- Oct 25 2023
- 11:47 AM
Drake’s Drum
Drake’s Drum is a snare drum that Sir Francis Drake took with him when he circumnavigated the world. Shortly before he died he ordered the drum to be taken to Buckland Abbey, where it still is today, and vowed that if England was ever in danger someone was to beat the drum and he would return to defend the country. According to legend it can be heard to beat at times when England is at war or significant national events take place.
Several times throughout history, people have claimed to have heard the drum beating, including: when the Mayflower left Plymouth for America in 1620, when Admiral Lord Nelson was made a freeman of Plymouth, when Napoleon was brought into Plymouth Harbour as a prisoner, and when World War I first began in 1914.
Reportedly, on HMS Royal Oak, a victory drum roll from a drum was heard when the Imperial German Navy surrendered in 1918. The ship was then searched twice by the officers and then again by the captain and neither a drum nor a drummer was found on board and eventually the phenomenon was put down to the legendary drum.
In 1938, when Buckland Abbey was partly destroyed by fire, the drum was rescued and taken to safety at Buckfast Abbey. Plymouth was devastated in the air raids that followed, reminding some of the ancient legend that “If Drake’s Drum should be moved from its rightful home, the city will fall”. The drum was returned and the city remained safe for the rest of the war.
The drum was most recently reported to have been heard in 1940 at the Dunkirk evacuation during World War II.
I wrote a post debunking the various myths about how “the Jedi condone slavery”, a while ago. Something I had omitted (because it’s such a big topic) was the following two statements that concern the clone troopers’ relations with the Jedi:
Both the above statements are inaccurate, let’s explore why.

Let’s get the easy one out of the way first, because it’s a logic that cuts both ways. If age is our only determination of the maturity of a Star Wars character, then Grogu is not a baby. He is aged 50, and is thus a middle-aged man.
Who cruelly eats the babies of a woman…
… and knowingly tortures animals for his own sadistic pleasure.
Of course, I’m kidding. Grogu’s none of the above things.
The narrative frames him as a cute baby who does innocent baby stuff. Him eating the eggs is played off as comedic, as is him lifting with the frog. To this day, some fans still call him “Baby Yoda”.
Conversely, despite the clones being 10/14-years-old, their actions, behaviors, way of thinking, sense of humor, morals etc, are all those of an adult.
Like, Ahsoka is technically older than Rex in this scene.
The scene doesn’t portray them as peers, though. This isn’t written as “a teen and a tween talking”. No, Rex looks, acts and behaves like a grown-up and is thus framed as such by the narrative.
You can make the argument “they’re child soldiers”, but (unless you’re doing so in bad faith) you’d also have to argue that “Grogu’s an adult”.

Nope. For all intents and purposes, they’re in the same boat as the Jedi, who George Lucas stated multiple times had been drafted to fight in the war.
Again: both the Jedi (monk/diplomats untrained for fighting on a battlefield) and clones (literally bred en masse only to fight) are being forced to fight by Palpatine and the Senate.
Though, on paper, the clones were commissioned by Jedi Master Sifo-Dyas, it was actually done by the Sith (who either manipulated or assassinated Sifo-Dyas then stole his identity, depending on the continuity you choose to adhere to). The rest of the Jedi had no idea these clones were being created.
So while the clones are slaves… they’re not owned by the Jedi.
They’re the army of the Republic, they belong to the Senate. This isn’t exactly a scoop, they refer to the clones as something to purchase…
… and manufacture.
As far as the Senate’s concerned, clones are property, like droids.
Like there’s a whole subplot in The Bad Batch about this very point: after the war, the clones are decommissioned and left out to dry because they literally have no rights, they served their purpose.
The only trooper to ever canonically blame the Jedi for the clones’ enslavement is Slick, who the narrative frames as having been bribed and manipulated by Asajj Ventress into betraying his comrades.
Also, the only canonical Jedi shown to ever be mean, dismissive or mistreating the clones in any way, is Pong Krell.
And it’s eventually revealed he’s in fact a full-on traitor, hence why the story frames him as an antagonistic dick from the moment he’s introduced. He doesn’t represent the Jedi in any way.
We know this because the other Jedi we’ve been shown are always prioritizing their clones’ lives over theirs, if given the chance.
Finally, if we wanna get even more specific… as Commander-in-Chief of the Grand Army of the Republic (GAR), the clones belong to Palpatine.
Palpatine who is a Sith Lord.
Palpatine who arranged for the creation of the clones and had them all injected with a chip that would activate upon hearing a code-word…
… and forced them to murder their Jedi without hesitation or remorse.
When you bear all that ⬆️ in mind and when you read this quote by George Lucas…
“The Jedi won’t lead droids. Their whole basis is connecting with the life force. They’d just say, ‘That’s not the way we operate. We don’t function with non-life-forms.” So if there is to be a Republic army, it would have to be an army of humans.”
- The Star Wars Archives: 1999-2005, 2020
… narratively-speaking, everything falls into place.
Sidious knows that:
… then the only way they won’t resist the draft and abstain from fighting is if they think joining the conflict will save lives.
So he creates a set of cruel, sadistic villains for them to face, opponents who will target innocent civilians at every turn…
… and instead of lifeless droids, he prepares for the Jedi an army of men… living, mortal people who, despite being well-trained, will be completely out of their league when facing the likes of Dooku…
… Ventress…
… Grievous…
… Savage Opress…
… or the defoliator, a tank that annihilates organic matter.
Thus, in order to save as many clone and civilian lives, the Jedi join the fray despite knowing that doing so will corrupt their values.
And as the war rages on, a bond of respect is formed between the two groups.
Clearly, the Jedi don’t like the fact that the Republic is using the clones to fight a war, but for that matter, they don’t like being in a war, in fact they advocated against it.
However, it’s happening regardless of their issues with the idea or personal philosophies. Said The Clone Wars writer Henry Gilroy:
“I’d rather not get into the Jedi’s philosophical issues about an army of living beings created to fight, but the Jedi are in a tough spot themselves, being peacekeepers turned warriors trying to save the Republic.”
And bear in mind, the Jedi are basically space psychics, the clones are living beings that they can individually feel in the Force…
… so the Jedi feel every death but need to move on, regardless, only being able to mourn the troopers at the end of every battle.


We see this in the Legends continuity too, by the way.

(that is, when the writers actually try to engage with the narrative)
Also, if you ask the clones, they’re grateful the Jedi have their backs.
When Depa Billaba voices her concerns about how the war is impacting the Jedi’s principles, troopers Grey and Styles are quick to make it clear how grateful they all are for the Jedi’s involvement:

So the clones aren’t the Jedi’s slaves. If anything, they’re both slaves of the Republic (considering how low the Jedi’s status actually is in the hierarchy).
Only I’d argue the clones have it much, much worse.
The Senate sees the Jedi as “ugh, the holier-than-thou space-monk lapdogs who work for us”… but a Jedi has the option to give up that responsibility. They can leave the Order, no fuss or stigma.
A clone trooper cannot leave the GAR! If they do, they’re marked for treason and execution. Again, they’re not perceived as “people”.
And it doesn’t help that the Kaminoans, the clones’ very creators, see the troopers as products/units/merchandise. A notion that the Jedi are quick to correct whenever they get the chance.

You know why the Jedi are right in this scene? Because it's literally how the Force works, this moment is undivorceable from the very basic worldbuilding fact that:
The Force works based on their emotions.
That is part of everything to do with the Force in the movies, that is the very first layer of the foundation of how it works! If they use the Force while they're afraid, that is straight up a path to the dark side, that's not just what the Jedi say, it's how Star Wars' worldbuilding functions.
“Once you become afraid that somebody’s going to take it away from you or you’re gonna lose it, then you start to become angry, especially if you’re losing it, and that anger leads to hate, and hate leads to suffering. Mostly on the part of the person who’s selfish, because you spend all your time being afraid of losing everything you’ve got instead of actually living. [....] So that is ultimately the core of the whole dark side/light side of the Force.” –George Lucas
Fear is the path to the dark side. It doesn't matter if the fear is justified or not, it's not necessarily a moral or value judgement, but it just is how the Force works.
So, the scene in The Phantom Menace goes like this:
Yoda: "Afraid are you?"
Anakin: "No, sir."
Yoda: "See through you we can."
Mace: "Be mindful of your feelings."
Ki-Adi: "Your thoughts dwell on your mother."
Anakin: "I miss her."
Yoda: "Afraid to lose her, I think, mmm?"
Anakin: "What has that got to do with anything?"
Yoda: "Everything. Fear is the path to the dark side. Fear leads to anger. Anger leads to hate. Hate leads to suffering. I sense much fear in you."
The Jedi are repeating Lucas' explanation almost word for word in this scene, fear leads to anger, anger leads to hate, hate leads to suffering, this isn't what the Jedi decided was how things work, it's how the Force works as decided by the guy who created the Force, they're absolutely, 100% correct about it.
And that's why it's important that Anakin isn't acknowledging his fear here, that it's not that he's afraid that's the problem or what the Jedi are saying is the problem--the Jedi express emotion all across the movies! that whole "there is no emotion" thing is NOWHERE in the movies or TCW! that is something Lucas himself never put in ANY of his canon!--but that he won't even be mindful of his feelings. Being mindful isn't immediately purging them, it's acknowledging that they're there, working through them, eventually letting them go.
"But it's normal for a nine year old to miss his mother! How can they say he's bad just for--"
They're not saying Anakin is bad.
Nobody is saying Anakin is a horrible person for missing his mother! Nobody is even saying that Anakin is a horrible person for not being mindful of his feelings! Nobody is saying that it's Anakin's fault that he doesn't have the tools for better emotional regulation!
But they are saying that he's not a good fit for the Jedi. And they're right! He's not a good fit for the Jedi! Not one single Council member even so much as implies that this is any kind of judgement of Anakin as a person or that he's bad for it! They're saying he doesn't have the rock solid foundation that a Jedi needs because that's how the Force works--and they're right. Every commentary Lucas ever makes about Anakin's fall is that he didn't want to regulate his feelings, he didn't want to let go of things.
The Jedi never once say or imply that that would make Anakin a bad person or that he's a failure because he didn't magically have things he wasn't taught, but they're saying that it would make him a bad fit for being a Jedi and they can already feel--given that they're psychic space wizards who can sense others' feelings--that he doesn't really want to change. ("He's nine! You can't judge a character at that--" Girl, it's a fairy tale meant to illustrate Lucas' personal philosophies about emotional regulation via fairy tale logic, not hyperrealistic examinations of characters, come on now.)
Which doesn't make Anakin a bad person or that he's in the wrong for being scared and not having the tools to deal with it. The Jedi can say "He's not a good fit for what we need to be because of the way the Force works." and not have it be any kind of condemnation of him as a person. His later actions, once he has the training and support to know better, sure. But nobody's saying the nine year old is at fault. They're saying the nine year old doesn't have the foundation he would need, which it doesn't matter that it's not his fault, it's still quite literally how the Force works, that you need that foundation.
The fun part with this is that there already is some crossover between aliens or UFO encounters and cryptid folklore. Now, this does betray that, to some degree, modern folklore has taken a more science-adjacent tone. You can see this in terminology. Instead of folklore, we have pseudo-science fields like cryptozoology or parapsychology.
The difference between cyptozoology and folklore centering on strange creatures in the forest is simply that we, as individuals, would like to see ourselves as less superstitious, and more rational, than those who came before us. And those who came before us felt the same way about their predecessors. The terminology changes, but the underlying idea of looking for something inexplicable, or finding something new remains the same. This is something you may want to keep in mind while creating new strands of pseudoscience to account for the supernatural creatures in your world.
The irony is, in scratching off the comic book approach, you’re skipping over something interesting and fun. What happens when the supernatural creatures of folklore and myth are aliens? Erich von Dänikenis probably the most prominent advocate for this idea. If you’ve ever seen Stargate, his idea of, “paleo-contact,” and the idea is that major mythological figures were aliens should be familiar. This is specifically a branch of pseudo-archeology and psuedo-history.
It’s not hard to spin this off into the idea of, “supernatural,” creatures that are actually exiled aliens. The Fey are particularly good for this, if you’ve spent any significant time looking at Celtic myths, though this also works with any sufficiently detailed pantheon. Again, that’s basically the route Stargate went with the Egyptian pesedjet, and gradually expanding into more cultures as the TV series’ continued. This is also the route Marvel went with Thor, meaning this is, literally, a comic book approach.
While the actual comic book is much darker, the original Men in Black film does a wonderful job of existing as a quasi-fever-dream suggestion for a world where supernatural entities operate as a kind of police force regulating visiting extraterrestrials. The technology they’re playing with is said to be of alien origin, but really, we’re solidly in Clarke’s Third Law territory here.
The fuzzy territory Men in Blackbrings into focus also illustrates one difficulty with this idea. The difference between an extraterrestrial and a fey or demon is the perspective you bring to the discussion. They’re allalien beings. Aliens have become a new form of outside creature. The difference between the premise of War of the Worldsand Doom II lies in the aesthetics of the monsters that came from Mars. This doesn’t mean you can’t use both, but you should be aware that they will naturally, “fill the same slot,” in your story, and it’s something to be conscious of. At the same time, this also creates a natural delineation if you want to mix and match different approaches to the supernatural and aliens.
The short version of this idea is that you can divide most supernatural fiction into a few general approaches. Either the monsters are hidden from the world via some (probably magical or technological) means, hidden via their own actions (which is to say, staying hidden), or they’re a part of the daily world. With some play between the second and third category depending on how many people are in on the secret. Mixing fantasy monsters and aliens gives you a good excuse for why one group might fall into one of the above categories while another does not, and allows for some wild combinations. Such as a world where aliens are a part of everyday life, but the supernatural is hidden by some mystical veil, a world where aliens hide among the population using technology while monsters try desperately to avoid being discovered by the modern world, or a world where supernatural beings are simply a part of everyday life, but the world is currently under a covert alien onslaught. Really, there are a lot of options here, and the only limit is your creativity.
I will say, this is something that is tailor made to have fun with. It’s is a wild mix, and there is a lot of freedom to how you approach this, including a lot of ways you can shake up conventional interactions between the groups.
-Starke
What're some things you wish you knew before getting into serious writing (i.e. things before writing a novel, editing large projects, etc.)?
This is an excellent question! I’ve come to terms with some things, but overall I’ve had a great time learning. Here are a few things that it would have really helped me to know early on.
The Devil, a card i made for the Moon Prism Tarot deck~
This probably isn’t the best place for the question, but considering the last two asks, in a conversation between characters who have never met the non-binary (female presenting) character, is it better to have them using the wrong pronouns or still using the correct ones, though there’s never been a moment before indicating that they’d know they go by they/them? (There technically could be explanations but not within the book.) It’s obviously more logical that it’d be the wrong ones but on the other hand I don’t want half the dialogue/narration (I write best with multi-pov limited) about the character in the book to have the wrong pronouns, and have characters who do know be constantly correcting it.
This is a great opportunity to illustrate pronoun sharing in your fiction. Including it in your stories is a way to help it become a part of everyday society.
Ideally, we would never assume someone’s pronouns regardless of how they present. Instead of making assumptions, we would use they/them pronouns or the person’s name until we learn their pronouns. We would also introduce ourselves to someone new by saying something like, “Hi, I’m Maxine, and I use she/they, how about you?”
You can have your characters do the same thing.
If a character who knows the nonbinary character introduces them to a third character indirectly, such as by showing them a picture or pointing them out across a room, this character can clarify the pronouns the character uses as part of the introduction. So, for example, “The person with long blond braids is Maxine, who’s home from Harvard for the weekend. Maxine uses she/they pronouns.”
If you have two characters discussing a third character (who isn’t part of the conversation), and neither of them know the character’s pronouns, they can either refer to the person using “they/them” or use their name instead of pronouns until their pronouns are learned.
I hope that helps! ♥
•••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••
I’ve been writing seriously for over 30 years and love to share what I’ve learned. Have a writing question? My inbox is always open!