute Véra Nabokov writing what might be one of her since destroyed letters. “Véra (Please Come Over, You’re Always Welcome)” (2025), oil and oil pastel on linen, 76 x 61 centimeters Salgado is continually interested in citation and the ways that memories and experiences layer atop and mold one another. Many of the authors he’s drawn to—Virgina Woolf, Jorge Luis Borges, and Margaret Atwood among them— “are influenced by art. By music and painting. They write about it all the time. The word is ekphrasis,” he adds. “Nabokov lists over 150 paintings in his collected works. So why shouldn’t the inverse also be true?” Intuitive marks of oil paint and pastel characterize Salgado’s works and seem to build up over time. Irregular stripes and circles add greater depth and dimension to patches of color delineating a dress or facial feature, leaving each scene with a certain indeterminacy. Allowing for interpretation and an array of personal references is essential to the artist’s thinking: “It’s ready for the taking. And whatever you take from it—from the books, or the paintings, or the ideas within—it’s all right. It’s all correct. There are no wrong answers,” he says. Self-Portrait as a Stack of Books is on view through June 28. Find more on Salgado’s website and Instagram. “My Year Of Rest And Relaxation” (2025), oil and oil pastel on linen, 90 x 100 centimeters “St. Augustine’s Confessions” (2025), oil and oil pastel on linen, 160 x 125 centimeters “Hotel Du Lac” (2025), oil and oil pastel on linen, 152 x 117 centimeters “Meditations” (Sayings, Speeches, Notes) (2025), oil and oil pastel on linen, 150 x 120 centimeters “The Last Evening On Earth” (2025), oil and oil pastel on linen, 125 x 100 centimeters “Beware of Pity” (2025), oil and oil pastel on linen, 80 x 75 centimeters “The Aleph & Other Stories” (2025), oil and oil pastel on linen, 216 x 164 centimeters Next article

Developing creative intuition, leaning into courage, and resisting editing away our unique voice.I pasted an Oscar Wilde quote into Notion the other day. As soon as I did, the AI symbol popped up with the “improve writing” suggestion.A quote by Oscar WildeI didn’t click it, but it made me think…If Oscar Wilde was alive today, would he too have been lured to change his words with AI? Would he have trusted AI more than his creative intuition?AI would most likely have edited Wilde’s voice by removing “unnecessary” words and simplifying sentences. But would it have been an improvement? If his work is no longer in his voice, how can we say it’s better?Our authentic voice is our workAs creatives, our authentic voice is our work. Whether we’re writers, singers, designers, painters, or sculptors.I’ve realized lately that I wish for us all to become less concerned with being perfect and more concerned with developing our unique voice and following our own intuition. When we read poetry, we learn that a sentence might not be perfectly correct but it speaks directly to our hearts. It breaks grammatical rules but it’s also able to break us open in ways we could only imagine.With our computers constantly prompting us to change and “improve” our writing, thinking, and making, we have to ensure we don’t lose our unique expression. We must make sure that we don’t lose touch with our creative intuition, that we continue to lean into courage, and that we don’t edit away what makes our work distinctly ours.DesignShift: From artificial to authentic1. Keep developing your own voiceWhen I use AI for my writing, I often find myself questioning if the AI’s version is really better than my own. I’m frequently confused about “why” it changed something, and even when I ask about the rationale, I find the explanation isn’t that convincing.Some would tell me that I’m just not prompting AI well enough to get the best result, but I keep asking myself what this tool is in service of.However, I’ve noticed how our tools encourage perfection, and doubt can start to creep in when AI suggests one thing and our intuition tells us something different. This happens to me on days when I show up to work with self-doubt — days when I’m deep in uncertainty about my own abilities. On those days, I trust AI more, and the prompt to change my words makes my swaying confidence even more rocky.On days like these, I remind myself of poetry. Through poetry, we learn that a sentence might not be perfectly correct but it speaks directly to our hearts. It breaks grammatical rules but it’s also able to break us open in ways we could only imagine. One such powerful voice is Maya Angelou, whose words “just do right” have stayed with me.In her wisdom, she says:“You know what’s right. Just do right. You don’t really have to ask anybody. The truth is, right may not be expedient, it may not be profitable, but it will satisfy… your soul.”Image from https://bookstr.com/article/10-writing-quotes-from-maya-angelou-to-inspire-you/These words move with rhythm, but they also remind us that we DO know what’s right. No one knows our voice better than us. And that is what people want to hear. We don’t always have to ask someone else or ChatGPT for a better way to say something. Trusting our own voice makes all the difference.The same way that a design that breaks the rules sometimes becomes more impactful, I remind myself that embracing my unique voice will take me further than a perfectly crafted bullet-style post powered by a robot.2. The courage to be seenThe other day, I read a quote that said “creativity is the courage to be seen.” While writing this post, this quote kept surfacing in my mind. As creatives, it takes courage to show up as our unique selves. It takes courage to show both the good and the bad. It takes courage to be all that we are. The reward for showing up vulnerably and authentically is connection.How we connect to topics. To someone’s story. To each other. When someone speaks from their heart, unedited and unfiltered, it helps us feel something.Connection happens when someone truly sees us for who we are and embraces all of it. That is true connection.There’s a difference between the desire to be seen and the courage to be seen. The desire is often rooted in external validation — wanting to be liked and wanted. Much of our online world is crafted this way. We edit (with or without AI) in order to be liked and followed. We make sure that our voice matches our brand and we craft one-minute elevator pitches to ensure people understand exactly who we are and what we have to offer.However, the courage that helps us connect to others lies beyond the poses and the polish. The courage to be seen is about showing up as our full selves.3. Connection happens in the cracksConnections and feelings are found in the cracks. They are discovered between the lines. In the awkward pauses and the unpolished thoughts. They exist in unedited, real expressions rather than perfectly written, bullet-pointed lists generated by a robot.As Joshua Schrei said on the Emerald podcast:“Art dies when culture decides that there is a certain way you have to say certain things. Then you don’t have art. You have a press release.”Poetry, art, and also the human experience thrive in its willingness to not make complete sense. For example, the raw, uninhibited expressions of artists like Jean-Michel Basquiat show us that perfection isn’t necessary for profound impact. When we share our authentic selves, we invite others to do the same. We often think that the world expects and craves perfection. We’re taught rules… but the human experience is flawed. The cracks make us able to connect with others.Creativity is about connection, and connections are formed in the cracks. When someone shows their weakness or vulnerability, we get permission to show ours.At the heart of it all are feelings. Creative work is about feelings, and even though ChatGPT can act empathetic, it’s not the same as real feelings. Because real connection is built through brokenness. It’s in the cracks that connections are formed.In times of robotsIf Oscar Wilde lived today, would AI have given him prompts? Would AI suggest “improvements” to the works of literary and artistic icons? Would Midjourney have offered to enhance Jean-Michel Basquiat’s expressive style?Would these creative icons have been lured to edit their unique expression to appeal to the masses at the creative direction of a robot? My intuition tells me that they would have resisted the prompts and leaned into their uniqueness even more — and that is what I hope for all creatives today. With our computers constantly prompting us to change and “improve” our own writing, thinking, and making, we have to ensure we don’t lose our unique expression. We must make sure that we don’t lose touch with our creative intuition and that we don’t edit away the uniqueness and the cracks that breed connections.In times of robots, I hope we can lean into our humanness even more. In times of robots, I hope we will remind ourselves and each other that our unique voices matter. In times of robots, I hope you will connect through your cracks without editing your uniqueness.Links and resources:Maya Angelou: Just do right (video)Trickster Jumps Sides: Disruption and the Anatomy of Culture (Podcast)DesignShifts: a better future for and through design (website)The Power of Poetry | Shayna Castano | TEDxLSSC (TED Talk)Burning Questions — James Victore is an irreverent prophet for the creative industries (article)From artificial to authentic was originally published in UX Collective on Medium, where people are continuing the conversation by highlighting and responding to this story.

The Canada Council for the Arts is recognizing the potential of emerging architects and the contribution of practicing architects by awarding the following four prizes. The Canada Council contributes to the creative and diverse arts and literary scene, and supports their presence across Canada and around the world. The winners include the following: Prix de Rome in Architecture — Professional The Prix de Rome in Architecture – Professional is awarded to a young practitioner of architecture or an architectural firm that has completed their first built works and has demonstrated exceptional artistic potential. With this prize, the recipient may travel abroad to develop their skills and their creative practice, and to strengthen their position in the international architecture world. D’Arcy Jones ArchitectsPhoto: Shane Hauser This year’s winner is D’Arcy Jones Architects. D’Arcy Jones is the principal of D’Arcy Jones Architects (DJA), a Vancouver practice recognized for design excellence. DJA’s responses to contemporary conditions have earned awards and publications nationally and internationally. Their work focuses on arts, residential and commercial projects. Previous practice honours include an Architectural Institute of British Columbia Emerging Firm Award, a Royal Architectural Institute of Canada Emerging Architectural Practice Award and the Ronald J. Thom Award for Early Design Achievement from the Canada Council for the Arts. Ronald J. Thom Award for Early Design Achievement The Ronald J. Thom Award for Early Design Achievement is given to a practitioner of architecture or an architectural firm. The successful candidate must be in the early stages of a career or practice and must demonstrate both outstanding creative talent and exceptional potential in architectural design. Odami. Photo: Arash Moallemi The latest winner, Odami, is an award-winning architecture and design studio that aims to “converge the pragmatic and the expressive, the subtle and the striking, the familiar and the unexpected.” Led by Arancha González Bernardo, a Spanish architect and Michael Fohring, a Canadian designer, the practice represents a merging of design values and histories, a process deepened by the contemporary multiculturalism of the city in which Odami lives and works. In embracing difference and purposely working between modes, perspectives and dichotomies, they’re in search of a fertile meeting ground—a space of conference and connection that gives rise to inventive outcomes.     Prix de Rome in Architecture — Emerging Practitioners Daniel Wong. Photo: Kabir Olatinwo The Prix de Rome in Architecture – Emerging Practitioners is awarded to a recent graduate from a Canadian architectural school who demonstrates exceptional potential in architectural design. With this prize, the recipient may visit architectural buildings and carry out an internship at an international architectural firm. The latest winner, Daniel Wong, is currently an intern architect at AAmp Studio, in Toronto. He holds a Bachelor of Architectural Science from the British Columbia Institute of Technology (BCIT) and a Master of Architecture from the University of Toronto. During his studies, he received several awards including the Barry W. Sampson Scholarship and the John and Myrna Daniels Foundation Opportunity Award. He also received the Kuwabara-Jackman Architecture Thesis Gold Medal for his research on architectural maintenance as a sustainable alternative for the built environment.   J.B.C. Watkins Award: Architecture Fabio Lima. Photo: Yixin Cao The J.B.C. Watkins Fellowship: Architecture is offered to an individual who has completed a bachelor’s or master’s degree in architecture in Canada and who will pursue postgraduate studies in another country, ideally Denmark, Norway, Sweden or Iceland. The latest winner, Fabio Lima is a graduate student and research fellow at Pratt Institute, in New York City, USA. His work explores the social archaeology of queer spaces by mobilizing the tools of historic preservation. Lima studied architecture at the Université de Montréal, in Quebec, and his work has been supported by the Royal Architectural Institute of Canada and the Royal Canadian Academy of Arts.           The post Canada Council announces Prix de Rome and J.B.C. Watkins Award winners appeared first on Canadian Architect.

You Can Now Visit the Small House Where Charlotte, Emily and Anne Brontë Were Born The newly renovated Brontë Birthplace in Bradford, England, was the three sisters’ home until 1820, when the family moved to a nearby parsonage The Brontë children were born near this fireplace, pictured mid-renovation. Matt Gibbons / Brontë Birthplace In the early 19th century, three sisters were born in a small house in northern England: Charlotte, Emily and Anne Brontë. Each one would grow up to become a pivotal figure in English literature, with Charlotte writing Jane Eyre (1847), Emily writing Wuthering Heights (1847) and Anne writing The Tenant of Wildfell Hall (1848). Now, that house in Bradford, England, where they were born has been restored and reopened to the public as a museum—and soon-to-be hotel. On May 15, Queen Camilla visited the village of Thornton to open the Brontë Birthplace in an official ceremony. After a year and a half of fundraising and renovations, the house is now a functioning educational center. Come July, its bedrooms will also be open to overnight guests, according to the Guardian’s David Barnett. The Brontë Birthplace pictured in 2008 Tim Green via Wikimedia Commons under CC BY 2.0 “This house is no longer just a place of literary history,” says Katharine Barnett, chair of the Brontë Birthplace, in a statement from the museum. “It is a living, breathing space filled with creativity, education and community pride.” The novelists’ parents were Patrick and Maria Brontë, an Irish clergyman and a Cornish gentlewoman who married in 1812. They had two daughters, Maria and Elizabeth, before moving to the Thornton house in 1815. Charlotte was born in 1816, Emily in 1818 and Anne in 1820. A brother, Branwell, was also born in 1817. When Anne was just three months old, Patrick was appointed the reverend of a nearby church, and the family moved to the Haworth parsonage. The two eldest children died soon after, but the younger four children survived. As they grew older, they also thrived as playmates, inventing “invented imaginary worlds together and [writing] about them in tiny books,” per the Brontë Parsonage Museum. Queen Camilla and Christa Ackroyd touring the Brontë Birthplace on May 15, 2025 Matt Gibbons / Brontë Birthplace By the mid-19th century, the three sisters were publishing novels under the pseudonyms Currer, Ellis and Acton Bell. Jane Eyre and Wuthering Heights would become two of the most renowned books ever written in English. After the family left the sisters’ birthplace, the building was repurposed several times. It has served as a butcher’s shop and a cafe, which shuttered during the pandemic, according to the Guardian. With the building up for grabs, a group of advocates—including journalist Christa Ackroyd and Brontë relative Nigel West—raised the £650,000 (more than $700,000) needed to purchase and renovate it. Every four years, the United Kingdom chooses a “City of Culture,” and this year’s selection is Bradford. Camilla opened the Brontë Birthplace as part of her honorary visit to the chosen city. A crowd gathered to welcome her. As Tom Golesworthy, a resident of Leeds who attended the opening ceremony, tells the Telegraph & Argus’ Brad Deas, “It makes you proud to be British.”The Haworth parsonage already attracts nearly one million visitors each year, per the Guardian. The Brontë Birthplace team hopes that those visitors will now add the Thornton house, which is only six miles away, to their itineraries. When the Brontës lived in the home, all six children likely slept in the house’s largest upstairs bedroom, while their parents slept next door, reports the Guardian. Both rooms, as well as a third that was added to the house later, will be available for overnight stays. “This will be the only place in the world where you can sleep in the same room that the Brontës slept in,” West tells the Guardian. Get the latest stories in your inbox every weekday.

Comparison of a megalodon tooth and a great white shark tooth, not associated with the study. (Image Credit: Mark_Kostich/Shutterstock) NewsletterSign up for our email newsletter for the latest science newsMegalodon teeth have always been key to understanding the ancient marine predator. Fossilized teeth are all that remain to prove the existence of these massive sharks, and the name megalodon is from the Greek for “big tooth.”A new study, published in Earth and Planetary Science Letters, highlights the importance of the megalodon’s human-hand-sized teeth once again. Thanks to extracting and analyzing the traces of zinc left in the fossilized teeth, researchers now know that the megalodon’s diet was much broader than scientists once believed.“Megalodon was by all means flexible enough to feed on marine mammals and large fish, from the top of the food pyramid as well as lower levels – depending on availability,” said Jeremy McCormack from the Department of Geosciences at Goethe University, in a press release.What Did the Megalodon Eat?Clocking in at 78 feet in length and weighing about twice as much as a semi truck, the megalodon was a big fish with a big appetite. It is suggested that a member of the Otodus shark family would require about 100,000 kilocalories per day to survive. Due to this extreme number, scientists have often assumed that the megalodon’s main source of calories came from whales.This new study suggests that whales were not the only item on the megalodon’s daily menu and that these sharks were actually quite adaptable when it came to their food. The research team analyzed 18-million-year-old giant teeth that came from two fossil deposits in Sigmaringen and Passau. What they were looking for was the presence of zinc-66 and zinc-64, two isotopes commonly ingested with food. Typically, the higher up in a food pyramid an animal is, the lower the presence of zinc. As they are oftentimes at the top of the food chain, species such as Otodus megalodon and Otodus chubutensis have a low ratio of zinc-66 to zinc-64 compared to species lower on the food chain.“Sea bream, which fed on mussels, snails, and crustaceans, formed the lowest level of the food chain we studied,” said McCormack in the press release. “Smaller shark species such as requiem sharks and ancestors of today’s cetaceans, dolphins, and whales, were next. Larger sharks, such as sand tiger sharks, were further up the food pyramid, and at the top were giant sharks like Araloselachus cuspidatus and the Otodus sharks, which include megalodon.”Surprisingly, the zinc levels in the megalodon teeth weren’t always that different from the zinc levels in species lower down the food chain. This result means that the commonly held scientific belief that megalodons focused their attention on eating large marine mammals may be incorrect. Instead, McCormack refers to the megalodon as an “ecologically versatile generalist” that adapted to environmental and regional constraints that changed the availability and variety of their prey.A New Method in Teeth TestingUsing the zinc content of fossilized teeth is a relatively new method of analysis, and the research team working on the megalodon couldn’t be happier with their results. The methods used in this study have not only been used for prehistoric shark and whale species but also modern-day shark species, and have even been used on herbivorous prehistoric rhinoceroses.Overall, these new methods have begun to rewrite the history of megalodon’s eating habits and may help to explain more about why these giants of the food chain went extinct. “[Determining zinc isotope ratios] gives us important insights into how the marine communities have changed over geologic time, but more importantly the fact that even ‘supercarnivores’ are not immune to extinction,” said Kenshu Shimada, a paleobiologist at DePaul University and a coauthor of this study, in the press release.Article SourcesOur writers at Discovermagazine.com use peer-reviewed studies and high-quality sources for our articles, and our editors review for scientific accuracy and editorial standards. Review the sources used below for this article:Earth and Planetary Science Letters. Miocene marine vertebrate trophic ecology reveals megatooth sharks as opportunistic supercarnivoresAs the marketing coordinator at Discover Magazine, Stephanie Edwards interacts with readers across Discover's social media channels and writes digital content. Offline, she is a contract lecturer in English & Cultural Studies at Lakehead University, teaching courses on everything from professional communication to Taylor Swift, and received her graduate degrees in the same department from McMaster University. You can find more of her science writing in Lab Manager and her short fiction in anthologies and literary magazine across the horror genre.1 free article leftWant More? Get unlimited access for as low as $1.99/monthSubscribeAlready a subscriber?Register or Log In1 free articleSubscribeWant more?Keep reading for as low as $1.99!SubscribeAlready a subscriber?Register or Log In

We made it, everybody. We’ve reached the end of HBO’s The Last of Us. Wait, sorry, I’m getting word in my earpiece that…we’re only halfway done with it because this show’s going for four seasons. At this point, I’m mostly feeling deflated. Last week’s episode was such a catastrophic bummer that it cemented for me that the show fundamentally misunderstands The Last of Us Part II, the game this season and those that are still yet to come are adapting. But you know how your mother would tell you not to play ball in the house because you might accidentally break the priceless vase on display in the living room? Well, if you’ve already broken the vase, you might as well keep playing ball, so we’ll probably be doing this song and dance into 2029. For now, we’re on the season two finale, which essentially wraps up Ellie’s side of this condensed revenge story and reveals the premise of season three. Most game fans probably assumed this was where the season would end and, if nothing else, it’s still a bold cliffhanger to leave off on.Suggested ReadingNintendo Switch 2 Price Is Set at $450 for Now, But Could Go Higher Share SubtitlesOffEnglishSuggested ReadingNintendo Switch 2 Price Is Set at $450 for Now, But Could Go Higher Share SubtitlesOffEnglishNintendo Switch 2 Price Is Set at $450 for Now, But Could Go HigherGuilty as chargedAfter last week’s flashback-heavy episode, we open on Jesse (Young Mazino) tending to wounds the Seraphites have inflicted on Dina (Isabela Merced), which means we get a real heinous scene of him doing some amateur surgeon’s work to remove the arrow she took to the knee. He douses it in alcohol and offers her a sip to dull the pain, but she staunchly refuses without explaining why. They made Jesse an asshole in this show, but he’s still a smart guy. The gears start turning in his head about why she might turn down a swig right now. Nevertheless, he takes that motherfucker out with no anesthetic, booze, or supportive bedside girlfriend to help Dina through it.Speaking of the absent girlfriend, Ellie (Bella Ramsey) finally returns to their theater base of operations. Now that she’s back, all her concern is on Dina, but Jesse is still wondering where the hell she’s been this whole time. Dina is resting backstage, and even though we only see these details for a few minutes, I once again want to shout out the set designers who recreated this little safe haven, which is covered in old show posters and graffiti from bands and artists that performed there before the cordyceps took over. I’m sure Joel would have loved to have seen it.Dina stirs awake and Ellie checks her wound. Jesse’s effort to wrap the injury leaves a lot to be desired, but it should heal in time. Ellie asks if the baby’s alright, and Dina says it’s okay.“How do you know?” Ellie asks.“I just do,” Dina replies.The one who is not okay in the room is Ellie, who is bleeding through the back of her shirt. Dina helps her undress and starts to clean the scratches on her back. As she does, she asks what happened while they were separated. Ellie says she found Nora (Tati Gabrielle), and she knew where Abby (Kaitlyn Dever) was, but only said two words: “Whale” and “Wheel.” Ellie says she doesn’t know what it meant. It could have been nonsense. She was infected, and it was already starting to affect her cognitive state.“I made her talk,” Ellie whispers. “I thought it would be harder to do, but it wasn’t. It was easy. I just kept hurting her.”Image: HBODina asks if Ellie killed her, but she says she just “left her,” meaning that somewhere in this timeline, Nora is wandering the depths of a Seattle hospital with broken legs and an infected mind. I thought the show couldn’t possibly concoct a worse fate for her than what happens in the game, but they found a way. It takes commitment to put down a character like showrunners Craig Mazin and Neil Druckmann have done for Nora across both video games and television. Personally, I think when you already know that people are wary of the way you treat one of the few Black women in your franchise as if she doesn’t deserve the same dignity as everyone else, maybe you should do better by her when given a second chance, rather than worse. But that’s just me. I’m not the one being paid a bunch of money to butcher this story on HBO Max every Sunday at 9 p.m. Eastern. So what do I know?Maybe this is just part of the contrived sadism the show has attached to Ellie. She thinks violence is easy and it comes naturally to her, so I guess she would beat a woman nearly to death until the fungal infection made her lose her mind. Meanwhile the game version is so traumatized by what she’s done in this moment, she’s practically speechless by the time she reaches the theater. God, I knew this shit was going to happen. Mazin has repeatedly insisted that Ellie is an inherently violent individual, something he’s communicated both in interviews and by having Catherine O’Hara’s Gail, the therapist who tells you what the story is about, say that she’s always been a sadist, probably. Now, when we get to moments like the post-Nora debrief which used to convey that Ellie is Not Cut Out For This Shit, the framing instead becomes “Ellie likes violence and feels bad about how much she likes violence.”Before The Last of Us Part II came out, a lot of Naughty Dog’s promotion for the game was kind of vague and even deceptive in an effort to keep its biggest twists under wraps, and some of the messaging it used to talk about the game’s themes have irrevocably set a precedent for how the game’s story is talked about years later. When the game was first revealed in 2016, the studio said the story would be “about hate,” which paints a much more destructive and myopic picture of Ellie’s journey than the one driven by love and grief she actually experiences through the course of the game.One of the most annoying things about being a Last of Us fan is that its creators love to talk about the series in ways that erase its emotional complexity, making it sound more cynical and underhanded when the actual story it’s telling is anything but. I can’t count how many times I’ve heard people reductively parroting notions that The Last of Us Part II is just about “hate” and “guilting the player” for taking part in horrifying actions when they literally have no choice but to do so, rather than cracking the text open and dissecting that nuance. Mazin’s openly-expressed belief that Ellie is an intrinsically bloodthirsty person similarly bleeds into how a lot of the public perceives her as a character, seeing her as a violent ruffian rather than a grieving daughter who was only ever taught to express her pain by inflicting it on those who made her feel it in the first place. Discussing these games as a fan means having to fight against these notions, but they’re born from a game built on subtext, and thus willingly opens itself to those interpretations.Its willingness to dwell in ambiguity only makes it a more fascinating text to unpack, or it would, if we lived in a world where discussing video games wasn’t a volatile experience in which you constantly run the risk of being targeted for performative online dunks, or running up against rabid console tribalism. Now, the Last of Us show has decided to lean into the most boring interpretation of what this story is about without an ounce of subtlety, nuance, or even sympathy for Ellie’s plight. She is a sadist who does terrible things not simply because she’s grieving her father figure, but because this is just who she is. Mazin has deemed it so, and here we are, and this vision of her will no doubt weave itself into the fabric of how we talk about Ellie Williams, even in the game.This story only has any thematic weight if Ellie’s violent outbursts are rooted in pain, not pleasure. Yeah, what we’re seeing in the show is her acting from a mix of those things but, in the game at least, the most affecting moments of Ellie’s Seattle revenge tour happen when she has to confront how she is not built for acts of violent excess in the same way Joel was. She never has been. Back in Part I, she was sick to her stomach when she committed her first kill to save Joel, and the entire point of Part II was that we see her cut off parts of herself to do what she feels she must, only to find that she’s unable to recognize herself when it’s all over. In the show, she is instead mesmerized by carnage, only to decide she doesn’t like that she feels that way, actually. But all this self-reflection is fleeting, because she’s only killed one person on her list, and there’s a lot more work to do. How many Joels is Nora’s life worth to Ellie? One-fifth?While Ellie is wrestling with these feelings, Dina is about to see things with more clarity than ever. At first, she says that Nora may have deserved this fate worse than death, to which Ellie says “Maybe she didn’t,” before telling her girlfriend everything. She tearfully recounts Joel’s massacre of the Fireflies at the base in Salt Lake City, how the group was going to use her immunity to create a cure, and how Joel killed Abby’s father to save her. Dina puts it all together and asks Ellie if she knew who Abby’s group was. She says she didn’t, but she did know what Joel did. Dina sits with that for a moment, then flatly says the group needs to go home.So I guess this is how the show gets Dina, who’s been pretty revenge-hungry thus far, back onto the track she’s on in the games. Without spoiling scenes in the late game for the uninitiated, some major points of conflict at the end of Part II require her to be less on-board with Ellie’s vendetta, so the fact that she’s been egging her girlfriend on to track down Abby was an odd choice. I wasn’t sure how the show would handle it down the line, but it seems the way HBO’s show has course-corrected was by having her condemn Joel’s actions. Dina had her own relationship with the old man in the show, so I imagine that in a later season she’ll interrogate how she feels about him in light of this new information, but having her more or less get off the ride when she learns what Joel has done sets up a contrast between her and Ellie that I’m curious to see how the show handles.The shame of it, though, is that this is just one more thing that undermines one of the core foundations of the source material, and I have to get at least one more jab in on this topic before we end the season. In The Last of Us Part II, when you look at what is actually expressed in dialogue, you see that characters are often lacking important information about each other. This lack of communication is an important part of its storytelling, but the show is instead having characters tell everyone everything. In Part II, Joel and Ellie don’t know who Abby’s father was. It’s strongly implied that no one other than Joel, Ellie, and Tommy knew about what happened in Salt Lake City, not even Dina. The more the show bridges these gaps of communication, the more senseless this entire tit-for-tat feels. To be clear, it was senseless in the game, but it was in a tragic, “these people are so blinded by their emotions that they can’t fathom another path forward” sort of way. This time around, everyone knows exactly what’s happening and chooses to partake in violence anyway. We don’t have any mystery or lack of communication to fall back on as a we struggle to understand why the characters keep making these self-destructive decisions. Everyone is just knowingly the worst version of themselves this time around, and I guess Mazin thinks that’s the point, which is the kind of boring interpretation that makes the show such an inferior version of this story.Family mattersWe now begin our third day in Seattle. Ellie and Jesse are packing up to get going in the theater lobby. The plan is to find Tommy (Gabriel Luna) somewhere in the city and then head back to Jackson. However, Jesse is a lot less talkative this morning. Dina limps into the lobby, and after a brief scolding for being on her feet, she gives Ellie a bracelet for good luck.“I’m not sure it’s been working for you,” Ellie jokes.“I’m alive,” Dina replies.Jesse is clearly uncomfortable watching his ex (or are they technically still together now? I’m not sure) give Ellie a prized possession, and says he can go alone if Dina wants Ellie to stay. Ellie says they’ll be safer together. Jesse relents and says they should be back by sundown. The tension is radiating off him, but the pair leaves Dina in the safety of the theater.Image: HBOEllie and Jesse awkwardly walk through the remains of Seattle. She finally breaks the silence by asking how he found Ellie and Dina’s theater base. He recounts his two days of tracking, giving a shoutout to the horse Shimmer who’s still vibing in the record store the girls left her at, but he’s clearly pissed. Ellie assumes it’s because he and Tommy had to cross state lines to come find them, but no, there’s something else on his mind. Why do Ellie and Dina look at each other differently? Why did Dina turn down a free drink for the first time in her life? He’s putting it all together. Dina and Ellie are no longer just gals being pals, and his (now ex?) girlfriend is pregnant.“None of this has to change things between us,” Ellie says.“Everything changing doesn’t have to change things?” Jesse asks. “Well, how about this for something new: I’m gonna be a father, which means I can’t die. But because of you, we’re stuck in a warzone. So how about we skip the apologies and just go find Tommy so I can get us and my kid the fuck out of Seattle?”Wow, okay. Judgey, much? I mean, you’re right, Jesse. This is a no good, very bad situation, and Ellie has put your kid in danger and won’t even tell you she was torturing a woman last night. But god, I miss kindhearted Jesse. I miss Ellie’s golden retriever best friend who, when finding out Dina was pregnant, firmly but gently told Ellie it was time to get the fuck out of Seattle. Now that the show has created a messy cheating love triangle out of these three, I’m once again reflecting on how The Last of Us Part II could have very easily made this storyline a dramatic, angry one, and instead it was one of the brighter spots in a dark tale. Meanwhile, in the show, the whole thing feels like it’s regressed to a rote and predictable earlier draft of the story that’s much less refreshing and compelling than the one we already know. Justice for Jesse. This is character assassination of the goodest boy in all of Jackson. Well, actually, that’s Abby’s job. Sorry, sorry. That’s actually not for another 35 minutes.As the two move further into the city, they see more art praising the Seraphite prophet on the buildings, but she looks notably different than in images we’ve seen previously. This art depicts a Black woman, whereas others have typically portrayed the prophet as white. Ellie wonders aloud if there’s “more than one of her.” Jesse says it’s possible, but ushers her forward as rain starts pouring down. I’m curious what the show might be doing here, as this is a divergence from Part II. Could the Seraphites be a kind of polytheistic group in the show that follows multiple prophets? Could they believe the Prophet was reincarnated into a different woman at some point? All we can do is theorize, but we haven’t seen much of the Seraphites this season so we don’t have much to go on. Which is by design, and feels pretty in-line with Part II, which didn’t tell you much about the group during Ellie’s three days in Seattle. We’ll pick this thread back up next season, I’m sure.The pair takes shelter but before they can catch their breath, they hear the popping sound of gunfire nearby as a W.L.F. squad corners a lone Seraphite. Ellie and Jesse watch in horror as the wolves strip and drag him away. Just as Ellie nearly gets out from cover to intervene, Jesse pulls her back. Once the coast is clear, Ellie walks away in a huff. As Jesse follows, he points out that they were outnumbered and would have lost that fight.“He was a fucking kid!” Ellie shouts.“Ellie, these people [are] shooting each other, lynching each other, ripping each other’s guts out,” Jesse says. “Even the kids? I’m not dying out here. Not for any of them. This is not our war.”Who the fuck is this man? I touched on it in episode five, but what is with this show putting all of Ellie’s unlikable traits on other characters so she keeps getting to be the hero? Jesse turns from a selfless guardian into a selfish asshole who will watch a kid get tortured to save himself while Ellie is suddenly very concerned about a war that, in the game, she seemed largely indifferent to. It’s as if The Last of Us’ second season is so concerned with us liking Ellie and feeling like we can root for her that it’s lost sight of anything else.So Jesse gets to be the belligerent asshole and Dina gets to be the revenge-driven one in the relationship. Ellie? She’s just bee-bopping through spouting cool space facts, and so when she tortures Nora, it feels like tonal whiplash. I don’t recognize Jesse. Most of the time, I don’t recognize Ellie. But really, the more I watch this show, the more I hardly recognize anyone, and I don’t have any faith in the series to figure these characters and their relationships out, even if it’s going to go on for two more seasons.Will the circle be unbroken?We shift away from the Jackson crew to check in on Isaac (Jeffrey Wright), who we haven’t seen in a few episodes. Sergeant Park (Hettienne Park) updates the W.L.F. boss that the incoming storm will get worse as the day goes on, but even so, the group is still preparing some kind of operation. She also lets him know the rank and file is a little nervous about whatever’s going on, but Isaac’s only concerned about one person: Abby. From the sound of it, she and most of her crew have all disappeared over the past few days. We’ve seen what happened to Nora, Manny is still around, but Owen and Mel are gone without a trace. Again, Isaac isn’t concerned with them. He’s nervous that they’re going into whatever operation they’re planning without Abby. Park is clearly exhausted by this lane of thinking and asks why he cares so much about the girl.Image: HBOShe starts off asking why one “great” soldier is so important when they have an army, and then gets into a weird aside where she exasperatedly asks Isaac if he’s harboring feelings for the girl when he’s at least 30 years her senior. I don’t know if this line is supposed to be a joke, but it’s not funny, even though Isaac laughs at it. She acknowledges it’s an out-of-pocket question, but says he “wouldn’t be the first old man” to make decisions based on such inappropriate impulses. As much as it’s a stupid thing for Park to say, it’s also a stupid thing for the writers room to nonchalantly whip out in a humorous fashion given The Last of Us’ history of old men preying on young women with the character of David. Why write this non-joke into your script if you don’t want viewers to possibly view his fixation on Abby as potentially untoward? Isaac’s following speech focuses on the preservation of his militia, in a very similar way to how David’s preoccupation with Ellie in season one was born from the cannibal’s warped views on longevity, and if you’re not trying to make this direct connection, why even gesture at it? Yeah, I don’t imagine anyone considered the optics of this obviously flippant, throwaway line, but Christ, if you’re that desperate for a joke or moment to cut the tension, this was the best you could come up with? Amateur shit.Isaac sits Park down and tells her why he cares so much about one soldier. He says there’s a very strong chance that the W.L.F. leadership will be dead by tomorrow morning. If that happens, who can lead the militia in their stead? He wanted it to be Abby. It was “supposed” to be her.“Well she’s fucked off, Isaac,” Park says as she leaves. “So maybe it wasn’t.”We go back to the Jackson crew as Ellie and Jesse reach the rendezvous point in a bookstore, and Tommy isn’t here. The place is in bad shape like most places are in this city, but Ellie gravitates to the children’s books section. She picks up an old Sesame Street book, the Grover classic The Monster at the End of This Book, and picks it up for the bun in the oven as Jesse says she picked a good one. As the quiet creeps in on the two, Ellie tries to break the silence by clarifying what happened, but Jesse says they have enough problems for the moment, so he wants to bury the issue.He says he loves Dina, but not in the same way Ellie does. He remembers a group that passed through Jackson, and how there was a girl he fell hard for. She asked him to leave with her to Mexico, but he declined because he’d found purpose and community in Jackson, and he was taught to put others first. People look to him to become the “next Maria” and lead the town, and he couldn’t abandon them for a girl he’d known for two weeks, even if she made him feel things he’d never felt before.Ellie immediately sees through this story. It’s not about him pointing out how he’s felt love and knows that he and Dina aren’t the real deal; it’s about how she’s putting her own needs and wants ahead of everyone else’s.“Okay, got it,” Ellie says. “So you’re Saint Jesse of Wyoming, and everyone else is a fucking asshole.”“You can make fun of me all you want,” Jesse responds. “But let me ask you this, Ellie: If I go with that girl to Mexico, who saves your ass in Seattle?”Before she can reply, they hear W.L.F. radio chatter about a sniper taking out a squad and assume it’s gotta be Tommy. The two head out to higher ground to get a better look, and Ellie sees a Ferris wheel in the distance. She finally puts Nora’s final words together: Abby is in the aquarium at the edge of the city. Immediately, her focus shifts away from Tommy as she starts trying to figure out how to reach Abby’s apparent hiding spot. Jesse is confused and says that Tommy’s got the W.L.F. pinned down in the opposite direction. Ellie starts coming up with justifications for her plan. They don’t know if that’s actually Tommy. If it is him, he’s got the group pinned down. Either way, he would want her to go after Abby to avenge Joel. Ellie doesn’t understand why Jesse is so against this. He voted to go after Abby’s crew back in Jackson, right?Image: HBONo, actually. He didn’t. He believed this vendetta was selfish and “wasn’t in the best interest of the community.” That sets Ellie off.“Fuck the community!” she screams. “All you do is talk about the fucking community, you hypocrite. You think you’re good and I’m bad? You let a kid die today, Jesse. Because why? He wasn’t in your community? Let me tell you about my community. My community was beaten to death in front of me while I was forced to fucking watch. So don’t look at me like you’re better than me, or like you’d do anything differently if you were in my shoes, because you’re not, and you wouldn’t.”Jesse takes a beat, then tells Ellie he hopes she makes it to the aquarium as he leaves. While this scene does exemplify the show’s typicalal “no subtext allowed” approach to writing that I find so irksome, the storyline of Ellie feeling ostracized by the people of Jackson while constantly being told that she must make compromises for them even as they are incapable of extending the same to her is one of the few embellishments The Last of Us makes that resonates with me. It’s easy to write off Ellie’s revenge tour as a selfish crusade that puts everyone else in harm’s way, but when she’s also one of the few out queer people in a town that mostly coddles bigotry and she’s being constantly belittled and kept from doing things she wants to do like working on the patrol team, why would she feel any kinship to this community? Now, when she’s so close to her goal that she can almost taste it, Jesse wants her to consider the people of Jackson? Why should she do that? They’re hundreds of miles away, and the only people who came to save her and Dina were the ones who already cared about her. Ellie’s disillusionment with her neighbors is one of the few additions to the story that The Last of Us manages to pull off.Ellie reaches the harbor from which she can use a boat to reach the aquarium and finds several Wolves meeting up on vessels heading somewhere off the coast. Isaac is here leading the charge, but it’s unclear where they’re going or what they’re doing. Game fans have the advantage of knowing what’s going on, but the W.L.F. storyline feels underbaked in this season, which is one of the real issues with the show dividing the game’s storyline into multiple seasons. During this section of the game, you get a sense that there’s an untold story happening in the background, and you can learn more about it through notes you can find in the environment and ambient dialogue from enemies. The show doesn’t have those same storytelling tools, so I wouldn’t be surprised if newcomers felt a little disoriented every time we hopped over to Isaac.Once the W.L.F. forces make their way wherever they’re going, Ellie finds one of the spare boats and starts to make her way to the aquarium. The storm is hitting hard, though, and the tide is not on her side. A giant tidal wave knocks her out of the boat and into the sea. (Good thing you learned how to swim, queen.) As she washes up onto the shore, Ellie hears Seraphites whistling as a group of them descends upon her. She’s too weak to get onto her feet and run, so the cultists grab her and carry her to a noose hanging from a tree in the woods. She screams that she’s not a Wolf and that she’s not from here, but they don’t listen. As they wrap the noose around her neck and start to hoist her upward, a horn sounds off in the distance. The lead Scar says to leave her, their village is in danger, so I guess that’s what the W.L.F. operation is targeting? This concludes our latest little exposition detour, as Ellie gets right back into the boat to the aquarium.Image: HBOShe manages to reach the building and finds a broken window through which to enter. Inside, she finds several makeshift beds. Whatever Abby’s doing here, she’s not alone. As Ellie makes her way deeper into the aquarium, she finds a ton of medical supplies, including bloody bandages and surgical equipment. Was Abby injured? Is that why she’s been missing in action as the W.L.F. undergoes a huge, all-hands-on-deck mission? Who’s to say?Quick sidenote: When Ellie infiltrates the aquarium in the game, she’s attacked by a guard dog named Alice. The W.L.F. used trained canines in their war against the Seraphites, but that element has been notably absent from the show. Between this and sparing Shimmer from her explosive fate, The Last of Us has been toning down the animal murder.Ellie keeps walking through the desolate aquarium and eventually finds fresh footsteps. She follows them and soon finds their source: Abby’s friends Owen (Spencer Lord) and Mel (Ariela Barer). The two are arguing about something, though it’s not clear what. Owen wants to go somewhere behind enemy lines, even in the midst of the battle Isaac has just initiated. He says he doesn’t have a choice because “it’s Abby.” Mel says he does have a choice and so does she, and the Abby of it all is why she’s not going along with whatever the plan is. Owen says he’ll do it on his own, and if Mel’s still here when they get back, she can “keep going with [them].” Either way, Owen’s leaving. Mel let’s out a hearty “fuck you, Owen” before realizing that Ellie is there. Sure seems like there’s a whole other story that’s been going on while we’ve been hanging out with Ellie, huh? I wonder if we’ll ever get any further insight into whatever this is. Perhaps in a season entirely dedicated to the other side of what’s going on in Seattle? Maybe in a couple years it might premiere on HBO Max (or whatever it’s called by then)? That would be something!Ellie holds the two at gunpoint and tells them to put their hands up. When she asks where Abby is, Owen realizes who she is and points out that he was the one who kept her alive. Ellie isn’t swayed by this, so he says they don’t know where Abby went. But, of course, they were just talking about her, so Ellie knows that’s not true. She spots a map on the table and decides to pull out an old Joel Miller standard: She tells Mel to bring her the map and point to where Abby is, saying that next she’s going to ask Owen the same question, and the answers had better match. Owen looks at Mel and says that Ellie will kill them either way, so there’s no reason to comply. Ellie says she won’t because she’s “not like” them. When she crosses state lines to torture and kill someone who killed somebody important to her, it’s very different than when they do it, of course.Owen stops Mel from grabbing the map by saying he’ll do it. He slowly turns to the table, but instead of picking up the map, he grabs a handgun stowed under it. Ellie is quick with her trigger finger and shoots him right in the throat. The bullet goes straight through him, and hits Mel in the neck as well. She falls onto her back and, instead of cursing Ellie, she asks for her help. Not to save her life, but someone else’s. She opens her jacket to reveal her pregnant belly, and asks if Ellie has a knife to cut the baby out of her before she dies. Ellie is in shock and doesn’t know what to do. Mel tells her she just needs to make one incision. That isn’t enough direction, and Ellie panics. She doesn’t know how deep or which direction to cut. As Mel starts to become delirious, she repeats “love transfers” and then asks Ellie if the baby is out. But she hasn’t even made one cut. Mel finally drifts off, and Ellie realizes it’s too late. She sits there until, eventually, Tommy and Jesse find her. Tommy attempts to comfort her, but she’s in shock and doesn’t speak. Finally they leave and head back to the theater.Naughty Dog / Cinematic GamingWhy can’t this show stop giving the audience outs to not turn against its leads? The death of Mel, specifically, feels like the show bending over backward to teach Ellie a lesson without laying blame at her feet. Mel’s death here is an accident. She’s an innocent bystander who dies because Owen and Ellie made choices, and she was, quite literally, caught in the crossfire. In Part II, by contrast, Mel “shot first.” Well, she tried to stab Ellie, but that doesn’t have the same ring to it. Ellie reacts in self-defense and stabs her right back, but she did it fully knowing she was about to send Mel to an early grave. The gut punch Ellie feels upon learning that she’s pregnant is a moment of dramatic irony, because the game’s shifting perspectives had already revealed her pregnancy to the player way back in the opening hours. So when you’re slamming the square button to fight back, you know that Mel isn’t the only one about to reach her untimely end. Here, she doesn’t even get that moment of agency to fight to protect herself. She’s just collateral damage. It’s a small but important distinction. At this point in the show, Mel’s only real trait is a clear distaste for Abby’s violence, and now, when she finally shows up again, she’s just an unintended victim of Owen pulling a gun on Ellie. Sure, season three will fill in those gaps, but the end result will be the same. Mel died not because she was fighting back, but because she was an inch too far to the left.Then there’s the matter of her pregnancy. Again, in the game players already knew about this by the time Ellie reached the aquarium, while the show kept it secret until the end. It’s hard not to see this last-minute reveal as a knife being twisted for shock value, but that’s only half the problem. My friend Eric Van Allen (co-host of the Axe of the Blood God podcast) would often joke with his college friends about how Michael Caine’s characters in Christopher Nolan films so often show up just to tell you, the viewer, in very literal terms what the story is about. Throughout most of this season, Gail has been this character, the one burdened with the heavy task of diegetic literary analysis, but Mel’s delirious “love transfers” line may be even sillier than anything Gail spouts; homegirl is bleeding out and telling Ellie that pain is not the only thing we inherit from our parents? Just one week after Joel tearfully told Ellie that he hopes she does better when she has a kid than he or his abusive cop father did?Perhaps in a show that hadn’t already spent two seasons using literalism as a writing crutch, Mel speaking her final hopes for her unborn child might have landed for me. But I think I’m just too jaded towards it now for even what should have been a genuine expression to feel like anything other than a heavy-handed, patronizing declaration of what lessons I’m supposed to take away from the story. I don’t think characters overtly communicating their beliefs and feelings about a situation is an inherently poor way of writing dialogue. In fact, some of my favorite works have managed to execute this well thanks to strong acting and stories that lent themselves well to this style of writing. The Last of Us, a series that often relishes in grounded dialogue that forced you to read between the lines and unearth that meaning yourself, the Last of Us show’s inability to let nearly any emotion, belief, or theme go unspoken feels so contrived and tiresome that even someone expressing something thematically resonate feels like being told what to feel. Mel uses her last words to tell me the themes of the story. Just in case I forgot. Thank you, Last of Us show, I don’t know how I would have ever understood your thematic richness if you didn’t make your characters tell me about it, even in their death gasps.The group makes it back to the theater and Ellie is still in shock, so much so that she doesn’t even look at Dina as she enters the building. Some time passes, and Tommy and Jesse are mapping out their route home on the stage. The storm is still pretty rough, so they’ll stay overnight and hope the sun is out when they wake up. Ellie finally joins the group, and Tommy reassures her that Mel and Owen played their part in Joel’s death, and they made the choices that brought them to that fateful end. Ellie can only fixate on what she didn’t get to do.“But Abby gets to live,” she says.“Yeah,” Tommy responds. “Are you able to make your peace with that?”“I guess I’ll have to,” she says, defeated.She looks to Jesse, who won’t even look up at her. Tommy realizes they might have something to talk about and walks to the lobby to pack. After some awkward silence, Ellie thanks Jesse for coming back for her, even though he had no reason to after the way they clashed.“Maybe I didn’t want to,” he says. “Maybe Tommy made me.”“Did he?” Ellie asks.After a second of contemplation, Jesse drops the act and says, “No.”“Because you’re a good person,” Ellie responds.“Yeah,” Jesse agrees. “But also the thought did occur, that if I were out there somewhere, lost and in trouble, you’d set the world on fire to save me.”Ellie says she would, and the two finally see one another, even if just for a moment. Jesse acknowledges that Ellie’s vendetta isn’t entirely selfish, and that when it comes to defending the people she cares about, dead or alive, you won’t find someone more loyal in all of Jackson. It’s good that they finally had this moment of connection after all this drama. But damn, I miss Ellie and Jesse being bros, and I miss her giving him shit for being a sap in these final moments. But most of all, I miss that dopey good ol’ boy with a heart of gold saying his friends “can’t get out of their own damn way.”All that understanding is short-lived, as the two hear some ruckus in the lobby, grab their guns, and book it to the entrance. The second Jesse opens the door, bam. A gunshot rings out in the lobby, and he is on the floor. We don’t even see that it was Abby who fired it until after we get a gnarly shot of him with his face blown open. He’s gone. It was instant. The Last of Us Part II tends to draw out death. It’s either long and torturous like it was for Joel or Nora, or it’s short like Owen’s and Mel’s, but in any case, the game typically lingers on the fallout for a bit. Jesse’s death, by contrast, happens so fast that you can’t even process it before you have to deal with the situation at hand. The show follows suit, and it’s recreated practically shot for shot. But that’s hardly the most disorienting (complimentary) thing that happens in these final minutes.“Stand up,” Abby growls forcefully from the other side of the desk Ellie has taken cover behind.She repeats herself: “Stand. Up. Hands in the air or I shoot this one, too.”Ellie can see Tommy on the ground with a pistol aimed right at his head. He tells Ellie to just run, but she tosses her gun where Abby can see it and crawls out from cover. Abby recognizes her immediately. Ellie asks her to let Tommy go, to which Abby replies that he killed her friends. Ellie says no, she did.“I was looking for you,” Ellie says. “I didn’t mean to hurt them. I know why you killed Joel. He did what he did to save me, I’m the one that you want. Just let him go.”Naughty Dog / VGS - Video Game SophistryHm. Okay. We’re almost at the end. I gotta get another little quibble in before the curtains close. I mean, come on, we’ve been through seven episodes of me complaining together. You can’t take one last gripe? This line from Ellie is slightly altered to account for the fact that she knows more about Abby in the show than in the game, and it means we miss one of the most important subtle interactions in all of the story. As I mentioned earlier, Ellie doesn’t know anything about Abby’s father in Part II. She assumes that Abby killed Joel because he took away any chance of the Fireflies developing a cure, so she cites that in this high-stakes moment. The original line is almost identical to the one in the show, but instead, Ellie says “there’s no cure because of me” and suggests that killing her would be the extension of Abby’s presumed vendetta. Then, we get some incredible, subtle acting from Abby actor Laura Bailey, who hears what Ellie’s saying, has a brief moment of angry disbelief on her face, and then scoffs under her breath before picking right back up where she left off. In just a few seconds, you see Abby realize that, after everything, these fuckers have no idea how much pain she’s been through over the past five years. But they’re not worth the breath it would take to explain herself. They don’t deserve to know the man her father was and what he meant to her. All that matters right now is that Ellie pays for what she’s done.Abby still views herself as the righteous one here, as she points out that she let Ellie live when she did not have to do that. It turns out that Ellie wasn’t deserving of her mercy, that she squandered it by killing her friends. Part of me has wondered if all the exposition-heavy dialogue in this show, such as Dever’s villain monologue in episode two before she murdered the shit out of Joel, was written to give its actors more words to say in front of a camera. When you’ve got big names like Kaitlyn Dever, Catherine O’Hara, and Pedro Pascal in your cast, you don’t want them to not talk, right? But all these elongated exchanges have also robbed actors like Dever of those subtle moments. Hell, she led an entire film with next to no dialogue in 2023’s No One Will Save You, and was great in it, so she has the chops to pull off that kind of acting. Communicating something through body language and expression is just as powerful as a poetic piece of dialogue (or in this show’s case, the most literal, unpoetic dialogue a person can fathom), but this show rarely, if ever, understands that.Image: HBOAnyway, Abby says that Ellie wasted the chance she was given when the ex-Fireflies spared her, and points her gun right at Ellie. We hear a bullet fire and Ellie shouts before a hard cut to black. But wait. That’s the season finale? You expect us to wait for two years, probably, to find out what happened? Well, about that. You will probably have to wait even longer.We do have one more scene this season, however: a flashback. We see Abby lying down on a comfy couch with an unfinished book resting on her stomach. She’s in a deep sleep before Manny (Danny Ramirez) loudly enters the room and wakes her up. He says Isaac wants to see them, and she stirs awake. She gets up and walks out of this cozy living space and into a giant football stadium. The entire field has been repurposed for agriculture, manufacturing, and housing. Abby takes a second to look at the whole operation before heading to Isaac’s, but the camera lingers over the field as bold white text flashes on the screen: Seattle, Day One.Alright, TV newbies, welcome to the second divisive twist of The Last of Us Part II. In the game, the player goes through Ellie’s three days in Seattle, killing Abby’s friends and mostly ignoring the war between the W.L.F. and the Seraphites. Meanwhile, Abby has been kind of an enigma the whole time. Every time Ellie finds a new lead, Abby has already come and gone. When Abby finally shows up at the theater for another round of vengeance, it’s clear that a lot of the story happening in this game has happened off-screen. That’s because you’re about to see an entirely different perspective on the last three days, and you’re going to play as Abby when you do it.As you can imagine, this shit drove some players nuts at the time, and you’ll still find angry people online complaining about it to this day. For all my problems with this season, I have to commend the show for actually going for it. HBO has taken the coward’s route in adapting this story for so long, it’s almost surprising that it’s ending here and, from the sound of it, season three will be entirely about Abby and what she’s been doing these past three days. It’s very likely we won’t see Ellie again until next season’s finale after we’ve followed Dever’s character for several episodes. Despite some ham-fisted attempts by the show to build sympathy for Abby early on, it seems like swaths of TV newbies still demand blood. Will viewers complain for an entire season as Dever takes on the lead role? I’d like to think they won’t. I hope that new audiences are more open to her than the worst people you’ve ever met were when the game launched.Despite all the golf club swings I’ve taken at this show, I’m looking forward to examining it further as HBO rolls out the next two seasons. The Last of Us Part II is one of my favorite games of all time, but I genuinely fucking hated The Last of Us’ second season. I don’t expect my feelings to improve in season three. At this point, the rot of Mazin’s poor creative decisions runs too deep for the show to be salvaged and reach the highs of the games. But if nothing else, it’s been a rewarding ride. Thank you for joining me on this seven-week journey. I think I’m due for a replay of The Last of Us Part II to wash off this stink. This shit was ass, HBO. I’ll see you in the ring again next time.

The Lord of the Rings Deluxe Illustrated Box Set (Leather/Cloth Hardcover) $146 (was $325) See at Amazon See at Walmart The Lord of the Rings Collector's Edition Box Set (Hardcover) $49.45 (was $105) See at Amazon See all Tolkien Collector's Editions (2024) The Collected Poems of J.R.R. Tolkien Box Set $68.34 (was $125) See at Amazon The Lord of the Rings enthusiasts and anyone who loves beautiful books should check out the incredible deal on The Lord of the Rings Deluxe Illustrated Box Set at Amazon and Walmart right now. The premium, three-volume hardcover collection released last October with a staggering $325 price attached to it. If the high cost deterred you from picking up this gorgeous box set last fall, now's your chance to get it for a price that could be far easier to stomach. The Lord of the Rings Deluxe Illustrated Box Set is on sale for $146, saving you $179. This 55% price cut doesn't have a listed end date, so interested Tolkien fans would be wise to snag it sooner rather than later.You can take a closer look at the Deluxe Illustrated Box Set below. We've also included the 2024 Lord of the Rings and The Hobbit Collector's Editions for those who want nice copies of Tolkien's iconic fantasy novels for budget-friendly prices. The Lord of the Rings Collector's Edition Box Set is also on sale for over 50% off at Amazon. Lord of the Rings fans should also check out our buying guide for two upcoming Tolkien box sets: Tolkien Myths and Legends and The Great Tales of Middle-earth. The Lord of the Rings Deluxe Illustrated Box Set (Leather/Cloth Hardcover) $146 (was $325) The Lord of the Rings Deluxe Illustrated Box Set is a revamped version of a gorgeous collection first launched in 1992. Across the three hardcover volumes--The Fellowship of the Ring, The Two Towers, and The Return of the King--there are more than 50 new pencil sketches and full-color paintings by beloved Lord of the Rings artist Alan Lee. All told, the box set has 1,332 pages, which makes it longer than most, if not all, editions of LOTR currently in print. The page edges are sprayed dark blue on the top and bottom, and the side edges have unique illustrations of billowing smoke from Mount Doom's eruption. Lee created new artwork for the covers, too. Each cover has a framed rectangular drawing in the center. The illustrations are inset on gray cloth board and surrounded by an elegant, silver foil-stamped border. Each book is quarterbound in blue leather, and the pages are sewn into the spine. You can mark your spot using the attached ribbon bookmark.The silver-foil text along the spine and on the covers was stamped onto each book. The custom display case was constructed from cloth board and features stamped circular emblems designed by Lee. The case has rounded front edges to make it easy to remove each book. With all three books removed, you can peer inside the fully illustrated interior of the case. Lee's depiction of Mount Doom's eruption covers every surface inside the lovingly crafted slipcase.Inside each book, you'll find a large art card that can be removed and displayed separately. Along with three art cards, you get a pair of foldout maps of Middle-earth drawn by Christopher Tolkien, the author's literary executor who edited, expanded, and organized many supplementary writings about Middle-earth, including The Silmarillion and his legendarium, which formed the massive 12-part series now known as The History of Middle-earth.To be clear, The Lord of the Rings Deluxe Illustrated is much different from the popular 2021 version illustrated by Tolkien, but the premium design is reminiscent of the Deluxe Special Edition of the Tolkien Illustrated version. See at Amazon See at Walmart The Lord of the Rings Collector's Edition Box Set (Hardcover) $49.45 (was $105) While the discount on the Deluxe Illustrated Box Set is quite good, $146 is still a lot of money for a single novel. But the great thing about modern editions of Tolkien's work is that there are beautiful collectible editions available at various price points. Case in point: The Lord of the Rings Collector's Edition Box Set.Published just a few weeks after the Deluxe Illustrated Box Set, the hardcover Collector's Edition Box Set carries a $105 MSRP. Right now, however, you can buy this handsome collection for only $49.45.Once again, the Collector's Edition is split into the three distinct parts that make up Tolkien's novel: Fellowship of the Ring, Two Towers, and Return of the King. Each book can be stored in the included display box shown above.The Collector's Editions have foil-stamped cover art, stained page edges, illustrated maps as endpapers, and built-in ribbon bookmarks. The beautiful cover art was previously featured in collectible editions released in the UK, so it's cool that American readers no longer have to import the books to admire the artwork up close.The box set also comes with an exclusive foldout map of Middle-earth.All three volumes in this box set are also sold separately, though it'd cost you about $15 more to buy them that way right now--and you miss out on the display case as well as the poster. But you may want to pair the box set with the matching Collector's Edition versions of The Hobbit and The Silmarillion, which were also published last year and are discounted close to 50%.J.R.R. Tolkien 2024 Collector's Editions (Hardcover)The Lord of the Rings Collector's Edition Box Set -- $49.45 ($105)The Fellow of the Ring Collector’s Edition -- $22.50 ($35)The Two Towers Collector's Edition -- $18 ($35)The Return of the King Collector’s Edition -- $21.47 ($35)The Hobbit Collector’s Edition -- $18.83 ($35)The Silmarillion Collector’s Edition -- $19.40 ($35) See at Amazon See all Tolkien Collector's Editions (2024) The Collected Poems of J.R.R. Tolkien Box Set $68.34 (was $125) For a markedly different Tolkien experience, consider picking up The Collected Poems of J.R.R Tolkien. This three-volume hardcover collection follows a similar design philosophy as The Lord of the Rings Deluxe Illustrated Box Set, so they would look great next to each other on a display shelf.This collection contains poems composed by Tolkien the teenager as well as Tolkien the aging literary giant. The nearly 200 poems across the box set's 1,700 pages were written across nearly 70 years. The poetry is accompanied by commentary about the author's work and life from two Tolkien scholars.Just know that this collection isn't related to Lord of the Rings or Middle-earth in general. While Tolkien included poetry in his famous fantasy novels, the verse in his Middle-earth novels barely scratches the surface of Tolkien's lifelong love of poetry.If you like the idea of reading poetry by Tolkien, you should also check out the upcoming hardcover box set titled Tolkien Myth and Legends. Releasing August 19, this eye-catching collection includes four books of epic poems. Two books feature Tolkien's own poetry: a narrative poem about King Arthur and a Norse mythology-inspired classic poem. The set also comes with Tolkien's personal translations of Beowulf and three other classic poems. See at Amazon The History of Middle-earth Box Set Deals & Tolkien Box Set PreordersThe History of Middle-earth Box Sets 1-4, Tolkien Myths and Legends, The Great Tales of Middle-earthThe History of Middle-earth Hardcover Box Set 1 (4 Books) -- $63.37 ($125)The History of Middle-earth Hardcover Box Set 2 (3 Books) -- $56.42 ($100)The History of Middle-earth Hardcover Box Set 3 (4 Books) -- $72.88 ($125)The History of Middle-earth Hardcover Box Set 4 (4 Books) -- $67.27 ($125)Tolkien Myths and Legends Hardcover Box Set (4 Books) -- $125 | Releases June 10The Great Tales of Middle-earth Hardcover Box Set (2025) (3 Books) -- $125 | Releases August 19The aforementioned History of Middle-earth series edited and compiled by Christopher Tolkien was reissued as 15 stunning hardcover books spread across four box sets, each of which is on sale for very low prices right now. Box Set 1 comes with four books, including The Silmarillion, and is on sale for only $63 at Amazon (nearly 50% off).Continue Reading at GameSpot

Every generation has a small group of young fiction writers who make it: They top bestseller lists, win prizes, and become household names. And for decades — well, nearly every decade — they have all been straight white men. Philip Roth. Norman Mailer. John Updike. Jonathan Franzen. Jonathan Safran Foer. You get the picture. But in the last decade or so, that’s changed: The up-and-coming writers capturing buzz and dominating critics’ lists have largely been women. Think Sally Rooney or Emma Cline or Ottessa Moshfegh. And when men do break through, they usually aren’t young, straight, or white. It’s worth pointing out that, while women now publish more books than men, men are still publishing more books now than they ever have before.But the (relative) decline of the men in letters has led to searching discussions, first murmured, but now increasingly debated in places like the New York Times and the Guardian: Why does the decline of the young, white, male writer matter? And what do we lose — if anything — with this shift?“We’ve seen a lot of great work being done to account for perspectives that were left out of literature for a long time,” Ross Barkan, a journalist and novelist, told Today, Explained co-host Noel King. “But I also think it’s important to know, for better and for worse, what the men of the 2020s are up to.”Barkan and King talked about how he feels young men have been shut out of literary fiction, what he thinks is lost, and his experience trying to get fiction published. His third novel, Glass Century, was released earlier this month.Below is a transcript of their conversation, edited for length and clarity. Make sure to listen to hear the whole thing wherever you get podcasts, including Apple Podcasts and Spotify. We are talking to you today because you wrote an essay not long ago called “From Misogyny to No Man’s Land: The Vanishing Male in Contemporary Literature.” What’s your argument in that essay, Ross?My argument in that essay is that among young literary writers today, there is a lack of men. This doesn’t mean there are no male novelists of prominence under the age of 40 — that’s the cutoff I use for young — but there are fewer of them than there were historically. And most of the prominent literary fiction writers today are women. I’m talking about a very specific type of fiction that is vying for awards or trying to vie for awards, trying to attain a certain level of prestige.You’re 35, and you’re a white man? Correct. I wonder about the kind of driving force for this essay and whether you are the vanishing male writer of which you wrote.I think so, yeah, I think there’s less of me for sure. I mean, there’d be an era where there were a lot of novelists like myself, Jewish or not Jewish, but certainly white men.I am inclined to find your argument very compelling. I was a teenager in the ’90s, a young adult in the 2000s. That’s when you read a lot of fiction, right? And I do remember David Foster Wallace, Jonathan Safran Foer…Yeah.…Jonathan Franzen. Jonathan Lethem! And so what you’re saying actually really does track to me. The question I wonder about is the why. And let me ask you first to answer the why from your personal perspective. You’re a novelist. You’re 35 years old. You’re a straight white guy — do you feel like those identities are holding you back in some way?Not in the real world. In the real world, I have enormous privilege. But in the 2010s, the literary world was less interested in straight men. I think you have a general lack of the heterosexual male perspective in newer fiction. There’s a long history of writers portraying toxic masculinity and rough male characters — and it feels like you see less of that today. I also think at the same time, young male writers, white and non-white, were taking less of an interest in fiction. It’s a chicken-and-egg challenge: Is it the publishing industry deciding this is no longer something we’re going to push or take a real interest in, or is it market forces as well?So some of it is internal — maybe there are fewer men who want to be great novelists, but maybe publishers are saying, “Hey, we’re just less interested in the perspectives of straight white men.” When you approached publishers with your novel Glass Century, did you hear that?I think you hear it behind the scenes. You’re never told to your face. I’m not complaining — I don’t consider myself a victim. I’ve had a successful career. I’m very happy with it. But what do you hear behind the scenes?To echo Joyce Carol Oates in a sort of notorious but not wrong tweet from several years ago — and I’m paraphrasing — agents and editors, at least in the 2010s and early 2020s, were just less interested in straight male fiction. I want to broaden it a little bit because you see even among Black, Hispanic, and Asian straight men — there are some, but [they’re] less common. And, certainly, the white male is now even less common, so I think publishers in general in that era were trying to diversify, which was fine. You had social justice politics, you had what they call “woke,” and in a way woke worked because it broadened things out and brought in new voices, but it is also zero sum. Some come up; some go out. And so for me, it’s observing that trend. What do you think we lose when we lose the perspective of those young white men?It’s a large part of the country. I think you have a lot going on with young men today. White and non-white alike, straight men — they are falling behind academically. They’re increasingly alienated. They’re increasingly angry. They are increasingly online. And fiction, in my view, is not grappling with all of that.I agree with you, but I did actually see that in one book in the last year, Rejection by Tony Tulathimutte. There were characters who were highly online. The most acclaimed story was about an incel. That book was incredibly powerful. And it got praise, right? What do you think about that?He’s a fantastic writer. I’ll start there. He’s a great prose stylist. There’s a short story I love about a young Asian man who is having these very lurid sexual fantasies about dominating other men. Fantastically written — he’s sort of the Roth of our era in terms of his ability to make a sentence really sizzle. But this is the caveat that people seem to be afraid to point out: It’s not a straight male fantasy. Could Tony have written a straight male fantasy of wanting to subdue a woman the way that character wants to subdue men? Tony himself is straight. It was an interesting choice there to inhabit a gay character. Nothing wrong with that. Writers should write about whatever sexuality. I don’t believe in limiting anyone in that way. But I thought it was a choice, right? Because straight male lust is very disconcerting. It’s not easy to write about. What do men think about? The modern novel is not addressing that enough. The nasty, nasty men. The men who are not — maybe they’re good at heart, but they have a lot of bad thoughts. And they take bad actions. You don’t see that much in fiction today, I would argue.Let me ask you about an argument that I think many people might have in response to what you’ve said, including many women. If you look at the stats going back to the year 1800, women made up about 5 percent of published authors. It’s 10 percent through about the 1900s, and then in 2015, women surpassed men — more women are publishing books than men. Although both genders are still publishing a lot of books, it should be said.Are you at all sympathetic to the argument that you guys had your turn for centuries, the attention, the prizes, the accolades, so we’re just leveling the playing field out?Yeah, I’m sympathetic, for sure. I think that it’s reasonable to believe that — that’s an honest argument. The problem is you’ll hear from people who say this isn’t happening, and I find that very tiring. I think the honest thing to say is that it’s time to rebalance the scales or turn the tables. But there are winners and losers, right? Women were losing; now men are losing. I will say, there’s no solace offered to the 26-year-old male who must pay for the sins of the past, right? The young male writer can’t sit at home and think, Well, golly, it was good Norman Mailer and John Updike had such a great run. So yes, I think one can rebalance, one can seek balance, one can ensure that groups of people who are discriminated against have their time as they should. My point merely is that you can’t then pretend there aren’t those who aren’t getting what they want.See More:

Tolkien Myths and Legends Hardcover Box Set (2025) $125 | Releases June 10 Preorder at Amazon The Great Tales of Middle-earth Hardcover Box Set (2025) $125 | Releases August 19 Preorder at Amazon See at Amazon (2018 set) J.R.R. Tolkien fans can soon add two display-worthy book box sets to their collection. Tolkien Myths and Legends Box Set, which features lesser-known original works and translations of classic English literature, releases on June 10. It will be followed up on August 19 by new editions of The Great Tales of Middle-earth, which is comprised of the final three prose novels set in Tolkien's iconic fantasy world. The new hardcover box sets feature lavish cover art and display cases. They are considered the fifth and sixth entries in a series of hardcover book box sets that debuted last year with the The History of Middle-earth, which was published by William Morrow in its entirety across four beautiful collections. Tolkien Myths and Legends Hardcover Box Set (2025) $125 | Releases June 10 The Tolkien Myths and Legends Box Set is a unique collection of J.R.R. Tolkien's work, because it doesn't contain stories about Middle-earth. Instead, as the title suggests, it compiles classic myths and legends, two of which were written by the author, while the other two were personal translations of some of his favorite works that inspired him.Like the vast majority of his posthumously published work, these were pieced together and edited by his son, Christopher Tolkien. Each hardcover book comes with a double-sided dust jacket. Just like The History of Middle-earth Box Sets, one side features elaborate artwork, while the other side has a more subdued aesthetic with solid colors. The four books come packaged in an eye-catching display case. Sir Gawain and the Green Knight / Orfeo / Pearl: Translations of a trio of classic epic poems juxtaposed with Tolkien's famous 1953 lecture on Sir Gawain.The Legend of Sigurd and Gudrún: An epic verse poem by Tolkien. It was inspired by classic poetry and Norse mythology. Along with Tolkien's composition, you'll find notes and commentary from Christopher Tolkien.The Fall of Arthur: A narrative poem written by Tolkien that chronicles King Arthur's final days. The book includes extensive notes made by Tolkien while drafting his only Arthurian legend. Fans of The Silmarillion will want to read this one, as it clearly inspired the plot of Tolkien's Arthurian-esque Middle-earth book.Beowulf: One of the most famous--and the oldest known---epic poem of Old English literature, Beowulf has received many translations. Tolkien wrote his translation in 1926 and then circled back later. In addition to the translation of the original poem, this book contains a plethora of commentary by Tolkien himself, which will give readers a glimpse into the mind of Tolkien the scholar.If you're interested in the Myths and Legends Box Set, you should also check out The Collected Poems of J.R.R. Tolkien, a massive three-volume hardcover box that released last fall. The gorgeous box set, which is on sale for nearly 50% off, compiles Tolkien's life's work as a poet and clocks in at over 1,700 pages. Preorder at Amazon The Great Tales of Middle-earth Hardcover Box Set (2025) $125 | Releases August 19 The Great Tales of Middle-earth is a must-read collection for all dedicated fans of The Lord of the Rings. Though understandably not nearly as well-known as The Hobbit, LOTR, or even The Silmarillion, the trio of novels in this set are the final pieces of prose fiction that take place across the author's iconic brilliant fantasy world. All of the stories take place during Middle-earth's First Age, so while written and published later than Tolkien's other books, these are the oldest full-length stories in Middle-earth.The new 2025 hardcover editions come with reversible dust jackets and feature special color plates, pencil drawings, and illustrated maps by Christopher Tolkien and beloved LOTR illustrator Alan Lee.Here are the three books you'll find in the beautiful display case, which features a fire-breathing dragon.The Children of Húrin (2007): Written after The Silmarillion as a standalone prequel story, The Children of Húrin takes place 6,000 years before the events of LOTR. The story follows the cursed son of Húrin, named Túrin, during an era of intense and constant war and widespread devastation caused by the Dark Lord Morgoth. If you've read The Silmarillion, you will recognize some of the names found in this novel.Beren and Lúthien (2017): Another very early tale set in Middle-earth, Beren and Lúthien was reworked and revised over time and eventually became part of The Silmarillion. This compilation of Lúthien and Beren's story was originally published in 2017. It shows the evolution of the love story between the mortal man Beren and immortal elf Lúthien.The Fall of Gondolin (2018): Founded by King Turgon, the eponymous city of elves was concealed for many years before Lord Morgoth's quest to destroy elven life across Middle-earth. The Fall of Gondolin's main protagonist is Túrin's cousin, Tuor, and his family. Tuor is married to Turgon's daughter, Idril. The story follows their attempt to save their child after the Gondolin (unsurprisingly) falls.It's worth noting that The Great Tales of Middle-earth is already available as a hardcover box set. While it won't match Myths and Legends or the four History of Middle-earth Box Sets, the 2018 hardcover collection is on sale for only $50 (was $100) at Amazon. Alternatively, you can purchase each book individually in hardcover or paperback.The Great Tales of Middle-earth Editions:The Great Tales of Middle-earth Hardcover Box Set (2018) (3 Books) -- $50 ($100)The Great Tales of Middle-earth Hardcover Box Set (2025) (3 Books) -- $125 | Releases August 19The Children of Hurin (Paperback) -- $10.70 ($19)The Children of Hurin (Hardcover) -- $14 ($35)Beren and Lúthien (Paperback) -- $13.69 ($19)Beren and Lúthien (Hardcover) -- $22.50 ($35)The Fall of Gondolin (Paperback) -- $11.69 ($19)The Fall of Gondolin (Hardcover) -- $14.41 ($35) Preorder at Amazon See at Amazon (2018 set) The Great Tales of Middle-earth Hardcover Box Set (2018) $50 (was $100) See at Amazon The History of Middle-earth Hardcover Box Sets (2024)J.R.R. Tolkien - The History of Middle-earth Box Sets (2024)The History of Middle-earth Hardcover Box Set 1 (4 Books) -- $63.37 ($125)The History of Middle-earth Hardcover Box Set 2 (3 Books) -- $57.18 ($100)The History of Middle-earth Hardcover Box Set 3 (4 Books) -- $73.60 ($125)The History of Middle-earth Hardcover Box Set 4 (4 Books) -- $68 ($125)The Complete History of Middle-earth Hardcover Box Set (3 Books) -- $138 ($250)The History of Middle-earth Paperback Box Set (5 Books) -- $28 ($50)The History of Middle-earth was originally published over a 14-year stretch from 1983 to 1996. While creating his fantasy world, Tolkien took extensive notes, building a backstory for Middle-earth across three different ages and 6,500-plus years. You could argue that the author's dedication to crafting the setting that would become home to a pair of landmark fantasy novels turned Middle-earth into the most believable character Tolkien created. His mythopoeic writings formed what is commonly referred to as Tolkien's legendarium.At the time of Tolkien's death in 1973, the exhaustive backstory of Middle-earth remained unpublished. Over the next few years, his son and literary executor, Christopher Tolkien, undertook the daunting project of editing, expanding, and curating the legendarium into publishable works. The legendarium would become a 12-volume series titled The History of Middle-earth.Continue Reading at GameSpot