Search

by Shel Zhou In 1984 , a dystopian novel by George Orwell, Orwell delivers a warning about how the  manipulation of language can affect one’s thinking and control a society. This message, conveyed through Orwellian concepts like doublethink, Newspeak, and the Party’s [in 1984 ] totalitarian regime, speaks to the dangers of governments censoring language and reality to maintain power. However, this warning seems to go unheeded in modern America as echoes of his fictitious story become reality in both political rhetoric and media manipulation. This is evident in two present-day examples: Donald Trump’s Jan. 6th speech and research published by Stanford University that demonstrates how language reinforces stereotypes. Despite Orwell’s clear warnings, modern society, particularly in the United States, seems to follow a path eerily similar to the dystopian future Orwell imagined, where language is weaponized by certain people to gain power and suppress dissent. Orwell’s 1984 depicts a society in which the government, led by the omnipotent ‘Big Brother,’ controls not only the actions of its citizens but also their thoughts. One of the Party’s most powerful tools is the manipulation of language - exemplified by Newspeak, a language fashioned to turn the citizens of Oceania into mindless drones. As Syme, a specialist in Newspeak, tells Winston, “the whole aim of Newspeak is to narrow the range of thought. In the end, we shall make thoughtcrime literally impossible because there will be no words in which to express it” (Orwell 52). This deliberate constriction of language makes rebellion impossible because when the people do not have the words to articulate discontent, it does not exist. This notion is an upsetting parallel to the very real censorship of language today, as language distortion continues to shape our political narratives. For instance, the phrase “fake news” has been weaponized to discredit legitimate journalism and reporting, similar to how Newspeak simplifies and distorts language to prevent independent thought. As Orwell demonstrated, controlling language is the first step to controlling thought, and this is a lesson contemporary political leaders seem to have learned all too well.  The United States, despite its tumultuous and often ugly history, is founded on Enlightenment principles of democracy and liberty. In contrast to Orwell's 1984 , where language is manipulated to suppress freedom of thought, the United States Constitution includes the First Amendment, which protects freedom of speech, press, and assembly—cornerstones of a stable democratic-republic. However, as Orwell explained in 1984 , even systems built on liberty can manipulate language for control, which can be seen in the U.S. today. Political discourse often distorts the meaning of words like "patriotism," "liberty," or even "democracy" to advance specific agendas. This distortion is comparable to Orwell's notion of Newspeak, where words lose their meaning and are repurposed to serve those in power. There is also a historical irony to consider: for all its vehement rejection of socialism and communism, the United States was, in many ways, born in the throes of a rebellion—an idea central to socialist and Marxist principles. Marx theorized that workers should rise up against corrupt governments to secure true freedom, arguing that rebellion against oppression was necessary to dismantle unjust systems. Likewise, the American Revolution itself was a rebellion against British tyranny, with the colonists advocating for freedom from what they perceived as a corrupt monarchy. The rejection of British rule was a violent uprising in the name of liberty, making the early United States' resistance to centralized authority somewhat akin to Marx's belief in overthrowing corrupt systems, despite the nation’s later demonization of anything resembling socialism. This ideological contradiction, therefore, reflects another manipulation of language: the word "socialism" in the U.S. political lexicon has been heavily demonized and misrepresented (Democracy Journal), as is Orwell’s concept of “thoughtcrime.” It is no longer associated with its original ideas of economic fairness but is instead used as a term to stifle discussion and fuel fear in the name of national security. In modern America, the spread of misinformation and the manipulation of facts have become increasingly common, particularly in political discourse. The 2020 U.S. presidential election and its aftermath serve as a prime example. Despite clear evidence to the contrary, many of Trump’s supporters continue to believe the election was “stolen,” a belief fueled by the former president’s rhetoric. This parallels the Party’s manipulation of reality in 1984 , where lies become indistinguishable from truth. In both cases, the Orwellian concept of “doublethink” is at play, as people accept contradictory information without question. Orwell’s warning about the dangers of manipulating truth is especially relevant in today’s era of “alternative facts”, where the very concept of truth is under siege. Trump’s infamous Jan. 6th speech, delivered shortly before the Capitol riot, demonstrates how language can be used to incite action and reinforce dangerous ideologies, much like the Party’s slogans in 1984 . In his speech, Trump repeatedly used words like “we” and “our,” creating a sense of unity and collective identity among his supporters. He declared, “Our country has had enough. We will not take it anymore, and that’s what this is all about” (Naylor). This rhetoric mirrors the Party’s use of slogans like “War is Peace” and “Freedom is Slavery,” which serve to simplify complex issues and foster a sense of collective purpose. By framing the issue as “us vs. them,” Trump’s speech capitalized on a binary worldview, much like the Party in 1984 does. The effectiveness of this tactic lies in its ability to manipulate emotions and create a sense of belonging among supporters, making it easier to suppress dissenting voices and manipulate reality. Furthermore, Orwell’s exploration of the power of language in 1984 is underscored by research conducted by Stanford University, which highlights how even well-meaning statements can perpetuate harmful stereotypes. The study found that phrases like “girls are as good as boys at math” inadvertently reinforce the stereotype that boys are naturally better at math than girls (Shashkevich). This demonstrates the subtle ways in which language shapes our perceptions of reality, much like Newspeak in 1984 shapes the thoughts of Oceania’s citizens. The researchers’ conclusion, that “language can play a huge role in how we perceive the world,” aligns with Orwell’s warning about the power of language to control thought (Shashkevich). Both 1984 and the Stanford study illustrate the importance of scrutinizing language and recognizing its potential to reinforce harmful ideologies or suppress dissent. In Orwell’s dystopia, the Party controls all aspects of life, from the media to personal relationships, using propaganda and censorship to maintain its grip on power. Today, we see echoes of this in the extreme polarization of American politics, where both major political parties engage in censorship and manipulation to further their agendas. The recent bans on books discussing race, gender, and LGBTQ+ issues in schools across conservative states, like Florida, evoke Orwell’s portrayal of the Party’s control over information. The censorship of ideas deemed “dangerous” or “unpatriotic” in modern America is reminiscent of the Party’s erasure of historical events.  Ultimately, Orwell’s 1984 is not just a cautionary tale about a distant dystopian future, but a reflection of the political and social dynamics at play in the modern world. The manipulation of language, the suppression of dissent, and the distortion of reality are not scary stories, confined to the pages of Orwell’s novel; they are realities we face today. The takeaway is evident: if we do not remain vigilant of how media perpetuates bias and how our everyday language influences perception, we risk falling into the same traps as the citizens of Oceania, where thought itself becomes a crime.  Works Cited 1984 . (n.d.). STRAUTNIEKAS Illustration. https://strautniekas.com/1984   Andrew Atterbury. (n.d.). LGBTQ advocates sue over Florida’s “Don’t Say Gay” bill . POLITICO. https://www.politico.com/news/2022/03/31/lgbtq-advocates-sue-florida-00022001   File:EugeneDebs.gif - Wikimedia Commons . (1920, October 11). Wikimedia.org . https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:EugeneDebs.gif   Naylor, Brian. “Read Trump’s Jan. 6 Speech, A Key Part Of Impeachment Trial.” NPR News , 10 February 2021. https://www.npr.org .  Accessed 28 September 2021.  Orwell, George. 1984 . Signet Classics, 1977.  Shashkevich, Alex. “Some Well-Meaning Statements Can Spread Stereotypes.” Stanford University Website , 10 July 2018. https://news.stanford.edu .  Accessed 28 September 2021.  Stening, T. (2022, July 27). Would a second term save Donald Trump from prosecution–even jail time? Northeastern Global News; Northeastern Global News.  https://news.northeastern.edu/2022/07/27/donald-trump-second-term-prosecution/   The Week Staff. (2017, May 30). Political cartoon U.S. College graduation free speech liberal censorship . Theweek; The Week.  https://theweek.com/cartoons/701847/political-cartoon-college-graduation-free-speech-liberal-ce   nsorship Words, Fighting. “Fighting Words.” Democracy Journal , 19 Mar. 2018, democracyjournal.org/magazine/48/fighting-words/ . Accessed 11 Jan. 2025. ‌ Follow the author on Instagram here!

by Mila Long Tales as old as time carry unimaginable influence. Stories that influence every waking breath of the modern literary era are often riddled with questions and misinterpretations. The quintessential male hero, is pitted as the ultimate warrior, strong of mind and heart and body. These characters only seem to strengthen in time, setting in stone their influence over our world and our words. However, the female characters disappear and are altered or set in stone as monstrous, weak, or docile. New translations of classical literature can give room to new interpretations, or clearer visions of what the original work showed, and yet these new translations chose over and over again to keep the female characters as less than the male ones. The complex and clever queen is reduced to a dutiful wife. The strong and mighty are simply discussed as a monstrous hag. This line of new and old becomes blurred as we chose to repeatedly speak of these women in such a diminishing fashion when it would not be against the essence or truth of the story to alter them. The translations of old classics that have carried their stories and influences into the modern era must for the future of complex and equal literature be open to interpretation and clarification.  In Beowulf ,   Grendel's Mother is described as a mighty mare wife or a monstrous hell-bride. These three words influence the reader from the very beginning of her introduction into the story line. It establishes three things: her power, her morals, and her gender. The old English term used to characterize Grendel's Mother is the same term used to characterize Beowulf’s strength, and through their extremely close battle it is shown that this term is more than accurate. Yet still, translators chose to use one of the myriad of other translations like describing her as a  monstrous hag that could be used for the same word, often with more negative connotations, when Beowulf is still described as mighty. It immediately lowers her power from the audience's perspective. It also loses any sympathetic nature that can be applied to her despite the multiple losses she takes throughout the poem, such as her son who is killed by Beowulf and was all she had. Her and her son were simply two inhuman creatures ousted from the world at large. Once Grendel is dead, his claws are displayed like  a trophy. A trophy of the death of the only person who ever had the possibility of understanding her. When the story is read, she is horrible in every word choice despite the intense power and issues she is clearly shown to have. Some modern translations have rectified this, however it is few and far between. Grendel's mother doesn’t even get her own name. She is forever defined by someone else, a man. The extremity in which female characters are defined as monsters, yet still limited in their power, leads characters to be shown as inherently worse than male counterparts or opposites.  In The Odyssey , Penelope is a dutiful and loyal wife or a rebellious and clever Queen of Ithaca. Penelope is Odysseus's wife who, while remaining in Ithaca, has to fight off suitors who want her hand in marriage as they believe Odysseus to be dead. She tells the suitors when she finishes weaving, she will marry one of them, but she takes apart the shroud she sews every night so she doesn’t have to marry a suitor. The interpretation of her central act, of her weaving, severely influences how audiences and the world views her character. An intensely interesting character, Penelope states that she will marry a new man once she finishes weaving a burial shroud for Odysseus’s father. However, every night, she unravels the day's work. This act can be interpreted in so many styles. Is she a wife knowing that her life should be for the man across the sea for 20 years? Is she cunning, wishing only to scheme quietly against the men who believe they can take so much power from her? Is she a hopeful woman wishing and praying that her husband will get home safe? Is she a rebellious and intelligent queen understanding that she is unable to fight in public due to the time period and social norms expected of her? Is she all of this? Her state as a complex female figure often confuses the audiences, forcing them to pick one interpretation or another. Instead, most translations often choose to center their analysis around Odysseus, not Penelope herself. This ultimately disregards an intensely interesting activity to be done by a woman of that time period, especially one who is not a god. The motivation and interpretation change throughout the versions of the Odyssey, but every change even one word influences the outlook on Penelope. Reducing a complex female character to a one dimensional one removes the interest and power carried in such fascinating storylines.  In Doctor Zhivago by Boris Pasternak, Lara and Tonya can be viewed only as catalysts to the male characters in the story due to translation choices. However, they both work to serve as incredibly important characters in the central conflict of the novel. Tonya is removed in the novel to be exiled, and seems to believe that she should not be mad for her husband's blatant cheating due to some of the translations of her letter which lead to her commending Lara for her husband. She can be seen as a push over and even unimportant, however Tonya is an incredibly brave woman. All of this is merely in subtext, which causes translations to fluctuate from sticking exactly to the work or expanding to provide context. Translations chose to make her merely an attachment of her child, despite the main challenge of the translation being to keep even slight faithfulness to the syntax. Lara, however, becomes only an attachment to another character, Yury. She is an incredibly important person and character who works to propel various essential side plots, such as that of consent and of the people left at home during the war. Even when Yury must leave for his safety, the description of her letting him go changes her character from a dutiful lover to a strong woman who must do what she has to for her family. Doctor Zhivago is a work of passion and of large scale battles between ideologies that have set the stage of world history for modern readers. Restricting the interest to the male characters removes vitally important side plots and is ultimately regretful to the vision of Boris Pasternak. It is time to thoroughly analyze the stories of women throughout the classics. Classics are history, reflecting the society of the times they are written in. Every word leaks bias and opinion and influence that future generations will see. As such, how do we want future generations to view us? Will we merely be figureheads of a misogynistic norm to reduce and lessen female stories? Will they be the exact same as us, still carrying antiquated interpretations of stories that reach far beyond simply literature? Literature affects the world. This is a fact proven in every era and every change. Literature portrays the world as it is but also as we wish it could be. Literature spearheads new beliefs and systems of thought, it portrays opinion and disagreement, and ultimately it shows hope and difference. Literature is immortal, so is this really how our time wants to be seen forever? Follow the author Mila Long on Instagram here!

by Prisha Have you ever picked up a book that you physically couldn’t put down, no matter how hard you tried? Is there a book you wish you could read for the first time? Well, this is one of those books. From the moment I started Thirteen  by Steve Cavanagh, I was hooked by a story that masterfully combines law and psychology into a riveting thriller. This book is part of a captivating series featuring Eddie Flynn, a criminal lawyer unlike any other. What makes him unique is his past that is filled with experiences and skills that set him apart since he was once a con man himself. He now uses his unconventional background to defend his clients, making him a capable and highly intuitive figure in the courtroom. By using the skeletons in his closet, he can understand both sides of the courtroom in a way no other lawyer would.  The way Eddie Flynn demonstrates and convinces the jury is truly awe-inspiring through how he can read the jury and understand how best to alter his speech. You then realise that court cases are all a game of manipulation and even the most masterful manipulator will always have some tell that will give them away, all you have to do is find it. Eddie Flynn’s time on the "other side" of the law grants him an almost sixth sense, allowing him to perceive deception, anticipate his opponents’ moves, and work around legal systems that often trap less experienced attorneys. Despite his rough background, he is one of the most compassionate lawyers you can find, in the fictional world. This double-edged insight gives Eddie a depth and authenticity that’s rare to find in legal thrillers. After all, the courtroom’s just like a stage, only here, everyone is trying to steal the same scene. The story kicks off when Eddie is approached by a prestigious law firm with a high-profile case. It's the kind of case that grabs the headlines, the one all lawyers want –– a scandal involving a celebrity power couple, where the stakes are high, and the details are tantalisingly dark. Eddie is brought on board to defend a wealthy man accused of killing his wife and her lover. From the outside, the case seems almost cut and dry, with strong evidence pointing to the husband as the prime suspect. But Eddie is too seasoned to accept appearances at face value, and as he delves into the details, he discovers that things are more dangerously interweaved than what it seems. “ THE SERIAL KILLER ISN'T ON TRIAL. HE'S ON THE JURY” Now that's a really intriguing blurb, reading it made me pick up the book, but how can a killer be on a jury ?Well now we’re also introduced to Joshua Kane, a truly fascinating, but chilling character who is unlike any other. Kane is a meticulous and highly intelligent individual with a dark obsession that drives him to extreme lengths. His perspective adds a whole new layer of tension to the story, as we gain glimpses into the mind of someone who operates outside the usual bounds of morality and law. Calculating and disturbingly calm, Kane plans every move with precision, making him a formidable figure who thrives on manipulation and control. His role in the story injects an eerie sense of danger, as his motives and actions slowly unfold. Not only is Kane conniving, but he also cannot feel any physical pain through a genetic abnormality called congenital analgesia. He is one of the best antagonists of the whole series, showing a completely different way of being a serial killer. After all, what’s the best way to get away with murder? Imitate the victim, so no one ever misses them. As Eddie navigates the convoluted twists and turns of the case, he uncovers shocking secrets and hidden agendas that completely upend any notion of a straightforward crime. The writing is tight and full of suspense, with each chapter building on the last to create an atmosphere of mounting tension. The pacing is relentless, driving readers forward and making it nearly impossible to put the book down for even a moment. One of the standout aspects of the book is its character depth. Eddie Flynn, as a protagonist, is layered and relatable. His past as a conman gives him a rough-around-the-edges charm, but it also means he understands moral ambiguity in a way that more conventional lawyers may not. He doesn’t shy away from difficult decisions or moral grey areas, instead he runs into them. And while Eddie is clearly the hero of the story, he isn’t a flawless knight in shining armour. His struggles, both personal and professional, make him feel real. He wrestles with ethical dilemmas, battles his own inner demons, and faces moments of self-doubt that add to his humanity. Eddie’s character highlights the fact that perfection is just fictional. There are nuances Eddie and that is what makes him so intriguing. And remember, every courtroom is a circus, but Eddie’s one of the few who can juggle law and order. The antagonists are more than just typical "bad guys." Each has their own set of motivations, secrets, and pressures that drive their actions, creating a tangled web of alliances, betrayals, and unexpected twists. It weaves in such a way that it’s nearly untraceable, yet the urge to leave his mark is his downfall. The villains aren’t simply evil for the sake of it, they have their demons and their reason, and yet their actions will still unsettle you to the core.  The author’s writing style is another reason this book is so compelling. The prose is sharp, direct, and laced with wit, perfectly matching Eddie’s voice and perspective. The courtroom scenes are detailed and intense, capturing the high stakes and strategic manoeuvring that define the legal profession. The author’s attention to detail brings the courtroom to life, making readers feel as though they’re sitting right beside Eddie as he faces off against formidable opponents and navigates the intricacies of the law. The dialogue is realistic and engaging, filled with tension and subtext that add to the overall suspense of the story. Themes of power, corruption, and morality give the book much more depth. The case at the centre of the story isn’t just about guilt or innocence, it’s about the power dynamics at play within the justice system and the way wealth and influence can shape outcomes in ways. Eddie’s fight isn’t just for his client’s freedom, it’s for the integrity of the system he believes in, even as he faces its flaws. It’s one of those books I wish I could experience for the first time all over again, diving into the characters’ minds, dissecting every emotion and thought, savouring every twist as it unfolds. It’s a perfect read for fans of John Grisham or The Lincoln Lawyer  by Michael Connelly, blending legal suspense with psychological depth in a way that grips you from start to finish.

Ongoing Events If you're interested in collaborating with us for an event, please email us at: events.rewritethestarsreview@gmail.com Past Events YPW Literary Magazine Fair Take Me There! Swiftie Summer Showdown Submissions Closed

Issue VIII: The Human Experience July 2024 Who are you? Who are we? What is our purpose on this planet? Why do we think? Why do we act? Why do we form groups? Why do we do what we do? How do we define ourselves? How do we know the things we love? What shapes our personalities? What causes our thoughts? What drives our actions? What influences our relationships? What defines our lives? What does it mean to be human? Psychological, biological, philosophical, or fantastical - whatever perspective you choose to go with, this is the question we wanted answered. We asked our readers to tell us in their own words and art what humanity and humaneness meant to them. We asked them to explain to us the human experience, in all its wonders and scars, beauty and flaws. Read Now CONTRIBUTORS POETRY Riddhi Iyer To be Human (Staff Contribution) Aurora Skye Vessel Ezra Mukami Untitled Jaiden Geolingo Here, Grief Angela Acosta Approximation of Latin American Diya Kapoor the big thing that lives in the sky Nirmit Mittal To Gaza Lydia Rae Bush Risk Ruth Towne Sweets to the Sweet Gabby Parkinson Lost in Translation Ray Shubert Purpose Mia Jevtic sentenced to your love Rah Royal the first twelve years of my life Liv Gamble How To Exist Nina Stadermann Reverie Muskan Gupta Poof and Gone Milan Singh Blur AC. Sandglass Just Talk Alexys K. Beautiful and Human Ruby Dyan My Day Wong Eu Kenn Michelangelo's Sculpture Sundos Hejazi art of life/life of art Kit Thurston-Mathews A Kitten's Offering Aunezti Burk What Day Is It? Rowan Through the artist's lens Nevaeh Phillips Life doesn’t end Chloe we were Urja Srivastava an understanding of the human experience Inaya Aly Khan Lunacy in a Fifteen Year Old Zoe Moon Xoxo Yuvika Gupta The Life Express Chloe Ho Chamber Music Maryam Majid I don't believe in atoms (I want to touch something) Jessamine Jin Infinities Cora McCullough Is Kindness Words Or Actions? Liv L. Ascend Bryan Duong Milstead faded gleam, renewed dream Halley Kunen Engine Flitting Malcolm Wernestrom it's a dog eat dog world Ivy J My Eurydice Friends W. E. Everhart Humanity weeps Asad R. Unexpected Transmission layla h. your best girl Rahil Najafabadi The Correspondence PROSE Isabel Loytty Highway Shannon Tran Grief & Bliss Elizabeth Butler Unnatural Selection E. Syson Seventeen Years (and an Extra Few Weeks) Alana Rodrigues Birch, Law of the Wild Aleeza Aneel who? me? Kiara Turner My Angst and Me Nusayba Bokhari Seeds alarminglytired (Nyx) As The Zephyr Wind Blows Claire M.M. A Ferryman's Fate Soraya Saros Crop of Prometheus Madison Cossaboom We Are The Fish Meagan Da capo sunny Our Paths Will Cross Again, I Promise Aki Rayne The Man by the Pond Arianna Kanji to be human is to wait Andrea Balingit The Exam Svara Carmel Narasiah Enough Alin Sengjaroen Tenderly Yours Phoenix Eddolls Death's favourite mortician Roukia Ali "The Old Brag" Ara Djati When Light Refracts Kaitlyn Fan Headed Towards Home FJGCSABA What are we defined as? How? Robert Aden Lonergan STRAWBERRY MILK CREATIVE NON-FICTION Kai Existential Espresso Kaitlyn Abrielle McCormick Eden Sydney Lynn A Letter From Ireland Zainab Ansari older and bigger Sophia Quintana The Numbers Game Clara Salo Meaning in Platonic Forms Elizabeth Maxwell What's next? Julia Vellucci Roses and Resilience ART Yasmin Kareem The depths within Desi Distel Northside gang:) Tehya Metzinger The Lake Sleeps Under the Willow Mitra Arianfar Lingering Touch PHOTOGRAPHY Sophia Liu Invisible China FEATURED INDIE AUTHORS Pavla Leitgebova The Deadliest Wish Sera Amoroso The Makria Cycle-Torsion

Issue VII: Arcane Arcades April 2024 Throughout history, humans have found ways to entertain themselves. The oldest board game in the world, Mancala, was invented in 6000 BCE. Europe during the Middle Age was filled with games of skill and outdoor games. There's even archaeological evidence to suggest prehistoric people played some form of games. No matter where you're from or how old you are or what you do in life, you would have played games. Video games, word games, traditional games, online games, board games... the list is endless. In this issue, we wanted to talk about these games. What do these games symbolize for people? Are they merely a respite from the grueling days of mundanity? Are they a form of connection to our community, and a way for us to bond with the people around us? Do they remind us of lives once lived, moments we'll never get back again? Do people like words and love giving our brains mental challenges? We wanted to hear about this source of entertainment. We asked our readers to choose a single game, or talk about games as a whole. We asked them to write as an observer, or from the point of view of inside a game itself. Our readers went above and beyond with their works. We hope this curation of pieces reminds you of games you have played with your loved ones, times forever enshrined in your memories. Take the opportunity to immerse yourselves in the arcades of games our pieces will explore. Happy or sad, funny or serious, silly or stupid, we have it all. Read Now CONTRIBUTORS POETRY Miguel Barrios After Tag E.S Merritt Game of Hearts Z. Hutchings Survive--Stay Alive, Winner Takes All and The beauty of a game Robin Pearson Snakes and Adders Nabiha Nostalgic Nights Ila. S Open Settings?, Nintendo Switch Controllers and Blocky Heart W.E Everhart Digital Odyssey: A Gaming Journey Phoebe B.H Mercury Monopoly Christopher Arkwright Pokémon is my faith in humanity Nitika Sathiya Rummy M.S. Blues where a kid can be a kid Devon Webb NPC EJM the game of being a teenage girl MG Doll House (Staff Contribution) PROSE Ellen Alfredson I am no expert at chess Adia Reynolds 8-bit-Arachnid Ander Miftari Blind Man's Bluff Alice Game Over Zara Pearce The Game of Life Arianna Kanji Inhumanity 101 CREATIVE NON-FICTION Georgia Hope 51 Standard (Minus an Ace) ART Audrika Chakrobartty Game Fuel FEATURED INDIE AUTHORS Pavla Leitgebova The Deadliest Wish Sera Amoroso The Makria Cycle-Torsion